Religion and a Rainy Day in Mississippi

Living in the mostly red state of Mississippi, I am often accused of being a liberal agent provocateur, usually in response to my LTEs of local and regional papers.  As I said in my first ever diary, it’s a lonely job, but someone’s gotta do it.  In actuality, I enjoy being the, uh, devil’s advocate, taking contrary positions.  It’s fun and it’s inexpensive entertainment.  Besides, law enforcement probably would frown on my use of Sweet Gum Balls of Mass Destruction (a shameless tribute to the author’s first-ever DailyKos diary).

My usual non-workday routine is to make a couple of cups of  coffee and peruse the area newspapers for news and opinion, then head off to blogland.  What I’ve been reading lately regarding attitudes towards religion concerns me.  Two, seemingly unrelated, news items in particular have prompted me to inflict another diary on the Kos community.  Besides, it's been raining for two days and my family wishes to share their misfortune of being cooped up with me.

On December 20th, the HattiesburgAmerican, the newspaper of record for Hattiesburg, MS, and the surrounding area, ran a storyconcerning a gentleman who planned to give away Christmas turkeys.  Only there was one catch:  the turkeys would only go to the first 300 people to tell him "Merry Christmas".

McDaniel, a Laurel attorney, said the reason for the turkey giveaway is to counter what he terms a "counterculture that is on a mission to extinguish the Christian version of Christmas."

...snip...

McDaniel said he was talking with friends about ways to make sure the "war on Christmas" was not successful in Mississippi.

Hold that thought for a second, fellow Kossack.

Yesterday, December 21, pjv’s diary, Blasphemy Challenge Done in Poor Taste, informed us of an someone’s efforts to directly challenge Christians’ belief in their God.  From the "Blasphemy Challenge" website:

"It isn't just adult Christians who are indoctrinated with the frightening ideology of Christian belief. In fact, most Christians are indoctrinated as children. These children are told that they must believe the following: That 2000 years ago a man died, stayed dead three days, rose from the dead and then flew into the air above the clouds-- and right now this man is with them as their invisible companion and savior from Hell, if only they will submit to him. If this bizarre theory were not religious in nature, teaching it to children would probably be considered child abuse."

Let’s pause to consider both of these news items.  

In the first, a person of faith takes an action which he apparently believes will advance Christianity or, at least, his version of it.  While I don’t question this gentleman’s sincerity or generosity, it strikes me as being a little self-serving; i.e., the turkeys were being given on condition of the recipients acknowledging the giver’s faith or at least the "Reason for the season".  To me, this is antithetical to the core tenet of Christianity:  unconditional love.  Christ commands his followers to be selfless in thought and deed and to be ambassadors of Christ.  To have strings attached to his "gifts", this gentleman theologically shot himself in the foot, in my humble opinion.  Being a native Mississippian, however, I understand this man’s attempt to do something, anything, to defend and promote his faith.  Faith is an important part of most Southerners’ lives.  Many consider themselves Christians and believe their faith and their values are under unrelenting attack.  

In the second item, someone intentionally creates controversy under the aegis of promoting free thought, inquiry and/or providing an outlet of expression for non-believers.  While I have no reason to doubt his sincerity (as I don’t know what was going through his mind when he issued his challenge) and I support his right to argue there is no God, I do not support his use of such a confrontational method.  It serves no constructive purpose and will result in confirming Christians’ suspicions there exists outright hostility towards them and their faith.  In fact, I see no difference in his challenge and cartoons negatively depicting the prophet Muhammed.  Both are offensive to those of the respective faiths.  Given the religious right’s push to impose their version of theocracy, unfortunately, I can almost understand this provocation.

The First Amendment gives us all the right to believe or not to believe, to express our beliefs or not to express them.  I would argue that having the right to express our views or our beliefs doesn’t give us moral license to arrogantly belittle those who believe otherwise nor are we entitled to launch ad hominem attacks on those we perceive as our enemies.  For those who insist such tactics are necessary because the other side’s rhetoric is so odious/dangerous/___(fill in the blank), I humbly suggest fighting fire with fire only gets you burned.  Besides, this kind of logic sounds like the justifications I hear from my two teenage sons when they get into trouble ("He hit me first" or  "He called me pizza-face"), as if it excuses loutish behavior.

I am not advocating giving an automatic free pass to evangelical leaders such as James Dobson when they publicly demonize others.  Neither should we allow vitriolic attacks on people of faith to go unanswered.  But we as a community must acknowledge and accept that both faith and the lack thereof are integral to many Americans’ lives and to our history.

Particularly in the area of religion, if progressives truly wish to be inclusive and advance their agenda, they should address the substance of issues without attacking the people behind them.  This is something we accuse conservatives of doing.

There are two pieces of advice Southern kids hear when growing:  "Be sweet" and "Play nice".  It's still good advice.