A website that critiques mainstream press reporting on religion turns its attention to a piece on gay marriage and "the Black churches."
Writing a puff piece: a how-to manual:
One line leapt out.
The recent Gallup poll indicates that perhaps 4% of Blacks would identify as "LGBT". Is 4% "significant"? And of course, only a small minority of that small minority would be in marriage-ready relationships.
So how is that "a significant number"? And where does the line break between significant and insignificant?
It would be fun to adapt Abraham's argument with the Lord about Sodom and Gomorrah --Wilst thou destroy it for for fifty, for twenty, for ten just?--to contemporary liberalism's passion for rescuing victims in "suffering situations". How many victims constitute a legitimate minority, deserving of all the ethical hyperventilation that is now de rigueur in this age of universal human rights and dignity and who are just a bunch of whiny cranks?**
*just the fact that a reporter can write "the Black churches" without further explanation shows, to paraphrase Mrs. Elton, "a shocking lack of diversity.
**An example: gays who want to get married are an oppressed minority, rejection of whose wishes is considered beyond gauche, even H8ful. But "angry White men", a much larger group, can be dismissed without fear of elite opprobrium. Funny how that works.
'via Blog this'
Writing a puff piece: a how-to manual:
One line leapt out.
"Some have even said that given the challenges in the black community — from education to health care — marriage for gays cannot be a priority, despite a significant number of African Americans in same-sex relationships."
The recent Gallup poll indicates that perhaps 4% of Blacks would identify as "LGBT". Is 4% "significant"? And of course, only a small minority of that small minority would be in marriage-ready relationships.
So how is that "a significant number"? And where does the line break between significant and insignificant?
It would be fun to adapt Abraham's argument with the Lord about Sodom and Gomorrah --Wilst thou destroy it for for fifty, for twenty, for ten just?--to contemporary liberalism's passion for rescuing victims in "suffering situations". How many victims constitute a legitimate minority, deserving of all the ethical hyperventilation that is now de rigueur in this age of universal human rights and dignity and who are just a bunch of whiny cranks?**
*just the fact that a reporter can write "the Black churches" without further explanation shows, to paraphrase Mrs. Elton, "a shocking lack of diversity.
**An example: gays who want to get married are an oppressed minority, rejection of whose wishes is considered beyond gauche, even H8ful. But "angry White men", a much larger group, can be dismissed without fear of elite opprobrium. Funny how that works.
'via Blog this'
1 comment:
There was an AIDS/HIV publication out about 10 years ago with a picture of the South African version of "Sesame Street" (a character named "Kami" -"Acceptance" in Xhosa, apparently) which asked (rhetorically) "How many choir directors and organists do our churches have to put in the ground before Black churches do more than light a candle?"
Post a Comment