All Along the Watchtower
My doorbell just rang. Sadly, our peephole is missing a lens, so I couldn't see who was outside. So, like a moron, I just swung open the door.
A lovely African American couple, armed with bags and Bibles asked me, with gleaming smiles, whether I was happy about the rising number of crime scenes in our area.
"No, I'd have to say I'm sad about that." I really hate being led by the nose.
Then they asked, "Do you think we can trust the government to handle the problem?"
Choose-your-own-adventure time.
*If you want to say "Yes, the government is competent," go directly to God-is-more-powerful, Psalms 146 rebuttal.
*If you want to say, "No, the government here is crap and we need to fight for better reforms," go to "Trust-God-for-your-reforms" speech.
I chose option three. Fight fire with rhetorical fire. Also misrepresent my belief structure.
"No we can't trust the government, we have to pray to God for those changes to happen when the next world comes" Blecchh. I hate the rhetoric of my fundamentalist youth, its dim utopian impulses, its defeatist political attitudes mixed with ultra-conservative political posturing. It's worse when it comes out of my own mouth, even in an attempt to get back to work more quickly.
Nonetheless, I've still misstepped. These weren't just any evangelicals--they were Jehovah's Witnesses. Not next world. This world. His hand goes into his bag, out comes The Watchtower. (They've gotten slimmer than they used to be, I notice). I coyly ask when the current predictions for the return of Christ was, since there have been, what, eight predictions since 1950? No, actually, I only wish I had asked that. Instead I say thanks and politely shut the door. I think they may be coming back another day to discuss what I'm supposed to read.
Here's the dilemma. I've tried everything with such Electrolux spiritualists. I've tried telling them what I think they want to hear. I've tried telling them quite simply that I don't share their beliefs and am not interested in reconsidering. I've tried telling them that I respect the missionary work they're doing (which I don't) but I don't agree with the religion they peddle.
Why is it that the only effective strategy is to be rude? In hawking a morality door-to-door, they literally force people into betraying that morality. And then they use it to justify the dire straits of the world. Do they not understand that they breed the conflict themselves? If there's something I dislike more than rhetorical leading-by-the-nose, it's being forced into acts I believe to be unethical by those who want me to adopt their ethic.
Comments
we had a couple stop by our place the other day, wanting to know if we were interested in the word of God and spoke Spanish and wanted to give a paltry sum of $100 to fund their door to door spread the word campaign.
Brandus pretended to speak french.
Posted by: alianora | September 9, 2003 4:17 PM
Ahh, the ol' "no speeka ingles" trick. Hadn't though about that one.
Posted by: Ryan | September 9, 2003 6:15 PM
well, as a spiritual-guide-in-the-making, i thought i might try to cut my teeth on this one. y'know, ryan-- the folks i used to live among down in Moab, UT, would say that there were three types of people in their tiny (remote) sleepy (extreme) town: the Mo's, the Jo's, and the No's. now, (they'd say) the thing you have to do is figure out which one you are. then when the doorbell rings, as it inevitably would, you have a plan: self-identify as quickly, firmly and honestly as possible. in my case, i'd just say "No!". Nancy Reagan would be proud. and, interestingly perhaps, the same description Nancy used to apply to the prevalence of drug dependency works in terms of religious fervency. Nancy wrote to a coalition of First Ladies meeting at the United Nations in 1985, "It knows no boundaries. it crosses all lines - geographical, racial, political, economic. There is no one here today whose country isn't affected by the inevitable sorrow and tragedy [it] causes. Not only can it tear down an entire nation, it also brings danger into the lives of our most precious resource; our children." so, for the children's sake, Ryan, just say "no." if it works to stave off the threat of drug dealers, it'll surely work against the threat of religious zealots.
alternatively, you could do like my dear friend bob who likes to arrive at the door wearing only a sheer skirt, holding a full glass of wine in one hand and a copy of 'The Basic Writings of Kant' in the other. typically bob doesn't have to utter a single syllable.
Posted by: fritz | September 10, 2003 5:41 PM