What is fueling the difference in our cultural response to, on the one hand, florists who do not want to provide their craft for a same-sex wedding and, on the other, celebrities who do not want to stand on that stage at President-elect Trump’s inauguration?
It takes courage to stand up for one’s convictions, whatever those convictions might be.
But instead of saying, “Wow, what courage of your convictions, bro!” when Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Denver, Colorado, said that his religious beliefs caused him to deny making baked goods to celebrate a same-sex couple’s wedding, people across this grand country balked and claimed it was “offensive and dehumanizing.” Every media platform lit up with judgment and mockery of the Christians in question and, most unfortunately, dismissiveness towards their beliefs.
This week, ever since at least a dozen celebrities, performers, and even DC area high school marching bands reportedly politely turned down the invitation to perform at President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration, people are lighting up media in praise of standing up for one’s convictions. Huh.
My point is that there is a painful double standard being celebrated in our midst, right now.
I do understand that there are laws that prevent public accommodations, including businesses, from discriminating based on gender, sex, race, ethnicity, marital status or sexual orientation. The thing such laws cannot account for, in all honesty, is the power of personal religious beliefs.
The separation of Church and State, as so many people paraphrase part of the First Amendment, was intended to keep our government from telling us what to believe. It cannot keep us from bringing our beliefs into our public engagements with one another. This is an issue that, it seems to me, we are not sorting through very well as a country.
If we can take a step back, I hope we can that what is really being said, in the suits filed against such businesses as Phillips’, is that it is a religious belief that is offensive and dehumanizing, when applied in the public realm. And while that just may be the case, simply stating that does nothing for serious engagement about or understanding where that belief comes from. I am, to be sure, a marriage equality advocate; but that does not mean that I see any good in forcing everyone else be one, as well.
Why is one “being true to one’s beliefs” all that different from the other?
Let’s see if I can sort through some of it: The former, believing that same-sex marriage is something that goes against God’s will, is a belief millions of people in this country hold. The latter stance, to choose not to be officially associated with our President-elect, is also a stance that millions of people in this country hold.
The former is based on a particular understanding of what the Bible says about sex and marriage; so it is a deeply personal belief. The latter is based on not wanting to align with someone who has been flagrantly misogynistic for years, and cannot put together an intelligent, substantive sentence on the fly, among other things. You better believe not wanting to associate with him has deeply personal implications.
The former falls under what we might casually call a “conservative Christian” worldview. The latter is coming from social and political “progressives.”
The former belief has been “punished” by bankrupting several businesses. Interestingly enough, at least one of the celebrities on that list declined the invitation in order to keep their fans happy - the flip side of the money issue.
The thing is, for better or for worse, there is nothing more deeply held or more powerful in its influence on our lives than a religious conviction. Shall we review a little history on this matter?
I imagine that most US adults know that racism and segregation were legally enabled in this country until the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the subsequent dismantling of the Jim Crow laws (though, what happens on the books and in real life are often quite different). But I wonder how many people know that the laws disenfranchising African-Americans or to make inter-racial marriage illegal in this country were created by “good Christian men,” drawing on biblical passages and ideas.
I wonder how many people know that the North Atlantic slave trade that spanned over 400 years was justified in part by a particular reading of the so-called “curse of Ham,” in Genesis 9. People were able to stand on religious convictions for that indefensible nightmare.
I wonder how many people know that when European and British citizens came to the North American continent, they took a cue from the book of Joshua and referred to this land as the new “Promised Land,” and the people already living here as “Canaanites.” This religious conviction empowered them, along with other financial and freedom-seeking desires, to slaughter countless native people.
I wonder how many people are aware that there have been laws on the books in every state, some as late as the 1990’s, that allowed husbands to rape their wives, or to deny that it was possible to rape a spouse. It might surprise some of you to know that overturning these “marital exemption” laws was not easy (it came before the legislature multiple times in some states before being overturned). “Good Christian” men claimed, in session, that they could do anything they wanted to their wives. This belief is also firmly supported by Biblical texts, which means it takes on the status of a religious conviction, consciously or not.
The fact of the matter is that I used to think that God had no place in heaven for anyone who approved of or was engaged in a same-sex marriage or relationship. It was a religious conviction of mine. It is, unfortunately, a misinformed belief, in terms of what the Bible actually says on the matter (something I have addressed here). And now I am a marriage equality advocate.
But I did not get from point A to B by someone mocking me or telling me my belief was offensive (social ridicule). I got there through education about what the Bible is and is not (understanding). People I loved told me their stories, and heard me out and understood my Christian beliefs on the matter. Friends helped me sort through the differences between what I had always believed and what my formal education was showing me.
What I am interested in is more than just a “why can’t we all just get along?” kind of a response. I am interested in people understanding each other, in particular when we encounter someone with beliefs other than our own.
I would like to believe that we are better than this shallow double standard.