Every decade or so Baylor University endures another media storm about Southern Baptists, sex and freedom of the press.<\/p>\n\n
Take, for example, the historic 1981 Playboy controversy. It proved that few journalists can resist a chance to use phrases such as \u201cseminude Baylor coeds pose for Playboy.\u201d<\/p>\n\n
Right now, all kinds of people \u2014 from the New York Times editorial board to Baptist Press \u2014 are hyperventilating about a Baylor student newspaper editorial backing same-sex marriage.<\/p>\n\n
By a 5-2 vote, the Lariat editors concluded: \u201cJust as it isn\u2019t fair to discriminate against someone for their skin color, heritage or religious beliefs, it isn\u2019t fair to discriminate against someone for their sexual orientation. Shouldn\u2019t gay couples be allowed to enjoy the benefits and happiness of marriage, too?\u201d<\/p>\n\n
I know how these Baylor dramas tend to play out, because in the mid-1970s there was another blowup in which students tried to write some dangerously candid news reports. In that case, I was one of the journalism students who got caught in the crossfire.<\/p>\n\n
It\u2019s interesting to note that some of the administrators who crushed us back then are often hailed in the media these days as enlightened, progressive voices at Baylor. Meanwhile, the current Baylor administration expressed outrage at the editorial, but did not sack anyone. Times change.<\/p>\n\n
This latest controversy about Baptists, sex and journalism comes in the midst of national headlines focusing on scandals in the Baylor basketball program and bitter divisions in the faculty over what is and what is not \u201cChristian education.\u201d<\/p>\n\n
There\u2019s valid news in all of this. But I also think there are lessons to be learned about the tensions between journalists and religious leaders.<\/p>\n\n
So let\u2019s pause and consider a different scenario for this new Baylor brouhaha.<\/p>\n\n
Let\u2019s say that the students did not settle for writing an editorial about one of the most divisive issues in American culture. This quick-strike strategy was almost certainly a trial balloon seeking headlines in Texas and national newspapers.<\/p>\n\n
Let\u2019s say that, instead of writing that easy editorial, the editors assigned their best reporters to write two news stories.<\/p>\n\n
Like any religious institution in the era after James Davison Hunter\u2019s book \u201cCulture Wars,\u201d Baylor has its own \u201ccamp of the progressives\u201d (truth is personal and experiential) and a competing \u201ccamp of the orthodox\u201d (truth is eternal and absolute). This is what the ongoing Baylor academic warfare is all about \u2014 clashing views of what truth is and how one finds it.<\/p>\n\n
That\u2019s a good news story, if journalists take the time to report it.<\/p>\n\n
So let\u2019s say that the Lariat devotes one 1,200-word story to the views of Baylor \u201cprogressives,\u201d who explain why they think changing U.S. laws to favor same-sex marriage is a good thing. They also explain how this change might affect public education, free speech, freedom of assembly and religious liberty. They say what they have to say \u2014 on the record.<\/p>\n\n
Then the newspaper devotes another 1,200-word story to the views of the \u201corthodox,\u201d those who believe that America should not embrace a fundamental redefinition of marriage. They address all the same questions \u2014 on the record.<\/p>\n\n
After these stories run, the editors might want to write an editorial. On an issue this hot, it would certainly help to hear dissenting voices as well.<\/p>\n\n
I think this is a more journalistic approach. After all, what\u2019s the purpose of having student journalists write editorials that cause news, before they have gone through the process of writing stories that report the news?<\/p>\n\n
I also think this approach would create a different kind of controversy, a more constructive kind. Instead of fostering academic guerrilla warfare and media stereotypes, this would put more information on the record.<\/p>\n\n
It might even lead to informed debate. And note that this approach would require leaders on both sides to put their views out in the open for the world to see \u2014 including regents, donors, parents and potential students.<\/p>\n\n
This candor would be a good thing, at Baylor and in lots of other religious camps.<\/p>\n\n
So here is my final question, as a battle-scarred veteran of the journalism wars at Baylor and in other religious sanctuaries. Which side would oppose this open, on-the-record, journalistic scenario? The progressives or the orthodox?<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Every decade or so Baylor University endures another media storm about Southern Baptists, sex and freedom of the press. Take, for example, the historic 1981 Playboy controversy. It proved that few journalists can resist a chance to use phrases such as \u201cseminude Baylor coeds pose for Playboy.\u201d Right now, all kinds of people \u2014 from […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":610,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[105,487,766,813],"class_list":["post-1272","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-baylor","tag-journalism","tag-same-sex-marriage","tag-southern-baptists"],"yoast_head":"\n