The ideas of George Lakoff are currently in vogue — and with good reason. His short accessible book Don’t Think of an Elephant! is an excellent primer on effective political communication, and makes the case that framing is an important component of political strategy. But there are those who have adopted “framing” as a panacea. Politics requires people, resources, organization, and strategy — as well as effectively communicated values and ideas.

When thinking about what to do in response to the Christian Right, it has been my experience that many people (but certainly not all) get so bogged down on matters of language that they are unable to get to the point of having coherent conversations about effective tactics and strategy — let alone evaluating and changing current tactics and strategy. The Christian Right has not ascended to significant power in the United States by framing alone. They have generated and effectively deployed people and resources, and refined and field tested tactics. They have a strategy and it has evolved over time. I addressed this in Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and Democracy. I identified what I saw as the major elements of the strategy of the Christian Right and offered some concrete ideas about what needed to be done.

There is no one correct formula of course, and those who are concerned about the Christian Right — wherever they may be in American political or religious life — are going to need to be actively reconsidering their approach to politics.

Chip Berlet, writing at Talk to Action, has launched a series of essays based on the principles learned in a quarter century at Political Research Associates, a progressive think tank that has specialized in studying the American political right.

Berlet argues this week that the general members of the Christian Right are not necessarily “dimwitted, ignorant, or crazy,” and that it is a significant mistake for people to think of them that way. Even worse to label them as such. Nevertheless, he writes, “That was a common perception promoted by centrist academics during the 1960s, but since the late 1970s sociologists have shown that people who join social movements–left or right–are remarkably similar to the population from which they emerge. And people in social movements are not mesmerized by crafty leaders, cluelessly following the whims of charismatic demagogues. Demagogues exist, to be sure, but they primarily succeed by swaying large groups of people by developing clever ways to frame ideas and issues.”

“Frames are necessary,” he continues, “but not sufficient to build a movement, but frames are an important tool.”

“That’s good news for progressives who want to mobilize a counter-movement. We can examine the frames put forward by the Hard Right and devise alternative frames that drive wedges between specific constituencies. We can do that with topical analysis, for example exploiting the tension between Christian conservatives and libertarians on social issues such as abortion and gay rights. And we can recognize that participants have different levels of commitment and loyalty to social movements.”

Talk to Action is currently in the first phase of development. We will be announcing a launch date for the second phase — a fully interactive site not unlike The Daily Kos or TPM Cafe soon. This will provide a place to discuss such matters among people who are concerned about the growth and power of the theocratic Christian Right.

Unlike what often happens elsewhere in the blogosphere, we intend to follow Lakoff’s advice regarding public disourse — that it be civil. Our inaugural post, at TTA was an essay by Berlet titled “Stop Labeling and Start Organizing.” Berlet believes — and we agree — that for a lot of people on the left and in the Democratic Party, name calling has too often substituted for more considered analysis — and that this has backfired politically.

Its time to rethink things.

As I wrote at the end of Eternal Hostility, “The threat is great and the time is now — and probably for the rest of our lives.”

The Biblical Witness Fellowship, a member of the rightist Institute on Religion and Democracy-sponsored Association for Church Renewal was probably the first to pop-up out of the rightwing jack-in-the box to denounce the UCC’s historic endorsement of marriage equality. (The BWF previously called for the resignation of UCC President John Thomas for having endorsed the resolution — which which received 80% of the vote.)

But the BWF went much farther than disagreement with the vote of the General Synod to endorse marriage equality in the church, and in the nation. The BWF in its statement implies that because of its stand, the UCC is no longer a Christian denomination:

“This resolution does not validate same sex relationships but only invalidates and de-legitimizes the UCC as a religious body… We are deeply saddened by this tragic day in the history of our church that once had a faithful witness for Jesus Christ.”

The BWF may be the first, but my guess is that it will not be the last to claim that the United Church of Christ is not Christian.

The United Church of Christ endorsed marriage equality at the denomination’s General Synod, meeting in Atlanta on July 4th. It is the first major Christian denomination to do so.

“Roughly 80 percent of the representatives on the church’s 884-member General Synod voted to approve the resolution Monday,” reports The Associated Press. “The resolution calls on member churches of the liberal denomination of 1.3 million to consider wedding policies ‘that do not discriminate against couples based on gender.’ It also asks churches to consider supporting legislation granting equal marriage rights to gay and lesbian couples and to work against laws banning gay marriage….”.

“UCC churches are autonomous, meaning the General Synod does not create policy for its more than 5,700 congregations.”

Its a move that may not change many minds on the subject. But the church’s stand demolishes the perception promoted by the Christian Right that all Christians are opposed to marriage equality. Signficantly too, in the run up to the vote, Rev. Andrew Young, a UCC minister, African-American civil rights leader, and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, endorsed the resolution.

For all the noise and spin that will undoubtedly follow when the PR offices of the Christian Right open on Tuesday morning, it is worth listening to this major Christian denomination’s speaking in its own voice first. Here is part of a moving report on the vote from a UCC press release.

“Afterwards, instead of loud applause, there was a dignified moment of stillness broken only by the voice of the Rev. John H. Thomas who offered a prayer.”

“‘Lord Jesus. We give thanks for your presence, especially here this morning,’ the UCC’s general minister and president prayed in a soft, pastoral voice. ‘We have felt your warm embrace, stilling us as we tremble with joy, with hope, with fear, with disappointment… Let us use our hands not to clap, but to wipe away every tear.’”

“As the plenary adjourned for lunch, the mood remained as one would expect after a service of worship, rather than a session of earnest debate and serious deliberation. The most demonstrative sights were those of couples of all ages and genders locked in tearful embraces of thanksgiving for what Thomas would later also refer to as ‘freedom.’”

“Later, in a press conference, Thomas acknowledged that it was not lost on the gathering that this historic stand was taken on the nation’s Independence Day.”

“‘On this July Fourth the General Synod of the United Church of Christ has acted courageously to declare freedom, affirming marriage equality, affirming the civil rights of same gender couples to have their relationships recognized as marriages by the state, and encouraging our local churches to celebrate and bless those marriages,’ he said.”

“Thomas also acknowledged that the issue of marriage equality is ‘the source of great conflict’ not only in society but also in the churches. The UCC, he said, ‘is no exception’ and ‘there are clearly great differences among our own members over this.’”

Synod action, he added, ‘does not presume a consensus of opinion among our members or our local churches, which are free and responsible to come to their own mind of this as on any other (issue). The General Synod speaks to and not for our local churches.’”

Chuck Currie has more details over at the UCC blog.

Chuck Currie marked his second day guest blogging on the new blog site of the United Church of Christ by writing about…. bloggers!

The UCC is breaking new ground this week, using an official blog to provide information and commentary on the proceedings of its biennial conference, or General Synod, to church members not in attendance and to the wider public. Response to the UCC blog is already lighting up the blogosphere, which is always interested in new developments, as Currie shows. He writes: “There will be a lot more in the coming days. Stay tuned.” Indeed. And in the run up to the vote on marriage equality, and whatever the outcome, the blogopshere will light up like the Fourth of July. And the fireworks will not all be celebratory.

The UCC is poised to become the first major Christian denomination to endorse marriage equality. Even in considering such a move, it has been under attack by conservative and evangelical groups. The other day for example, UCC President John Thomas endorsed the marriage equality resolution that will be considered by the General Synod. Imediately, a UCC rightwing caucus, the Biblical Witness Fellowship, demanded Thomas’ resignation, declaring “He now now longer enjoys the credibility to continue as a religious leader of a Christian church.” One can only imagine this outfit’s reaction if the General Synod passes the marriage equality resolution.

This group is affiliated with the rightist Institute on Religion and Democracy, which has a twenty year history of external agitation and opposition to the social justice missions of the mainline denominations. IRD sponsors a network of conservative “renewal” groups that oppose the historic social justice mission and democratic traditions of the mainline churches. The annual meeting of this group is held in conjunction with the National Association of Evangelicals.

Last year, when the UCC sought to air a television ad that sought to portray the church as a place of welcome to all during the Christmas season, the Biblical Witness Fellowship joined with IRD in denouncing the ad. The tiny group is often given far more play in the media than they represent in numbers.

The UCC’s General Synod is an elected and representative body in the Congregational tradition. As the UCC points out on its web site, “Because every UCC congregation is self-governing, its [the General Synod's] resolutions speak ‘to’ but not ‘for’ the local church.” In other words, if the synod endorses same sex marriage, it does not mean that local churches are required to perform any. But if groups like the Biblical Witness Fellowship got their way, they would be seeking to create not only conservative doctrine, but to police doctrinal purity.

Religion News Service recently reported that Diana Butler Bass, a senior researcher at Virginia Theological Seminary “worried about conservatives’ attempts in the UCC and other churches to centralize authority, discipline and doctrinal standards, especially in the UCC where local congregations relish their autonomy. Such a move violates ‘the democratic impulses of American Protestantism,’ she said.”

“‘These denominations are so closely tied to the practice of democracy in this country,’ she said. ‘If they lose that kind of local meeting-house democratic impulse, it makes me wonder what’s going on in the larger culture.’”

[Crossposted at Talk to Action.]