My post comes from this article.
“Ten years ago, the death of gay college student Matthew Shepard shocked the nation when he was found beaten to death and tied to a split-rail fence outside
Just as shocking were the protesters who showed up outside his funeral at St. Mark's Episcopal Church in
The leader of these “protesters” is Fred Phelps, the senior pastor at
Rewind 60 years. Theophilus Eugene "Bull" Connor, a proud member of the Klu Klux Klan, known for his preference of attack dogs and fire hoses against black protestors, is the Police Commissioner of
The general public eventually grew outraged at the actions of both Phelps and Connor. How long did it take, and at what cost? One would think the clergy would eagerly speak out against such injustices-- unfortunately, this is not the case. King writes in his letter from the Birmingham Jail, "I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate" and the clergymen who “stand on the sideline and merely mouth pious irrelevancies and sanctimonious trivialities.”
It seems like there was a similar delay in the clergy’s response to Phelps protesting Matthew Shepard’s death--
"My concern about what happened around Matthew's death 10 years ago was not extremism so much as it was the horrifying silence from pulpits around the country," said Harry Knox, who directs faith programs for the Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay rights group.
"(Shepard's death) helped a lot of mainstream church people see that anti-gay positions were literally killing people," DeBernardo said. "It caused a lot of them to be aware that they had to condemn violence."
While Phelps and Connor are now widely condemned for their actions in the gay and civil rights movements, it’s interesting to note that clergy in both cases failed to immediately protest such terrible behaviors. What does this mean for today?
Matthew Sheppard was beaten to death for his homosexuality nearly ten years ago, and in 2008, gay and lesbian individuals in this country have yet to the enjoy the fundamental right of marriage. How can we contextualize the gay rights movement within the framework of the civil rights movement? Is such a comparison possible? How much progress remains before homosexuals enjoy equal rights in
Posts
9 comments:
I feel it is a stretch (at best) to compare Bull Connor and Fred Phelps, and the plight of homosexual Americans today to African-Americans in the 50's, 60's and before. The connections between both the individuals and the movements seem nebulous at best; Connor was a public official with a great deal of authority, Phelps is a man with a congregation of his own family of 20 as his followers (and there is serious thought that even he doesn't actually believe what he is doing, but the whole thing is just a show). If the ACLU would stop giving him so much legal aid and the media acting like he mattered, no one would even care that he exisited, sans a few Kansas social workers concerned for his grandchildren. Further, despicable as Phelps may be, he has not been involved in countless lynchings and violences and opressive practices, and even if he were, he would not be doing so as a government and public servant. While there are indeed still public acts of violence and discrimination against homosexual citizens today, these are generally considered unacceptable and punished by law (see what happened to the murderers of Matthew Shepherd). While the inability of homosexual citizens to enter into domestic partnerships may be considered unjust, it is important to avoid knee-jerk reactions which view this as equivalent (or even comprable to) the systematic racism, violence and murders which went unpunished in the Jim Crow south. One needs only to look at the figureheads mentioned to begin to see how different the situations are.
While the discrimination against gay people in the United States definitely resonates with the racial intolerance of the past, I think it is really hard to compare the movements because of one major difference: slavery. Homosexual people in America, while they have been taunted, teased, denied jobs, harassed and even killed, were never forced to work without pay in a system that literally made them the lowest of the low. Slavery fed into the Jim Crow South and created a society where discrimination was not only accepted, but also enforced by law. While gay people may not be able to marry, they can vote, find jobs and live normal lives. Therefore, comparing the struggles of the civil rights movement to those of the gay rights movement is a stretch. Hopefully, no group of people will ever have to face what African Americans have had to face in this country ever again.
I agree with Drew and Kaitlyn that the gay rights movement and civil rights movement are similar in the sense that both were responses to the injustices of the time. But because there was a "systematic racism" involved in the civil rights movement, the civil rights movement cannot be compared to gay rights. Men like Connor had the law at their side to support their actions, whereas Shepard's killers were tried and sentenced.
To answer one of your questions about obtaining equal rights for gays. I think that this will occur sooner rather than later. Because sexual orientation is not contrained to a particular class, individuals who identify as gay come from all walks of life. As a result, gay right proponents are attacking the injustices at all levels of our socio-economic and political system.
I agree with all the comments ahead of me. Fred Phelps is sticking to generally peaceful protest versus the action of violence. His following is also so small that it's hard for them to even make a dent in society anymore. I remember hearing about him a lot 5 years ago when he was in full force, but his influence has died quite dramatically since that time. As for pastors not reacting, I think it's actually kind of a good thing. What Fred Phelps wants is attention, whether that be good or bad. If every church in the country goes on a rant about how evil he is, he'll be getting exactly what he wants. It's better in my opinion to maybe mention it, but if he claims to be a Christian, it's hard to condemn the man in a church setting, even though he's obviously way off base.
I think it’s terrible that anyone would protest at a funeral, let alone a pastor. This kind of behavior would be especially difficult for family and friends who were at the funeral. It is also behavior that is not typically done by a pastor or his congregation. However, I don’t think that Phelps and Connor can be compared. Phelps protested based off of radical religious beliefs, and only had a few supporters. Connor’s behavior in the Civil Rights Movement was backed by the law at the time and had a larger number of supporters. Nonetheless, I don’t think that these two men can be compared because the issues and challenges that the victim’s faced were so different.
Fred Phelps is an incredibly radical pastor. I’m disgusted that he believes he has a right, and a duty, to protest the funerals of homosexuals, or anyone who might potentially be a homosexual. While I did not see an overt correlation between Phelps and Connor initially, I can understand how that comparison could be drawn. It is true that African Americans have suffered more than any other grouping in United States history. Unfortunately, our times of discrimination have not ended; they have shifted to include different races, religions, and sexual orientation. Discrimination is not as prevalent against the gay and lesbian population, but it is still present across all parts of this country. Thankfully our culture has become less tolerant of discrimination over the years. Connor was a politician and police official in Alabama during the sixties; his actions of violence were not surprising to anyone. Fred Phelps could never be elected to political office or have authority over anyone except his family and congregation (not even in Kansas).
I do see Bennet’s comparison of these two radicals. Connor was a die-hard racist, and Phelps is the biggest homo-phobe ever. Ironically, both of them protested against those groups. In doing so, they provided support for the movements they were fighting against. A social movement is able to gain momentum by pointing at certain individuals and labeling them the devil. Bennet makes an interesting comparison between the two men, one that is far more accurate than the others give him credit for.
I also agree with the above posts, however I do understand what Bennet G. was using as an example. I am not trying to minimize what homosexuals go threw in our country, but it does seem extreme to compare the oppression that African American’s faced to that of LGBT members today. We assume that oppressed groups will eventually have their voices heard, but the truth is that it is the responsibility of those innocent bystanders to help aid them in that progression. The role of the Westboro Baptist Church should be not be dismissed even though they are spreading hate, in my opinion, but they bring more attention to the issue. News reporters will cover them protesting and they will hopefully tell the story of the innocent victim, helping other Americans see the truth, but that does not justify what the Westboro Baptist Church does.
In my discussion of the Gay movement and the Civil Rights movement with my best friend who is black and a lesbian, she responded that it is fair to examine them in juxtaposition, but one must realize the difference in drastic apparentness. Race is identifiable or at least assumable upon entering the room, sexuality can be hidden. Therefore, the struggles become different in the ways that they are readily visible. I failed to see this point so I thought I would share.
My instinct though was to commend bennet g’s efforts to connect the two- especially with the idea of Mathew Sheppard’s lynching of sorts with the lynching of African American’s in the south. It is true that not nearly as many GLBT community members have been slain as those in slavery, but it is also dangerous to argue that one struggle is worse than the other. Therefore, I will say that it is not offensive to compare the two movements, but not completely cohesive either.
As for the two “reverends” the difference in public position does matter I agree, but that doesn’t erase the power both have on the public. The families at the funerals that Phelps and his followers protest, I would argue, feel just as violated as the families of the men, women and children that were brutally killed by Connor. The amount and extent again are different, but the effect is the same- is it not?
That should have been Gay Rights Movement- whoops!
Post a Comment