As my FB post on the unborn is making the rounds again, just a quick note to let folks know: 1) Yes, I’m aware #notallprolifers. 2) Christian smarm is a bad witness. 3) People who actually do some form of advocacy already know these things. 🧵 1/8
White allies for black lives, men who fight misogyny, straight cis folks who advocate for LGBTQ folks— those who are already *about the work* don’t get defensive when black activists post about wypipo, or women post #yesallmen , etc. 2/8
So when folks come at me for distinguishing what REAL advocacy looks like from what passes for “pro-life” among evangelical (not RC) Christians, they are simply confirming that they have no idea what advocacy is. 3/8
Real advocacy for the unborn would be working to leave them a planet that hasn’t warmed by 2C, fighting tooth and nail for paid family leave and universal health care. Real advocates know that their issue intersects with practically every other justice issue. 4/8
Real advocacy for the unborn would be about free contraception and comprehensive sex education, because stopping harm “upstream” is what doing justice is about. (Real advocates have heard the “children in the river” analogy a bazillion times) 5/8 landiscenter.lafayette.edu/wp-content/upl…
Real advocates for mental health, for example, know that their advocacy MUST overlap with issues of mass incarceration, racism, disability rights, health care, education, & drug policy. ANY advocacy that doesn’t address context and systems is just posturing. 6/8
It is only in the area of “advocacy” for the unborn where so-called advocates insist on being siloed from most other social justice issues. Just look at the way so many evangelicals go to great lengths to declare social justice a competing gospel. 7/8 davebarnhart.wordpress.com/2019/05/24/soc…
It is this poverty of kingdom-oriented imagination and awareness of how systemic injustice impacts one’s relationships with others that makes claims to “advocacy” on behalf of the unborn fail the credibility test. 8/8 davebarnhart.wordpress.com/2021/09/08/a-c…
(And I mean, really, could you ask for a better parable for pro-lifers? "Who is throwing these children in the river?" But going upstream would mean questioning the effectiveness of abstinence-only education and who benefits from it.)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The thing you think of as you is basically a story you are telling yourself.
Similarly, most politics is basically a struggle to tell our collective story in a way that centers our selves — these fragile things built of stories — as the heroes of our subjective universe. 1/6
Our attempts to make these two stories cohere, the self and the society, is why politics is so contentious — because it involves how we construct our own identity and everything we trust. 2/6
But there's liberation in realizing that the received stories we rehearse most frequently are myths. There is deeper truth about who you are and who we are together that does not fit easily into media narrative or political binaries. 3/6
There is a strange, nonsensical phrase about charity that we say almost exclusively in church. Whenever we talk about doing direct service, I hear this phrase: "Feeding the homeless." People say it without blinking. 1/12
If you said "clothing the hungry," or "giving the naked a drink of water," people would look at you funny. But we will say "feeding the homeless" all the time. Because addressing the primary need, the thing that defines homelessness, is almost unthinkable. 2/12
During the housing crisis, it was often pointed out that there were more houses sitting empty due to foreclosure than there were homeless persons in the United States. And still, people talked about "feeding the homeless." 3/12