..."But you just don't understand how *bad* these people are." For the partisans of any conflict, this assertion is used as an emotional show-stopper. 

... a refusal to fight for my side was taken to mean that I wanted the other side to win.
 
 

I want justice, respect, and, yes, love and compassion for all people...
 

For me, once again, the model is Jesus... he dealt with individuals as individuals, whatever group they belonged to or represented. 
 
 
 
 
 
 

In the culture wars, who will be the first to turn the other cheek and go the second mile?

I've been wanting for some time to put down in writing some observations about how the two sides in the homosexuality debate appeal to public opinion. The American public is, generally speaking, good-hearted, compassionate, and willing to go to bat for the underdog. In the battle for hearts and minds, the side with the most sympathy wins. 

Any pacifist who has debated the merits of a particular war, or perhaps of capital punishment, has found the most passionate arguments from the other side to be those founded on stories of atrocity: "But you just don't understand how *bad* these people are." For the partisans of any conflict, this assertion is used as an emotional show-stopper. 

In the culture wars, it's no different. Supporters of civil rights for gays point to instances of harassment, discrimination, gay-bashing (and entrenched institutional structural support for the conditions that give rise to such instances), to show that something must be done to protect the victims of such things. From the viewpoint of the religious right, it is the morally upright citizen who is under attack, and civilization as we know it that is in danger: the victim is the family and its values, employers who are forced to hire people they otherwise wouldn't, managers who are fired for expressing their religious views, children who are forced to hear that immorality is okay and that their parents and church leaders are bigots. The bashers are promoters of special rights, and talk of nondiscrimination on the basis of gender attraction is an attempt to raise lgbt people to minority status. 

Point is, on both sides people are trying to establish (1) that their side is defending victims and (2) that the victims the other side is defending really aren't victims at all. Each side, moreover, portrays the other side as being lopsidedly ahead in the battle. This shouting match is played out in the media, the state and federal legislatures, the courts, and increasingly in local school boards. 

Enter ex-gays, and things get even more complicated, because here you have people who can identify as victims of both sides, and who are easily labeled, by each side, as a present or former victim of the other. In the culture wars, their home is no-man's land. Both sides want to claim them, but both suspect their loyalty. They are uniquely placed, perhaps, to be peacemakers in the great conflict. But such a task is not for the fainthearted. 

In the midst of such propaganda battles, negotiating a truce, or even entertaining the thought that peace could be possible or desirable, can be deadly, and is easily regarded as treasonous. Back in the sixties, when I struggled with whether to register as a conscientious objector, I was as often as not accused of being a Communist. Because a refusal to fight for my side was taken to mean that I wanted the other side to win. 

I feel like that, again, at bridges-across. I want to be a noncombatant in the culture wars, yet I am fearful that there will be those in my conservative church who will assume that means I am fighting for the other side. Among friends and family, there are some who can't for the life of them understand why I am not fighting for the other side. But what I want is an end to the victim wars. I don't want to hear any more claims and counter-claims of who has been more damaged by whom. I want justice, respect, and, yes, love and compassion for all people. That includes my gay and lesbian relatives and friends, and it also includes my theologically conservative relatives and friends. I don't want my friends telling me not to associate with my other friends. 

For me, once again, the model is Jesus. He associated with Pharisees and with prostitutes. He knew what he faced, but did not face it as a victim: he rejected the victim role and the victim rhetoric, and what he suffered he suffered by choice. He identified with criminals, though not a criminal himself. He supported much of the teaching of the Pharisees, though he abhorred their hypocrisy. Most importantly, he dealt with individuals as individuals, whatever group they belonged to or represented. And he taught an approach to conflict that asserts strength without violence, dignity without haughtiness, humility without fearfulness. 

In the culture wars, who will be the first to turn the other cheek and go the second mile?

by the Reverend Robert C. Buehler

Pastor, Marbury Church of God 

Author, Building on the Rock: Practical Advice from Jesus

Basics

Reading

Faith