Let's talk about Rick Warren
Everyone seems pretty clear on the fact that Rick Warren is no advocate for same-sex marriage. He's also strongly against abortion. [Warning: this interview contains a fairly offensive comparison of pro-choice people with Holocaust deniers: link.] So, as feminists, just how angry should we be about his invitation to give a prayer at the inauguration of President-elect Obama?
I'm going to suggest the answer is "not very," for two reasons.
First, Obama and his campaign have been clear that Pastor Warren's invitation is not a tacit wholesale endorsement of his politics.
The second reason is even more important, though: Pastor Warren, for all of his socially conservative and (to me) offensive beliefs, also has an agenda I can get behind. He wants to end poverty, for example. He's an advocate for health care and for education. These are the kind of things that I, as a feminist, care about. He's definitely not on my page about everything, probably including how to carry out these very agendas, but he's not a scion of evil either.
I'm starting worry that those of us sitting over here on the progressive bench have forgotten about an important quality of coalition building: you don't have to feel like everyone working with you on issues of hunger and poverty is your soul-sister. You don't have to agree with her about religion, abortion, or whether to stay home with kids, as long as you can both agree to show some tolerance. Tolerance is a liberal value, remember?
It's true that there are some things on which members of a coalition probably need to basically agree: it's important not to discriminate based on identity, which includes race, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, class, and religion. And it's important not to impose our choices -- or ideas about what makes someone acceptably progressive in terms of politics, dress, or anything else -- on others. (Check out this brilliant article on how middle-class progressives alienate their working-class allies with tofu for some great examples and even greater suggestions.)
In the end, what it comes down to is this: if we insist that we can't talk to Rick Warren -- that the only people we can work with are people who are just like us -- we're going to prevent ourselves from making the kind of alliances that will get things done, choosing instead to stay on our high horses. And there's nothing progressive about that.
I'm going to suggest the answer is "not very," for two reasons.
First, Obama and his campaign have been clear that Pastor Warren's invitation is not a tacit wholesale endorsement of his politics.
The second reason is even more important, though: Pastor Warren, for all of his socially conservative and (to me) offensive beliefs, also has an agenda I can get behind. He wants to end poverty, for example. He's an advocate for health care and for education. These are the kind of things that I, as a feminist, care about. He's definitely not on my page about everything, probably including how to carry out these very agendas, but he's not a scion of evil either.
I'm starting worry that those of us sitting over here on the progressive bench have forgotten about an important quality of coalition building: you don't have to feel like everyone working with you on issues of hunger and poverty is your soul-sister. You don't have to agree with her about religion, abortion, or whether to stay home with kids, as long as you can both agree to show some tolerance. Tolerance is a liberal value, remember?
It's true that there are some things on which members of a coalition probably need to basically agree: it's important not to discriminate based on identity, which includes race, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, class, and religion. And it's important not to impose our choices -- or ideas about what makes someone acceptably progressive in terms of politics, dress, or anything else -- on others. (Check out this brilliant article on how middle-class progressives alienate their working-class allies with tofu for some great examples and even greater suggestions.)
In the end, what it comes down to is this: if we insist that we can't talk to Rick Warren -- that the only people we can work with are people who are just like us -- we're going to prevent ourselves from making the kind of alliances that will get things done, choosing instead to stay on our high horses. And there's nothing progressive about that.
posted by Sarah at 7:15 AM
2 comments
