Introduction:
A theory is needed to explain this sentence: Most black churches fall into two main camps: adamantly opposed to it and disappointed in Obama and; or they support the measure but vehemently refuse to marry anyone other than a man and a woman.
Exactly why are they taking this position? My theory is it is MONEY! When President Obama moderated his position on same-sex marriages, the net result is asking for more acceptance of the LGBT community and this will hurt fundraising.
My dairy of yesterday sparked a lot of comments. It was called The race of "color" that discriminates for Romney.
Yes I have to pick a title that sparks your interest, however, my purpose is not to divide people but to unite them.
Before moving forward, lets make a few definitions and summarize that post.
Definition of a Fact: Something that can be supported with conclusive proof.
Definition of a Theory: An explanation of something that is a situation based upon facts. Theories can explain a reasoning behind past or present situations. They can also predict future situations.
Definition of a Myth: An explanation of something that isn't a real situation, or offers reasoning based upon things that are not facts.
Definition of a Race: A group of individuals that can be classified according to a particular characteristic. Under my definition of "race" the LGBT community is a race and discrimination on the basis of sexuality is a form of racial discrimination.
Summary of yesterday's post:
Facts:
1. In 2008 polls revealed people of color voted 70% against same-sex marriages in California.
2. Most swing States have laws against same-sex marriage.
3. Romney has taken a pledge to end all same-sex marriages and adoptions on a national basis. Obama moderated his stance.
4. Some pastors of "color" vowed to do everything in their power to "influence" members to stop Obama.
A large coalition of African-American pastors, snubbed by President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder in their demand for a meeting to discuss same-sex marriage, are calling on blacks to boycott the president and sign a petition demanding that the administration withdraw support for gay marriage.
5. The race between Romney and Obama is close.
Theory:
Enough people of "color" in swing states will switch to Romney or stay at home and boycot to ensure Romney's victory.
That sums up yesterday's post. However, I didn't explain to you the reason why people of "color" agree so much with Romeny's anti-LGBT stance. I have a theory.
My theory is largely based upon personal observation. Yes this will spark many comments. However, come up with a theory if you don't like mine that explains the following facts.
Here are the facts:
1. When I moved to Hawaii I noticed it was kind of like Detroit. In Detroit I was trained that references to a person's color should not be made. People were people.
2. The difference in Hawaii were references to a person's sexuality seemed absent. People were people.
3. At the lumber yard I worked at, I recall gay and lesbian couples that were building houses together. Never once did I hear any employee refer to their sexuality.
When David and Peter came in to buy lumber, we knew they were a couple. When the lumber was pulled and stacked and delivered it went out to David and Peter's construction site. No one ever said that lumber is going to the home of those two gay guys.
4. Hawaii has some politicians that were generally known to be members of the LGBT family, however, not once did I see a reference to this in print, on the radio, or mentioned by a candidate. Unlike most of the United States, who slept with whom was none of our business. Which Hawaiian politicians these were wont' be listed here as it isn't relevant.
5. My employer said certainly to my request that my same-sex partner be covered by the company medical plan.
6. Hawaii is one of the wealthier States. It is in the top 10.
Part One of Theory:
Churches need to raise money for salaries, buildings, repairs etc. Churches with memberships that are not very wealthy may have a more difficult time of it. These churches need to give their membership a strong reason to give money. Defending against an "evil" or "danger" and "protecting" or "defending" the family or marriage brings in MONEY!
Here is a typical request for money:
Support ADF with a generous gift to continue the ongoing legal battle to protect marriage in America.
In Hawaii, where people are wealthier, it may not be necessary to resort to scare tactics.
Part Two of Theory:
This part of the theory is necessary to account for why other wealthy States are not as accepting of the LGBT community as Hawaii. What is so different in Hawaii?
My believe is that answer is found in its unique history. Until relatively recently, a few families controlled nearly all the wealth, most of the land, and were the largest employers. Two of the very wealthiest of these families had sons that were generally known as being gay.
Exactly who they are/were, is not relevant. What is relevant is your imagination.
What would it be like in your State right now if two gay men between about 1940 and 1975 owned a huge portion of everything in your State?
Would a preacher dare to take the pulpit and rail against the LGBT community?
Absolutely not. They may make a comment in private, however, they wouldn't dare call the employer of a good deal of people in the church a villain.
Conclusion:
A theory is needed to explain this sentence: Most black churches fall into two main camps: adamantly opposed to it and disappointed in Obama and; or they support the measure but vehemently refuse to marry anyone other than a man and a woman.
My theory as advanced here was that we can account for this by examining places like Hawaii where the citizens have an Aloha spirit and largely accept the LGBT community. We can then ask why Hawaii is different.
That answer is in part due to a wealthier congregation that can afford to support the church better. It is also linked with Hawaii's history of a few families with gay sons controlling vast amounts of the wealth.
Therefore: When President Obama, by his example, essentially asked people of color to begin accepting members of the LGBT community he was taking away the ability of pastors of color to continue to vilify them. Not being able to bash the gays takes away a proven fundraising tactic. Why should poorer members of the congregation dig deep to give to the Church when there isn't an immediate threat and no reason to defend against them?
In How to Write Fundraising Materials That Raise More Money (2008), Tom Ahern offers insight into the top fundraising emotional triggers: anger, and fear were right at the top of the list.
Note: I really like this group. Some of you are really on the ball and realize I am up to something. I most certainly am. I am making connections, and trying to spark reactions. I may be wrong on this, however, I believe strongly that the prime issue of the 2012 election is same-sex marriage and those that support or contest it.
The issue of same-sex marriage goes hand in hand with the Super PAC lawsuit I launched.
The reason I placed that poll at the end of the previous post, is I wanted to see how many of you would consider Romney's large contribution to the National Organization for Marriage to have potentially violated State laws. Fifteen out of seventeen so far said YES, or he would get away with it. This I find interesting since when I ask a similar question about violating Federal laws by giving excessive money to a Super PAC, it is about 50/50.
So where am I headed? Simple, as stated before again and again the only way to derail Romney is to show him for what he really is and to derail the Super PAC money train.
In regards to pastors of color, it is a gentle and difficult process which makes you subject to personal attacks, however, it is worth it. Pastors have to be shown that the real evil is someone like Romney that rises to the White House by bashing the LGBT community and baiting President Obama to reveal himself to be an accepting and loving person.
Now who do you want in office?
Go find a pastor of color, assure them their church will survive this frightening change to become more accepting.
P.S. I think the GOP has found me here so expect a whole bunch of deflection comments.