{"id":251366,"date":"2022-04-09T16:35:12","date_gmt":"2022-04-09T20:35:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/oncubanews.com\/en\/?p=251366"},"modified":"2022-04-09T16:35:12","modified_gmt":"2022-04-09T20:35:12","slug":"where-is-politics-played","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/oncubanews.com\/en\/opinion\/columns\/no-filter\/where-is-politics-played\/","title":{"rendered":"Where is politics played?"},"content":{"rendered":"

On April 1, the <\/span>\u201cPalabra Precisa\u201d program<\/span><\/a>, on Cuban state television, gave voice to a male pastor and a female pastor to talk about the new <\/span>Family Code<\/span><\/a>. The draft is under popular consultation and must be put to a referendum soon. The female pastor, Dora Arce Valent\u00edn, general secretary of the Reformed Presbyterian Church in Cuba, represented the support for the Code draft. Pastor B\u00e1rbaro Abel Marrero Castellanos, president of the Western Baptist Convention, defended a position mostly contrary to the proposed code, argued in a conservative framework of defense of the biological family, against same-sex marriage and gender and sex education.<\/span><\/p>\n

That \u201cPalabra Precisa\u201d broadcast is unprecedented for at least two reasons. One, until now state television had not been a platform to resolve openly religious issues, doctrinally arguing policies on a topic of collective interest. Two, the line represented by the male pastor is contrary to what the government institutions have been defending \u2014 not without contradictions \u2014, and the discourses against the government\u2019s interest do not reach state television.<\/span><\/p>\n

The program (re)opened questions about the strong pulse of conservative religious politics in the country and the impact it has and may have on state television as a religious communication platform; on pluralism in the public sphere where rights are settled; and about the Family Code itself.<\/span><\/p>\n

The context, beyond Cuba<\/b><\/p>\n

Throughout Latin America and the world, religiously-based neoconservatism has gained strength, audience and impact. Its existence and presence is not new, but in the last decade, it has more scope and consequences. A sector of evangelicalism and conservative Catholicism are key actors.<\/span><\/p>\n

The \u201cneo\u201d prefix is justified, among other things, by the strategies they use to defend the \u201ctraditional values\u201d of the \u201cnatural family\u201d and of societies. Especially evangelism displays a strong digital activism in social networks, and has increased its presence in the media (public, state, private, community, formal, informal or directly owned by churches). In many countries of the region, the radio and television stations they own have grown exponentially.<\/span><\/p>\n

Among the new strategies is also its clearer presence in public spaces in the form of marches, sit-ins, etc. On the other hand, their legal action against regulations under discussion or approved, and against people or organizations that defend rights, is becoming frequent. Religious neoconservatism is constantly activated at legislative junctures: constitutional changes, creation or modification of laws, resolutions, national programs, etc. Public statements and collection of signatures are equally common.<\/span><\/p>\n

Through these channels and others, religious neoconservatism defends its public voice and affirms it, many times, by appealing to the freedoms of worship and expression. Ecumenical platforms have been created of sectors of evangelicalism and Catholicism to oppose same-sex marriage, gender and sex education, abortion, the inclusion of concepts such as \u201cprogressive autonomy\u201d of childhood, assisted reproduction, transversality of the gender approach in public policies, the approval of quota policies to ensure parity in political representation, and a long etcetera. They have also been key in electoral triumphs such as that of Bolsonaro in Brazil, and they produce alliances with a large number of presidential candidates, such as Bukele in El Salvador or the recently elected Rodrigo Ch\u00e1vez in Costa Rica. Religious neoconservative figures increasingly occupy more political seats at different levels, create more channels of influence in political apparatuses and persist and expand their voice in international platforms such as the Organization of American States.<\/span><\/p>\n

Downward, they devise strong communities of faith where each member is a \u201cspiritual warrior.\u201d The idea that the church must wage spiritual warfare against \u201cevil forces of gender\u201d or \u201cdevastating gender ideology\u201d is part of the identity of many congregations of this profile. They join forces with sexist conservatism that is not necessarily religious, and oppose faith communities that defend human rights and feminist and LGTBIQ+ activism.<\/span><\/p>\n

The question of how they produce their bases can be answered in different ways. Some are: the increase in impoverishment, the abandonment by States, the little or insufficient presence of social movements defending rights in the territories, the presence of neoconservative actors in power apparatuses, the convenient tolerance of high politics against the neoconservative advance, and many more. The argument and political line represented by Pastor B\u00e1rbaro Abel Marrero in \u201cPalabra Precisa\u201d is throughout the world, throughout the region and throughout Cuba. Cuban religious neoconservatism deploys the aforementioned strategies to the letter.<\/span><\/p>\n

On the background and anticommunism in Cuba<\/b><\/p>\n

The genealogy of religious neoconservatism in the face of the Family Code did not begin with the broadcasting of the \u201cPalabra Precisa\u201d program or with the consultation of the Code.<\/span><\/p>\n

The scope of religious neoconservatism in Cuba was established in 2018, during the debate on the draft Constitution of the Republic. The proposal of a specific article that redefined the institution of marriage (no longer between a man and a woman but between two people) activated a very audible neoconservative campaign. It was not only religious but the religious congregations of that profile led the singing voice in the public square. The Western Cuba Baptist Convention, now chaired by Pastor B\u00e1rbaro Abel Marrero, was especially active at the time.<\/span><\/p>\n

That congregation \u2014 then under Reverend Dariel Llanes \u2014 was one of the five signatories, in June 2018, of the first <\/span>official public statement<\/span><\/a> against \u201chomosexual marriage\u201d that the draft Constitution enabled. It did so together with the \u201cAsambleas de Dios\u201d Evangelical Pentecostal Church, the Eastern Baptist Convention, the Evangelical League of Cuba and the Methodist Church of Cuba. That statement denounced the presence of \u201cgender ideology\u201d in the country.<\/span><\/p>\n

Due to one of its contents, that declaration was anachronistic with the regional neoconservative rhetorical arsenal. In Latin America and the world, neoconservatives associate \u201cgender ideology\u201d with \u201ccultural Marxism,\u201d with communism, with \u201cCastro-Chavism.\u201d However, in Cuba that first statement assured that \u201cgender ideology has nothing to do with our culture, our struggles for independence, or with the historical leaders of the Revolution. In the same way, it does not have any link with the communist countries, say the former Soviet Union, China, Vietnam and even less North Korea.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Placing \u201cgender ideology\u201d as opposed to communism was a \u201ccontribution\u201d and, without a doubt, a strategic move that tried to ensure political influence. Shortly after, in the second collective statement where the Western Baptist Convention was also present together with twenty churches, they did not speak of \u201ccommunist countries\u201d but of the scientifically proven reality of \u201cthe binary structure of human sexuality,\u201d of the \u201cdivine institution\u201d that is marriage and the right of the Cuban Church to a \u201cpublic voice.\u201d Never again has it been mentioned in the terms of the first statement.<\/span><\/p>\n

Churches of this profile have fermented in Cuba for decades. Since the government has reticular control in the territories, there is no reason to think that it was an unknown process. During the constitutional debate, these actors, in a line similar to the most conservative Catholicism, showed their firm hand.<\/span><\/p>\n

The finally approved version of the Constitution opted for a Solomonic solution: displacing the conflict. The definition of what marriage is was removed from the Magna Carta. It was announced that this would be the responsibility of the future Family Code. It compromised on plebiscite rights: the Family Code is the only legislation, among more than a hundred, that needs a referendum for its approval.<\/span><\/p>\n

That future is already here. The draft of a new Family Code is prolific in terms of rights. Institutional actors who have opted for a radically different and broad code in rights have participated in its formulation, and the LGTBIQ+ and feminist civil society has influenced it. The referendum is yet to come and, in this context, B\u00e1rbaro Abel Marrero makes his appearance on state television.<\/span><\/p>\n

An old dispute: television<\/b><\/p>\n

In most of the countries of the region, religious content in general and neoconservative content in specific are included on state television. In Cuba it is not like that. That does not mean that television is free of homophobic, sexist, racist narratives. In fact, LGTBIQ+, feminist, anti-racist civil society and voices defending rights (non-institutional and institutional) exercise active oversight of the state media and there are continuous debates about it. However, for open religious neoconservatism specifically, there had been no room. On the contrary, those congregations have made a strong demand for a space on state television.<\/span><\/p>\n

On March 30, the Executive Committee of the Western Baptist Convention published on its Telegram channel a Call for Prayer in which they announced the broadcast, on April 1, of \u201cPalabra Precisa\u201d. They described their participation in that program as an \u201canswered prayer\u201d:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe have demanded the opportunity to express our criteria on National Television, with respect to the Code, we believe that our criteria can enrich the popular debate and thus balance the opinions that are expressed every day in the mass media.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

They also called to \u201ccontinue praying\u201d during the day of the recording of the program, to accompany the opportunity provided by God to \u201cBe Light in our nation.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

A few days earlier, on February 22, the Western Baptist Convention, together with the Free Baptist Convention of Cuba and the Baptist Convention of Eastern Cuba, also published a joint <\/span>statement<\/span><\/a>. In the document, they expressed their \u201cdeepest indignation\u201d at the use of the Baptist name as an ascription of faith of a homosexual pastor, Adiel Gonz\u00e1lez, in an audiovisual product shared on television that day. It is important to clarify that this material had already been put on television two days before, but with the censorship of Pastor Adiel\u2019s presence. LGTBIQ+ organizations quickly <\/span>denounced<\/span><\/a> the incident and the audiovisual was broadcast, this time in its entirety. The aforementioned churches reacted to this second broadcast.<\/span><\/p>\n

The declaration of the Baptist conventions did not refer only to the audiovisual but also described the content of the Family Code as \u201cimmoralities.\u201d It expressed its \u201crejection of the biased and discriminatory attitude of the Cuban media,\u201d which \u201ccondemns our historic churches to ostracism, denying us any possibility of massively sharing what we believe.\u201d It added that \u201cthose responsible for the media in Cuba\u201d did not have \u201cthe courage and intellectual honesty\u201d to allow the churches to express themselves, and that they distorted their faith and practice. With this, the demand for access to the media was reiterated.<\/span><\/p>\n