Editorial: It Wasn’t Abortion That Formed the Religious Right. It Was Support for Segregation
- Status
P
ProdglArchitect
Guest
This title is a bit of a non-sequitur… as is the article. The response was not specifically to desegregation, but rather to the government’s insistence that they have the right to declare what does or does not qualify as a protected religious belief. Had they been trying to force the campus to accept openly homosexual teachers promoting the homosexual lifestyle the response would have been the same.
Slate has always shown a bit of anti-religious bias in their articles; and do not present a balanced picture of what actually happened throughout this article.
Also, the “religious right,” did not emerge from a single event, but rather from a series of events throughout the last century. The author is cherry picking one instance that supports their presuppositions, and presents it as the singular catalyst in what is actually a complex series of cause-and-effect events.
Slate has always shown a bit of anti-religious bias in their articles; and do not present a balanced picture of what actually happened throughout this article.
Also, the “religious right,” did not emerge from a single event, but rather from a series of events throughout the last century. The author is cherry picking one instance that supports their presuppositions, and presents it as the singular catalyst in what is actually a complex series of cause-and-effect events.
M
Murmurs
Guest
Except it wasn’t. Moreover the fact that the so-called religious right didn’t form just around the desire to continue segregation doesn’t invalidate the argument that segregation was an issue (among others).
Slate’s subtext of course is that the ‘RR’ shouldn’t therefore be trusted (“once a racist/homophobe, always one”, I suppose), which is patently absurd.
The underlying historical analysis isn’t unsound, however. Just because it’s a bit unpalatable doesn’t mean it has to be discredited. So what if a contributory factor was a desire to continue segregation?
The annoying part of me, meanwhile, does wonder how on earth could anyone with a shred of credibility that segregating white and black (or simply white and everyone-else even) students is remotely related to any religious belief or practice (never mind the streak of tolerance and egalitarianism that has to be inherent in any Christian denomination), in the first place…
meltzerboy
New member
I do recall that Jerry Falwell was not particularly concerned about abortion at first. In fact, he asked why Evangelicals should be concerned since “we are not Catholics.” In time, however, Evangelicals made abortion an important political issue.
meltzerboy
New member
I think the answer to your last question is that the religious right succumbed to the political climate of the times, which, for a significant number of people, consisted of opposition to integration.
M
mdgspencer
Guest
Actually, I was very much involved in the desegregation battle of decades ago. (In fact, I went on some of Martin Luther King’s marches in the U.S. South.) I don’t think this was the case. I presume this opinion is from someone who actually doesn’t know what happened then.
P
pnewton
Guest
This editorial is a piece of propaganda, pure and simple. Is uses guilt by association to make abortion rights seem the equivalent of racial equality. Terms such as “religious right” are amorphous. Such historical tracking my work for an individual, like Falwell, but he is not the “religious right”. For every Falwell, there is another who protested first for racial equality and civil rights, then applied that same fervor to the unborn.
M
Murmurs
Guest
That’s a very reasonable point I think.
I’m tempted to say that it’s happening/ed again today (though obviously not about integration), but I won’t for fear of getting forum-yelled at by others
J
JustaServant
Guest
The writer of the article is indeed very liberal and has an agenda of their own, however there is some uncomfortable truths touched upon
There is (or was at one time) a shadowy connection between the KKK and American Christian fundamentalism. Both movements grew simultaneously to one another after the Civil War and especially at the turn of the century.
Many of the ‘founders’ of fundamentalism such as Bob Jones Sr., Billy Sunday, J. Frank Norris, Bob Schuler and many others were very sympathetic to the Klan. A building on the campus of Bob Jones University is dedicated to a Klan grand dragon who was once a governor of a southern state.
Jerry Falwell was very much involved in the fundamentalist movement in the 1960s. Although I never heard the statement Meltzerboy cited. Falwell was very much the spiritual face of the “religious right” in the 1970s and 80s. In his defense, the Moral Majority was ecumenical at the time, which angered many of his fundamentalist friends in the South. The fundamentalist paper at the time, “The Sword of the Lord”, put out by racist fundie preacher John R. Rice, stopped supporting Falwell.
So, there is ‘some’ truth in the article to the allegation.
There is (or was at one time) a shadowy connection between the KKK and American Christian fundamentalism. Both movements grew simultaneously to one another after the Civil War and especially at the turn of the century.
Many of the ‘founders’ of fundamentalism such as Bob Jones Sr., Billy Sunday, J. Frank Norris, Bob Schuler and many others were very sympathetic to the Klan. A building on the campus of Bob Jones University is dedicated to a Klan grand dragon who was once a governor of a southern state.
Jerry Falwell was very much involved in the fundamentalist movement in the 1960s. Although I never heard the statement Meltzerboy cited. Falwell was very much the spiritual face of the “religious right” in the 1970s and 80s. In his defense, the Moral Majority was ecumenical at the time, which angered many of his fundamentalist friends in the South. The fundamentalist paper at the time, “The Sword of the Lord”, put out by racist fundie preacher John R. Rice, stopped supporting Falwell.
So, there is ‘some’ truth in the article to the allegation.
A
AbideWithMe
Guest
Exactly. Though it preceeded Falwell by more than a century, Oberlin College, from the idealism of its Evangelical roots, was the first American institution to admit black students to higher education in America; it was also important in promoting higher education for women. Charles Grandison Finney was a famous abolitionist, an influential Evangelical leader, and the second president of Oberlin College.
The article as much as admits that educational segregation as a uniting cause wasn’t enough to galvanize the “religious right”, yet continues on with its tar-dipped broad brush trying to make shoddy comparisons. Hack journalism at its finest.
A
AbideWithMe
Guest
But the “some” truth doesn’t justify the writer’s agenda. She’s not trying to give a history lesson, she’s cherry-picking to support her agenda.
J
JustaServant
Guest
She doesn’t know the history of how Falwell broke with fundamentalism over the abortion issue. The “religious right” encompassed quite a few denominations.
BUT, there was a history of segregation and racism among historic American fundamentalism.
A
AbideWithMe
Guest
And it’s good to be aware of all this as a lesson in history. I’m just objecting to the one-sided portrayal and the use of it to promote her agenda. I know plenty of people who would lap up her conclusions with not much critical thought.
B
benhur
Guest
Thank you. Sounds good to me. Another ‘accuser of the brethren’.
- Status