What’s worse: signing a potentially racist statement about traditional marriage, or relentlessly attacking a political candidate’s faith?
Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann has drawn a barrage of criticism since July 7 when she signed a conservative group’s traditional Marriage Vow. The document’s preamble made the outrageous claim that a slave child in 1860 was more likely to be raised in a two-parent household than a black baby born after the election of the first black president.
Osha Gray Davidson of Forbes quoted Indiana University sociologist Lorraine Blackman about the pledge’s slavery claim, given that her 2005 study, The Consequences of Marriage for African Americans, was cited as its source.
“That’s just wrong,” she said. “It is a serious error.”
At Jack & Jill Politics, Cheryl Contee had this to say:
Given that families were broken up regularly for sales during slavery and that rape by masters was pretty common, this could not be more offensive. … When will Republicans inquire with actual Black people whether or not we’re ok with invoking slavery to score cheap political points?
Zerlina Maxwell added a heap of hyperbole at The Loop 21, but used the misstep to attack Bachmann’s faith.
If Michele Bachmann is a “submissive wife” as she claims to be based on biblical teachings, then how can she be President of the United States? How can Bachmann be the leader of the free world when she is not the leader of her own household?
The Grio piled on:
If idiocy needed a spokesperson, look no further than Minnesota congresswoman and GOP presidential hopeful, Michele Bachmann.
Politico reports that Bachmann and the group have backtracked.
“In no uncertain terms, Congresswoman Bachmann believes that slavery was horrible and economic enslavement is also horrible,” said [Bachman] campaign spokeswoman Alice Stewart.
“We agree that the statement referencing children born into slavery can be misconstrued, and such misconstruction can detract from the core message of the Marriage Vow: that ALL of us must work to strengthen and support families and marriages between one woman and one man,” the group’s statement said.
The Atlantic’s Ta-Nehisi Coates isn’t buying it.
The group never acknowledges that they offered no factual basis for their claim. They just are sorry that it “can be misconstrued,” and may have caused “negative feelings.” No one’s actually wrong anymore. They’re just sorry that you can’t handle the “truth.”
At The Daily Beast, Michelle Goldberg zeroed in on her underlying concern:
Those who follow Bachmann’s career know that her evangelical commitments are even stronger than her fierce hostility to government. On Thursday, she demonstrated that once again.
Urban Faith wholeheartedly agrees that implying that black children were better off under a system of slavery displays a gross level of historical ignorance and insensitivity. On the other hand, Michele Bachmann’s personal ignorance should not give her political detractors a license to lambast her Christian beliefs. We should be able to call out her prejudice — no matter how unintentional — without resorting to prejudice ourselves.
I don’t know. When I saw the article and that the pledge is a “convervative Christian” pledge, I felt sick.
This whole thing is making me take a very hard look at what it means to be Christian. There is such a strong disconnect between what Jesus advocated and what’s being displayed by these prominent politicians who say they’re advocating family values. It feels to me that it’s more about control than actual witness, and that they care very little for the people they’re preaching to. I want my faith to reflect Jesus, and it’s things like this that makes me want to distance myself from “conservative Christianity”.
Thanks so much for the comment LaShawn.
I don’t want to be identified with this kind of Christian witness either and I find this Marriage Vow (and its preamble) troubling for a variety of reasons, but I also tend to close ranks when the faith of my fellow believers becomes an object of public derision … even if I don’t support those believers’ agendas.
I find our political process and a lot of the public discourse about it extremely discouraging. What should we do?
I am really upset by this whole debate concerning “The Marriage Vow” and Republican presidential candidate, Michelle Bachman’s signing of it. I’ll explain why I’m upset later. I’m not sure of the accuracy of the statistics concerning marriage in slavery times versus marriage today in the Black community. The one thing I believe we can all say is that, considering the fact that 70+% of all babies born to African-Americans are born out-of-wedlock in the U.S. today, it couldn’t have been much worse during slavery than it is now! Also, after reading the statement I’m having a hard time understanding what all the uproar is about. The statement in no way tries to justify slavery. It does not make the claim that African-Americans were better off during slavery than we are now. It only makes the observation that families during slavery times may have been more intact than today in the context of advocating for the traditional marriage model. One can definitely disagree with this point based on how you interpret the data from the original source.
What is really upsetting to me is that we are more angry with a statement made in a document supporting the traditional family than we are with promiscuity running rampant in our communities, sexual disease profoundly affecting peoples lives, babies having babies, boys fathering children they cannot support, mothers having to try and fill the roles of both mother and father (or finding a suitable male role model) and the list of problems goes on and on!
Could it be that the reason we are really upset is that our dirty laundry is being pointed out and it’s white conservatives doing it? Could it be that this document that Mrs. Bachman signed invokes God into the conversation as well as traditional values (a.k.a. Christian values) and we know how most Liberals feel about that!
I am well aware that racism still is a factor in our nation. I also know that none of us will ever really know how much slavery and its effects still live with us. But our ancestors (under slavery and Jim Crow) showed much more intestinal fortitude than we do today. When someone like Michelle Bachman points out that the disintegration of marriage in the Black community may be a major contributing factor to our plight, we take the easy way out. Instead of dealing with the issue in a straightforward manner, we cry racism, idiocy, ignorance, and also accuse fellow believers of not being like Jesus. We continue to want to blame everyone else instead of looking in the mirror. But why should I be surprised by this. In our current climate, it’s great politics to pick apart one statement or act of a political opponent, call them a racist, sexist, or homophobe, use it against them and then destroy them. Sometimes, being like Jesus means pointing out the sin no matter how much it might hurt or embarrass someone. Ask the Woman at The Well or the Pharisees!
I am sorry but slaves were not allowed to be married it made it easier to sell them, if you define two parent household as two adults having say over your upbringing slaves remember slave children were trained to believe the Misses of the plantation was their mother and their parents simply sired them and were not the final say in their lives. Finally just because your parents are their in physical proximity does not mean you have a household.
Thanks for weighing in so passionately Edward.
You wrote: “Instead of dealing with the issue in a straightforward manner, we cry racism, idiocy, ignorance, and also accuse fellow believers of not being like Jesus.”
What would a straightforward confrontation of this issue look like?
To be honest Ms. Scheller, I’m not sure how a straightforward confrontation would look. Maybe it would begin with each individual looking at their situations, examining them, then seeing how they contributed to their present circumstance. Maybe preachers in the Black community need to focus more on preaching repentance before God instead of appealing more to political leaders for solutions to help us. There was a time when having a child born out-of-wedlock brought with it shame because it let everyone know what you were doing. (Of course, rape is excepted from this kind of shame!) But now, it’s no big deal. Years ago, a bible-believing community (which most African-Americans consider themselves a part of) that had a 70% out-of-wedlock birthrate would have brought that community to its knees before God in repentance. Not anymore! Why? Because we’ve fooled people into believing that a political solution will fix a spiritual problem. It’s called SIN! We need a spiritual revival! So Ms. Scheller, the straightforward confrontation I’m looking for would take place at the altar of every Bible-preaching church!
Thanks Mr. Sutton. That sounds like a good place to start. And please call me Christine. Blessings to you.~
Thanks to you as well. And call me Ed!
Let’s be honest here. I think part of this statement was to get back at President Obama seeing that he is specifically mentioned in the preamble.
Good point Rlynn. It’s a cheap political shot.