This is from a story about Lady GaGa getting ready to perform gay weddings, but I wanted to draw attention to this section about the Westboro Baptist Church:
“My request to [fans] and public authorities is to pay these hate criminals no mind. Do not interact with them, or try to fight… Do not respond to any of their provocation.”
She continued: “Don’t waste your words, or feelings, no matter what you hear or see you are more fortunate and blessed than they are, and in your heart just pray for them.”
Westboro Baptist Church is known for picketing the funerals of US soldiers with slogans such as ‘God hates fags’. It believes that the deaths of US soldiers in the middle east are God’s punishment for a country which allows homosexuality.
Earlier this year, church spokeswoman Shirley Phelps-Roper said: “We will be going to her concert with placards reading ‘God Hates Lady Gaga’ – to inform people that they will be going to hell too if they listen to her messages.
Westboro Baptist Church will be in the Western PA area in a few weeks and there is discussion about what to do in response. What Would Lady GaGa Do?
Although I completely applaud your usage of the “Great GaGa” (and I would have probably done the same thing) to support your position on what is the appropriate way to respond to our upcoming visit by WBC, I do have a few problems with it. The first being, is it really WWLGGD or is it WWHRC (What Would Human Rights Campaign Do)? The second is, since this is a matter of religion concerning some “fucked in the head” Christians spouting out hate, isn’t the real question WWJD?
Let’s be real for a minute and not forget that these messages (although sincere and heartfelt) by artists or talent are almost always crafted with the help of organizations that support the particular cause(s) the talent or artist are fighting for. This is not a bad thing typically speaking and in many ways is helpful to both the artist and the cause they support. However, mainstream organizations are by form, function, and some argue, by necessity a part of the system that they may be fighting. They will often craft messages and create methods of delivering those messages that they believe will best be received by the mainstream. In this particular case we can definitely see that groups like HRC, an organization that Lady GaGa has been honored by and worked with, have the same position as we see Lady GaGa taking here. This may be a question of which came first the egg or the chicken, but regardless the real question is: Is this method of dealing with WBC a meaningful, empowering, and beneficial tactic for advocates and activists.
Beyond those questions and concerns though we come to the crux of my problem with this particular response (or non-response as might be argued). WWJD? We are dealing with “christians” here and a response by other Christians does seem to be warranted. Certainly there are many members of the LGBTQ community that view themselves as people of faith. More explicitly, many of those people of faith would call themselves Christians. In fact a look at resource lists for the LGBTQ person reveals any number of Christian churches that are either predominately LGBTQ or friendly and welcoming to our community. So I ask again WWJD in the face of this spectacle of hate?
Would Jesus ignore it so that the hate might be overlooked and not noticed? Would Jesus go there and shout hate back at them? Would Jesus see this as a teaching moment and use the opportunity to show Love in the face of Hate?
For my money Jesus would go and show Love in the face of Hate and let the world see a visual contrast between the good of Love and the evil of Hate.
Rob,For the record, I have no position on what an appropriate response to WBC is or is not, and didn’t post this to support any one position. I did however, post it to prompt dialogue, and you have done a fine job getting that started.I would take issue however, with your assertion that Lady GaGa doesn’t speak for herself, byt rather is parroting the ideas of some non-affiliated organization. I think you miss the point about who she is as a person and as an activist.I think the only “position” I have is in relation to your assertion that the question WWJD is either valid or answerable. In fact, I think it is humorous to ask that and then turn around and say “Let’s be real.” If we are real, we have to accept that we can’t even know if there was some dude named Jesus who would have said any one thing or another, nor what that opinion would have been.That said, I think there are plenty of great reasons to either demonstrate a response to WBC (and you list several possible scenarios) or to ignore them, and allow their hatred to be visible for what it is. A case can be made for both approaches. I’m not making a case for either, but hoping others, will join this wonderful dialogue that you have begun.
For the record, I sat scratching my head for several minutes after reading your response. It was literally shocking for me to read. Why was it troubling?
Let me begin though by apologizing for attributing to you a position you have not taken. It was a misunderstanding on my part and I sit here corrected.
That being said though, I am perplexed and bothered by the statement that you “have no position” on the matter of what an appropriate response to WBC should be. I am honestly a bit incredulous that a leader within the LGBTQ community has no position on how to respond to a threat to our community. I would be more than glad if you shared my particular views on how to respond, but would be happy enough if you were to hold the opposite position as well. What I want to see is positions taken and dialogues held on how we as a community should respond.
I of course realize that the LGBTQ community is not monolithic and of the same mind on any matter. I also realize that we will not always work in concert with our leaders or the rest of the community at large. It is however important to see our leaders take positions and offer their advice on how to best address the issues facing us. We may or may not like what they say or do, but that doesn’t mean they can sit on the fence and say or do nothing.
Your issue with my asserting that “Lady GaGa doesn’t speak for herself”, is rather nonsensical in the sense that I made no such assertion. I specifically made the point that artists and talent use organizations to “help” them articulate their beliefs and “help” them to best support their causes. I even mentioned the fact that their messages were “sincere and heartfelt”, though none the less frequently crafted with the help of others.
As you can see, my assertion was not that she was a parrot, but that she like other artists used organizations to help her help her causes. This is not a guess on my part, this is a fact that I can support specifically (as an example) in the case of Lady GaGa’s support of the repeal of DADT at the MTV MVA show. In that case Lady GaGa used the Service Members Legal Defense Network to aide her in selecting her “dates” for that night (as reported on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow show). More generally I know that other artists and talent have used organizations to do similar if not more involved aide in supporting their causes. I know this through my years in radio, concert and club promotions. It is in fact done the way I presented more frequently than not.
I certainly would agree that finding any real certitude to the question WWJD is problematic. To know for certain WWJD is difficult when one reading of the Bible can reveal one thing to one and something at odds to that interpretation by another. However I do feel comfortable saying that Jesus would be on the side of Love. A study of the the early teachings of the church reveals that to be a universally held belief of those who would later become known as Christians and it seems logical to infer that it had some basis on the views held by the founder of that faith. Definitive by no means but a leap of faith or logic seems safe enough on this point.
As far as getting real about the fact that we can’t even “know whether there was a dude named Jesus” at all, well that is an incredibly weak and rather intellectually dishonest argument against my statement. We in fact do know that there was a “dude” named Jesus. Extra-canonical sources such as Josephus and Publius Cornelius Tacitus both report the presence of a man named Jesus and the cult that sprung up around him.
With all that said I guess the real question here is WWTCWD?
Again Rob, Thanks for sharing your ideas on this. Let me see if I can shed some light on what I said/ why I said it, or what I meant by it.
I guess it wasn’t entirely true to say, “I have no position.” I have thoughts about what I feel is the right response, but I have not yet come to a conclusion as to if I feel those ideas are right or not right, thus, I have no position. Does that make sense?
When WBC came to Pittsburgh for Catherine Baker Knoll’s funeral, my partner and I organized a rally to counter protest, so I have some experience of doing that. It would be true to say, that Im certainly not opposed to it. At the same time, I also think I have opinions (some would say I have too many opinions, or I hold them too strongly) about issues that truly threaten the LGBT community. I guess I’m not sure that WBC falls into that category. I don’t think they are really a threat. On the other hand, homophobia is a threat, and it can be argued that what they do assists in the perpetuation of homophobia. In my previous reply, I believe I said that I thought a case could be made either way- for or against.
I think one of the biggest reasons for a counter protest, is if people there, in the community of Washington feel a need to express their own voice against this outside group bringing their brand of crazy to the Washington area. rallies and counter rallies help give people a voice, and that is a very good thing. But that voice is of the people themselves.
If I have any real thing to disagree with you is with your notion that “as a leader, I should [fill in the blank]. If we really expect to make change towards Equality, we have to each become engaged and act in the ways we see fit. Not as leaders, but as everyday people. One of the reasons we, as a whole community make so little ground, is because we, in the most general sense, are waiting for leaders to make it all happen, and yet we, in the most general sense, don’t trust them to do that.
I won’t argue about Lady GaGa. Not really worth it. I will say however, that she is inspiring real meaningful action in amazing ways, and THAT is something we all need to be taking note of. I’m sure she had to work with her butcher to end up with a meat dress, but that doesn’t mean the statement she was making with the dress was any less her own words.
As far as Jesus is concerned. There is little doubt that a cult developed, but past that truly we don’t know much about what or why was behind it. Josephus was as poor a real historian as they get, writing what his boss expected him to write more than anything else. Again, not really of interest to argue about. There are plenty of Jesus scholars and there are vast varieties of ideas about what was real and not real about what some biblical character did or didn’t do, or would or would not have done. There is nothing intellectually dishonest about that. To decide what can be logically inferred from a myth belongs in the pulpit (which is a fine place to be), but I’m not sure I think it ought to be the basis for political engagement. YMMV.
Again, Thanks for taking the time to add to this dialogue!
As for WWTCWD, I really don’t have an answer for that. I would whole heartedly support whatever effort members of that community feel they want to do/ need to do. I would completely support efforts that help engage people to give voice to their own experience and ideas. but WWTCW do , specifically in relation to WBC, no comment at this time.