Race-ing Faith and Fate: The Jeremiad in Multiracial "Traditional Marriage" Alliances

Abstract

One of the most intriguing developments in twenty-first century American politics is the rise of religion-based, cross-racial alliances defending heterosexual marriage against the perceived threat of same-sex marriage and/or civil unions. Since 2003, "marriage protection" advocates have achieved political victories in dozens of states and cities, some of which have been propelled by multiracial coalitions. This is significant, given that previous attempts to draw on religious values to build racially diverse coalitions mostly foundered. One strategy that has proven useful for uniting religious racial communities is a jeremiadic narrative, a tool through which activists reach across racial and partisan boundaries, employing religious and cultural frameworks to argue that the nation's, or a racial community's, ultimate survival will be endangered if marriage rights are expanded. This article explores the function of the American Jeremiad tradition as a rhetorical strategy in these new religion-based multiracial alliances and considers the possibilities and limits of these alliances for ideologically deeper or longer-term multiracial coalition politics. Examining a range of cultural texts and practices, I detail how religion-based "traditional marriage Jeremiads" fostered politically influential, short-term, cross-racial alliances in New York, Massachusetts, and Colorado between 2004 and 2006. Engaging with coalition politics literature, including the framework articulated in Stokely Carmichael and Charles V. Hamilton's Black Power framework, I explain how the intentionally multiracial aspect of some traditional marriage alliances fails to produce antiracist ends.