This piece reveals my stance on the Promise Keepers organization (of which I am a member) or rather my stance on those opposing the Promise Keepers organization.

The Broken Pencil Effect

Several weeks ago, a group of religious men, the Promise Keepers, met at the National Mall in Washington D.C. Some critics insisted that they "marched" on the Mall, implying that the Promise Keepers harbored hidden political agendas, while others preferred to focus on the group’s effects on the women’s rights movement, and believed that they were negating all that women had worked for and achieved over the decades. Summarizing all aspects of this opposition is the National Organization for Women (NOW), led by Miss Patricia Ireland, as well as other organizations, such as the Center for Democracy Studies. Unfortunately NOW and its counterparts are succumbing to the "broken pencil effect" by missing the entire point.

In 1966, the National Organization for Women was founded with the intention to bring about equality for all women through action. Initially, the group’s goals were limited to issues involving such problems as fair wages and sexual harassment. As the group has evolved, however, they have come to embrace the non-traditionalist’s view on such hotly debated issues as abortions, lesbians, and, now, polygamy. To achieve their goals (according to their homepage), NOW can, will, and does resort to "organizing mass marches, rallies, pickets, counter-demonstrations, non-violent civil disobedience and immediate, responsive ‘zap’ actions." With their radical viewpoints existing on the opposite wing than that of the Promise Keepers, it is no surprise that NOW singled out the men’s group and quickly organized a "no surrender" resistance to it.

Promise Keepers, on the other hand, was founded to uphold a Christian standard that was initially prevalent in the fledgling United States. A decline in the morality of the nation was horribly evident at the time, so founder Coach Bill McCartney envisioned yet another Great Awakening, and decided to take action by starting a prayer group wherein the members were accountable for each other’s actions and lives. The idea soared, and soon the Promise Keepers were filling stadiums in huge prayer and praise rallies. Never did they organize mass pickets, counter-demonstrations, civil-disobedience acts, etc.; rather, they made their views known by sheer number of attendees and private endorsement of the program to others by individual members. As is inevitable in any large association, many individual members presented and supported their political views, thus igniting the fuse of the "hidden agenda myth" bomb.

In the weeks prior to the largest Promise Keeper rally, aptly named "Stand in the Gap" due to the theme of racial harmony, NOW devoted much of its resources to launching a large campaign against the gathering. Several members were sent to the rally to protest, flyers were mass-produced, caustic videotapes were shot and sold, and the NOW Internet website was expanded to include a slew of anti-PK articles and other media. In response to NOW’s efforts, Promise Keepers swarmed around the NOW representatives at the rally to pray for them, Promise Keepers gently attempted to calm and answer the fiery accusations and questions shot at them, and otherwise Promise Keepers essentially ignored the NOW’s resistance.

The scenario is this: a group of men is founded on the principles of love and equality, and strive toward the spiritual leadership (not to be confused with straight leadership) of men in their households, churches and communities. Essentially, the Promise Keepers are a group of Christian men pursuing Christian and biblical ideas, and attempting to restore the nation to the original vision most of the founding fathers shared. NOW misses the point and misinterprets the Promise Keepers’ intentions as trying to restore women to a submissive status, using excerpts from the leaders’ speeches completely out of context to support their opposition. They incorrectly insist that the Promise Keepers are undermining and attempting to eliminate everything that women have worked for by confusing "marital and family domination" for "spiritual leadership." Also, isn’t polygamy a reversion to a way of life even further regressed than any that the Promise Keepers are accused of endorsing?

To spark further argument, one should ponder how an organization after the founding fathers’ own hearts (PK) can be attacked by a group of radical women who support some of the most unethical practices in the nation (NOW). Even more ludicrous perhaps, is the fact that groups such as the "Center for Democracy Studies" are siding with the rebellious NOW rather than the more traditional Promise Keepers.