Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.” He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.

A friend of mine recently confided that he is afraid of developing a racist attitude following some disturbing interactions he’s had lately and some disheartening situations he’s found himself in. This was a pretty remarkable confession, given the extent to which he has gone to bridge the racial divide, at great personal effort and cost, and having volunteered an extended amount of his time to making a real, immediate difference.

Such conversations can turn into gripe sessions where everyone points to examples that support and excuse their racial prejudices. Instead, I shared with him my view that we are all mutually responsible for the blight in our community, and my belief that our own prosperity is inextricably tied to the prosperity of our neighbors. That part he no doubt understands better than I do myself.

But there’s a second part to that which is frequently overlooked, and that I thought might help encourage him. And that’s simply this: we’re all beneficiaries of the abolition of slavery and the civil rights movement — all of us, not just one race or community. Frederick Douglas, Harriet Tubman, Abraham Lincoln, Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King… all of them fought and suffered so that we would one day live in a country that was truly free, legally impartial, nondiscriminatory, and open for equal opportunity. Because they paid that hefty price, I can be a friend to James, the African American who lives next door to me, and vice versa.

I’m confident that if everyone held those two beliefs — both mutual responsibility and mutual benefit — we’d all be much better off. There is nothing useful, nothing to be gained, from either community feeling the need to constantly justify and defend itself, to carry constant unmerited guilt, to harbor undying prejudice, to stay ever alert against every perceived slight, or to seek out only its own interest and entrench itself in exclusionary bunkers.

Commercial Appeal columnist Wendi C. Thomas gets it half right in her latest piece, calling for “a meeting of the minds” between blacks and whites. A community dialogue such as this could certainly be helpful, but only if it avoids devolving into mere swapping of grievances.

Watch out, or our minds will go to the familiar bitter places and our eyes will play tricks on us. This white person before you might morph into every white person who treated you poorly. Or the black person might become the embodiment of every nasty stereotype you suspected was true.

But stay focused. This is not a waste of time, no matter what your emotions may be saying at the moment. Resist this urge to get up and leave.

Its a promising opening, but then Thomas concludes by asking us to excuse and gloss over the racially bigoted comments of a Baptist reverend, suggesting that his prejudices are explained by his background and “life experiences.” Pardon me, but if I won’t entertain the creeping prejudices of a penitent friend, I’m certainly not going to abide hearing a preacher justify his unrepentant bigotry.

But Thomas, who previously admitted to her own racial prejudices, gets an “amen, sista” and an “I totally agree” from Richard Thompson of Mediaverse:Memphis, who argues that the victim of this pastor’s prejudice was actually blessed by the abuse he received, and may have actually “orchestrated” the entire affair.

In addition to being dazzled by that fragrant waft of conspiracy, I’m also puzzled by the recommendation of Jeramia at OnMemphis.com, who enthusiastically points visitors to the comments on a Mediaverse:Memphis post about the “GPAC 3.”

A synopsis, for those who need it: three stagehands at the Germantown Performing Arts Center were recently fired for creating a “hostile work environment” by tying some of the ropes backstage into “noose-like knots.”

Says Germantown City Administrator Patrick Lawton,

“This is extremely offensive to the African American community… I can’t think of anything worse and so we took appropriate action.”

If you can’t think of “anything worse” than theater employees carelessly tying hangman’s nooses backstage, you aren’t really thinking. Just to be clear, these employees didn’t seek out any individual, didn’t attach any racial message or image to the knots, didn’t cause or threaten any physical harm, didn’t engage in any verbal harassment or make inappropriate statements, apparently didn’t intend any ill will or harbor any racist attitudes, didn’t vandalize anything or damage any property, didn’t steal anything, as far as I know didn’t have any history of harassment, etc.

Still, this was enough to get the three employees fired. Their offense was inadvertent racial insensitivity:

Even if GPAC technical director Matthew Strampe and part-time stagehands Michael Laraway and William Martin didn’t fully grasp the racist connotations of the nooses, Lawton said, “absence of knowledge is not a defense. It is wrong.”

The reaction and backlash after these firings was apparently so boisterous that the paper disabled its online comments section. But two posts by blogger Thaddeus Matthews (here and here) generated 228 comments, and the aforementioned comments at Mediaverse:Memphis totaled 32.

And though Jeramia of OnMemphis.com says these are “comments that actually further an important discussion instead of retarding it,” I fail to see where the discussion is advanced at all.

At the heart of the issue is an exchange between Thompson and Autoegocrat, a member of the liberal Peskyfly group blog who also comments here on occasion.

It basically boils down to Autoegocrat repeatedly asking a variation of the question, “when did a noose become an inherently racist symbol,” and Thompson repeatedly offering a variation of the response, “if you are unaware of the racial overtones of nooses, then I’m not sure who could explain that to you.”

In summary, the “absence of knowledge is not a defense,” and yet one is unable to ask for that knowledge with sincerity and get a constructive response. So you should just know what you shouldn’t do, and if you don’t know we can’t tell you, and if you mess up, you’re fired.

Of course, nobody denies that some African Americans were lynched, just as they were shot and beat and burned to death for nothing more than the color of their skin. The question is why nooses are now thought of as inherently racist where these other torture and killing methods may not be, especially since people of every race and culture throughout history have died by hanging.

And yet, if this truly is a generally-held feeling, people would of course want to know that, and maybe learn why that is the case so that they can understand better and perhaps avoid making similar errors in the future. As it stands, if people don’t know, and nobody will tell them, it’s going to happen again, even if they have the best of intentions.

And, on the flip side, perhaps those who are otherwise apt to jump to conclusions should give them the benefit of the doubt that their motions may not derive from the action you’ve interpreted. So perhaps you could ask them what their intent was and tell them how you feel about what they’ve said or done before taking more drastic steps.

So, yes, let’s have that dialogue. But let’s not excuse prejudice just because people had some negative experiences, let’s not refuse to explain things to each other when we ask in all sincerity, and let’s not jump to conclusions when we see or hear something that might offend us.

* Headline is a line in R.E.M.’s “Welcome to the Occupation”
** Quote is from Galatians 3:13-14