Bigotry Has No Place in ORCSD: My Response to Robert Barth

Robert Barth’s letter is a heady brew of paranoia, anti-religious zeal and conspiracy thinking.  It’s wrong on so many levels it’s hard to know where to begin, but let’s start with the facts.

The assertion that Trinity International University’s “entire curriculum is based on belief that the old and new Testaments represent historical and scientific fact without exception” is demonstrably false.  A glance at TIU’s website (http://undergrad.tiu.edu/academics/) shows that curriculum to include, among other majors, English, biology, psychology, nursing, physical therapy and pre-med.  Needless to say, none of those subjects are to be found in the Bible.

Second, Barth conflates Christian evangelicalism with Biblical fundamentalism. Evangelical Christians represent a wide range of theological beliefs; many if not most do not believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible.

Furthermore, Barth makes the inference that because Piedmont’s (adult) son attends a college that is associated with the Evangelical Free Church of America, that the father therefore must be a Christian fundamentalist. Even if we grant that this tendentious scenario might somehow be true, Barth is entirely wrong about the religious affiliation of Piedmont and his family; they are Roman Catholic, a faith that most definitely does not espouse a literal interpretation of the Bible.

Therefore, both the idea that Piedmont’s “agenda might include the denial of rational thought, fact-based conclusions and most science” and that one “would have to suspect that a prime motive for anyone holding such beliefs to run for School Board would be to incorporate their ideation into the curriculum” are simply absurd.  Even if Piedmont’s religious beliefs dictated such a stance, no individual member of the School Board has the power to change the curriculum—that authority is in the hands of the Superintendent and his leadership team.

Just for a moment, let’s conduct a little thought experiment: if Barth published a letter demanding that a Jewish candidate provide reassurance that he would not use his elected position to advance the worldwide Zionist conspiracy, would our community not rise up in righteous indignation to condemn his anti-Semitism? Why, then does Barth feel it is legitimate to question what he supposes to be Carl Piedmont’s motives, based on similarly false assumptions about Christianity?

The answer is obvious.  Barth is not interested in actually getting an answer to his questions, or else he would have availed himself of one of the many opportunities to ask Piedmont himself, either in public or in private.  Rather, the letter is a transparent attempt to tie Carl Piedmont the worst stereotypes of the so-called Christian right.  This attempt is all the more loathsome because Barth’s allegations are manifestly untrue, and it is most unfortunate that Foster’s gave him a platform to legitimize his false propaganda.

In short, Barth is wrong about just about everything.  Not just wrong, but willfully wrong.  Spectacularly, fantastically, crazy-conspiracy-theory wrong. The hatred, contempt, and intolerance he’s put on display are shameful.

But Barth is not just wrong on his facts, he is not just wrong in his inferences, he is not just wrong in his transparent attempt to smear Carl Piedmont and his family. When Barth writes “I would defend without reservation any individual’s right to believe whatever he/she chooses, but that doesn’t mean I will always respect or tolerate those beliefs” (emphasis added) he strikes at the very heart of what makes our community, our country, our society what it is.  For tolerance is, and ought to be, a bedrock principle of our nation and the ORCSD community. 

By stating that he cannot “tolerate” beliefs with which he does not personally agree Barth places himself outside the norms of our society, which demands respect and, yes, tolerance of those who are different from ourselves.  His bigotry belongs in the trash heap of discredited ideas, along with racism, sexism, nativism, and all the other harmful -isms that our society has, as it matured over time, rejected.

And so, Mr. Barth, here is a question I hope you might address—a “red flag,” if you will.  I would like to be informed as to your beliefs with respect to neo-Nazis, Klansmen, white nationalists, neo-Confederates, racist skinheads, the “Patriot” movement, and other hate groups.  Because, Mr. Barth, when you say you can’t “tolerate” the beliefs of others, as someone who has experienced anti-religious bigotry first-hand that is the kind of company that leaps to my mind. 

Perhaps comparing this letter to the Kach Twitter debacle may be apropos: the ORCSD community eschews bigotry of all sorts, including religious intolerance. This was demonstrated by the hundreds who protested former Board member Jim Kach's Twitter remarks two years ago. But while Kach was re-tweeting small-minded statements that lacked the originality of thought that the Barth letter contains, Barth's remarks are even more loathsome, since they come from his own pen.

It is again incumbent on all of us to state loudly and without reservation that this sort of false and malicious defamation, this bigotry masquerading as political discourse, has absolutely no place in our community.  A good start would be for the other two candidates, whose campaigns this attack was designed to boost, to denounce it.