But, as I read argument, I think the professor probably should be arrested. Not because I think that Methodist seminary professors should go to jail. But because I think their arrests could add to the moral power of the movement.
The political situation in North Carolina is like that of the whole country. If you look at the polls on issues, it seems that the public is much more progressive than the election results indicate. There are lots of folks who are in favor of increasing the minimum wage, granting equal access to marriage, restricting carbon emissions, and not making it harder to vote, but who are voting for the Republicans who are implementing the very opposite policies. Or they are not voting at all.
Why? It's always hard to tell individual motivations.
But, voting has a tribal quality; that is well known. People inherit political preferences from their parents and absorb them from the surrounding community and loyal for a long time. It feels like "People like us vote for our party."
What that means, practically, is that there are many white Christians who continue to vote for the Republican Party out of habit and out of emotional identification, even though they don't particularly agree with the positions of the candidates.
White, suburban, Christian voters see the GOP as people like them, and the Democrats as a coalition of the others: multi-racial, blue collar, intellectuals, poor.
There is a middle in the United States right now, and much of it is progressive on issues, but votes for reactionary extremists. Progressives will advance as we win over that middle. Sometimes, you win over the middle by moderating one's demands. (Been there, done that.) But more often you win over the middle, by persistently asking the question: which side are on? When white Christian religious leaders choose to get arrested, they answer that question.
Which Side Are You On? The middle hates that question. They want everybody to stop asking it. They want middle ways and compromises and third ways. They want "civil unions" rather than "marriage equality." They agree with "the goals but not the tactics". They agree with "the ends, but not the means". They like the movement but want different leaders. They want love over division. They accuse those who ask the question of selfish and devious motives. They want to do the same thing, but get a different result. But in the end, most of the middle, inspired by the examples of people they trust and admire, will step up for justice.
I know, I've been there.