Okay, so Lakoff you know: Don’t Think of An Elephant, the Rockridge Institute, framing?
And you know me: pastor, sicko, frequent poster here.
The question is, what do these two things have in common?
Well yes, there’s the liberal thing. But more specifically, there’s– this:
The Rockridge Institute is planning an online conference centered on religion and religious values for progressives. The conference, planned for May 9 through 20, will be an interfaith event specifically highlighting the Christian, Jewish, Islamic and Buddhist faith traditions. This work will serve as a basis of a project where Rockridge will build new frames to convey progressive religious values and link them to public policy issues. We will use the event to share perspectives and gather information about the progressive religious movement. That input will be used to develop a paper addressing the major problems progressives face in shaping public policy (i.e. religion and religious values have been ceded, in the public mind, to religious conservatives) and showing a broad outline of the solution.
I’ve been invited to be one of the online hosts of the conference. What they tell me is that the conference will work like this:
The convener puts up the agenda and questions for the day and provides some commentary.
Participants begin commenting on the questions.
Moderators read the comments and help facilitate the conversation.
If a problem arises, a moderator would help guide the conversation back to the topic.
If a conversational thread appears that would be furthered with the opinion of an expert, a moderator would guide an appropriate host to the topic for his or her comment.
At the end of the day, the moderators would summarize the day’s conversation for the convener to include in the next day’s agenda post to help keep participants engaged and up-to-date on the happenings.
So I’m not a primary poster, but something of an intermediate: I’ll comment on and augment the convener’s thoughts. And I don’t know who the conveners will be, but the hosts are pretty heavy hitters in their own right:
Stephen Barnes
Robert Barr
Marcus J. Borg
Rita Nakashima Brock
John Cobb Jr.
Harvey Cox
Maia Duerr
C. Welton Gaddy
Ursula Goodenough
Rabia Terri Harris
Michael Lerner
Penny Nixon
Rebecca Parker
Rosemary Radford Ruether
David Saperstein
Alan Senauke
Romal Tune
Diana Winston
They also have some pretty good Muslim, Buddhist, and Interfaith leaders, but they apparently haven’t confirmed their participation yet. But if you know any of these names, you’ll know why I’m scared sh-, er, out of my wits. It’s a bit like getting called up from Double-A ball to the Big Leagues; these are all people whose books I really should have read by now.
So I’m going to need your help. I need to know what you need me to say to represent this community adequately. But before I throw the floor open, let’s hear Rockridge’s Statement of Purpose:
One of the basic tenets of our country is the separation of church and state. Those boundaries have been blurred of late through the influence of the Christian Right. Even so, as a pluralistic society, religious values necessarily influence our politicians and inform the nation’s policies. However, with the current rightward tilt of our national conversation, an imbalance has occurred. Our hope is that this project will be but one part of a return toward greater compassion and tolerance in our national policies. Progressive values are part of all major religious faiths, and we desire to see these values restored to their rightful place.
The rightwing extremists who dominate the political debate appropriate religious values to hide the real effects of their policies. The results of their policies are often at odds with the way most Americans interpret the religious traditions they invoke.
We have to start talking about the issues in terms of progressive values, and progressive religious values in particular. Clearly, progressives have ceded the religious landscape and bungled their attempts to connect with religious people. For example: during the last election John Kerry struggled to talk about his own Catholic faith in a way that would connect with Americans. But to many people his words sounded hollow. This was not an isolated case: presidential candidate Howard Dean famously said that Job was his favorite book in the New Testament causing much derision for his mistake in not knowing it as a book from the Old Testament or Tanakh.
Religion is often equated with values. But, spiritual Progressives do not understand their moral system and therefore have not defined it in a way that is conducive to communicating that worldview. Poll after poll has shown that much of America agrees with progressives on specific
policy issues. But, when progressives try to counter the policies of the right we fall into the trap of fighting on the facts.
But frames always trump facts, and people’s basic political frames are based on their values. Facts are of course crucially important, but just as important is that they be framed in appropriate ways. Facts have to be understood, and they are never understood in a vacuum. There are two important facts about facts: first, facts alone do not set you free; and, second, if the facts conflict with the hearer’s frame, the frame will win and the facts will be ignored.
Therefore, in order to change the public debate on the environment, we must change the frames. In order to change the frames of public discourse, there has to be a coordinated two-pronged effort: the facts and the frames.
This conference is the first step in Rockridge’s work to frame progressive spiritual values and beliefs. The conference will enable Rockridge to gather needed information to guide the larger effort of re-framing religious and spiritual values for progressives.
Now, I know some of you will disagree with the concept behind the conference. Some folks think that religion has no business in the public square, much less in the political life of our nation. If that’s what you think, I can understand, but really, there’s not much I can do, beyond advocating for equal treatment of the non-religious in public life. Given who I am, I’m not sure I can adequately represent your views. But by all means, come and participate: you’ll see below that this is in fact one of the questions this conference will be considering.
For those of you somewhere in the middle, who are concerned that trying to build a frame around faith for progressives is simply buying into the
Republicans’ way, I ask you to consider this: according to no less a light than Fredrick Clarkson, the radical secular right has been seeking to undermine religious progressives and moderates for more than twenty years as a way of achieving their political aims. Framing religion for progressives isn’t a matter of theology; it’s hard-nosed advocacy for the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. At least, that’s one thing I’m intending to argue.
I should also note–in the interests of full disclosure, if nothing else–that theocracy/dominionism is not itself one of the topics of this conference. However a number of folks are working on a separate project along these lines, including Fred, Bruce Prescott, dKos’ troutfishing and myself. More information here and as it comes available.
But like I say, I need some help figuring out the rest of it. Here’s the “questions and agenda” so far:
The main questions we will explore in this online conference are:
What values do we share as spiritual/religious progressives, regardless of our particular faith?
What values and ideas can help religious progressives and secular progressives overcome mutual suspicion and forge a stronger connection
in support of a shared vision for the country?
How have conservatives been able to appropriate the mantle of religion and religious values for their worldview and paint progressive people as hostile to religion?
What values and ideas can religious progressives use to build dialog with religious conservatives about the importance of grace, compassion, and other progressive religious values?
Where do progressive religious people go from here?
Below is our agenda for the two-week event. (As more partners join in the event, the agenda will most likely change.) The below only includes topic areas but not the questions we’ll be asking.
Getting started (Goal: setting the groundwork for the rest of the conference — getting people comfortable, giving them the proper context for the rest of the discussion)
Framing 101: Taking a look at the Nurturant Parent and Strict Father models
Sharing your spiritual journey: People’s stories of coming to progressive religious beliefs
Child-rearing: Looking at how child-rearing affects religious and political affiliations and beliefs
History of religion and politics
Worldviews and why they matter (Goal: coming to a place of understanding our shared values)
Conceptualizations of God
Different worldviews, different religions, different theologies
Finding common values
The politics of empathy (Goal: understanding politics and religion contextually)
Legacy of liberal religion
List of progressive values (from Lakoff)
Should progressive politicians be talking about religion?
Role of religion in political/policy debates
Separation of church and state
Real world implications (Goal: coming to a better understanding of how religion can influence some of the current big debates)
Life issues
Care of the planet
Budget as a moral document
Universal health care
War and nonviolence
United we stand (Goal: figuring out how to move forward)
Creating a movement
Common ground between spiritual progressives and those who do not identify
Well, I’m excited. I intend to report back here fairly frequently, summarizing the drift of the conversation, and letting you all know what I’ve contributed so far.
If you’d like more information, or to sign up for the conference, look here.
And for right now, let me know what you’re thinking: questions, comments, snippy remarks (within reason)?
