There has been significant and understandable angst and anger on the part of the GLBT community concerning the setbacks to gay rights; in particular, the passage of Proposition 8 in California has raised the level of of these emotions to proportions that I have not observed since growing up in the San Francisco Bay Area in the late 60's and 70's.
However, I have observed this anger spilling over into what I believe to be counter-productive approaches and efforts. Recently, there was an incident wherein a protest occurred at the Mount Hope Church in Michigan. While I do not agree with the version of Christianity that this church preaches, I feel strongly that this sort of reaction does nothing to further the cause of equal rights for all; and in particular, of those who are a part of the GLBT community. It is my belief that if this approach is adopted as standard operating procedure, or even if it is applauded and embraced by the majority of the gay community, it will wind up doing incredible harm to the cause of gay rights, and thereby, to the cause of universal equality.
First, I am not gay. I am straight, and I am a Christian. With this said, I don't live in CA, but if I had, I would have voted against prop 8. Furthermore, I do believe in equal rights for all, including gays; my own faith says that one's relationship with God is between the God and that individual, and it is not my place to judge (And really, if love truly exists, I am not sure that there is anything to judge anyway). The question of gay rights is akin to that of abortion in my mind: it is not my place to impose my morals or those of those who profess the same faith as mine on another. For this reason, and many others, I support both full equal rights for gays, and I am also pro-choice.
Now, in my discussions both here at DKos and with friends and neighbors, the point has been brought up that perhaps I don't have the right to tell the gay community how to react or how to make their point. Still, I believe that I do have some insight into how people will react; what will resonate well and what will strike discord with those that must be convinced in order to win this fight. Furthermore, I do not believe that the goal of equality will ultimately be achieved through the courts or through legislation which can be overturned (see also Prop 8); what it is that I see as being needed is the difficult, long haul approach of changing perceptions and biases.
It is my firm belief that it will take those who are allies and/or friends of the gay community, and those who support equal rights for all in order to achieve the end of equal rights for gays. And the disruptive, and frankly, obscene, display at the Mount Hope Church will have a negative impact on those who are on the fence as to whether or not to support advances in gay rights. It will seriously distrub those whose interpretation of scripture is that homosexuality is morally questionable or wrong, but are willing to live and let live.
Now, before I go any further, please note that my views on the manner in which the protest was conducted in no way condones some of the preachings of said church. I have no problem with protesting what is being advocated by certain elements of my religion; I myself do not agree with it. Rather, it is the manner in which the protest was conducted with which I have objection. Not only do I not believe that the protest was constructive for the fight for equal rights; it is my opinion that it was downright as intentionally crude and insulting as possible.
Anyway, to continue. The point has been made in other diaries that this should not be a matter of a "popularity contest" - that fundamental, constitutional human rights are just that, and are not subject to public perceptions or judgments; that this goes beyond beyond these things, and that because the cause of equality is right, then perceptions, biases, historical teachings and old social judgments should not matter. Or, to put it another way, that the righteousness of the cause of equality trumps public perceptions, and it should not matter what the majority thinks.
In a perfect world, I'd agree with this. Unfortunately, this is anything but a perfect world. And in order to advance the cause of gay rights and equality, advocates of equality need friends and allies. If the perceptions of the majority of the population in relation to the efforts on behalf of equality for the homosexual minority is allowed to be that of an angry mob who interrupts church services, who will use any means without compunction to achieve their ends, then this fight will be lost.
Now, realize that I am not attempting to paint the GLBT community and their allies (the latter being a group that I consider myself to be a member of) with the broad brush of a sweeping generalization. Rather, my point is that if the opponents of equality are allowed to frame the argument in terms of actions such as occurred during the Mount Hope Church protest, then the sweeping generalization fallacy will become a very effective tool in their arsenal. It will still be a fallacy, but it will work, and it will do incredible damage to the fight for equality.
It is my belief that if the opponents of equality and gay marriage are so allowed to frame the discussion in these terms, the impact will go far beyond that of Proposition 8 type vote outcomes. It will impact what litmus tests are used, and the electability, of judges who will rule on gay rights issues. It will impact whether politicians who support gay rights are elected or not. And it will have a direct impact on how all gays - and really, all minorities fighting for equality - are perceived.
Never forget that those who deal in hate are well organized. As distasteful of a truth as it is, fear and hatred sell well, and hence, tend such efforts tend to be well funded. Non-peaceful actions, protests that are overtly offensive, will be used as ammunition by those who would oppress others; for example, knowledge of the now well-known church protest has rapidly spread throughout the Christian community; liberals and radical gay protesters and those who hate Christians are already being lumped together like Bush lumped terrorists and Islamic terrorists. Whether or not one thinks that said protest was a good thing in and of itself, whether or not the church in question was preaching hate, the perception will spread, at least to some extent, that all who support equality for gays support such protests and displays. Given that hatred and prejudice are far easier to sell when fear and disgust are thrown into the equation, I believe that all this protest did was to further the cause of those who would deny fundamental human rights to gays.
So, what then is the approach that I would advocate?
Well, that which I advocate is not an easy approach. I have no problems with an in-your-face approach, but it must be designed to change hearts and minds, not simply to relieve angst and anger, not to simply shock. I would advocate looking to the lessons of Gandhi, of MLK, even those taught by the way that Obama ran his campaign. I am advocating taking the high road; I realize that it is hardly the easy road, but in the end, I believe that it is the only road which will lead to the success of the equality movement.
Now, let's take a look at the differences between those of the sort advocated by the leaders I cite and the Mount Hope Church protest.
By way of example in the former case, look to Rosa Parks and the lunch counter protests of the Blacks during the civil rights movement. There were many who felt that those protests were out of line, but they had a specific purpose. First, those protests put Blacks in a place where they had a right to be; furthermore, they placed moral and ethical questions in the mind of those who opposed civil rights. Through these actions, the following sort of questions were raised: "Why shouldn't these people be here? Why should they not be treated as equals?" These protests forced people to look in mirrors; the actions of the protesters, while offensive to some, would not have been offensive had Black people already had equal rights.
By way of contrast, the Mount Hope Church protest had a different sub-text. No one - straight or gay - has the right to disrupt a place of worship, no matter how much you disagree with their beliefs in the manner in which was enacted. The questions raised were, "Why aren't these people in jail?" and "Are all supporters of gay rights like this?" Rather than questioning biases and beliefs, these actions served to reinforce those who would deny equality to the gay community. And while this sort of response might be cathartic to some; while it might be an escape valve for the anger, it will not further the overall cause and goal of equality.
I would propose that if one wants to protest a religious organization such as the Mount Hope Church (and this can be generalized to any protest), the correct and far more effective approach would have been a public protest in front of said church. The signs would have been designed to throw arguments back in their faces; upside down crosses will not accomplish this. (And note that given that I live on Capitol Hill in Seattle, I don't blink at seeing gays making out on Broadway or holding hands in the local market, these actions have no place being preformed in front of the alter in a church. I'd say the same if straight people started making out publicly.) The literature would have been likewise thought provoking; rather than attacking Christianity as a whole, they would have challenged Christians to walk the walk, to judge not lest they be judged, to be loving and accepting of one's fellow men and women, to serve ther fellow man as Christ is said to have served us all.
Anger at injustice is something I can understand. But if one wants to accomplish the long term goal of true equality, then it is my belief that one has to accept the ironic fact that those who fight injustice have a harder fight than those who would fight to continue injustice; that without numerical superiority, the only road that leads to success is the high road, while the opposition can get away with all sorts of dirty tricks.
Is this fair? Heck no. But it is how the world works. To think otherwise is naive.
Before I close, I will make one further point. It is my belief that adopting the angry, fearful, hateful and insulting tactics of those who would deny the gay community its just rights that the impact upon one's self be very carefully considered. There is a reason that those who preach violence and hatred are despised by those who strive for justice and equality; beware of becoming what you hate in the name of a just cause.
I realize that these thoughts may not be that well received. But I ask you to consider this, if you think I am way off base: if I, being a dyed in the blue liberal and a supporter of gay rights is offended by protests such as the one which occurred at the Mount Hope Church, consider the impact of those on the fence and those who are on the other side of the fence. This is not an easy fight, this will not be a short fight. And I've heard many times that folks are sick and tired of waiting and being told to be patient; unfortunately, I do not see a viable alternative. I am not by any means saying to be silent, to stop pushing, to stop protesting, or even to stop getting in the faces of those who advocate intolerance and hatred. But I am saying choose your battles, your approaches, your tactics with your eye on the goal. Do not let your anger at the injustices being done to you be the undoing of your attempt to right those injustices. And finally, don't forget that you do have allies, but that we too have our beliefs. You ask us to be "straight but not narrow" - perhaps I am asking you to be "gay but not narrow."