'Dave' campaign alienates those who don't agree

I don't want to know that you agree with Dave. I would like you to keep your faith to yourself. If you proclaim that you do believe in Jesus Christ as your savior, you also tell me at the same time that you will pass moral judgment against me if I say I believe differently. And if I do believe differently, I will be offended by what I consider the inappropriate and incorrect moral judgment you have passed against me, and we will be angry with each other.

ERIN I. LEWIS/YH Those who agree with Dave have established a remarkably large and visible presence on campus.

Is this the goal of the organizers of Do You Agree with Dave? Regardless, it's what they have achieved.

I have been surprised by the size and organization of this Christian movement. I never expected to see the "I Agree with Dave" t-shirt on so many Yale students—I suppose because my group of friends here happens to be fairly religiously homogenous, or at least ideologically not inclined toward Christianity. These friends, along with quite a few others, have recently also become rather incensed about the Dave campaign.

Other than the spread of the blue and gold t-shirts, the only reaction I have witnessed to the Dave phenomenon has been very negative. Many of those who don't agree with Dave feel compelled to defend themselves with an arsenal ranging from private mockery to public derision to vandalism. One of my friends told us he wanted to create buttons saying "I agree with Flava Flav." I saw a t-shirt today that read "I agree with Bart." The Yale College Humanist and Secularist Society (YCHS) has posted flyers everywhere bearing slogans like "Dave is wrong" and "God is all-knowing and all-good. Why, Dave, did God make souls that he knows will go to hell?" And some extremist protestor changed a banner on Old Campus to ask "Do you agree with Dave Koresh?"

A pro-Dave activist asserted in the Yale Daily News that this kind of response is in fact welcomed by her group: "We're here to provoke people into examining their faiths. I feel a negative reaction is better than no reaction." ["Behind the posters, just a guy named Dave," YDN 4/4/01] I don't believe that what she said is true. Why would Christians be interested in insuring that others be generally in tune with their respective personal beliefs, as opposed to desiring that they all convert to faith in Jesus Christ? The Christian religion certainly has a rich missionary history, originating directly from the nature of the ideology, stretching all the way back to Paul's epistles to the Corinthians.

Indeed, figurehead Dave Farrell's, MC '03, statement of his faith as published on the website www.iagreewithdave.org includes a very missionary contention: "[God's love] extends to me and to you, no matter who you are...Despite this love, we as humans have an attitude and act with behavior that not only keeps us separated from God and his love, but is also deserving of death." This is basic Christianity, and it doesn't offer non-believers much leeway. Either you get to joining up or you're going to find your miserable self in hell. It's this kind of condemning, superior, exclusionary attitude that summons up such dramatic defensiveness as the YCHS has displayed.

The rampant expression of anti-Dave sentiments is particularly striking because of the lack of persecution leveled against Christians at this University, in this country, in Western culture, at any other time since the early Roman Empire. I wonder why Dave Week exists. Its ostensible purpose is to promote Christian pride, but as far as I can see, Christian pride has nowhere to go but down. Does the religion really need a gimmick like Dave to help its followers feel good about their life choice? I can't help but think that the t-shirts, the buttons, the website, the rally, are all designed to lure in outsiders. Quite possibly, the evangelistic meeting scheduled by the Dave organizers for Tues., Apr. 24 has a similar intent.

I can't find fault with a religion that encourages its members to be happy that they belong to it. It's not objectionable to me that certain people should be content with their way of life, even if it's not the same one to which I adhere. But I have no trouble getting angry when those people start tearing down my native beliefs in order to win me over to their side. Evangelism is invasive and insulting to its objects. At least on this campus, it's also likely to be ineffective.

I imagine that most of the dialogue prompted by the Dave movement follows the same pattern as a discussion I found posted on the Dave website, in which a lone Humanist called KEW unwaveringly held his ground while 10 or so Christians joined up in the attempt to sway him. Their words flew past each other on parallel lines, equally full of truth and equally unconvincing. Those who don't already agree with Dave are probably not going to get a new t-shirt this week, unless the guy who agrees with Bart decides to go into business. 

Rachel Kamins, JE '02, is an Opinion editor of the Herald.

Back to Opinion...