The conservative media isn't a big fan of discussing racism. They are however very eager to discuss all of the reasons people shouldn't be talking about racism. The diversionary tactics include such classics as "playing the race card", "black on black crime", "White guilt", "I have a black friend" as well as more recent incarnations like "all lives matter", "reverse racism", and "racism doesn't exist anymore". The purpose of these talking points is not to have a substantive discussion on how to improve race relations in America. No, the purpose of these talking points is to specifically avoid such discussions by dismissing racially based discrimination and hate as the imaginary rantings of politically correct crybabies.
Unfortunately the recent events at Missouri University offer yet another example of conservative media's deride and disparage tactics when it comes to the uncomfortable conversation of racism. Rather than talk about the overt racism experienced by some black students, the conservative media is dissecting video of a student that may or may not have been struck by the University President's car. Rather than debate the need for greater diversity among the staff and faculty, the conservative media has obsessed over a false story that the bathroom swastika might be a hoax. Rather than consider how some minority students might feel marginalized at a predominately white school, the conservative media is more concerned about the criticism they have received for their reporting.
Maybe the incidents described by students are completely accurate or maybe they aren't, but all of this hand wringing about needing extensive proof of racism rings hollow coming from the conservative media, given their penchant for making a mountain out of a molehill. For example, one of the top viewed stories on Fox News the past few days is an article by Christian huckster Todd Starnes titled Teen runner disqualified from state meet -- Was it the Bible verse?. Despite providing zero evidence that the runner was disqualified for his religious views, Starnes had no problem publishing the concern of Republican lawmakers over "Religious expression being squashed right here in the Ninth District".
The reality is that when it comes to the concerns of conservatives, the mere appearance of discrimination is all the proof that is required. So while the conservative media chides a group of people they tend to label as entitled and lazy for organizing and bringing about change with terms like "disgusting" and "infantile", their concern for this kind of change via protest seems to be limited to black students and liberals. In fact, when it comes to protests outside of medical clinics by anti-abortion zealots who bully women into conforming to their way of thinking, the conservative media is rather supportive. The same is true of instances like the Christians at Duke University that protested the use of the school's chapel bell tower for the Islamic call to prayer and the protest over the lack of Christmas symbols on the cups at Starbucks. If trying to change minds through protest is disgusting and infantile, then these acts by conservatives deserve as much if not more scrutiny than the Missouri students.
Perhaps the problem here is that the conservative media doesn't like the idea of someone demanding change. After all, the conservative media response to the list of demands submitted by Concerned Student 1950 was to cry fascism. This rhetoric is, however, surprisingly absent in the conservative media when conservative Christians like Mike Huckabee, Franklin Graham, and Bryan Fischer demanded change because their feelings were hurt.
The conservative media was also largely silent when Republican politicians made outlandish demands as part of the debt ceiling deal, payroll tax cut negotiations, as well as the recent Republican presidential debate.
But possibly the biggest hypocrisy of the conservative media when it comes to the Missouri University protests has to do with how they have reacted to Jonathan Butler who went on a hunger strike in response to what he saw as systemic racism at the University. The bulk of the conservative media coverage of Butler has focused on the fact that he comes from a wealthy family, because in their minds this exposes a hypocrisy by Butler regarding his organization’s statements on white privilege. The problem is that his wealth has no bearing on the color of his skin. Perhaps he is a spoiled rich kid, but that doesn't mean he hasn't also experienced racism or discrimination associated with being an African American.
Even if it were the case that privilege and white privilege are synonymous, does that somehow make Butler unqualified to comment on the topic? Republicans in Congress routinely complain about how the system they are a part of is broken, yet the conservative media never suggests that their job as a Congressman makes them ineligible to critique Congress. After every terrorist attack perpetrated by Muslims, the conservative media is the first to ask other Muslims to denounce these acts. And you can bet anytime a Democrat disagrees with President Obama, the conservative media will be the first ones to hold that person up as proof of the president's failure.
The idea that being rich precludes Butler from the bigotry and intolerance experienced by black students is idiotic. but compounding the issue by also suggesting his critique is invalid simply because he grew up privileged is completely embarrassing.
The reality is, if there is anything that should be dismissed out of hand, it is the conservative media's coverage of racism. Not only is their narrative so uniformly biased as to be detrimental to a rational discussion, it is also absurdly hypocritical. There is plenty of worthwhile issues to debate regarding racism in America; unfortunately, the conservative media has decided to bury their heads in the sand and cover none of them.
Monday, November 23, 2015
Monday, November 9, 2015
Christians persecution peddlers want special treatment - not religious freedom
Christian persecution has become a new religion for many. These people take it on faith that a war on Christianity is being waged in America. The reality is, the only war being waged right now is one to define the religious freedoms afforded to Americans by the constitution. Despite this fact, the Christian crusaders in the conservative media are still out in full force trying to convince their viewers that any limitations to how and when they can practice their religion are tantamount to outlawing Christianity.
For example, conservative Christian zealot Todd Starnes has spent the past few weeks trying to convince people that "public schools are shoving Christians in the closet" because a Washington state football coach was told he could not pray at the 50 yard line after games. The problem is that in order to claim Christian persecution Starnes must willfully ignore the legal limits of religious freedom.
It's possible that this coach is well within his rights to pray after games. It's also possible that since the coach prays on school property in a place where students are present his actions represent state sponsored religion. Luckily, the decision on what this coach is legally allowed to do is not one that will be decided by the media; but when you have an agenda to push, concerning yourself with factual legalese becomes secondary to generating spurious outrage.
Regardless of how this case turns out, the biggest problem it exposes is not some conspiracy theory where a small minority of Americans are repressing the rights of the Christian majority, but rather just how self-serving the application of religious freedom is for these Christian activists.
It seems likely that if this were a Muslim coach it would be conservative Christians demanding that this coach keep his religious views to himself. After all, despite arguing that Christian children should be allowed to pray in public schools, it is Christians that are most upset with schools that make accommodations to protect Muslim students’ rights to practice their religion.
The problem for many is that in spite of the fact that these rights apply to all religions equally, the practices of Muslims fall outside of our Judeo-Christian traditions, so the accommodations being offered have the appearance of special treatment. The truth is, American schools were designed to facilitate Christian religious customs. For instance, while schools are closed for Christian holidays like Christmas and Good Friday, Islamic holidays are largely ignored by the public school system. Schools have also structured their weekly schedule around the Christian day of rest while the Islamic day of prayer, Friday, is considered just another day for most public schools. And while schools have made sure that wearing skirts, as required by some Christian religions, is acceptable for any dress code, some schools have banned traditional Muslim attire.
Where are the media's conservative Christian raconteurs demanding the protection of religious freedom for those who are being forced to conform to Christian customs?
Of course school accommodations are hardly the only instance of conservative Christian religious freedom hypocrisy.
After hearing of a legal case involving two Muslim truck drivers who refused to transport alcohol because doing so was against their beliefs, many Christians suggested that if these drivers couldn't do the job then they should do something else. Yet these are some of the same people who argue that Military chaplains should have the religious freedom to shame gay service men and women because of their firmly held religious beliefs. Given that the federal courts ruled that discriminating against gays, lesbians and bisexuals is unconstitutional, ending this restriction, it seems that the chaplains’ views now make them unable to properly execute the duties required by their position. Following conservative Christian logic, these chaplains need to find another occupation where their religious convictions don't interfere with the job they were hired to do.
Another example of the duplicity of the conservative Christian media can be seen in how they handle racism. For many in this group, racism is something that only exists in the minds of race baiters, yet somehow they are oblivious to their own position as instigators of the manufactured war on Christianity. When a racially motivated situation arises, the conservative media is the first to whine about Al Sharpton showing up to shine a light on the discrimination being perpetrated. They call him "racial ambulance chaser" and insist that if Al Sharpton is there "you can safely assume you’re being taken for a ride". But when the issue is Christian religious freedom they feel they are doing God's work by highlighting a potential injustice and they praise groups like the Liberty Institute that vigorously pursue and publicize situations involving possible religious discrimination.
Are these people altruistic fighters for freedom or repugnant profiteers of ignorance? Unfortunately, how these people and organizations are viewed tends to have little to do with their actions and far more to do with the beliefs of the person judging those actions.
Having said that, if the persecution peddlers are serious about solving this issue, they should follow the advice the conservative media has for liberals and stop playing the victim in an attempt to get people to cater to their needs. The reality is that the vast majority of instances that these Christian propagandists claim are Christian persecution are just situations where there is some uncertainty regarding the interpretation of the constitution. Claiming otherwise is great if you want to sell ads space, but it's pretty stupid if you really care about religious freedom.
For example, conservative Christian zealot Todd Starnes has spent the past few weeks trying to convince people that "public schools are shoving Christians in the closet" because a Washington state football coach was told he could not pray at the 50 yard line after games. The problem is that in order to claim Christian persecution Starnes must willfully ignore the legal limits of religious freedom.
It's possible that this coach is well within his rights to pray after games. It's also possible that since the coach prays on school property in a place where students are present his actions represent state sponsored religion. Luckily, the decision on what this coach is legally allowed to do is not one that will be decided by the media; but when you have an agenda to push, concerning yourself with factual legalese becomes secondary to generating spurious outrage.
Regardless of how this case turns out, the biggest problem it exposes is not some conspiracy theory where a small minority of Americans are repressing the rights of the Christian majority, but rather just how self-serving the application of religious freedom is for these Christian activists.
It seems likely that if this were a Muslim coach it would be conservative Christians demanding that this coach keep his religious views to himself. After all, despite arguing that Christian children should be allowed to pray in public schools, it is Christians that are most upset with schools that make accommodations to protect Muslim students’ rights to practice their religion.
The problem for many is that in spite of the fact that these rights apply to all religions equally, the practices of Muslims fall outside of our Judeo-Christian traditions, so the accommodations being offered have the appearance of special treatment. The truth is, American schools were designed to facilitate Christian religious customs. For instance, while schools are closed for Christian holidays like Christmas and Good Friday, Islamic holidays are largely ignored by the public school system. Schools have also structured their weekly schedule around the Christian day of rest while the Islamic day of prayer, Friday, is considered just another day for most public schools. And while schools have made sure that wearing skirts, as required by some Christian religions, is acceptable for any dress code, some schools have banned traditional Muslim attire.
Where are the media's conservative Christian raconteurs demanding the protection of religious freedom for those who are being forced to conform to Christian customs?
Of course school accommodations are hardly the only instance of conservative Christian religious freedom hypocrisy.
After hearing of a legal case involving two Muslim truck drivers who refused to transport alcohol because doing so was against their beliefs, many Christians suggested that if these drivers couldn't do the job then they should do something else. Yet these are some of the same people who argue that Military chaplains should have the religious freedom to shame gay service men and women because of their firmly held religious beliefs. Given that the federal courts ruled that discriminating against gays, lesbians and bisexuals is unconstitutional, ending this restriction, it seems that the chaplains’ views now make them unable to properly execute the duties required by their position. Following conservative Christian logic, these chaplains need to find another occupation where their religious convictions don't interfere with the job they were hired to do.
Another example of the duplicity of the conservative Christian media can be seen in how they handle racism. For many in this group, racism is something that only exists in the minds of race baiters, yet somehow they are oblivious to their own position as instigators of the manufactured war on Christianity. When a racially motivated situation arises, the conservative media is the first to whine about Al Sharpton showing up to shine a light on the discrimination being perpetrated. They call him "racial ambulance chaser" and insist that if Al Sharpton is there "you can safely assume you’re being taken for a ride". But when the issue is Christian religious freedom they feel they are doing God's work by highlighting a potential injustice and they praise groups like the Liberty Institute that vigorously pursue and publicize situations involving possible religious discrimination.
Are these people altruistic fighters for freedom or repugnant profiteers of ignorance? Unfortunately, how these people and organizations are viewed tends to have little to do with their actions and far more to do with the beliefs of the person judging those actions.
Having said that, if the persecution peddlers are serious about solving this issue, they should follow the advice the conservative media has for liberals and stop playing the victim in an attempt to get people to cater to their needs. The reality is that the vast majority of instances that these Christian propagandists claim are Christian persecution are just situations where there is some uncertainty regarding the interpretation of the constitution. Claiming otherwise is great if you want to sell ads space, but it's pretty stupid if you really care about religious freedom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
