Tammy's getting herself in trouble again in the Oregon weblogging world. The last time this happened, a certain somebody dropped me a line:
I was kinda worried, wondering if you knowingly hosted her and if she was related to you then I saw your response to her latest post which cleared things up.Yes, I knowingly host Tammy. Yes, she is related to me. No, I do not agree with her socio-political views.
Why then do I continue to host her, if I find much of what she says ignorant and/or offensive?
There are several reasons, actually, among which are these:
- Tammy is family. She is my first cousin. We have shared history and shared blood. We are radically different human beings, but I love her, and she loves me.
- I do not believe that just because a person has a different voice than mine, that person ought to be silent. I try to put myself in that person's shoes. If I were a lone liberal in a sea of conservatives, would I want to have myself drowned by their flood? No. Many of Tammy's beliefs are repugnant to me, but I believe she has every right to hold these beliefs, and to share them. (Of course, I also believe she needs to reap what she sows, too. When her statements cause controversy, she needs to be able to handle that controversy. I'd love it if she were to actually respond to criticism with reasoned argument, but that's evidently not going to happen, so we just have to accept it.)
- Most importantly, I believe that the Weblog, as a form and idea, is a revolutionary form of communication. It's so many things at once — grassroots level news, personal diary, focused information for "taste tribes", etc. — but all of these boil down to personal journalism, the likes of which have never been possible before. Let me say it again: I think weblogs are revolutionary, and I believe everyone ought to consider writing one. They're not for the elite; they're for the masses.
Fellow Oregon weblogger Chuck Currie is cranky with Tammy, and understandably so:
She is the state's Anita Bryant wannabe. Tammy claims to be a Christian homemaker but is quick to violate Scripture by casting stones (if not bullets) at gays and democrats. For Tammy hate is the family value.
He wonders — perhaps rhetorically — whether Tammy is real:
But is she for real? Her daily rants turn her into such the stereotype of, well, the perfect Anita Bryant that some have begun to wonder if she isn't a hoax. I wonder myself. Could she be a liberal in disguise trying to bait progressives into honing their arguments on the issues? Or is she just someone out for a laugh? Maybe the truth is darker than that. Maybe she is for real.
I assure everyone that Tammy is real. In person, she is warm and funny and loud, just as one might expect from reading her weblog. She's also opinionated, and not shy about sharing her opinions.
The extended Roth family has only recently re-established yearly get-togethers. Our first was held about three years ago, in Tammy's home. A group of us were sitting upstairs, chatting about various topics. Tammy turned to me and asked me, "So, J.D., which church are you going to now?"
I knew the weight of the question when she asked it. I also knew that I wasn't prepared for a theological debate; I was filled with a warm familial glow, and had no desire to argue scripture. Still, I would not lie.
"I don't go to church, Tammy," I said. "I'm an atheist."
The room was silent for a moment, and then Tammy did her best to convince me of the error of my ways. I suffered in silence under her verbal assault, and then it passed. I'm now the wayward cousin, blind to the Truth. Generally, we don't discuss religion or politics except when one or the other of us says something just a little too provocative. Mostly we ignore the topic, and that works fine for us.
And that's my advice to those of you out there who find Tammy makes you oh so very tense: just ignore her. Yes, it's frustrating that people with her ideas exist, but to them it's just as frustrating that people with your ideas exist. The best way to —
sigh
I say this, rush to Tammy's defense, and then she writes something like this:
You see, God still has His people scattered about in Babylon. And it's time we quit weeping by the river and pick up our swords and fight. We must reclaim our nation.
Reclaim your nation from whom, Tammy? From yourself? See, I've tried to point this out before: Christians rule this nation. They always have. Something like 99% of this country believes in a god. Most of these believers are Christian. Are you trying to tell me you think there's some sort of cultural apartheid here? That you're being oppressed by the small percentage of non-Christians?
This is ludicrous!
Tammy, you are not oppressed. Christianity is not under attack in this country. (It's also possible that many Christians don't subscribe to your particular brand of dogmatism, that they think your interpretation of the Bible and of Christ's teachings are just as wrong as you think theirs are.) Christianity is the dominant paradigm. Yes, there are aberrations, and these aberrations bother you, but they're the exception and not the rule.
If you want to know what it's like to be oppressed, try being an atheist in a Christian nation. (And oppressed is too strong a word here; I live my life in a Christian world, but I'm not, say, enslaved and forced to build temples. Because of this, I don't feel oppressed the way black slaves felt oppressed.)
Christianity is omnipresent. It's everywhere. It's inescapable. Don't cry to me that you need to reclaim your nation. You've already claimed it, and all your moaning is because a small fraction of people don't want to think like you do. Why is it so important that everyone think just like you? Why is that so frightening?
My lands, that Tammy is so frustrating...
On this day at foldedspace.org
2005 — Odds and Ends I'm busy. Here are a few quick thoughts.
2003 — Nemo, Found In which I find Nemo (not the fish). In which Kris now has a lap cat.
I just start to think moreso that maybe, just maybe there is a God, then more of the 'we are greater than the rest' 'they ought to all believe as we do' attitude shows again - making me do a double take and decide to keep my status as Agnostic.
JD, you are very tollerant "Tammy is family. She is my first cousin. We have shared history and shared blood. "
I have family that I have chosen to drop communication with - there is choice in family and non-family as to whether or not you maintain contact.