Aunt B over at Tiny Cat Pants (here), who I have learned is "Betsy" in real life, has responded to my post (here) about her post (here) about MLK (here).
She spends a lot of time heralding Al Sharpton, which was really just a small part of my post (hyperbole, in fact); however, her reverance for the reverend betrays a lot about her view on race relations.
Even though I find Sharpton always candid, sometimes funny, always humorous, sometimes sincere, I view him less as a "reverend" or "minister" and more as a "demagogue" or "charlatan." And, frankly, I think Black "civil rights leaders" who came from the ranks of clergy too often forget to drop their title when they move on to non-spiritual vocations. In sum, I think folks like him make it hard to move on from the racial divide that is in our country's (and world's) history. Every disparity between a person who happens to be black and a person who happens to be white (or even group of persons belonging to either group) does not constitute a moral failure or a tragedy and certainly not a need for government's intervention.
Betsy is unimpressed with my reference to Bears Head Coach Lovie Smith and sees no irony in her claims that we haven't made any progress on the things that mattered to MLK. Whatever. But playing a sport and coaching a sport are two different skills; therefore Lovie Smith and other African-Americans who know football are competing with 85% of the population who also know football for those few positions.
MLK certainly believed that changing laws and gov't was key to ending segregation, but that has been achieved and she is insinuating that MLK would be marching in favor of DA Nifong and raising minimum wage laws and re-defining marriage. I don't buy it.
Betsy says she never said that things were worse for blacks today than in MLK's day, but she did say that beatings, disenfranchisement, overt prejudice are all "serious problems for black people" today and we haven't made much progess on such problems.
Hello world!
7 years ago
9 comments:
Honey, I hate to break this to you, but let me put it, gently. Martin Luther King Jr. was a social liberal. Your own people, social conservative blogger-types, have a field day in linking Mr. King's communism and hanging his dirty laundry with mistresses out to dry like a tawdry affair. Coretta Scott King said of her own husband, "I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice," she said. "But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'"
Martin Luther King Jr. also had Baystin Rustin as a colleague, who was openly gay and did not hide this fact from King Jr:
gaylife.about.com/od/gayrights/a/bayard_rustin.htm
Joey, who you calling "honey"? I hardly know you!
And nice try, but even if MLK was a philanderer or rake or libertine doesn't mean he thought that homosexuality was normal or okay.
The fact that MLK--who oversaw a movement more than a "ministry" and had objectives that superceded personal lives of those around him (heck, even his own personal life, it seems) tolerated a homosexual colleague is unimpressive.
Lastly, it is major conjecture to say that Mrs. King's sentiments or expressions of support to her political "friends" at the end of life aren't representative of MLK's. Indeed, black evangelicals are much more disapproving of homosexuality and homosexual marriage than ANY other demographic group, even white evangelicals.
Oops, last paragraph should say "end of life are representative of MLK's"
"And nice try, but even if MLK was a philanderer or rake or libertine doesn't mean he thought that homosexuality was normal or okay."
Ned. That's what your fellow conservatives use to castigate and tarnish the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. I'm not labeling him a sinner or anything else. Your friends do that for me.
Here's a few other choice quotes of Cornetta. She's gone on the record as saying her husband was supportive of gay rights. I guess she doesn't know what she's talking about, considering that she was married to Dr. King for 15 years.
Those are his wife's own words, Ned. She has gone on the record as saying that Dr. King supported civil rights for gays and lesbians. I guess you have some divine knowledge that Dr. King believed homosexuality was in opposition to Biblical tenets and that your divine intervention trumps a woman who was married to the man for 15 years.
Rustin himself was tapped to organize the Montgomery Bus boycott and 1963 March on Washington. He was a significant figure in the civil rights movement. Since he was openly gay, why would Dr.King give such an important role to a deviant?
Meanwhile, Ned, here's what your God-fearing fellow social conservatives say about Dr. King.
From Jesus is Our Savior Web site:
"Martin Luther King Jr. was NO Christian. King propagated a social Gospel of ecumenism (which is still strongly followed today by African Americans), but King certainly did NOT preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
2. Martin Luther King Jr. was NO Baptist Preacher. Many of King's doctrines were way out in left field. He denied the bodily resurrection of Christ and believed that spirituality could be gained through "religious experience" as he termed it.
3. The "social justice" which Christianity Today praises was nothing less than a continued Communist conspiracy to destabilize America. This "social justice" has spawned feminism, homosexuality, gay-marriage, abortion, and a host of other evils in America. Freedom without moral restraint is no freedom at all and can only lead to certain bondage. The social justice which King propagated was not just a fight for equality amongst African Americans, but was largely a campaign to morally bankrupt America."
In the last years of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s life, conservative plaudits treated him with fear and derision. In 1967, a Life magazine conserative writer dubbed King's prophetic anti-war address "demagogic slander" and "a script for Radio Hanoi." Years later, Ronald Reagan described King as a "near-Communist."
Those are your people's views on Dr. King, Ned. That's the legacy he leaves to your fellows.
What's more is that Dr. King created the first affirmative action group, heaven to Betsy! His Operation Breadbasket kept tabs on corporations that effectively rooted out African-Americans.
In his 1964 writing Why We Can't Wait, he said, "Whenever the issue of compensatory treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree; but he should ask nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic."
In a 1965 Playboy article, King linked affirmative action with the GI Bill: "Within common law we have ample precedents for special compensatory programs.... And you will remember that America adopted a policy of special treatment for her millions of veterans after the war."
"We are all tied together in a single garment of destiny... I can never be what I ought to be until you are allowed to be what you ought to be," she said, quoting from her husband. "I've always felt that homophobic attitudes and policies were unjust and unworthy of a free society and must be opposed by all Americans who believe in democracy."3
"Gays and lesbians stood up for civil rights in Montgomery, Selma, in Albany, Georgia, and St. Augustine, Florida, and many other campaigns of the Civil Rights Movement. Many of these courageous men and women were fighting for my freedom at a time when they could find few voices for their own, and I salute their contributions."4
Those were the quotes from Ms. King I left out in my second response.
Joey,
The premise of the only quote you've provided from Coretta Scott King is that failing to re/undefine marriage constitutes an injustice.
And I know what many Social Conservatives say about MLK; and frankly, I think it is a shame that he wasn't faithful to his wife--it calls into question the virtue of other things he did.
MLK led masterfully, and spoke eloquently, and inspired a movement and following generations, and accomplished some amazing things. He is a heroic figure. But, that is only potentially relevant on the issue of what he thought of homosexuality (or fidelity in marriage). Indeed, if he believed the Bible, he certainly would have believed that homosexual acts were sin.
And good for Rustin. I've never asserted that gender confusion or "devian[cy]" or doing homosexual stuff (or cheating on your spouse) necessarily disqualifies someone from being intelligent or organizing and leading effectively.
We were composing simultaneously . . . your last two posts are fine, Joey.
And those aren't "my people" even though we might hold the same position on certain public policies.
But, maybe you and Betsy are right in arguing that MLK was virtually a socialist. I guess he and I could agree on the fact that Jim Crow laws and apartheid and segregation were wrong. Good night.
But see, that's the thing. You don't know what he thought of homosexuality. And neither do I, really. We can only go on what Ms. King gave us, and that was a record of justice of all of God's children.
"And good for Rustin. I've never asserted that gender confusion or "devian[cy]" or doing homosexual stuff (or cheating on your spouse) necessarily disqualifies someone from being intelligent or organizing and leading effectively."
But it certainly undermines their moral compass in your eyes. And for an issue that Dr. King thought was morally unjust and was so close to his heart, I just find it ironic that he gives this most important position to an openly gay man.
Post a Comment