Wading in with the Ducks

If I have a goal with my blogging efforts it is to challenge all of us, most certainly myself, to be and do better, especially in the context of the message of Jesus. My posts are aimed at those of us who strive to follow his teachings, but I welcome all to comment, question and help me with own struggles to understand how Christianity is what it is in the 21st century in this country, in particular.

To that end, I'm putting on my waders to venture into the lake where the Ducks abide. I'll skip over the downright gross comments Phil Robertson made in his now famous GQ interview. Let's get right to a part which has not been so widely quoted. From the article titled "What the Duck" on gq.com (in the entertainment section which should give us a clue about what's going on, by the way):

Drew Magary writes, referring to Robertson, "Then he paraphrases Corinthians: 'Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.'"

First, and this is one thing I can't understand, in general, in certain Christian circles, why pick one thing from the list to completely vilify while ignoring the others? If you're going to boil your spiritual beliefs down to bare, basic rules and requirements, rather than incorporating grace, forgiveness and love, don't you have to go all the way with that line of thinking?

Can we talk about idolatry for a moment? The obsession over the Robertson family causes me to pause. Wanting to look like them, dress in the clothing they market, use every product they offer and be just like them is rampant. The crowds that seek them out are enormous. This is not an indictment of anyone's actions, enjoy their show if you want, but when I see giant, freestanding displays of Duck Dynasty merchandise towering up to the sky in retail stores, I wonder if camoflage is the new gold. It is for the Robertson's, for sure, but think in terms of a golden calf and you might get my meaning. 

For teetotalist fans of DD, did you know they have their own wine label? I certainly have no problem with that because drinking alcohol in moderation is not tantamount to drunkenness, but I would think that could be a problem for some who believe any consumption of alcohol is a sin.

Next, let's discuss greed. I know this is a dicey area because we're all supposed to be on board with capitalism working at its finest. Let's be clear: I do not begrudge the Robertsons their financial success. Good for them for becoming multi-millionaires. 

And they are likely charitable folk, although I did find the following on their website. In response to the "frequently asked question" of "Will you donate to our event?" The answer is, "While we sponsor and contribute to several organizations in our home town and several national charities, we are unable to respond to any requests from individuals or other organizations that we have not already chose." Most successful major corporations have methods to donate at least SOMETHING to charitable organizations for fundraising purposes, even if only autographed photos of a smiling (or not) Phil. I know this from experience in working in the nonprofit sector and organizing fundraising events.

And here's a tidbit. One local man told me last summer that he was paying Willie Robertson $40,000 to stop by his event for a couple of hours. Willie was double-booked that day, so he couldn't stay long. The man said he was fortunate to get Willie for that amount as the arrangements had been made before his fee had gone up. The man had checked into getting Phil and Miss Kay, but they were fetching $100,000 for their speaking engagements and he could not afford that. It is not for me to define greed, but it is difficult for me to reconcile those numbers with what someone might be "getting for their money" by paying the Robertsons that much.

Finally, to Robertson's main cause of outrage: homosexuality. You can trust me on this, there is WAY more fornicating amongst heterosexuals (that's on the list in Corinthians, too, although unmentioned by Robertson) and adulterous sex happening in this country than there is same-sex sexual activity.

Play the percentages. It is estimated that 4 to 5 percent of the population is homosexual. At least some of them are celibate. (No matter your opinion on that issue, the numbers are small when talking about active homosexuality.) So, that leaves a 95 percent heterosexual population. Given the number of unmarried, sexually active individuals and the divorce rate of around 50 percent, often caused by someone fooling around on the side, well, do the math. Of the millions of viewers of Duck Dynasty who are backing Robertson's claim that homosexual sin is "not logical," you can bet there many of them who are not keeping their private-part activity confined to a monogamous marriage situation and yet, are somehow finding logic in their own actions. 

And of course, for me, there is the ongoing issue of how the overall message of Jesus gets lost in the muck. He commanded us to love God and love our neighbors. Sorry, I'm just really not getting it in this case. Maybe some of Robertson's defenders can help me understand how his words are helping to promote peace on earth and goodwill toward all. Because as we are just days away from celebrating the birth of Christ I would hope that might be uppermost in our thoughts and actions.

There are certainly more vulnerable members of our community who are in greater need of being defended than someone who has the means, and the platform, to quite adequately defend himself. Phil is going to be OK, don't you think? I'm saving my outrage for other issues.