The story of Michigan State Representatives Todd Courser and Cindy Gamrat, both claiming Republican / Tea Party status, has been making the rounds, generating some baffled condemnation, by which I mean the progressives who despise them seem puzzled. Here’s an example from Steven Payne @ The Daily Kos plus his commenters, which includes both an explanation of the timeline of events (the two had a love affair, Courser concocted a tale of being caught in a homosexual love affair, for reasons unclear, tried to get an aide to leak it to the press, but the aide refused and the entire sordid mess came to light), and some of Courser’s subsequent explanation.
As of now, neither has resigned their elective post. The political world, particularly their opponents, the progressive faction of the United States, has had little sympathy for them. I think this is a mistake.
- Countrymen. For all that they espouse a political philosophy much at odds with the progressives, and appears to have a sizable population of folks espousing positions of an outré nature, they are fellow citizens. Let us not forget the primary causation of nations is the basic urge to band together to survive an hostile world; it becomes a logical conclusion, then, that having sympathy for fellow citizens, for whom we’ve not generated a personal antipathy, is a necessity for building a successful society and nation. Attempting to co-exist in mutual disgust is not a prescription for a prosperous and peaceful society. Is such a pattern of behavior taught and practiced by Jesus? Gandhi? Then why should we indulge our baser natures in it?
- Understanding your opponents. On the other end of the spectrum, engaging in a struggle with another human being almost inevitably proceeds to a more favorable resolution to the conflict when you understand their many important facets. These include motivations, history, educational slant, fears, ambitions, and the list goes on, as I make no claim to completeness. The progressives’ understanding of the Tea Party may be boiled down to this sentence: They’re stupid. This attitude has twin sins associated with it: demonization and ignorance. For just a taste, keep in mind that Senator Ted Cruz, one of the seemingly most lunatic of the fringe, happens to hold a juris doctor degree from Harvard Law School – magna cum laude.
So it’s worth looking at Courser’s remarks, and to view them as sincere in trying to understand him. Here are some of the things he wrote, all from Payne’s diary on The Daily Kos.
In my life sin had its root and it worked to undo so much and has yet to undo so much more; my life, my reputation, my relationship with my wife and children and my extended family; not to mention my relationships and reputation around the world. This sin in my life has been and will continue to reap its reward.
He clearly speaks in a religious context, mentioning how sin seems to control his life. We can ask if he has problems with impulse control, is married to the right woman, is addicted to sex or novelty. He acknowledges the mistakes of his ‘sinning’, and how they negatively affect him; it not only raises the question of why he indulged in this, but also to reflect on our own lives & mistakes over the years.
In every one of these experiences it has been an incredibly humbling to me.
Humbling is an interesting word, as it brings up images of submitting to a greater power, admissions of failure, and that sort of thing. His discussions with fellow sinners may actually bind him into the community at a different level than us less humble types might experience.
After some discussion of how this affects his family and some sad commentary on his critics, he writes,
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no the evil I do not want to do-this I keep doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in that does it.
The should of life, if I may write in fragments. Learning what one should do in the context of society, in order to survive and prosper, is perhaps one of the great driving forces of human existence. For most citizens of the United States1, some form of religion offers a source of should, and whether the source is engaged intelligently or literally, it colors the outlook of the adherent. Given his religious outpouring, we can understand he looks to the Bible for guidance for a world to which he lacks an intuitive understanding. That same Bible offers ambiguous guidance on other matters, but to him, as his guide, he tries to apply it. It is not so important to understand the Biblical portion, but the desperation portion; he dare not dispute with his guide in any portion, for that questions all in a perilous world in which he needs guidance – even if he ignores it. It would be interesting to hear if he puts the Bible first, above Justice. I suspect so; but has he considered the question? The unquestioning injustice of reserving marriage only for heterosexuals must be terrifying, once it is acknowledged.
And, finally, redemption. A key force in both religion and American life. It is, in fact, no surprise that he and his lover have chosen not to resign their posts. The publicity concerning their personal failures has, in effect, immunized them from further leverage; their sin has connected them to their communities in new ways, while permitting their constituents to realize that, in their humiliation, they’re just like themselves.
If this is their first public mistake, then I suspect they may both be re-elected (although Michigan has term limits on state Reps); another moral failing, say enrichment at the public’s expense, might get them booted out, though.
1 Source: Gallup.
