All posts tagged Conversation

Peter_Fonda's_American_Flag_Patch

Critique and Civility on July 4th

(I woke up this morning reading James K.A. Smith’s Tweets regarding a more critical look at what is meant by “independence” or “freedom” and particularly the seemingly inextricable tie between freedom and war portrayed in July 4th celebrations.  ”War” Smith tweeted, “is not a necessary condition for freedom… Don’t tell me I owe my freedom to war.“   I agree with the critique. I also affirm the courage of tweeting that on this, America’s most sacred celebration.  Which leads me to re-post this piece of mine from July 4, 2010)

—

Most are familiar with the opening lines to the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal…” But the Declaration begins with a short explanation of it’s necessity.  Jefferson opened the Declaration with the suggestion that “a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”  It is striking to me that this letter, inflammatory as it is, is nonetheless tempered with “respect” for its readers and their opinions, oppressive tyrants though they be.

The philosopher Bernard Henri-Levi notes that America…

“..never was and never will be founded on the continuity of a race,..  the solidity of a soil, or on an intrinsic autochthony or even a shared history.. “

Instead, we are a nation…

“… forged by people of diverse origins who had nothing in common but this sharing …of a desire and an Idea.”

We are a people whose roots are tangled up in the Idea that a diversity of thought strengthens us just a diversity of culture enriches us.

I hope our celebration of America can go without the notion that certain opinions, certain philosophies and certain people must be silenced or defeated (or deported) in order to enjoy my America.  Including the voices of those who sincerely critique our country. It is a vast, complex and truly great conversation we have entered into and entertained for well over 2 centuries; it’s energy is provided by the tension between cultures, opinions, theories and world-views. No, we do not always carry the conversation well; but we are exactly at our worst when we  react poorly; when we receive the differing political, religious and philosophical thoughts of another as primarily a threat to our way of life and not, at least in some way, an enrichment of a diverse, growing and still young nation.

Don’t get me wrong: I am no dualist. I believe in one, uniform, whole, encompassing Truth which pervades and permeates all life, space and time… I just don’t think we arrive at anything resembling that Truth by silencing, much less insulting the “other guy.”  I believe, in fact, that discovering Truth or coming to an understanding of what is good for a people happens best in the context of a sincere and spirited conversation; one with the foundation of “a decent respect.”

Happy 4th of July.

349 days ago /  Tagged: , , , 1
I worry that fighting over Facebook and Twitter does to queer/straight dialogue what online fights do to most everything else: make it less real.

A few weeks ago, a few cable news networks featured a video sermon by a preacher who suggested violence against queer* family members.  They followed that “story” a week or so later by posting a similar sermon video  from a different pastor with a similar message. Both of these vids showed up multiple times in my Facebook and Twitter feeds, posted by outraged friends.  Yesterday, the video of a child singing “ain’t no homo gonna make it to heaven” made it’s noisy rounds on the web, aided my many of those same outraged friends.

I didn’t watch the video. I’m pretty confident I don’t need to in order to know that it is shamefully out of line and unlike Jesus as I know Him.

While I certainly believe there are times when those using their social and public influence for destructive ends ought to be socially and publicly addressed,  I wonder if we just as often create monsters by driving up hits and plays of obscure cultural figures or moments and then feel that we’re fighting the good fight by denouncing them.  I’m not at all suggesting that vitriolic garbage such as “ain’t no homo gonna make it to heaven” should go uncorrected… I am suggesting that, in my experience, such correction has had power when it’s been done by someone I’ve known.

A friend  who posted one of these videos captioned it with something about the stupidity of religious people and the damage of religious teaching.  I asked him if he personally knew any religious folks who thought and spoke the way the pastor in the video did.  He said he did not, which I thought made his sweeping devaluation of “religious people” and the teachings they subscribe to rather empty.  Do the Christians you know think and say hateful things about LGBT friends?  If so, I would suggest that, before addressing the wrongs done by a small group of folks in a modest church 1500 miles away, the hatefulness of your friends is your business. 

I also worry that “fighting these battles” over Facebook and Twitter does to queer/straight dialogue what online fights can do just about anything else: make it less real. “Hate” becomes something backwards, white, religious southerners do (which likely means you are in the clear) and it’s enough to post a snappy comment about it.

Which leads me, at last, to this…

As I’ve written about elsewhere, being a hateful or violent person is a problem unto itself. Queer folks, racial minorities, women or the upper class only serve as convenient targets at which to aim that hate.  An emotionally mature person can think someone is wrong (even dangerously so) and still not hate them. So, I don’t believe it’s helpful to lump those who believe that homosexual behavior or even orientation is outside God’s original design together with those who are hateful towards the LGBT community.  While conversations about hate are related to conversations about religious and social differences, I believe that, as a far as it is possible, they are better had as separate conversations.

384 days ago /  Tagged: , , , , 45
ultimate-fighting-championship

No, You Shut Up: A Conversation

Much of the CMY(K) project is focused on a conversation around doubt or a lack of faith. That conversation can certainly be internal but is just as often external. In fact, few of the songs on the EP’s are written about friends who no longer  consider faith possible.  Keeping with that theme, this will be the first in a series of blog posts that will actually be a conversation with one such friend.

I’ve known Lance Johnson since I was fifteen years old and consider him a good friend. We share a great deal in common including a love for comic books, a discerning taste in beer and a half-joking distain for bad pop music.  We also share many of the same critiques of popular religion, though from different perspectives. My critique of popular religion stems from the assumption that Something True can be found or revealed in life and that bad religion makes that a harder process. Lance, as an atheist, assumes that there is no “Something True” to be discovered or revealed and that all religious effort in that direction is misguided at least and destructive at worst.

If, as a person of faith, you have had such interactions with such persons you know what I must do.  Lance must be destroyed.

Or.. we could talk. In fact, we’ve always talked quite cordially and thoughtfully about these things (imagine that?). I respect Lance’s perspective, just as he respects mine.   He and I have debated or discussed religion online in the past, back when I had a message board at my web site called “The GeekBoard.” He was “El Lancito” and I was … “Justin McRoberts.”

 

So, because we think the conversation between Christianity and Atheism important, we’re going to make a few of our conversations public.  I will begin by posing a question to Lance (below), who will answer it at his blog and finally I’ll respond to his response.  We’ll then reverse the sequence when Lance asks me a question.

We think it will be fun.

Lastly, I’m calling it a conversation for a two reasons:
1. Debates bore me. 
2. I’d like to continue lifting up the skill of listening. Debates are about hearing just enough of what someone else is saying to prepare your next point.

We think it will be enlightening (our conversations generally are enlightening and fun for us).  We also think it’s important.

 

 

 

So, Lance… my first question is; If a train leaves Chicago traveling 100MPH and another train leaves a city New York traveling 150MPH… um.. never mind.. scrap that…

ACTUAL QUESTION: You’ve stated that religious faith is bad for people. This implies some kind of good; a universal good, at that. Can you describe the “good” religious faith is an obstacle to?  Is it a universal good; can it be applied to all people?

 

 

 

 

687 days ago /  Tagged: , , , , , 2

CMY(K): Take One For The Team (“C”, Track 2)

In July of 2009, novelist Anne Rice publicly disassociated herself from Christianity because of the general impropriety of Christians. She found those who call themselves ‘christian’ to be “quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious and deservedly infamous.”

As I have written previously, I found her analysis accurate but her response to be off the mark.  Shortly after I posted the blog, I got to work on “Take One For The Team.”   Lyrics are below the video but if you haven’t checked out the digi-book we put together for the EP, I’d recommend reading the lyrics there.

You can pick up the EP at iTunes.
It is also available at my web store. 
For more on the whole CMY(K) project, visit the CMYK info page.

Take one for the team
Take it on the chin
Pick yourself back up
And brace yourself again
They don’t come to fight
They only come to win
So take one for the team
And take it on the chin

Take another step
A mile beyond the call
Bear the weight of choice
To choose something at all
At times you’ll want to stop
And times you’ll want to craw
But take another step
A mile beyond the call

Honestly, you should know
You’ve been there
Sad and low
Patience waited on you, though
So, honestly, you should know

Take a moment now
To ponder your next move
Is what you’re giving back
The honest best of you
I truly understand
You’ve got to know I doYou took one on the chin
But you were swinging, too.

 

691 days ago /  Tagged: , , , 2
Listening_in_2008

“People Just Want To Be Heard”

I get it.

I do.

And I certainly believe that the art of listening is lost on many of us.

Yet “just being heard” can just very easily become a license to just talk trash.  Or complain.  “Just being heard” can become the banner under which we proudly march while airing the same dirty laundry we’ve been airing for weeks, months and years all the while avoiding the call to submit that dirty laundry to a careful cleaning.

The male impulse to ‘fix things’ has taken a public beating of late.  It’s become something of a joke.  Yet, my feeling is that if a thing is worth bringing up and complaining about, especially if it’s something brought up repeatedly, then it’s likely worth the effort to fix.

So, I’ll grant the license to “just be heard” so long as the license to “just fix it” is granted somewhere close to as often.

 

733 days ago /  Tagged: , , 0

Mr. Willis From Ohio

How often is it that a better argument means anything at all? More often, it seems that our response to being out-argued is to find the nearest exit and start scouring the landscape for a place where the conclusions we’ve already drawn have resonance (see Protestantism’s 33,000+ denominations in 238 countries).

The 6th episode of the West Wing’s first season, entitled “Mr. Willis of Ohio”  is one of my favorite among the show’s seven seasons.  A congresswoman from Ohio has passed away and her husband, Mr Willis, fills her seat temporarily.  In the meantime the Administration is trying to push through an item central to their platform.  The vote is, predictably, split down party lines and is vey tight. Mr. Willis’ wife would have been a vote against the White House’s agenda.  In her absence, White House Communications Director, Toby Ziegler invites Mr. Willis to sit down with a few other Congressmen in hopes he can convince them to change their vote. The conversation, once again predictably, amounts to the players from each party repeating and defending their preconceived conclusions on the issue.  But then something better happens:

Toby: “If you don’t mind me asking, sir.. What changed your mind?”

Mr. Willis: “You did. I thought you made a very strong argument”

Toby: “Around here the merits of a particular argument generally take a back seat to political tactics.”

Mr. Willis: “I would imagine.  But it worked on me.”

We live by what we believe. Our ideas shape our decisions which eventually shape our lives which, in turn, shape culture. Our ideas are important. To hold an idea as important ought to mean that it is important enough to test that idea and find true… or not.

974 days ago /  Tagged: , , 3