# Black church opposition to marriage equality in Illinois **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 1, 2013, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839 "2013-06-01T04:07:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2013, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/21 "2013-06-05T02:29:04Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > I’ve read the book (white female here), and while I certainly wouldn’t call interracial-mating issues a “major message” in it, that was definitely a salient theme. As a black female blogger writes in [“Sometimes the White Girl (Or Guy) Isn’t About You”](http://blacksnob.com/snob_blog/2009/6/2/sometimes-the-white-girl-or-guy-isnt-about-you-unconventiona.html#.Ua6ZKY5K6nw), It’s about the slap in the face a wife feels when she’s been kicked to the curb the moment her husband has “arrived.” It’s an old theme echoed in a million movies. Except usually instead of the protagonist complaining about a “white bitch”, the home-wrecker is a 20-something, skinny, fake-boobed, dim-witted “bitch.” I saw “First Wives’ Club” not long after seeing “Waiting to Exhale”. The self-righteous anger in the two films is interchangeable. Bernadine would have been just as pissed if her husband had left her for a black woman. The line “I was his white girl for eleven years…” communicates not a sense of racial betrayal, but a feeling she’d done everything right by him, but it still wasn’t good enough. If anything, the book’s message is that women have to find happiness where they can get it. There is no message that says interracial relationships are wrong. Major or otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2013, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/22 "2013-06-05T04:21:39Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > There is no message that says interracial relationships are wrong. Major or otherwise. Not wrong _per se_, but there’s definitely a theme that the interracial aspect of that affair constitutes a sort of racial betrayal that at the very least compounds the romantic betrayal: > [@](#): > > Bernadine: I give you 11 fucking years of my life and you’re telling me you’re leaving me for a white woman? > John Sr.: Would it help if she was black? > Bernadine: No. It would help if you were black. ---
**Author:** ![Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omg_a_Black_Conservative)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2013, 7:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/23 "2013-06-05T07:13:19Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > All the polls show there’s been a large increase in support from African-Americans since Obama announced he supported legal recognition for same-sex marriage… Also known as the sheep effect. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2013, 7:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/24 "2013-06-05T07:37:29Z")
> [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > Also known as the sheep effect. That’s certainly more original than references to plantations and overseers. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2013, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/25 "2013-06-05T12:45:01Z")
Just so that there is no misunderstanding, the denomination that President Obama belongs to is not a “black” denomination. The church he attended where the Rev. Wright was the minister, did have mainly blacks. Despite, the Rev. Wright, the denomination itself is very liberal and racially mixed. > [@](#): > > **Ibn** : I’m willing to bet that most white Christians in Illinois are going to be either Catholics or born-again Christians. I honestly don’t know what the satistics are in Illinois. But you do seem to be overlooking Presbyterians of assorted denominations, United Methodists, Lutherans and others. These are mainline churches. Even some Baptist churches are liberal – just not so much as the Southern Baptist Churches. Even that is way too much of a generalization. The Episcopal Church with two million members is not a small denomination at all. Just consider how many denominations there are. The one that I currently belong to has about 80,000 members and it is over 200 years old. (Cumberland Presbyterian) We are an open and liberal church, but people do have varying opinions. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2013, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/26 "2013-06-05T16:49:30Z")
I guess that at a superficial level, this is surprising because black = Democratic voter = liberal. Anyone who follows politics should know that this sort of pigeonholing doesn’t work, though. Conservatives hate subsidies, but conservatives from farm states are apoplectic at the thought of cutting them. Liberals don’t care for military spending, but liberals from states with large defense contractors are up in arms at talk of cutting defense spending. > [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > I’m not sure what makes you think that African-Americans felt all that strongly about “anti-miscegenation laws”? I can’t speak for the black community of the 1960s, but as a student as a historically black law school I have a pretty good insight into the attitudes of _today’s_ black community regarding aspects of the Civil Rights movement. After _Brown_, and the passage of the CRA and VRA, _Loving_ is by far the most widely approved legal development of the era. Black people aren’t stupid; they all know that anti-miscegenation laws were to protect the “purity of the white race” rather than uphold some general societal order. Even black women at the school who have the attitude you describe from _Waiting to Exhale_ (I didn’t watch the movie or read the book so I can’t comment on whether you are correct), _Loving_ is regarded with great approval. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2013, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/27 "2013-06-05T23:27:36Z")
> [@Zoe](#): > > Just so that there is no misunderstanding, the denomination that President Obama belongs to is not a “black” denomination. The church he attended where the Rev. Wright was the minister, did have mainly blacks. Despite, the Rev. Wright, the denomination itself is very liberal and racially mixed. > > I honestly don’t know what the satistics are in Illinois. But you do seem to be overlooking Presbyterians of assorted denominations, United Methodists, Lutherans and others. These are mainline churches. Even some Baptist churches are liberal – just not so much as the Southern Baptist Churches. Even that is way too much of a generalization. And on the flip side some Presbyterian (such as PCA) and Lutheran churches (the Wisconsin and Missouri Synods) are conservative. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/28 "2013-06-06T00:14:00Z")
Missouri Synod Lutherans aren’t just conservative. They’re terrifying. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/29 "2013-06-06T17:55:56Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > I’m not sure what makes you think that African-Americans felt all that strongly about “anti-miscegenation laws”? I’m not necessarily saying they did (I don’t claim to be an expert on black culture). I agree with many of your points about the issue of interracial relationships being complex, and not necessarily one that many black people are gung-ho about. But there’s a big difference between cultural approval of an interracial relationship and legislation against it. I’d be surprised if there were many black people who thought (1) Anti-miscegenation laws weren’t unjust discriminatory hateful laws and (2) they were intended to treat black people as inferior second-class citizens. However they feel personally about homosexuality, that they don’t see the parallels in the _laws_ about it baffles me. ---
**Author:** ![Condescending\_Robot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a183cd/32.png) [@Condescending\_Robot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Condescending_Robot)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/30 "2013-06-06T19:13:38Z")
Too many leading black politicians view civil rights as a zero-sum game. The NAACP has provided great leadership on these issues, but when you get into local pastors with their flocks of followers, all to often the belief is that every right given to gays or immigrants must somehow be taken away from the black population. Combined with the fact that black activism tends to come out of very traditionalist churches, and we have this terrible situation where people who were born into second-class status themselves are rallying to preserve it for others. ---
**Author:** ![Belowjob2.0](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Belowjob2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belowjob2.0)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2013, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/31 "2013-06-06T21:57:23Z")
> [@](#): > > Too many leading black politicians view civil rights as a zero-sum game. The NAACP has provided great leadership on these issues, but when you get into local pastors with their flocks of followers, all to often the belief is that every right given to gays or immigrants must somehow be taken away from the black population. Any support for your claim, or is all this just fact free speculation? First demonstrate that “leading black politicians view civil rights as a zero-sum game”. Good luck. Then, provide a few examples of black churches where " the belief is that every right given to gays or immigrants must somehow be taken away from the black population". Chances are you’ve never actually been to a black church, and you certainly haven’t done any objective surveys or opinion polls. In point of fact, it’s been demonstrated that immigration of unskilled laborers hurts working class blacks and working class whites. Working class Americans of all ethnic backgrounds aren’t imagining things: unlimited immigration reduces the number of jobs available to them, reduces their wages, and puts additional strain on limited public resources in education, public health, and public transportation. Those black Americans who oppose gay marriage oppose it for the same reason that Mormons oppose it, that conservative mainline Protestants and Catholics oppose it. The linkage between (long overdue) full citizenship rights for black Americans and gay marriage (a radical change in the customs of pretty much every nation in the world) only exists in your confused mind. ---
**Author:** ![Condescending\_Robot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a183cd/32.png) [@Condescending\_Robot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Condescending_Robot)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2013, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/32 "2013-06-07T16:14:25Z")
So your assertion is that black church opposition to gay rights doesn’t exist, and also is totally justified, for the same reason it’s justified when white churches oppose gays, namely, because gays are icky. And similar “how dare you accuse people of holding this belief that they are totally correct for holding” reasoning for immigration. Doesn’t sound very coherent to me. ---
**Author:** ![Belowjob2.0](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Belowjob2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belowjob2.0)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2013, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/33 "2013-06-07T17:57:07Z")
Feel free to regale me with your detailed knowledge of black churches. I’ll wait. Your unproven assertions remain unproven. They are, I suspect, unprovable. You and the OP maintain that there’s something distinct, and negative, about the black churches’ opposition to gay marriage that does not apply to white churches. Here’s the thing: the denial of full citizenship to black Americans, based on a rigid colorline, was a weird, distinctly American anomaly. Didn’t really exist anywhere else in the world. A peculiarly American madness that we were able to indulge in for generations because we were prosperous, powerful, and isolated. Ending it was a case where the degenerate, after much coaxing, finally quit fucking the family pet. Yay, I quit fucking the dog. Give me a medal. Gary marriage represents a radical change in nearly every society where it’s been proposed. This is not to say that gay marriage is wrong, or should be opposed. There is, however, absolutely no reason to expect black American churches to take a different position on the issue than the position taken by Mormons, or conservative Christians. Incidentally, there’s a term for people who support social conservatism and economic liberalism, Populist. White Populists largely went over to the Pubbies after the Dems withdrew their support for white supremacy. A lot of black Americans are populists who remain in the Democratic party. Nothing hypocritical, unusual, or pathological about it. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2013, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/34 "2013-06-07T18:02:21Z")
> [@Condescending\_Robot](#): > > So your assertion is that black church opposition to gay rights doesn’t exist, and also is totally justified, for the same reason it’s justified when white churches oppose gays, namely, because gays are icky. And similar “how dare you accuse people of holding this belief that they are totally correct for holding” reasoning for immigration. > > Doesn’t sound very coherent to me. What makes you think black social conservatives don’t oppose SSM on what they think are its merits? Do white conservatives oppose extending gay rights because it’s bad for their interests? Or do they get the benefit of the doubt when they say it’s because it’s contrary to the will of their angry god-figure? ---
**Author:** ![Condescending\_Robot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a183cd/32.png) [@Condescending\_Robot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Condescending_Robot)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2013, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/35 "2013-06-07T19:33:10Z")
Anybody who opposes gay marriage is by definition evil, irrational, and bigoted. But only one group that opposes gay marriage gets defended by “liberals” who call people racist for pointing out, and that’s black people who are evil, irrational, and bigoted. Your view of white homophobes is presumably the same as mine. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2013, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/36 "2013-06-07T19:36:49Z")
Who’s defending them? People in this thread have said it isn’t surprising, but nobody has said anything in their defense. ---
**Author:** ![Belowjob2.0](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Belowjob2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belowjob2.0)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2013, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/37 "2013-06-07T21:10:18Z")
> [@Condescending\_Robot](#): > > Anybody who opposes gay marriage is by definition evil, irrational, and bigoted. But only one group that opposes gay marriage gets defended by “liberals” who call people racist for pointing out, and that’s black people who are evil, irrational, and bigoted. Your view of white homophobes is presumably the same as mine. That’s a cute rhetorical game you’re playing there. Get caught out, and try to turn it around. You and the OP attack a group of people based solely on race. We call you on it, and now we’re defending homophobes? Nope. We’re calling you out on your bigotry. Again, there’s absolutely no reason to expect black churches react differently to gay marriage than Roman Catholics, Mormons, or Southern Baptists. Saying, “you all should react differently because you’re black” is transparently racist. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2013, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/38 "2013-06-08T22:33:37Z")
I think you guys err in thinking that conservatives see miscegenation and same sex marriage as being even remotely equivalent. To liberals, gay people are a minority group. To (social) conservatives, not so much. And it is my perspective that black churches are often more conservative than their white counterparts. And black people may not be more homophobic, but the media sure presents them that way. BTW, I find it odd that Southern Baptists are liberal around where you guys are. They sure aren’t around here. They are the ones most vocal against abortion and homosexuality. The only thing that makes them “liberal” is their position on eternal security (aka “once saved, always saved”). ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 9:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/39 "2013-06-09T09:23:21Z")
> [@Belowjob2.0](#): > > Again, there’s absolutely no reason to expect black churches react differently to gay marriage than Roman Catholics, Mormons, or Southern Baptists. I believe that there is on issues with civil rights. Would you expect black Americans as a group to be more supportive of racially integrated schools, or Japanese? I don’t think there is anything in black ETHNICITY that would make them more aware of the dangers of “seperate but equal” since they have suffered the brunt of undeniably racist policies like seperating public schools by race. I would not be surprised if Japanese people were less supportive of integrated schools just because they have much less historical background in that area. Similarly, no one has ever within living memory made it illegal for Catholics to marry because of their religion in the United States. Blacks should really know better, and it isn’t racist to think so, and point out the hypocrisy of marching on the streets and getting blasted with firehoses for THEIR civil rights, and shutting the door on those civil rights behind them. And “The Bible” is not a valid excuse. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/40 "2013-06-09T12:04:54Z")
> [@Condescending\_Robot](#): > > Anybody who opposes gay marriage is by definition evil, irrational, and bigoted. Not true. Anyone who opposes same sex marriage is wrong. However, claims that such people must be “irrational” or “bigoted” are, themselves, irrational. Claims that they are evil is nothing more than an attempt to poison discussion with name-calling. There are many people who grew up with utterly no exposure to any reference to Same Sex Marriage. The earliest reference I can find to SSM is from around 1972, but without looking it up, I would have said that the idea dated to the late 1980s. It was simply not discussed, even within socially “liberal” circles for a very long time. Proposing SSM to people who have never encountered the idea is going to bring a reaction that one is talking nonsense because that is not “what marriage means.” And even when the idea was finally voiced in public, few people would have actually encountered or considered the idea. We can see that simply by looking at the polling results. SSM was first widely mentioned as a possibility about a year or two before the passage of DOMA. That law passed with overwhelming public support because most people simply responded to the idea of SSM with “_of course, marriage is between members of the opposite sex_.” Not out of a sense of moral outrage against homosexuality, but simply because they had never considered any other possibility. As the issue has gotten more and more play in the media, (and as more people have openly noted their homosexuality, making it seem less like an alien situation), the numbers of people who have changed their views have steadily increased to the point that a majority in the U.S. now supports SSM. This is not evidence that huge numbers of people have become more rational or less bigoted. It is certainly not an example that more people have become better human beings. It simply indicates an increase of awareness of people that such a phenomenon is possible and that arguments against it are not satisfactory to continue opposition. Given the basic opposition to SSM that starts with the idea that “_it does not make sense_,” it will not be perceived as an issue of human rights. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839.md?page=3)