Barney Frank: Why I didn’t talk about my atheism while serving in Congress

[cbayer]

http://chrisstedman.religionnews.com/2014/06/06/barney-frank-didnt-talk-atheism-serving-congress/

Chris Stedman | Jun 6, 2014


Former Congressman Barney Frank.
Photo courtesy Frank.

This weekend, the American Humanist Association (AHA) will honor former Congressman Barney Frank of Massachusetts with their 2014 Humanist of the Year award.

Last year, Frank—a trailblazing politician who was the first member of Congress to come out as gay and the first to be in a same-sex marriage while in office—revealed his atheism in an interview with Bill Maher. The atheist and Humanist community has enthusiastically embraced him; earlier this year he was awarded the Lifetime Achievement in Cultural Humanism award by the Humanist Community at Harvard.

In advance of his appearance at the AHA’s 73rd annual conference tonight (Friday), I spoke with Frank about Humanism, LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer) rights, and atheism and politics.

Below, he shares how anti-Semitism impacted his decision not to talk about his nontheism sooner, his advice for atheists who want to run for public office, what he considers the most pressing issues for nontheists and LGBTQ people today, and how responses to his nontheism have differed from responses to his sexual orientation.

- See more at: http://chrisstedman.religionnews.com/2014/06/06/barney-frank-didnt-talk-atheism-serving-congress/#sthash.h2FJ00mh.dpuf

[Act_of_Reparation]

1. Summed up in one sentence:

"I wouldn't have been electable."

[cbayer]

2. Except he never says that.

[Act_of_Reparation]

3. Except he does.

Right here:

And it’s complicated by my Jewishness. Obviously, being Jewish is both an ethnicity and a religion. I was concerned that if I were to explicitly disavow any religiosity, it could get distorted into an effort to distance myself from being Jewish—and I thought that was wrong, given that there is anti-Jewish prejudice.

[cbayer]

4. That's all about the impact it would have had on the Jewish community, clearly.

And he doesn't speak to electability in that context at, just to the harm it might cause if he appeared to distance himself from his Jewishness.

You boiled it down to a very simple statement while the explanation he gives is, not surprisingly, complex and nuanced.

[MADem]

6. No, that's not what he said at all.

His concerns about disavowal had more to do with misinterpretation about his "cultural identity."

In sum, he didn't want anyone saying he was "ashamed" of his Jewishness, or disavowing it, or anything of that nature.

Nothing about electability in that piece at all.

I don't think anybody in MA had the idea that Barney went to temple on a regular basis. And no one gave a shit. He was a highly effective rep, and that's all that mattered.

[trotsky]

8. ...

"he didn't want anyone saying he was "ashamed" of his Jewishness, or disavowing it, or anything of that nature."

Correct, because it would have been used as an election issue. I.e., it would have affected his electability.

[MADem]

10. Not for RELIGIOUS reasons.

He would have been targeted -- in the same way that the right targeted him for the "sin" of being gay -- as someone who disavowed his culture, who didn't like "Israel," or other canards.

The sticking point wasn't about RELIGION. If it was, he would have said so. Barney is nothing if not articulate. And Jews come in all flavors, from conservative to reform to secular--and then some.

You just don't have the nuance on this.

It would be like the rep from Southie denying his Irishness (and not his Catholicism).

[trotsky]

23. Yes, I realize that I am too stupid to understand.

Thanks for at least trying to explain it to me.

[MADem]

35. Thanks for stinking up the room. I didn't call you stupid, and by suggesting that was my

inference, when in actual fact you just didn't prove your assertion and are piqued because that was noticed, you've demonstrated your inability to discuss an issue constructively.

Heckuvajob!

[trotsky]

36. You'll note that I didn't accuse you of not having the "nuance" on this.

Don't drop a big turd and then complain somebody else made the place stink.

I see you've doubled down on personal insults, thus strengthening my case. Thanks.

You take care.

[MADem]

38. I'm not personally insulting you--but how interesting that you dropped THAT bomb, too.

I'm simply describing your behavior. Plainly, I hit a nerve.

[trotsky]

41. Sure, you tell yourself that.

I never attacked you or insulted your intelligence, and I don't need to play the coy "Gee, must have hit a nerve" game. I'll let the record speak for itself. Please, have the last word (and another insult if you need to).

[MADem]

48. Since I haven't insulted you even once, though provoked, how can I possibly have another? nt

[progressoid]

37. Not for religious reasons?

I think you're dismissing the intense distrust and outright hatred Americans have for Atheists. Even in liberal/blue areas, politicians know better than to announce their atheism while in office. People distrust Atheists more than teh Gays. Frank knew this. He would have better luck coming out as a Muslim.

It's not about turning his back on Israel, but turning his back on God®

[MADem]

42. They don't like trick-turning escorts cohabiting with congressional reps either.

But some people are just so compelling in their work ethic that they can overcome what some might regard as the insurmountable.

Are you not familiar with his history?

Barney is a force of nature. He was involved in a scandal of epic proportions, involving drugs and a young man who was both a paramour and a prostitute who was turning tricks in HIS house, while he was still in the closet, that would have brought an ordinary schmuck to their knees, crawling away to obscurity and shame-- and he survived it and won reelection by a landslide. Being gay back when this scandal broke wasn't "nothing but a thing," everyone thought it would be the end of Barney. EXCEPT his constituents, who knew better.

You think that just anyone could have managed that? He was fortunate in that he had the capacity to deliver for his constituents and his constituents were smarter than the average voters. I'm telling you, they could not possibly give even a small fart, never mind two shits, about what Barney did with his bits or what or if he worshiped. It just did not matter. He answered the demands of his constituency, be it that road that needs widening or a full-throated defense of harvesting prerogatives for fishermen. He had some of the best constituent services in the delegation, he had committee clout, and he followed through. No one cared about his religious practices or lack thereof--at least not in his HIS district, and that's all that mattered.

MA is not like other states, and his district (before redistricting, anyway) was NOT like other districts, either.

[Act_of_Reparation]

16. Ask yourself who such "misinterpretation" was more likely to hurt

and perhaps you'll see what I mean.

[MADem]

19. I'm from the Bay State. I know the electorate here.

They wouldn't have given a shit if he said I'm a screaming atheist who likes to bark at the moon on alternate Tuesdays. He had a very LOYAL constituency and they liked him because he was an extraordinarily effective representative. He knew his constituents and he understood and was responsive to their parochial issues. No one in his district--or in the state--ever thought of him as "religious" and most people, if asked to guess, probably would have pegged him as atheist or agnostic.

His concerns had to do--justifiably--with the role that anyone but the obtuse know that Israel plays in our national and foreign policy. We have a symbiotic relationship with Israel, as we do with UK. Sure, we have deep relations with other nations that have contributed to our population (e.g. Germany/Ireland) but those two are BIGGIES and they have an historical as well as a national security component to them. Barney, as a Jew, didn't want to be seen as disavowing those national security concerns.

THAT was the aspect that was driving his decision making process. It wasn't about an invisible man in the sky, it was about national security, who's "with us or agin' us" and "letting the terrists win." I don't blame him for not wanting to get into that shit--it distracted from HIS agenda.

[Act_of_Reparation]

21. Now you're catching on

His concerns had to do--justifiably--with the role that anyone but the obtuse know that Israel plays in our national and foreign policy. We have a symbiotic relationship with Israel, as we do with UK. Sure, we have deep relations with other nations that have contributed to our population (e.g. Germany/Ireland) but those two are BIGGIES and they have an historical as well as a national security component to them. Barney, as a Jew, didn't want to be seen as disavowing those national security concerns.

Bingo.

And it is worth pointing out that if he had appeared to have "abandoned Israel", he would have risked irking a fair portion of the largest non-Christian religious group in Massachusetts.

That's a nice G.W. impersonation, by the way. Frank was wise not to draw too much attention to his atheism back in 1980, or Little George's false dilemma may have actually worked.

[MADem]

43. As a Jew as in a cultural Jew--not a religious Jew.

It's like saying "As an Irishman" -- it's not about religion.

Good grief, there are more secular Jews in America than anywhere else on earth. They can parse the difference; it's only the Christians and Muslims that seem to have difficulty with the concepts.

[hrmjustin]

12. I am not sure he is saying here he wouldn't get elected as you think he is.

[cbayer]

14. He's not. I think it was a comment made without reading the article, actually.

[Act_of_Reparation]

17. If you take issue with something I say, you're more than welcome to say it to me

Snickering in the corner is kind of childish, don't you think?

[cbayer]

18. I did answer you directly and you didn't respond.

But your point is taken and I will ask you directly. Did you make the comment before reading the article, because he doesn't say anything like that.

[Act_of_Reparation]

25. I do apologize.

Some of us proles have jobs.

Yes, I read the article. Perhaps you found Frank's "I didn't own up to my atheism because I didn't want to talk about it and I didn't want to give anyone a reason to discriminate against the Jews" excuse convincing. I did not. That doesn't mean I didn't read the fucking article.

[cbayer]

28. Well, he doesn't really call himself an atheist.

No need to get hostile. You attributed something to him that he didn't actually say. And later you have indicated that you just don't believe him.

Whatever you want to take from it, I guess that's all yours.

[pinto]

34. "It was never relevant"

BF - It was never relevant. I never professed any theology. And it’s complicated by my Jewishness. Obviously, being Jewish is both an ethnicity and a religion. I was concerned that if I were to explicitly disavow any religiosity, it could get distorted into an effort to distance myself from being Jewish—and I thought that was wrong, given that there is anti-Jewish prejudice.

And I loved this comment -

BF - The subject just never came up. The only religious services I’ve attended for the last 20 years were funerals; I’ve attended more masses than a lot of my Catholic friends.

The man's pretty forthright overall. I've met him and found him to be convincing as to who he is and what he stood for. No more nor less. And a wry sense of humor about it.

[Act_of_Reparation]

39. My comment seems to have been interpreted as an indictment against Barney Frank...

... it isn't. Overall, I hold a favorable opinion of the man.

I'm not saying he lied, but instead gave a rather "political" response to the question.

[cbayer]

40. Barney Frank has really not been known for giving a "political" response.

He has, however, been known for his blunt honesty.

I'm having trouble seeing why his answers are not deemed his honest opinion and experience here.

He didn't deny that others may have difficulty and would probably be the first to acknowledge that lack of belief would be a serious problem in some areas of the country or for other individuals.

He is merely relating that it wasn't an issue for him in that way.

[Act_of_Reparation]

44. That's a shining appraisal of the man.

Yes, Barney Frank was a good congressman, but he was still a congressman. He still had to win elections to keep doing the job he obviously wanted to do. He was blunt and fiery, but he wasn't stupid; he understood losing an election to the Republicans doesn't benefit anyone. But, as a matter of etiquette, he is not going to say "I knew I couldn't win as an atheist, so as long as no one was bringing it up, I kept my mouth shut", because it is considered poor form (for some reason) for a representative to admit he panders to public opinion.

This doesn't make him a bad person, a bad democrat, or a bad politician... shit, it isn't even indicative of anything wrong with Barney Frank. The problem is we live in a society that, if the numbers are right, have made it abundantly clear they generally don't tolerate non-believers in positions of authority or power.

[cbayer]

46. While I understand your argument, I don't think you have standing to

speak for him and I'm going to take the words coming out of his mouth over yours.

He's got nothing to lose by telling the truth.

There is no doubt that non-believers are at a tremendous disadvantage for being just that. Again, he would probably be one of the first to acknowledge that.

It just wasn't what he experienced or believed to be true in his case.

Maybe there are lessons to be learned from him, as he points out in this interview. There are ways to approach and express ones lack of religious beliefs without it becoming a detriment, at least in some situations.

I hope that point is not missed.

[cleanhippie]

52. "He's got nothing to lose by telling the truth." Except that he said he DID have something to lose

Your being intentionally obtuse on this is distracting from the point.


Oh, wait. I get it now.

[MADem]

20. You are invested in an opinion that isn't supported by the article or Barney's comments. nt

[Act_of_Reparation]

22. That's right.

I'm saying the article, and Barney's comments, are specious.

In other words: I don't buy it.

[cbayer]

24. Wow, I think that's the first time I've ever heard Frank called specious...

on this site.

[Act_of_Reparation]

26. Did you read my post?

Because I didn't call Frank specious. I said his claim was specious.

Hero-worship much?

[cbayer]

30. No, I generally don't hero worship at all.

I found the interview very interesting and I generally like him very much.

You apparently have a different POV.

[trotsky]

33. Are you implying AoR doesn't like Barney Frank?

That's not very cool.

[MADem]

45. I've concluded you aren't terribly familiar with the guy. nt

[Act_of_Reparation]

50. Ah. That's it. I'm an idiot.

Though, I suppose I can't be blamed for that. I wasn't lucky enough to have been born in the magnificently, uniquely-liberal Commonwealth of Massachusetts. How us Connecticutians do often cast an envious eye to the north, wishing we were sufficiently acquainted with our own representatives to know if they were telling the whole truth when divulging the intimacies of their personal lives to complete strangers.

And your liquor stores are open so much later than ours, too

Alas and alack!

[MADem]

51. I have no idea where THAT rant came from, but it's all about you-not me.

I do happen to like the Bay State; despite the snark about "Taxachusetts" I think we get good value as citizens here.

I have never--not once, not ever--said a bad word about the state of Connecticut, so I'm not really sure why you're playing a "compare and contrast" game with me--AND going on about liquor stores, as well.

FWIW, my grandmother, may she RIP, knew Barney quite well when they both worked on the Hill (Beacon, not Capitol). She was a government drudge, he was a state rep. I'm not his best friend, but I'm not a total stranger, either.

Now, you have a good day, and hope you find a bit of happiness in your life.

[rug]

53. Lol!

[libodem]

5. Bookmarked

I'm coming back for a good read later. Me loves me some Barney Frank. I'd be his beard any day.


Marry me, too, Barney.

[MADem]

7. He's pretty much still a newlywed! nt

[cbayer]

9. I thought it was a really good interview.

As usual, he is able to thoughtfully explore and explain some complex decisions and positions.

I think we better keep your love on the lowdown, though!

[rug]

11. He can speak with authority.

CS: Do you feel your experiences as a gay person and as a nontheist have any parallels, or do they feel different?

BF: I’ve never felt any discrimination because I was not a believer in any religious doctrine. The constraining factor was, as I said, my fear that (my nontheism) would be interpreted by some as a repudiation of Jewishness. But no, I can’t say I’ve experienced (discrimination for being a nontheist). The prejudice and criticism for my sexual orientation was much more pronounced. I’m not aware of any on the religious side.

[Goblinmonger]

13. I find this interesting/troubling

I’ve never felt any discrimination because I was not a believer in any religious doctrine.

You just came out. You have never been open about your non-theism. Does he mean since he said it on Maher's show? I find this troubling because some will use it to say that there is no discrimination against atheists. Plus he's from Boston. He might feel differently in the Midwest or South.

[trotsky]

27. Nice catch.

It's an all-too-common refrain seen even here on DU. "*I've* never experienced any discrimination as a non-believer," generally followed with dismissal of the experiences of anyone who has.

[Goblinmonger]

29. I like Barney Frank. He's awesome.

But for someone who lived in a SUPER liberal area and who wasn't an out atheist, it's a pretty odd claim. Basically he's saying, "Yeah, I never was discriminated against for something that nobody knew or thought I was."

[trotsky]

31. Absolutely - Frank was a fantastic rep.

But you are correct in your summary of what he's saying.

[Warren Stupidity]

32. Barney's district was redrawn after Mass lost a seat and he got a very catholic

section of the state (the New Bedford region) in his new district. There is no way he could run as gay and jewish and an atheist. He knows that, even if he goes out of his way to not directly say it in the interview. I don't fault him at all for that. It took incredible courage to be out and run for a congressional seat. He broke down barriers that needed breaking.

[MADem]

49. He decided not to run after they threw Bristol County into the mix, not because of the

"Catholic" thing (hello--whose seat did he fill in Congress? Bob DRINAN's--that's radical Roman Catholic priest FATHER Drinan to you!), but because he had no standing on the constituent issues.

He knew at his advanced age that it would take a shitload of work, schlepping back and forth and playing the "Getting to know you" game with a huge chunk of people whose concerns he'd have to get up to speed on, and he was TIRED. Hell, the guy is seventy four now, a septuagenarian has a right to not want to keep banging the drum when he has to learn a whole new tune. THAT is the reason he left; he just didn't want to put in the hard slog to persuade half of a new district after losing such a big piece of his old stalwarts. It was just too damn hard. He has said as much on a number of local interviews.

His district was centered in Newton--they are beyond "tolerant" (in the Made For TV Movie sense of the word) and have been well before it was cool. It's almost Point of Pride for them to go OTT when it comes to diversity of viewpoint, culture, ethnicity, background, etc. The more the merrier, the more different, the better--that's how they roll.

[MADem]

47. He was a representative, not a senator, in a very sophisticated and well-off district (the 4th).

It was (up until redistricting) fairly cohesive. Everyone knew where his house (his mother's house) was. His "nontheism" was obvious. It's not like there are a lot of places for religious Jews to worship. When someone isn't a member, and doesn't turn up for services, people figure it out.

And they just didn't care.

[pinto]

15. Interesting guy and an excellent Congressman.