*
Media coverage of issues like the ongoing hissy fit over Rick Warren can make me momentarily forget that the homosexual "community" is not really very homogeneous at all. This lulu, by a HuffingtonPost blogger named Chris Durang, is in my eyes really the nadir of self-marginalizing liberal political thought, and invites both knee-jerk derision and stereotyping even from a kind gentleman such as me. Although he acknowledges, with qualifications, that Pastor Rick "is good on the environment and on AIDS in Africa", Durang's overriding issue is he feels "hurt and upset" by Obama's decision to include Warren in the inauguration. The implication of Durang's argument is that politics are mainly about people's feelings, and that the feelings of gay people are more important the feelings of evangelical-minded people.
Today, as I skimmed over the decreasingly useful HuffPost I did notice some gay and liberal pushback against the guilt-by-association stuff that has been written about Obama. The best one, by Bob Ostertag, ceremoniously dismantles idea that gay marriage is a major political issue for most gay people. The issue, he says, is (as always) equal rights for everyone. Ostertag helpfully notes that weird evangelical beliefs about gay marriage are rooted in even weirder beliefs, such as that the God of The Universe literally sent his only Son to die for earthly sinners, however that might work. The substrate of Ostertag's text is some solid horse sense about political pragmatism from which I think liberals in general could benefit if they paid attention. Furthermore, in a nice act of journalistic integrity, Ostertag also provides some fuller context about Rick Warren's thoughts on gays, as extracted from a widely read beliefnet.com interview that I don't feel like linking to. The upshot is that Warren isn't quite the know-nothing cartoon character he has been painted as by the angry gays and liberals over the past few weeks.
The Ostertag piece is a bit long, but I strongly recommend it. He directly nails several points I was trying to make in my previous post, but he has the benefit of writing about gay and liberal activism as an insider (i.e., he actually knows what he is talking about from experience).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
and SM knows what he's talking about from _________.
ReplyDeleteAnon: I am a somewhat informed observer and offer opinions. Ostertag knows what he's talking about because he has "gay cred," if you want to call it that. That was my point. Thanks for asking.
ReplyDeletejust read Cesca's take on this, and it's pretty strong. Still, I've gotta agree with you here. Mainly for the strategic significance of it. I'd say being "touched" by Obama is far more likely to make these jokers change their extreme ways, and maybe the opinions of some of their sheep, than vice versa.
ReplyDelete