[Vision2020] boycotting & religion

[Paul Rumelhart]

Since you've nicely numbered them for me, I'll reply to each one 
individually...

Joe Campbell wrote:
> Paul,
>
> You are incorrectly describing Keely’s position and talking past her.
>
> First, where does Keely say anything about boycotting Christ Church 
> businesses? She is merely talking about her personal choice of where to 
> shop, which you note is her business.
>   

She mentions Francis Foucachon's objections to boycotts in the first 
section.  I realize that she is not advocating for them on a mass scale 
in that email.  But since she brought the subject up, I'm discussing it 
by giving her my take on it.  I'm sorry if I either gave the impression 
that she was advocating that, or if in a flurry of writing, I lost track 
of that point myself.  However the public statement "I won't shop there" 
could likely be construed as being in favor of a boycott.  My apologies 
if I screwed up on that one.
> Second, I don't know of anyone who is critical of Christ Church affiliated 
> people merely because of their religious beliefs. Keely made this point below 
> but you ignore it.
>   

I think trying to frame this as not being about religion is simply 
incorrect.  Keely mentions that she holds similar beliefs, then a couple 
sentences later takes Doug Wilson to task for being arrogant, evasive, 
and prejudiced "in the name of the religion he and I both share".  That, 
I think, is the crux of it.  If he was merely some nutjob who wasn't 
religious going around getting people to share his viewpoint, I wonder 
if he would be considered to be such a large target.
> Third, how can you call the belief that slavery was OK a religious belief? How 
> can you call the belief that Islam is a religion of hate a religious belief? I could go on.
>   

They believe that slavery back then must have been ok, because it is 
mentioned in the bible under favorable terms in some places (according 
to their reading of it anyway - I'm not an expert) and it was people of 
faith doing the enslaving.  I think it's self-deceiving and that it is 
in fact another great example of letting your beliefs cloud your 
findings, but I would also say that it is a religious belief.  If the 
people at that time owning slaves were Muslims or if it was the white 
Christians who were enslaved, they would likely believe that slavery 
back then was a heinous crime.  I wonder if they even see that fact.

Their beliefs and their apparent lack of respect for facts, evidence, 
and science have led them to believe many strange things. 
> Fourth, please tell us what you think about some of the recent political actions 
> of members of Christ Church -- the sign suggesting that three candidates are 
> bigots, and Dale Courtney's involvement with an anti-levy ad, where he used 
> the name of a dead man instead of his own name. In light of these and other 
> actions, how can you continue to think that Christ Church is merely a church?
>   

 I think the guy with the sign was an idiot.  He's welcome to believe 
that, though, and if he owned a business here (I don't know if he does 
or not) I would not let it affect whether or not I bought from him.  
He's merely expressing his opinion in alignment with the First 
Ammendment.  I usually don't care what the guy behind the counter 
handing me a fresh donut thinks about religion or politics.  I think 
that Dale Courtney, if he did actually take over moscowlevy.com and 
place those ads, is an asshat and should face the legal consequences for 
it.  That doesn't affect whether or not I shop at Christ Church owned 
businesses, since he alone would be at fault here.  If he owned a shop 
here in town (I don't know if he does or not), it might be enough for me 
to avoid it, assuming he was found to be guilty.  This isn't just a 
wacko belief in this case, he would have been actively deceptive and 
manipulative.  I'm not sure I want to shop where the management is known 
to behave that way.

I think they are merely a church.  Churches have been political since 
their inception.  In fact, I would say that they exist so that they can 
be political.  I can fight them on the political front if I need to.  
If, for instance, they tried to pass Chris's Trinitarian Oath idea I 
would fight it tooth and nail.  Yet I still think that taking any of 
that out on the people that happen to believe their crap is wrong.

And, just to make sure nobody is talking past anyone here, what do you 
think about the divide that is growing in Moscow between kirkers and 
non-kirkers?  Are we going to end up with two separate business 
districts and a big fence between them?  Are we going to start 
boycotting people who do business with these businesses, because a 
portion of that money gets back to Doug Wilson somehow?  Is this at all 
healthy for this town?  Are there any ideas for fixing this?  Should 
they be run out of town on a rail?  Maybe we could help this situation 
by divorcing the idea of the politically-motivated people running the 
show from the people who simply believe their take on Christianity.

Paul
> Best, Joe
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 15:07:50 -0800
> From: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] boycotting & religion
> To: keely emerinemix <kjajmix1 at msn.com>
>
> Keely,
>
> I don't like the idea of boycotting people based on their religious 
> choices.  You think that Doug Wilson is arrogant and evasive.  I can see 
> that.  They believe that he is helping them to interpret the Bible and 
> their religion in a way that they believe is true.  Boycotting people 
> who believe this and tithe to the church *is* boycotting for religious 
> reasons.  The fact that you find this particular religion more odious 
> than most is beside the point.  I could care less about the 10% that 
> they give to the church.  Why deny them the 90% you otherwise would have 
> given to them? 
>
> You've made a choice to not give money to people who give a small amount 
> of it to Doug Wilson, and that's fine.  Why urge others to do so en 
> masse?  Let people make their own choices.  My choice, for example, is 
> not to care what religion the people I do business with follow, nor what 
> the character of the people are that they give some of their money to.
>
> I don't like the divide that is growing ever larger between the people 
> of this church and others in the community.  I don't think it's healthy 
> for Moscow.  I disagree with both the boycotting of Christ Church-owned 
> businesses and the practice that I've heard mentioned of Christ Church 
> members being urged to patronize only those same businesses.
>
> I disagree with their theology as much as or possibly even more than you 
> do.  When it comes down to it, they are just a bunch of everyday Joes 
> trying to make a living.  I propose going out of our way to welcome them 
> into the community, while holding an extremely firm line on forbidding 
> them to change any of our laws to favor the ideals of their church.  I 
> propose this, actually, for people of all religions - not just Christ 
> Church members.
>
> Paul
>
> keely emerinemix wrote:
>   
>> I've been reading some of the Daily News letters to the editor and 
>> comments from my letter regarding Francis Foucachon's objection to 
>> boycotts "based on religion."  He is horrified by the Christ Church 
>> congregant-owned list, and it appears a lot of folks are angry about 
>> my publicly stating that I won't patronize businesses owned by Doug 
>> Wilson's followers.  They call is "religious bigotry."  It isn't.
>>
>> I would remind people that I am a Trinitarian, evangelical Christian 
>> with a high and conservative view of Scripture, so it certainly, in 
>> this case, isn't about Christ Church's religion.  I care absolutely 
>> not at all about the religious beliefs, or lack thereof, of those who 
>> own businesses in our town.  I care about their behavior, and it is 
>> properly called "behavior" to follow and support financially a man who 
>> has, in the name of the religion he and I both share, elevated 
>> arrogance and evasion, not to mention prejudice, to an art form.  My 
>> behavior in response to the behavior of following such a man?  I'll 
>> act in a way that ensures that not a dime of my money goes to support him.
>>
>> It really is that simple. 
>>
>> keely
>>     
>
>
>
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet, 
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>                http://www.fsr.net                       
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================