nothing gives one person so great advantage over another
as to remain cool and unruffled under all circumstances.
as to remain cool and unruffled under all circumstances.
- Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Francis Eppes, May 21, 1816
I know that so many of us who believe in decency are too tired and fed up with the seemingly ubiquitous evidence of craven behavior and outright inhumanity being demonstrated so consistently by the present Administration. This being said, we must not allow our frustration to lead us to lower our own standards. As our former First Lady put it so elegantly not long ago, "When they go low, we go high."
Which brings us to the horrific recent SCOTUS decision involving the Colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple (Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission) and the recent disinvitation of the Press Secretary from a suburban Virginia restaurant. In both cases, in a public place, people were denied service. It's like a flashback to a half-century or more ago....
In a surprising (to some) 7-2 decision, the Justices of the US Supreme Court ruled that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had been too zealous in its efforts to find fault with a baker who refused to make a cake for a same-sex wedding because of what he claimed were his deeply held religious beliefs. Whether or not we agree with this decision, one thing is apparent: in it were very clear indications from the Court about how to approach this issue in the future so that SCOTUS intervention wouldn't be necessary again. And while I believe this approach may ultimately prove helpful so that this issue of the service responsibilities of a business supposedly open to the general public could be addressed more effectively going forward, that subtlety is lost on the millions of our fellow citizens whose only knowledge of the case is the headline that a baker with deeply held religious convictions can judge someone in the moment and deny him, her or them service. My suspicion is that many, especially on the Religious Right, will see this as a victory for their warped worldview, one in which discrimination in God's name is not only acceptable but (now) legal and state-sanctioned.
Then, just last weekend, in a suburban Virginia restaurant, the White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was refused service by its owner, whose claim was to be offended by Ms. Sanders' support of the current Administration's inhumane immigration policies and her frequent lying in defense of these and other unconscionable state actions.
Are these two incidents comparable? I think so, because they involve a singular act that I believe has no place in our society: the refusal of service by business open to the public. Simply put, in my view, it's an issue of fairness and equal rights in that any business that chooses to serve the public should serve all of its members, not just some. Why? This, too, is simple in my view: because it's virtually impossible to parse who's in the in-group versus who's in the out-group without violating someone's rights in an immoral way. For example, are progressive Christian business owners allowed to refuse service to their conservative counterparts because they view the latter's deeply-held beliefs to be perversions of the very Scripture to which they (both) claim allegiance? Or what about the easier and more obvious ones that have deep roots in this country's history: can I be refused service because I'm Black, or Muslim or Mexican, etc.? At least relative in the America I thought I knew and that I want to live in, the answer is no.
Which makes what Representative Maxine Waters did in suggesting that members of the public make Administration officials aware that they are unwelcome in public spaces all the more unfortunate and also wrong. Do I agree that this Administration's heinous behavior should be contested at each and every opportunity? Absolutely! But does this extend to denying them their right to free access, a right that we claim for ourselves? Absolutely not! While I understand and empathize with the profound sense of indignation that animates so many of us who are appalled by what we are witnessing, we should not allow this to lead us to sink to the level of those whose behavior we detest. For, to use a phrase that I was taught as a child, it's unquestionably true that two wrongs don't make a right, so those of us who expect greater humanity from those who represent us must extend that very humanity even to the representatives who most challenge our patience and conscience.
Again, as Michelle Obama reminded us, when they go low, we go high. And we do this not just to be morally superior (which is a self-congratulatory illusion), but because we must abide by the example that we expect in return: to be treated fairly as an equal, as a fellow citizen and Child of God. Another motivation is a sadly simple and political one: the minute that we engage in untoward behavior in our protest, those we are protesting immediately focus on our method and not our message, typically resulting in a successful distraction that prevents a full hearing for our grievances and requests for restitution/resolution (that we hope to attain for all, not just for ourselves). Therefore, we also need to be impeccable in our conduct so that we do not allow the Politics of Distraction to impede our determined march toward a better America for us all.
So, hard as it may be, grit your teeth and keep taking the high road because it turns out that Ron Burgundy was right: we do, in fact, need to stay classy, especially when what we are witnessing and what were protesting is almost unbelievably and unconscionably objectionable to us. Actually, we are called to exhibit the same confounding and seemingly superhuman restraint that the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., exhibited more than a half-century ago. We must be mindful that this sort of loving discipline is supremely difficult, but necessary to contest the forces of negativity and evil in a way that can lead to positive change. In sum, we must be prepared to show the best of ourselves in the face of the worst behavior from many of our fellow citizens as we seek to evolve our country to be a better one not just for us, but for them, too....
Taking the high road is never easy, but it's always right, including because from the perspective of history it's always a defensible approach. Negativity and inhumanity, by contrast, never wear well and tend to make us want to avoid our history rather than embrace and learn from it. So, as difficult as it may be, let's commit to behaving in the ways that we are asking others to emulate while keeping our eyes fixed on the prize of the better America that can and will come from our committed effort. And though they may hurt greatly in the short run, the accumulated wounds from this effort will produce the most beautiful battle scars when the victory is won. Let's stay focused on that vision of a better America and keep treating everyone - especially those who disagree with us - as if it already exists, because in our hearts and minds it does….
In a surprising (to some) 7-2 decision, the Justices of the US Supreme Court ruled that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had been too zealous in its efforts to find fault with a baker who refused to make a cake for a same-sex wedding because of what he claimed were his deeply held religious beliefs. Whether or not we agree with this decision, one thing is apparent: in it were very clear indications from the Court about how to approach this issue in the future so that SCOTUS intervention wouldn't be necessary again. And while I believe this approach may ultimately prove helpful so that this issue of the service responsibilities of a business supposedly open to the general public could be addressed more effectively going forward, that subtlety is lost on the millions of our fellow citizens whose only knowledge of the case is the headline that a baker with deeply held religious convictions can judge someone in the moment and deny him, her or them service. My suspicion is that many, especially on the Religious Right, will see this as a victory for their warped worldview, one in which discrimination in God's name is not only acceptable but (now) legal and state-sanctioned.
Then, just last weekend, in a suburban Virginia restaurant, the White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was refused service by its owner, whose claim was to be offended by Ms. Sanders' support of the current Administration's inhumane immigration policies and her frequent lying in defense of these and other unconscionable state actions.
Are these two incidents comparable? I think so, because they involve a singular act that I believe has no place in our society: the refusal of service by business open to the public. Simply put, in my view, it's an issue of fairness and equal rights in that any business that chooses to serve the public should serve all of its members, not just some. Why? This, too, is simple in my view: because it's virtually impossible to parse who's in the in-group versus who's in the out-group without violating someone's rights in an immoral way. For example, are progressive Christian business owners allowed to refuse service to their conservative counterparts because they view the latter's deeply-held beliefs to be perversions of the very Scripture to which they (both) claim allegiance? Or what about the easier and more obvious ones that have deep roots in this country's history: can I be refused service because I'm Black, or Muslim or Mexican, etc.? At least relative in the America I thought I knew and that I want to live in, the answer is no.
Which makes what Representative Maxine Waters did in suggesting that members of the public make Administration officials aware that they are unwelcome in public spaces all the more unfortunate and also wrong. Do I agree that this Administration's heinous behavior should be contested at each and every opportunity? Absolutely! But does this extend to denying them their right to free access, a right that we claim for ourselves? Absolutely not! While I understand and empathize with the profound sense of indignation that animates so many of us who are appalled by what we are witnessing, we should not allow this to lead us to sink to the level of those whose behavior we detest. For, to use a phrase that I was taught as a child, it's unquestionably true that two wrongs don't make a right, so those of us who expect greater humanity from those who represent us must extend that very humanity even to the representatives who most challenge our patience and conscience.
Again, as Michelle Obama reminded us, when they go low, we go high. And we do this not just to be morally superior (which is a self-congratulatory illusion), but because we must abide by the example that we expect in return: to be treated fairly as an equal, as a fellow citizen and Child of God. Another motivation is a sadly simple and political one: the minute that we engage in untoward behavior in our protest, those we are protesting immediately focus on our method and not our message, typically resulting in a successful distraction that prevents a full hearing for our grievances and requests for restitution/resolution (that we hope to attain for all, not just for ourselves). Therefore, we also need to be impeccable in our conduct so that we do not allow the Politics of Distraction to impede our determined march toward a better America for us all.
So, hard as it may be, grit your teeth and keep taking the high road because it turns out that Ron Burgundy was right: we do, in fact, need to stay classy, especially when what we are witnessing and what were protesting is almost unbelievably and unconscionably objectionable to us. Actually, we are called to exhibit the same confounding and seemingly superhuman restraint that the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., exhibited more than a half-century ago. We must be mindful that this sort of loving discipline is supremely difficult, but necessary to contest the forces of negativity and evil in a way that can lead to positive change. In sum, we must be prepared to show the best of ourselves in the face of the worst behavior from many of our fellow citizens as we seek to evolve our country to be a better one not just for us, but for them, too....
Taking the high road is never easy, but it's always right, including because from the perspective of history it's always a defensible approach. Negativity and inhumanity, by contrast, never wear well and tend to make us want to avoid our history rather than embrace and learn from it. So, as difficult as it may be, let's commit to behaving in the ways that we are asking others to emulate while keeping our eyes fixed on the prize of the better America that can and will come from our committed effort. And though they may hurt greatly in the short run, the accumulated wounds from this effort will produce the most beautiful battle scars when the victory is won. Let's stay focused on that vision of a better America and keep treating everyone - especially those who disagree with us - as if it already exists, because in our hearts and minds it does….
No, our motto is "when they go low, we go high."
- Michelle Obama, Democratic Convention Speech, July 25, 2016
No comments:
Post a Comment