Should you speak up or walk out when diversity goes awry?

 A funny thing happened on the way to the 21^st century, many cultures merged into one people.

America's communities increasingly are places where cultural and religious groups with differing customs,  backgrounds, languages  and beliefs seek shared purpose and common ground.  Those highly skilled at cultural conversations and coalition-building stand to prosper. 

 This summer, I'll post a series of pop quizzes that serve as a road test for this bumpy cultural terrain.  Best to test your driving skills now - before cultural collisions occur.  Let’s get right to work.

 

 Challenge of the Day:

You are at a fund-raising dinner when the minister gets a little carried away with the benediction. He begins to talk about Jesus Christ and the need for Christian values.  There are Jews, Muslims and Mormons in the room. What do you do?

Answer:

This is one of those sticky situations that tend to make us sweat. I’ll let you in on a secret. Sticky situations are the hot new business currency.  The more you have, the better prepared you’ll be for global markets and challenges.

Next time you are in the hot seat, remind yourself: “I am so lucky. Just think, this opportunity could have been given to anyone but the universe picked me.”

As The Cultural Coach, I am going to propose four responses. Select the one that most closely fits your style and personality:

      Do nothing and hope someone else brings the issue up.

      Get up and walk out the door to show others your displeasure.

      Use the prayer to trigger a conversation among your table's dinner guests. You might say, "I find myself wondering how I might feel now if I were Mormon, Muslim or Jewish. I know I sometimes feel uncomfortable when others preach to me." Your thoughts? 

      Quietly pull the minister aside without making a scene.  Let him or her know that you enjoyed the prayer but you felt the heavy-handed Christian doctrine might have made it hard for guests of other faiths to understand the message. “I wonder if there might be a way to get around this ssue next time?” you might ask.

Now, which response would you select? Discuss, discuss.

 

If you have a question or a situation you would like to discuss, write me at theculturalcoach@aol.com

Comments

[Jazz]

Where is this function being held? And to benefit whom? (If it was in a church, to raise money for a Christian effort, I'd consider the source. Even expect it.)

Also, being a Jew, I realize that most "Christian values" (Be good. Do good) are pretty much endorsed by all the religions I'm familar with. (Not to say I'm not annoyed by those who think it's the orginal idea and intellectual property of the Christian church.)

So, I'd mention my own religious identity to my table-mates and make a general inquiry as to their feelings about the preacher's remarks.

But I would *not* be offended unless the message was disparaging of others' beliefs or non-beliefs. If that was the case, I'd be upset and probably communicate my feelings with the preacher in a private, calm, respectful manner. (That is, later!)

[Linda]

Thanks, Jazz.

Good questions, all. I applaud the fact you sought more information before attempting to reach a conclusion.

Let's say the organization is a non-profit with a diverse group of supporters. But the event organizers are Christian volunteers. They may not be experienced planners.

One professional event organizer wrote me to say that she feels the organizers should accept esponsibility for this problem. Is possible they did not provide the minister with clear instructions.
They might have asked him for a prayer -- without providing any details about the audience.
That's a point I had not considered. I'll share my response with you in a few days -- after more coaches out there weigh in.

[KES]

Why do examples like this always seem to involve conservative Christians as the offenders? If a Muslim were giving the benediction, and he made remarks that indicated he thought his theological beliefs represented the only true or the best faith, would the four possible responses be the same? Or would most people want to add a fifth: "take no offense because his beliefs are entitled to the same respect as those which dominated this country's worldview until recent times"?

[Linda]

KES

Thanks for offering a fifth option. It is a good one. In fact, it is just as important as the others.

This conversation has helped us to take a look at our assumptions. I made an assumption that the Mormons would be offended. A friend who is Mormon wrote me to say "The Mormons in the room will agree with him! I'm not sure what leads you to be concerned that the Mormons in the room would be offended.As to your point about the audience being mixed (having non-Christian faiths present), I think the appropriateness depends on the circumstances. I agree completely that a fund-raising dinner (I assume a for political purposes), the minister should take into account the sensibilities of the non-Christians. The shoe could just as easily have been on the other foot if the bendiction had been offered by a Jewish Rabbi or an Muslim Imam."

Another assumption: The minister is conservative. Is it possible the minister jwas not given clear instructions.

Thanks for the great conversation. Keep those ideas coming! Anyone have a sixth suggestion?

[Dr. Karanja (A. Ajanaku)]

Linda,

You directed that I respond according to my personality. So knowing me, I would have dismissed options 2 & 3. The minister's remarks came during the benediction, pretty much negating these two options.

If I were truly bothered by the remarks, option 1 would not be viable.
That would leave option 4, with me making the adjustment of asking the minister a question without first making my declarative statement.

Freeing myself from the options, and just looking at the scenario, I most likely would have examined why I was at the fund-raiser. If I was responding to a personal invitation, I most likely would have made my thoughts and concerns known to the person who invited me.

If I attended just to support the cause and without a personal invitation, I likely would put my thoughts and concerns in writing and directed them to the appropriate person.

In either instance, I would make a mental note to be sure and choose my own language carefully the next time I was the speaker before such a diverse audience.

[Lance_K]

Linda:

The Mormons in the room will agree with him! I'm not sure what leads you to be concerned that the Mormons in the room would be offended.

As to your point about the audience being mixed (having non-Christian faiths present), I think the appropriateness depends on the circumstances. I agree completely that a fund-raising dinner (I assume a for political purposes), the minister should take into account the sensibilities of the non-Christians. The shoe could just as easily have been on the other foot if the bendiction had been offered by a Jewish Rabbi or an Muslim Imam.

As to the question (speak up or walk out) I would not make a scene by walking out if this was a first-time offense for the minister and the host of the fund-raiser. There is a fine line to walk between objecting to insensitivity without being insensitive in return. It appears hypocritical to react to intolerance with intolerance. But I would speak up after it was over, both to the minister and the host. If both react with deaf ears, then it would be appropriate to voice my views more publicly; however, I think the first instinct should be to give the other person an opportunity to rethink the events rather than immediately boxing them into a defensive corner.