ASNN

I agree with almost everything you've said, including the fact that Al Sharpton has gone overboard and should be removing the plank from his own eye. I disagree with the leap from Al Sharpton as flawed/crazy so therefore his claim of racism is "false." The most insidious forms of racism aren't the ones that stem from conscious intent but from unconscious enculturation. IOW, the anchor didn't have to mean anything by it for it to still be racist.

The other area where I call bullsh*t is the attempt to wriggle out of racism for yourself. I don't know that original sin means that we *all* are guilty of *all* sins, but racism is one that seems anecdotally universal. Matthew 5:27-28 says, "You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.'[a] 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." Can you can tell me that you've never had an adulterous thought, or a racist thought, or even a murderous thought that you've quickly checked and re-canted. I know at various points in my life I've had all three (although maybe not at the same time ;-)

I wonder also if maybe there's a difference between bigotry and racism. The term "racism" itself has been so skewed, and I wonder if the two of you are just having a semantic differences, rather than true idealogical differences.

However, I do tend to agree with Alan that racism (and/or bigotry) is a pretty general sin that we are all guilty of at one time or another (especially when applying the "if you thought it you did it" idea), much like hypocrisy (can any of us TRULY say we've never been a hypocrite?). I was raised in a (relatively) multi-cultural environment, and consider myself to be very knowledgeable about race relations and extremely sensitive to the issue, and even I have had my occasional racist thought, which I of course never act upon or even desired to have. Part of the problem there is how racism becomes so engrained in our consciousness by media and by loud mouths on either side of the argument. Even those of us who are incredibly knowledgeable are still susceptible to thoughts time to time that we don't at all agree with, and it's because our media has taught us to fear certain things, and has taught us a world slightly different than our own. It drives me crazy when I'm walking down the street late at night, and I naturally feel slightly more nervous when I see an African-American walking toward me than if I saw a Caucasian. I have NO reason whatsoever to have this reaction, especially considering my past and my feelings on the issue, other than the fact that movies, news, and television have taught me that that is a more dangerous situation.

The thing that frustrates me the most about Sharpton is that racism is screamed so quickly in response to every situation, that everyone becomes so terrified of being a racist that no real dialogue happens.

But now I'm rambling. To make a long story short, no you're not a crazy ignorant white boy.

I've wondered about this before, specifically when attending church services that include corporate confession of sin. While usually we as a congregation make our confessions of sin rather vague when we confess them as a group, sometimes the liturgist gets more specific, and often when they do it's about the sin of racism. Through most of my life I've generally approached the sin of racism as an intentional, specific action like theft or getting unfairly angry at somebody; not as a state of being that was created at the Fall. Being prone to committing a sin, and committing it periodically, does not make me guilty of it on a continual ongoing basis, does it?

And so if I haven't thought/said something racist this week, it feels weird to confess to it at church, if that makes sense.

But Alan's given me some food for thought.

(Oh, and for what it's worth--I can think of few people in politics more repellant than Al Sharpton. Ever notice that his words of wisdom tend to invariably inflame, rather than heal, racial tensions every time he opens his mouth? Ugh.)

Alan,

I disagree with your application of Jesus' example using adultery and lustful thoughts in Matthew 5. Jesus is saying that both the thoughts and the actions of adultery make us guilty under the spirit of the Law, since that Law was given (in part) to communicate God's perfect standard. Because of that, ANY thought or action that doesn't capture God's perfection is, by definition, sinful.

However, that doesn't mean that the thoughts and actions are equivalent, under the Law or otherwise. I recently read a wonderful post that describes this a little more:

Is there a difference in the eyes of God between thinking about adultery and actually doing it? Absolutely. If we say anything other than this, I believe we do damage to God’s character and encourage the act based upon its premonition. The point Christ makes in Matt. 5:28 is not that lust and the actual act are equal, but that they both violate the same commandment, even if the degrees of this violation differ. This way, Christ was telling all people (particularly the religious establishment of the day) that thought they were safe because they had fulfilled the letter of the law that the law runs much deeper. The spirit of the law is what matters. Therefore, if you have ever lusted, you have broken the sixth commandment. If you have ever hated your brother, you have broken the fifth commandment (Matt. 5:22). But, again, the breaking of the principles of the commandment is the issue, not the degree to which it is broken.

It might surprise you that I am more than willing to concede that I have had racist thoughts in the past. It was almost impossible NOT to do so, growing up in the white, suburban, skinhead neighborhood in which I did. However, I will confess to racism no more than I will confess to adultery just because I've had lustful thoughts. I might fail the same commandment ("love your neighbor as yourself") as the one that burns crosses or bombs black churches, but that does not make me complicit with those heinous acts.

To equate racist thoughts with willing racist actions — "it's all racism" — denigrates past and present targets of truly abhorrent racist actions. Further, it implicates and alienates bystanders and damages those valiant efforts to stamp out true racism everywhere.

Oh, and to the other point, I recognize the logical fallacy in saying, "If Al Sharpton claims racism, it cannot actually be racism because he's a kook." I wasn't precisely saying that; rather, I haven't heard anyone else clamoring to say that the action was racist. Therefore, my statement might be more like, "If Al Sharpton and only Al Sharpton claims racism, it cannot actually be racism because he's a kook." That is also logically fallacious, but the probability of it being true is still higher.

I don't think I believe that something can be "accidentally racist" though, given that all of the definitions at dictionary.com indicate a belief or doctrine of some sort. I'm more apt to call it what it is, according to the definition: racially insensitive, hurtful to the black community, moronic. But do I believe that the comments satisfy one of the following definitions (of racism)?

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races

Negative.

You make a good point about the degrees of sin. The ruin caused by our actions varies in scope. The key distinction for me is that all sin is sin in God's eyes, regardless of degree. Lying to my friend and lying to a country are drastically different in scope, but both are lying and fall short of perfection.

Racism is the same way. I'd argue that we have all had racist thoughts at some point--and while that's not as horrifying as a lynching--it is still racism. It can be involuntary, from "growing up in the white, suburban, skinhead neighborhood" but it is still racism.

Calling ourselves recovering racists is an acknowledgement that we are flawed, that we know this, and that we need to strive to be better than our past.

It's okay if we agree to disagree. In the grand scheme of things, neither position is heretical :)