Sexual Semantics

Last updated on: May 9, 2013 at 6:20 am by Faithful Democrats

Sexual Semantics 2013-05-09T06:20:39-06:00 Faithful Democrats

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Why did so many Black people vote Republican in the 2004 election? As

it turned out, when it comes to sexual politics and the issue of "gay
marriage," Black evangelicals were more conservative than Democrats
bargained for. African-American protest votes across the U.S. helped
build Repubican hegemony in the U.S. house, senate and executive office.

According to The Black
Vote in 2004, a study by the Joint Center for Political and Economic
Studies*,* "In
2000, Bush received only 9 percent of [Ohio's] black
votes; in 2004, Bush received 16 percent of them." In essence, the
study says, the black vote may have cost Kerry the election.

Why did so many black people vote Republican in the 2004
election?

As it turned out, when it came to sexual politics and the
issue of "gay marriage," black evangelicals were more conservative than
Democrats bargained for.
African-American protest votes across the U.S. helped build Republican hegemony in
the U.S.
house, senate and executive office.

Not too long ago, I had a conversation with a friend who
self-identifies as "queer." She also identifies as an
evangelical Christian. She is also black.

We searched for the bottom lines in the issue of gay marriage. Here are the points we agreed on:

Marriage is a religious
sacrament. As such, for the state to legislate its bounds would be a
breach of the separation of church and state.
Since the U.S. is not a theocracy, people in the
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ) communities must be
viewed first and foremost as individual human beings and U.S. citizens with the same rights, duties
and protections afforded to all U.S. citizens. As such,
they should be afforded the human right of self-determination and the
right to marry.

Here's where it got sticky — semantics*.*

"Marriage" vs. "Civil Union":
Some evangelical Christians support "civil union" for the LGBTQ communities,
but draw the line at "marriage."

Yet, my friend protested this thinking on two
counts:

Civil Union doesn't
afford the rights, protections and benefits afforded to those covered
under the term "married." In effect, this inequity leaves
a subset of U.S citizens permanently disenfranchised without access to a
basic human right.
Marriage is what many
gay people want — not a union. As Tony Campolo says, the Religious
Right claims that gay marriage is the biggest threat to the institution of
marriage. Yet, ironically, it is currently projected that 40-50% of U.S.
heterosexual marriages will end in divorce. And born-again Christians
have a higher divorce rate than other Christians, atheists, and agnostics.
So, evangelical Christians must look inward to strengthen the institution
of marriage in the U.S.

Thus, for the U.S. to live up to its own ideals including
the separation of church and state and civil rights protections for
every citizen, the U.S. needs to face every facet of its plurality with
fairness and equity:

Either comparable
legal protections and benefits should be afforded to gay civil unions
Or, to honor the
separation of church and state, there should be a clear distinction drawn
between civil (secular) marriage and religious (sacred) marriage. Of
course religious institutions would be free to perform gay religious
marriages as their governing bodies allowed.

If the 2004 election is any indication, the Democratic party must have
a plan for how to deal with this issue if it is serious about gaining a
foothold in this year's mid-term election and the 2008 presidential
election. The plan must include protection for the separation of church
and state and enforcement of the LGBTQ communities' civil rights.

It was a good conversation between my friend and me. We approached the
issue from different perspectives with the goal to listen, hear and understand
the interests of "the other."

In the end, we were surprised to find, that at least between the two of us,
the issue came down to semantics.

Featured Writers

Previous Post

September 2, 2006

Common Good Strategies

Next Post

September 3, 2006 Sacred Is As Sacred Does

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category About Us About Us Action Center Advertise Ask a Theologian Ask a Theologian Blogs Books Campaign Blog Candidate Spotlights Commentary Donate Facebook Featured Writers Fellows Fellows From the Pulpit General Information Hillary Clinton Interfaith Blog Latest Media Center Media Center Media Center MyBlog MyBlog News Newsflash Newsflashes Our Team Reader Blogs RSS Sermon of the Week Shop Social Networking Static Items Support Talking Points Test blogs The Basics Theology Uncategorized YouTube

Select a Month November 2020 October 2020 February 2020 August 2019 July 2018 July 2017 March 2017 February 2017 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 June 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 January 2006 August 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who pleaded with Joseph for Benjamin's release?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Reuben Levi Naphtali Judah