According to a front-page story in today’s Amarillo Globe-News, a group called Go Away KKK! is planning to be downtown tomorrow “to counter the Ku Klux Klan’s rally by drowning out its speakers with noise.” A KKK group from San Angelo, Texas has been issued a permit to demonstrate on the steps of Amarillo’s City Hall from 3-5 p.m. this Saturday.
Milissa Milam, a spokesperson for Go Away KKK! noted the Klan’s reputation for all kinds of violence and racism, and is calling for residents of Amarillo to show up at the Klan rally with “pots, pans, drums, guitars, whistles, air horns, radios—anything that makes noise.”
A Go Away KKK! poster that accompanies the story in the paper claims that at a recent KKK rally in Austin, TX “protesters got the Klan to leave in just 20 minutes by overwhelming them with noise!”
Today’s editorial in the Globe-News frequently quotes Martin Luther King Jr. and continues the paper’s endorsement of the “Community Unity Day Celebration,” planned by the local NAACP and scheduled for 3-5 p.m. at the MLK Park in Amarillo, far from City Hall.
As I mentioned in a post two weeks ago, other local voices have suggested that people here should completely ignore the Klan’s rally and go on as usual. At least one local pastor has planned a church prayer service to coincide with the rally.
By the way, I have no idea of the source of the photo in this post. But as I was looking through images on the Web, this one fascinated me. I can't get it to post any larger (without serious blurring); the white in the background is a Klansman. The face of a child, the competing principles, life lessons learned early . . . This one’s worth well more than a thousand words.
So, if you lived in Amarillo, Texas, where would you be tomorrow afternoon? Why? I’ll keep you posted.
4 comments:
How has the leadership of your congregation responded to this Frank?
Shalom,
Bobby Valentine
Bobby,
For various reasons (not including "forsaking the assembling of ourselves together") I haven't been around my home congregation in about 2 weeks.
My guess is that nothing has been said there. As you well know, although the Churches of Christ have tended to be a lot more political than we used to be, we still don't know much about how to get in a public fight over any sort of social or political issue.
Too, I think some of it is the church culture of exclusivism; it tends to mean that you have a problem with everyone else's idea. And your own idea is . . . to have a problem with everyone else's idea.
Dee,
I'm confident you agree with me when I say that there are SOME things worth getting yourself into to trouble over. But it's frequently hard to tell (Bonhoeffer's fretting over what the will of God was, etc.).
I find that I am more and more likely to be involved in some sort of protest or demonstration than I used to be. I was so disappointed by the Church of Christ leadership in Connecticut when the the state legislature was falling all over itself trying to pass a new, but unnecessary, law regarding same-sex unions. It passed with hardly a word from our pulpits, and absolutely nothing along the lines of participating with Catholic and Protestant clergy in the state.
It seems to me that, to the degree that this is, indeed, a post-Christian era, Christians must learn to do things a little differently (I mean, besides learning how to cuss like the rest of the world).
I wonder if addressing an issue like this is really going "political?" Racism is a sin pure and simple.
You are right that at times we need to have the courage to speak up. Amos should be read a little more in our churches perhaps.
I say this beloved knowing a price can be paid. Without holding myself up as an example in the slightest, I was fired from a congregation for addressing this very issue. It was in Mississippi and not Texas.
Shalom,
Bobby Valentine
Bobby, you're absolutely right about "political" vs. " downright sinful."
I think the question is one about how to act at the intersection of faith and public life. Having said that, I'm sure that some of my own "cluelessness" has served the goal of doing nothing.
Our people would, for the most part, regard racism as sin. I also think that because some of this sin is so deep in our bones, or because we don't want to deal with our own folks for whom that's true, it's easier to say and do nothing. Why risk alienating yourself over truth we really don't care that much about? (Is my interpretation too harsh?)
Something I learned in Connecticut is that one of the first consequences of standing is that you'll be misunderstood, misquoted, protrayed in a bad light, second-guessed in truly unfair ways. (Not that I got within light years of martyrdom. Rats!) To remain standing, I think you have to trust yourself in a healthy way and show courage.
One thing's certain; you learn some things about yourself, not all of them necessarily good.
Post a Comment