Religious activism, then and now

Activism is as activism does

In 1965 I had returned to live in Rochester after the race riot of 1964

To deal with the roots of the community's problem a number of Rochester churches paid for a Chicago activist organization to come to Rochester.

I will always remember over hearing an old timer complain that "churches should stick to religion" as he feared the activism would inflame rather than encourage.

In fact my supervisor at the telephone office I worked in had a similar Conservative attitude that established channels and organizations were preferred by him to make social changes with.

During the Civil rights movement that followed nationally,the same process of churches being a center of activity was occurring.

As an activist minded person myself I always have supported churches working for social justice.

Now a different situation exists concerning the LDS Church and the question of prohibiting gays of any religion or none from legally marrying.

Rather than wanting to extend a right to more classes the LDS considers the right to define marriage as an exclusive one along with an unusual coalition of Black churches, Catholics and fundamentalist Protestant denominations.

I actually feel the LDS Church has a right to speak on the subject and even be activists concerning it.

However I also feel that anyone objecting to this activism has a right to boycott those who donate to that activist cause especially when prompted to do so by their church.

Activism and free speech are American ideals. The right to protest and actively work to counter its effect is also a right, one I do not want to see diminished.

I do however want to see the Law, especially the Constitution's intent to maintain a wall between Church and State,respected.

Speech is protected but the abrogation of Civil Rights(see the Bill of Rights)is not.

© 2010 Albert 1 - 1/26/10


add as favorite