Fighting for God, country and the Diag preachers

Jack Schillaci Slam it to the Left

Can we talk about the Bible? Better yet, let's not.

There are dozens upon dozens of categorizations and issues that are just itching to cause arguments and divisions among the members of our wonderful community. But one thing that nearly all can agree on is the utter futility of the Diag preachers' mission. Christian, Jewish, black, white or whatever, Wolverines almost universally find the Diag preachers more annoying than helpful.

Day after day, they come to our campus with signs decrying we horrible sinners. ("Go to hell. Go directly to hell. Do not pass Go! Do not collect $200," would be a good one, though they're usually less whimsical, more fire-breathing.) They want to save us, to deliver us from the horror of our debauched lifestyles before the fiery pits of the underworld engulf us.

After all, the millennium and ensuing apocalypse are near. And if there is any one place that is categorically void of spirituality, it's got to be large public universities. Student life is a cesspool of youthful excess and we hedonists need to be put back on the path toward enlightenment.

At least that's what I've gleaned of their thinking while walking through the Diag. Out of this misguided sense of urgency and necessity, the Diag religious folk try to convert the preached to at least five days a week. And like teeny-boppers at an LFO concert, most students walk through and wonder what the hell it is they're yammering on about.

There are those that stop. They listen. They yell back. Sometimes they get really angry. They walk away. In the end, just like those that walk on by, they find it as convincing as when a Bush asks us to read his lips.

Part of this has to do with the speakers' method of argument and their audience. Academic types are notoriously critical of things they can't dissect into a proof, empirical test or thesis. Mix in the fact that most Diag dwellers answer pointed philosophical questions by screaming, ignoring the question or just repeating what they've already said, usually verbatim, and you have a recipe for wasted time. In-depth theological discussion this is not.

Using religion as a way to create a public fervor is not limited to Ann Arbor, however. Unfortunately, it's just as ubiquitous elsewhere. We've all witnessed the recent explosion of religious trendiness with Cosmo, Details and their ilk printing articles about which stars believe what, complete with paragraph-long sidebars (poorly) summarizing the basic tenets of Scientology, the Kaballah, Buddhism and so forth.

And of course, religion has always been a big issue in politics, be it the much-fabled separation of church and state, or campaign funding for and perhaps influence over many candidates. Lately, indeed, there has been a surge in the number of politicos who call on religion to ease our woes. Numerous politicians on both sides of the aisle have capitalized on the immorality of the Clinton White House to call for a return to our spiritual roots.

Jesse Ventura made headlines two weeks ago when he called organized religion a crutch for the "weak-minded." Oh the drama, but does anyone (besides red-faced Minnesotans, who by now have got to want him to shut up) really care what he has to say about this subject?

Al Gore and George W. Bush have both spoken about our nation's spiritual basis and the importance of god as a cement to build communities. For example, both have made expansion of public support for faith-based organizations a significant component of their campaigns. According to GW's Website, government must turn "first to faith-based organizations, charities and community groups to help people in need." Through these "armies of compassion," we can overcome societal problems and rebuild our sense of community. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

This isn't the Great Awakening. Politicos and the riff-raff in the Diag are not Jonathon Edwards. We're not on a spiritual highway to hell, though much of Washington's lip service on the topic suggests otherwise.

Religion was not meant to be a punch line or a campaign slogan. It wasn't meant to be something to bring up when you run out of talking points. Religion, roughly, is about a very personal connection one feels between themselves and a higher power. It will necessarily be debated publicly, but it should not be wielded like a sword against hapless political enemies or unwitting college students trying to get to class.

Discussion among faiths is vital, but it should not take the form of screaming and jumping up and down. Understanding and tolerance are important if we are to prevent the religious conflicts that have plagued human history, but they cannot be achieved by fiat or through politics.

- Jack Schillaci can be reached via e-mail at jschilla@umich.edu. Amen.

10-11-99