Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
WALLIS, SLATED TO SPEAK AT DNC, TALKS DOWN TO WOMEN.
With its stepped-up focus on faith, this year's Democratic National Convention has slated a number of religious leaders to offer benedictions and invocations, including Joel Hunter, the Florida megachurch pastor who was once slated to be president of the Christian Coalition before he decided they were too nasty. Hunter, a registered Republican, has been at the forefront of the "abortion reduction" movement and recently, shall we say, blessed the Democratic Party platform, declaring that "pro-lifers of both parties can now support Senator Obama."
But Jim Wallis, the president of the evangelical anti-poverty group Sojourners, will be taking center stage, moderating two of four Faith Caucus meetings: "Common Ground on Common Good" and "Faith in 2009: How an Obama Administration will Engage People of Faith." (The moderator of the other two faith caucus meetings, "Moral Values Issues Abroad" and "Getting Out the Faith Vote," will be Joshua DuBois, Obama's National Director of Religious Affairs.)
So what can we expect from Wallis' leadership? Today Pastor Dan sticks it to Wallis, picking up on a post from Wallis' blog about abortion reduction that "oozes patriarchy." Wallis wrote:
Support for women caught up in difficult situations and tragic choices is a better path than coercion for really reducing the abortion rate. Yes, I agree there is never a "need" for abortion except in the case where the health of the mother is threatened. But until we can reach out to women who "feel" the need for abortion and support them in alternative choices, we will never change the shameful abortion rate that both sides seem content to live with while they just attack each other. It is time to move from symbols to solutions.
Pastor Dan shot back:
This is literally the most patronizing attempt to legislate morality that I have seen in a long long time, outside of the Bush administration. It is smug, elitist and condescending. There is no vision of social benefit, no argument about the values of one policy option over another. When it boils down to it, the purpose of this dubious proposal is to make the Democratic party safe for people like Wallis and other pro-lifers who want to act upon women in the guise of "reaching out to them."I don't want to hear any more crap about how "we're all on the same team." Until Jim Wallis can start his discussion of abortion with the recognition that women are moral agents in their own right and don't need him to guide their decision-making, we're not on the same team at all.
Wallis doesn't like the phrase "reduce the need for abortions" in the party platform -- he and his allies wanted the phrase "reduce the number of abortions" instead. He doesn't want anyone to think that an abortion is ever needed -- in fact, he's intent on passing judgment on women who choose abortions, and to remind them, before and after the fact, of the "shamefulness" of that choice. The platform writing committee might have turned this judgmental rhetoric aside, but Wallis may well bring it to the convention anyway.
--Sarah Posner
COMMENTS (10)
OK, correct me if I am wrong, but don't all pastors, ministers and priests set themselves up as moral guides (however dubious the claim)? Why is one moral guide attacking another one? Is a moral guide likely to appear condescending? Yes.
Paint me confused.
Posted by: Carol | August 22, 2008 12:25 PM
Carol, I think the point here is that Wallis seems to think that women are essentially incapable of making their own decisions about what they need. I don't think "I know what's best for everyone" is the core skill set for a religious leader.
My general impression of Wallis has been that he just doesn't "get it" (to use the favorite phrase from the Year of the Woman). He really just doesn't understand why people would disagree with him and think he's being a condescending, sexist ass whenever he discusses abortion. He's spends so much energy insisting on being heard that he doesn't bother to listen.
Posted by: Pesto | August 22, 2008 12:31 PM
If you're going to reach out to people who are thinking of getting abortions, of *course* you're going to reach out to women.
I suppose you'd rather have him reach out to men? -- whose wives/girlfriends are thinking about abortion? To get their wives/girlfriends to decide not to? Isn't that *more* patriarchal and condescending?
Wallis's "reaching out" attitude reminds me of the attitude that social workers take, in trying to get parents to reduce hitting their children, in getting alcoholics to seek help, in getting teenagers to use condoms, etc., etc. We social workers know it as "outreach".
The objection seems to be that Wallis is a man. If a woman was talking like this, I doubt you'd see this contempt for someone who is so obviously good-hearted and on our side on so many issues. And let me remind you -- most pro-lifers are women.
Posted by: captcrisis | August 22, 2008 12:42 PM
The objection seems to be that Wallis is a man. If a woman was talking like this, I doubt you'd see this contempt...
Ain't that the truth!
Posted by: El Viajero | August 22, 2008 12:56 PM
I don't think Wallis saying that women are "incapable" of making their own decisions. He just appears to recognize that external factors can influence the woman's choice. Take away those external factors, and the woman's choice may change. In other words, if those who are morally opposed to abortion really want to reduce the number of abortions (as opposed to just demagoguing against it), their best bet might be to help remove those external factors. Don't kick the teenager out of school because she's pregnant and maybe she will decide to give the baby up for adoption instead. Push for low-cost, subsidized childcare & healthcare, so maybe the single woman won't feel like she can't afford to raise a baby alone. Etc. I'm having a hard time seeing what's so patronizing about that (or anti-choice, even).
Posted by: Jennifer | August 22, 2008 1:12 PM
Who. Cares.
Posted by: Pat | August 22, 2008 1:12 PM
"Ain't that the truth!"
Nope, it "aint ... the truth," as there are, in fact, women who do talk like this and they are, in fact, criticized just as harshly for the idiotic remarks. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong?
Posted by: PaulB | August 22, 2008 1:34 PM
"The objection seems to be that Wallis is a man."
I think the objection is that Wallis sees the fetus as the start of human life. The modus operandi is then to attack the fact that Wallis is also churched-- as if the presence or absence of church automatically determines how one views the fetus. And as if the attack on religion doesn't offend pro-choicers who are also churched. Or who were at some point in their lives.
Not so, Virginia.
Posted by: Anonymous | August 22, 2008 1:51 PM
Here's what Wallis had to say in his post that started the kerfluffle:
... As I said over there (as RT), PastorDan strikes me as refusing to take 'yes' for an answer. While griping about Wallis' position "that Democrats could reach untold numbers of voters if they'd only bend a little on abortion," he ignores the fact that Wallis has gone ahead and endorsed the Dem position, as is.IMHO, PastorDan took the one mildly objectionable thing that Wallis said in that pair of posts, and decided to pick a fight over it.
If Atrios or Sarah Posner or anyone else who's piled on here has gone back and read what Wallis posted, I sure haven't seen any evidence of it.
But folks, that's what links are for: so you can go back and see if the quote reflected the essence of what someone was saying, or whether it was taken completely out of context.
If you're going to jump into a fight that's already in progress, it's a bad idea to take your buddy's word about what the putative bad guy said.
Posted by: low-tech cyclist | August 22, 2008 2:52 PM
IAs a DNC prayer leader anti-gay?
DNC Evening invocations and benedictions
Thursday, August 28
Invocation: Rabbi David Saperstein, Union for Reform Judaism, Washington, DC
Benediction: Pastor Joel Hunter, Evangelical, Northland, FL
1. Rev Joel Hunter and wife signed the fl marriage amendment petition defining marriage as only between a man and a woman.
http://www.knowthyneighbor.org/florida/index.php?first_name=&last_name=hunter&street_address=&county=Seminole&searchMode=&sortBy=last_name&sortDir=ASC&page=1&anchor=list&state_code=fl#list
Who Signed the Petition?
The names and addresses posted here were collected by Florida4Marriage.org as part of the citizens initiative petition process and have been verified by each individual Florida County Supervisor of Elections. They are part of the public record.
Last Name First Name Address City State County
Hunter Michael 263 Blackwater Pl Longwood FL Seminole
Hunter Karen 263 Blackwater Pl Longwood FL Seminole
Hunter Melissa 407 Monticello Dr Altamonte Sprin FL Seminole
Hunter William 646 Palm Dr Oviedo - FL Seminole
Hunter Connie 646 Palm Dr Oviedo - FL Seminole
Hunter Nakia 1354 San Remo Pt Unit 106 Oviedo FL Seminole
Hunter Deedra 450 Forestwood Ln Maitland FL Seminole
Hunter Becky 203 Savannah Park Loop Casselberr FL Seminole
Hunter Joel 203 Savannah Park Loop Casselberr FL Seminole
2. Rev Joel Hunter hosts a group at his church that seeks to help gays leave the gay lifestyle.
Among Friends is a weekly small group for. men who struggle with homosexuality and/. or homosexual feelings that want to live a life pleasing to God. www.northlandcc.net
You decide!!!
Posted by: diane owens | August 24, 2008 1:15 PM