Grammatical Correctness
by Joe Naiman
I don't intend to use this column to promote my Reaganite political views. But since the subject of this column is applying the proper use of grammar to my beliefs, a point of reference of what might otherwise be expected of me is warranted.
Recently I met a writer who said she was working on a book on how the Bible is misused to oppose homosexuals. "Homosexuals or homosexuality?" I asked.
My personal acceptance of homosexuals is based on a differentiation between homosexuals, homosexuality, and the gay political agenda. That's not pandering to both sides; that's drawing a line. My tolerance of homosexual people doesn't equate to a support of homosexual acts or to various pro-homosexual educational curricula.
My personal religious beliefs are that Jesus and the Virgin Mary were sinless and that nobody else is or ever was. Therefore the rest of us are sinners regardless of whether we're homosexual and regardless of whether homosexuality is a sin. My religion also believes that sinners are eligible for forgiveness and ultimately salvation, so even if homosexuality is a sin I'm willing to forgive homosexuals for their actions. My religion has moral standards; the Lord's Prayer which is part of my religion includes the line "and lead us not into temptation". Immediately before that line, however, are the words "as we forgive those who trespass against us". While some denominations have stripped various books out of the Bible, my beliefs tolerate homosexuals even if homosexuality is less than acceptable.
A few years ago the issue of a religious institution's exemption from hiring laws that prohibited religious discrimination was debated. The Catholic Church has been hiring Protestants as far back as 1918. Knute Rockne was Notre Dame's football coach, not a theology professor, so his Lutheran beliefs were welcome as long as he fulfilled his duties to win football games while upholding Notre Dame's academic and moral standards. Rockne put aside his religious differences with the Catholic Church, and the Fighting Irish compiled a record of 105-12-5 over 13 seasons. Knute Rockne had different religious beliefs than the management of the University of Notre Dame. But he didn't parlay his religious beliefs into subversion of his job.
If Knute Rockne was on pace to win 12 games and lose 105 with Notre Dame, he would have been relieved of his coaching duties long before he had the chance to lose 105 games. If Rockne hadn't been killed and had coached long enough to lose 105 games, he would have won 918 had he maintained the same winning percentage - a figure which would put his 105th loss in the future. Rockne's job wasn't to teach Catholic values; it was to uphold them while winning football games. Had he not done his job, he would have been dismissed regardless of his religious beliefs or values.
Anyone who works for a religious organization, regardless of their own religious beliefs, must do the job they have been hired to do. If that involves the promotion of religious principles or values, that is what they must do. If they can put aside their religious or moral values and perform the job as it needs to be done, then they have earned a position with the religious organization. If they aren't performing their job, then they should be dismissed not on their religious or moral beliefs but on their failure to perform their assigned task. I'm willing to support laws prohibiting discrimination against religious beliefs under the condition that employees fulfill the goals of the hiring organization.
In the 1990s I ran for a local political office and filled out various candidate questionnaires. One of them queried my views on whether creation should be taught in science classes. I believe that God created the universe, but I opposed such teaching on the grounds that creation wasn't science but rather history. This didn't go over the greatest with one conservative leader, whose words to me were "this is no time to be philosophical". If philosophy and truth are to be sacrificed for expected answers, I'm not surprised that this conservative leader later spent time in prison.
Click on this: next column
My right-of-center friends also put up with my support of affirmative action. Affirmative action doesn't mean quotas or record-keeping; it means searching sources dominated by minorities or women. It means looking at Howard University as well as Harvard University; if a white male student at Harvard is the best choice he should be hired while if the black at Howard would best fill the position such hiring is common sense rather than racial equality. If I owned a motorcycle racing team, I'd be looking for five more James Stewarts. If I was a rodeo promoter, I'd be trying to find ten more Fred Whitfields and ten more Charlie Sampsons. Searching in more places for the best candidate is a free-market principle, not a liberal one.
In 2000 someone asked me how I felt about being called "right-wing" in the Reader. I hadn't seen that reference, which turned out to be a letter to the editor regarding the Reader's article on the purchase of the East County Californian by the publisher of the East County weeklies. The letter had been written by a staff writer for the weeklies under the previous owner. The writer complained about the new ownership and said that all of the other writers who didn't e-mail in their stories left except for Greg Eichelberger and myself, both of whom are right-wing.
It doesn't bother me if someone makes an assessment of my political views. But since this writer got his facts wrong, the Californian was better off without him. Greg and I e-mailed our stories, in contrast to what was said about us. There were actually four of us left over from the previous ownership. Norrie West, the golf columnist, didn't e-mail his stories and was still with the Californian. Ninette Sosa, who also worked for KOGO and made national headlines for Jesse Jackson's remarks about her, is more moderate than right-wing but was still writing for us. The writer's wrong facts bothered me more than his political assessment of me.
Ironically, I consider myself more right-wing now than I did in 2000. The one-dimensional Christians and the establishment Republicans who cater to national security have quashed the Reaganite wing of the Republican Party. But those of us who are conservative on taxes, regulation, and decentralization are the true conservatives. We are in fact further to the right than those currently called right-wing by moderates and liberals.
I do not sacrifice those right-wing views for political correctness. But grammatical correctness causes me to apply my
 Joe Naiman |
|
Joe Naiman was born in Pasadena, CA and moved to San Diego in 1966. He is a graduate of Northwestern University, where he obtained a double major in Political Science and History. He has been a free-lance writer since 1985. He has writen two books: "Another Chance" and "The San Diego Padres Encyclopedia" co-authored with David Porter. He has been a member of the Society for American Baseball Research since 1980. Joe lives in the San Diego suburb of Lakeside. He has a son and two daughters. |
Here's how to obtain his books:
"Another Chance"
"The San Diego Padres Encyclopedia"
Thanks for the article Joe ... John Wolf
