Black Pastors' reason to back Bush is baffling.
/- Originally published in the Alameda Times-Star September 2, 2004
WHEN the president decided to join the Christian Right's fanatical dogma by supporting a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, I thought it was nothing more than a politician's desperate attempt to secure his base.
Never in my wildest dreams did I believe it would be an effective recruiting tool to lure African Americans into the GOP. But recently I was reminded by a group of black pastors representing churches in Oakland that the more I engage in the human adventure, the less I know.
While standing on the corner of 34th Street and San Pablo Avenue, a haven for drugs and prostitution and one of the most violent areas in the city, according to Oakland police, a group of black pastors, citing biblical opposition to same-sex marriage, openly declared their support for President Bush in the November election.
I have no problem with the pastors in question supporting the president; there is nothing to suggest African-American politics should be monolithic in its support, but how can same-sex marriage be THE issue?
The pastors, in taking a position to the right of Vice President Dick Cheney, were concerned that Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry favors letting states decide whether to allow same-sex marriages.
It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than to amend the Constitution -- the latter has only happened 27 times in our history.
Perhaps the pastors were unaware that, before, the Senate used three days of the people's business to debate a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage that most knew it had no chance of passing.
Kerry's position is identical to that of many conservatives: A ban on same-sex marriage does not rise to the level of a constitutional amendment, thereby making it a nonissue that should be left up to the states to decide.
Assuming that I understand the argument of the pastors correctly, they have opted to use some of their leadership capital to support the president's re-election based solely on his rhetoric on a nonissue.
The pastors must somehow be convinced that the possibility of a second term that would allow Bush to nominate another Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia or some combination thereof to the Supreme Court is a risk worth taking.
How can the pastors give this single nonissue greater importance than the candidates' positions on aid to poor children, military spending, stem cell research, education, labor and environmental protections on trade agreements, health care, a livable wage or corporate welfare?
I would also be interested to know if the pastors, after making their remarks, walked along San Pablo Avenue to ascertain the five most important issues to the residents of that community. If so, how many cited a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage?
Perhaps my greatest confusion lies in their use of biblical justification to support their position.
While the pastors have several scriptures that validate their position, there is a lot hidden between Genesis and Revelation that had to be ignored in order to myopically conclude George W. Bush was their man.
I am quite certain somewhere in the Bible it reads, "Thou shall not kill." Moreover, I believe it also says, "Men and women will beat the swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more."
President Bush has used our tax dollars to learn war with such precision that he is a dissertation away from a doctorate. Using misleading and woefully inaccurate reasoning to justify war, he has sent nearly 1,000 innocent men and women to their deaths, 5,000 soldiers to be maimed, and roughly
10,000 Iraqis know firsthand what can happen when our "smart bombs" lose some of their IQ.
Yet, these pastors believe that our future depends on the unlikely possibility of a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Only the pastors know within their hearts whether this nonissue is indeed the genesis of their support for the president.
Given the importance of this election, I'm just saddened that they could not have held out their endorsement for something more meaningful.
- Byron Williams is an Oakland pastor and syndicated columnist.
