Monday, May 16, 2011
Sojourners controversy
Recently, progressive evangelical group Sojourners opted not to run a Mother's Day ad from a group that promotes full LGBTQ inclusion among mainline Protestantism. Sojourners' assertion was that they did not want to take a position on this hot-button issue, but many countered this by pointing out that rejection of the ad was already a (negative) position. A flurry of articles ensued (see, for instance, here for a summary of the opposition, here for Sojourners' response, and also here, here, and here). I understand the firestorm on the one hand -- a group claiming to be progressive wavers on this progressive issue -- but I also understand the importance of consensus building and the different realities of the evangelical world. I suppose the backlash was stronger than I would have expected. I would welcome any others' thoughts on this issue.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I sympathize with Sojourner's, although I admit it's complicated. Any position they could possibly take on the issue of LGBTQ inclusion would instantly and decidedly estrange about half of their support base. Is it worth jeopardizing half of your political force with one simple ad? You can definitely argue that there's wisdom in sticking to their core issues: end the war, empower the poor, provide healthcare in the developing world, advocate for a world free of nuclear weapons, etc., rather than getting embroiled in the LGBTQ question. Not that I don't think it's an important question. I just don't think it's Sojourner's question, and if they make it their question then they're bound to have some major setbacks to all their other questions.
ReplyDelete