Did Obama's pastor preach hate?

[Sasquatch]

Did Obama's pastor preach hate?

While some label the Reverend Wright's words 'hate speech,' others point to a tradition of exposing social ills.

By Jane Lampman (http://www.csmonitor.com/cgi-bin/encryptmail.pl?ID=CAE1EEE5A0CCE1EDF0EDE1EE&url=/2008/0328/p03s07-ussc.html) | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor (http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0328/p03s07-ussc.html)
from the March 28, 2008 edition

They're the campaign issue that refuses to fade away.

The words of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., Barack Obama's longtime pastor, continue to fuel controversy, in part because the contest for the Democratic presidential nomination is so close this year, in part because the words themselves pose a stark question about America's cross-racial discourse: When does speaking out against injustices cross into hate speech?

Senator Obama's Democratic rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton, stoked the fires this week, saying, "Given all we have heard and seen, he would not have been my pastor." Former Gov. Mike Huckabee, who quit the Republican presidential race, seemed eager to damp the flames as he told MSNBC, "Sometimes people do have a chip on their shoulder and resentment, and you have to just say, `I probably would, too. In fact, I may have had more of a chip on my shoulder, had it been me.' "

For many in the black community, however, the controversy over selected clips of Wright using inflammatory language has been blown out of proportion. More important, they say, it reveals little awareness among whites of the centuries of African-American struggle and its tradition of "prophetic preaching."

In response to the furor, "There's a desire to redouble efforts to portray the beauty and complexities and challenges of our tradition," says the Rev. Brad Braxton, of Vanderbilt Divinity School in Nashville. "Many feel the need to remind people of how the black church tradition has been the soul and conscience of the nation."

Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech, for example, spoke powerfully of what was awry in the land and what needed to be done to put things right.

In Wright's case, however, the language of video clips in which he said "God damn America" for its historical treatment of minorities and accused the government of spreading HIV/AIDs sounded hateful to many. Senator Clinton compared Mr. Wright with Don Imus, the shock jock whose MSNBC TV show was canceled last year after he called the Rutgers women's basketball team "nappy-headed hos." "I spoke out against Don Imus, saying that hate speech was unacceptable in any setting, and I believe that," Clinton told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review this week.

Senator Obama himself has condemned the statements and called them stupid.

With the furor continuing, the recently retired preacher of Trinity United Church of in Chicago canceled his trip to the Black Church Summit this weekend in Fort Worth, Texas, where he was to receive an award for his years of pastoring.

Some pastors, both black and white, argue that Wright's damning of America was not wishing ill on Americans but making a theological point that God condemns acts of oppression. The theme of the sermon from which that clip is taken was that people should not depend on government – which sometimes lies and does wrong – but rely wholly on God.

How people hear something depends on their own experience and worldview, says Teresa Fry Brown, who teaches the art of preaching at Emory University in Atlanta. "I listen to 60 sermons a week by black and white pastors, and you could find something in almost any one that is offensive to somebody."

The key as to whether language is hate speech lies in a preacher's overall message, according to Martin Marty, professor emeritus of the University of Chicago Divinity School and renowned historian of religion. Dr. Marty, who has visited Trinity many times, says, "If Wright only had whites in his searchlight, you might call it [hate speech]. But he goes after the men in his church" about fatherhood, he puts himself and his people under the prophetic spotlight.

Prophetic preaching has been fundamental to the black church since the days of slavery. The Bible and its thundering prophets modeled a way forward that enabled black preachers to speak the hard truths while simultaneously envisioning a better future.

"The black church took the distorted version of Christianity that provided the religious justification for slavery, carved out the racist elements ... and implanted new content that actually moved Christianity in this country closer to ' message," says Dr. Braxton.

First and foremost, the black church is rooted in the Bible. Christian slaves, slipping out to the woods for secret prayer meetings, appropriated the narrative of Exodus for their own story, promising eventual freedom from bondage. Worship became a means of survival and hope.

A former slave described a religious service shortly after Emancipation in this way: "Every heart was beating in unison as we turned our minds to God to tell him of our sorrows here below. God saw our need and came to us. I used to wonder what made people shout, but now I don't. There is a joy on the inside, and it wells up so strong that we can't keep still. It is fire in the bones."

[Danny White]

If it wasn't hate, but rather legitimate social commentary, then why did Obama denounce it?


Honestly, people who keep dredging this issue up -- trying to make excuses for the Reverend or Obama -- aren't doing their candidate any favors.

[Sasquatch]

If it wasn't hate, but rather legitimate social commentary, then why did Obama denounce it?


Honestly, people who keep dredging this issue up -- trying to make excuses for the Reverend or Obama -- aren't doing their candidate any favors.

I just thought the article provided an interesting perspective on the whole affair.

Personally, I think the issue is ultimately irrelevant, unless you think Obama, by virtue of his association with Wright, is going to push punitive legislation against whites and deliberately run the country in the ground as President to satisfy his intense hatred of the "US of KKKA." ;)

I think that's rather unlikely.

[Hostile]

If it wasn't hate, but rather legitimate social commentary, then why did Obama denounce it?


Honestly, people who keep dredging this issue up -- trying to make excuses for the Reverend or Obama -- aren't doing their candidate any favors.You asked what I would have. He was absolutely right to do so and I applaud him for it. Everyone should.

I could not support a pastor who uses the Lord's name in vain. There is no excuse for that IMO. Nor a pastor who demonstrates "riding dirty" while demeaning (actually slandering) a former President of this country. Whether you approve of President Clinton or not, Wright's words and demonstrations about him were wrong.

He may have had many wonderful messages and given many people hope. I don't care. Those are 2 images I cannot ever condone and I am offended by them and his words.

I do not include Senator Obama in my disgust for this. I have taken him at his word and appreciate his stance against these messages of hate, because that is exactly what they are.

[iceberg]

maybe obama can help his paster get past it. ya never know what the purpose of people in our lives is for at times.

[ScipioCowboy]

I could not support a pastor who uses the Lord's name in vain. There is no excuse for that IMO.

I agree. I'd forgotten about that portion of the speech.

His speech wasn't racist, in my opinion. It was, however, factually suspect.

[vta]

Separating Obama the Presidential Candidate from it and looking at it with complete objectivity, what he preached was a scathing, hateful indictment of the United States.

Had he not been the preacher of a man that is currently in the favor of many people in this country, there would hardly be any of these back breaking attempts, by any of these people, to understand 'the deeper meaning' of this guy's vitriol.

"The United States created AIDS". Is there a deeper meaning to what that sentence means, besides, the United States purposely created a deadly disease?

"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye...and now we are indignant, because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought back into our own front yards." Is there a deeper meaning than what that paragraph means, besides the United States is getting what it deserves?

Humans are a funny species, as they won't take what they see at face value, when there really exists no depth to ponder. There's plenty of nuance in life and our creativity is our strength, but at times, we just try too hard. We search for the deeper meanings of blatant proclaimations to soften the impact of a harsh blow for our own psychological well being.

Pseudo intellectualism has run amuck; trust that when a man says he f•cking hates you, he f•cking means it.

Reverand Wright is a hateful SOB.

[BrAinPaiNt]

I thought it was hateful and he comes off as a hateful person in some respects.

One thing is clear whether you think it was hateful or not, that speech was not needed in church IMO.

Maybe it is different for some, but I never went to church to hear a political message...I went to hear a spiritual message.

But, that was so long ago, maybe times have changed.:laugh2:

[SultanOfSix]

Were some of the things he said hateful? Yes. Could it be classified as "hate speech"? No, I don't think so. There was certainly a lot of anger in it, but sometimes anger is justified.

From what I understood, the media did an injustice to what was said by taking certain things that were said out of context in the first place. One could take verses out of the Bible, Qur'an and other religious texts, decontextualize them, and then claim that those texts have "hate speech" in them.

Some of what he said had elements of truth in it. The way it was presented just rubbed certain people the wrong way, especially concerning issues where the negative aspects of American foreign policy have come back to haunt the country. But, certain people don't want these things to be delved into and would rather mask the deeper issues and those who question them with anti-Patriotic and anti-American labels.

[trickblue]

Highly innapropriate and racist... easily...

[Sasquatch]

Gee, VTA, someone eat your leftover pizza or something? :)

Separating Obama the Presidential Candidate from it and looking at it with complete objectivity, what he preached was a scathing, hateful indictment of the United States.

Had he not been the preacher of a man that is currently in the favor of many people in this country, there would hardly be any of these back breaking attempts, by any of these people, to understand 'the deeper meaning' of this guy's vitriol.

I suspect it wouldn't have been newsworthy at all if not for its obvious political value for Obama's detractors.

"The United States created AIDS". Is there a deeper meaning to what that sentence means, besides, the United States purposely created a deadly disease?

Admittedly, a dumb assertion.

We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye...and now we are indignant, because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought back into our own front yards." Is there a deeper meaning than what that paragraph means, besides the United States is getting what it deserves?

Many people like Ron Paul have made links between our foreign policy and hostility towards the United States. Of course, dropping the a-bomb on the Japanese had nothing to do with 9/11, but if Wright is preaching about the need for the state to embody core religious values, it's hardly shocking that he denounce the incineration of 100,000 civilians which is an obvious violation of the sixth commandment, regardless of the Truman administration's justifications for the bombings.

He certainly isn't the first loud-mouthed man of the cloth to fulminate against the wickedness of the United States and claim that it has brought about God's wrath. It's simply being magnified because of his relationship with a presidential candidate whose political opponents are trying to portray as unpatriotic, which is blasphemy in post 9/11 America where the nation has acquired quasi-sacred status with fervid patriotism as the orthodox form of worship.

Humans are a funny species, as they won't take what they see at face value, when there really exists no depth to ponder.

A rather different position than the one you maintained in our other discussion.

[Jon88]

Separating Obama the Presidential Candidate from it and looking at it with complete objectivity, what he preached was a scathing, hateful indictment of the United States.

Had he not been the preacher of a man that is currently in the favor of many people in this country, there would hardly be any of these back breaking attempts, by any of these people, to understand 'the deeper meaning' of this guy's vitriol.

"The United States created AIDS". Is there a deeper meaning to what that sentence means, besides, the United States purposely created a deadly disease?

"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye...and now we are indignant, because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought back into our own front yards." Is there a deeper meaning than what that paragraph means, besides the United States is getting what it deserves?

Humans are a funny species, as they won't take what they see at face value, when there really exists no depth to ponder. There's plenty of nuance in life and our creativity is our strength, but at times, we just try too hard. We search for the deeper meanings of blatant proclaimations to soften the impact of a harsh blow for our own psychological well being.

Pseudo intellectualism has run amuck; trust that when a man says he f•cking hates you, he f•cking means it.

Reverand Wright is a hateful SOB.


I think smart people have learned to take things at face value.

[Jon88]

Were some of the things he said hateful? Yes. Could it be classified as "hate speech"? No, I don't think so. There was certainly a lot of anger in it, but sometimes anger is justified.

From what I understood, the media did an injustice to what was said by taking certain things that were said out of context in the first place. One could take verses out of the Bible, Qur'an and other religious texts, decontextualize them, and then claim that those texts have "hate speech" in them.

Some of what he said had elements of truth in it. The way it was presented just rubbed certain people the wrong way, especially concerning issues where the negative aspects of American foreign policy have come back to haunt the country. But, certain people don't want these things to be delved into and would rather mask the deeper issues and those who question them with anti-Patriotic and anti-American labels.

I don't see how that makes sense.

[vta]

Gee, VTA, someone eat your leftover pizza or something? :)

Nah, my in-laws own a pizzeria; I never have to worry about being short on pizza. ;)

I suspect it wouldn't have been newsworthy at all if not for its obvious political value for Obama's detractors.

It would have made the news, if some one had found it; the major difference is, no one would be extending these ridiculous efforts to defend him if he weren't linked to Obama. He'd be hung out to dry.

Many people like Ron Paul have made links between our foreign policy and hostility towards the United States.

And I certainly don't shy from this fact. Iran hates us for a valid reason, as do many other Mid-East and South American nations.

Of course, dropping the a-bomb on the Japanese had nothing to do with 9/11, but if Wright is preaching about the need for the state to embody core religious values, it's hardly shocking that he denounce the incineration of 100,000 civilians which is an obvious violation of the sixth commandment, regardless of the Truman administration's justifications for the bombings.

Doesn't this man claim to be a Christian? The Christian faith doesn't espouse an eye for an eye. Just admit he's an angry dude, not quite up to snuff with living up to 's lofty examples.

He certainly isn't the first loud-mouthed man of the cloth to fulminate against the wickedness of the United States and claim that it has brought about God's wrath.

Yep, and I remember those jerks apologizing when it became headline news. 9/11 is God's revenge for accepting gays, indeed... :rolleyes:

It's simply being magnified because of his relationship with a presidential candidate whose political opponents are trying to portray as unpatriotic, which is blasphemy in post 9/11 America where the nation has acquired quasi-sacred status with fervid patriotism as the orthodox form of worship.

I don't deny that Obama is also being subjected to partisan attacks at all, but on the other side of the coin, the only reason anyone is defending Wright on a public scale is because of said relationship.

Partisanship has it's privileges and it's prohibitions.

A rather different position than the one you maintained in our other discussion.

It fluctuates. Not everything is worthy of a deep and intense scrutiny. A man acts like an @ss in the street, the passerby are not obligated to an intense self-scrutiny to find what they did to bring about such behaviour: some people are just @ssholes.

[Sasquatch]

Nah, my in-laws own a pizzeria; I never have to worry about being short on pizza. ;)

With all our disagreements, I think I despise you most for that, you lucky bastid. :p:

[vta]

With all our disagreements, I think I despise you most for that, you lucky bastid. :p:

:lmao2:

[hairic]

Listen and judge for yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdlnzkeoyQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvMbeVQj6Lw

[burmafrd]

Leave it to mostly the Libs to be so willing to find a way to say he did not say anything all that bad.
If he had been a Republican or a conservative they would have wanted him executed immediately (despite their repeated claims against the death penalty).
The hypocrisy of some is really funny to watch.

It was hate speech. He has done that many times from all accounts.
But some will keep trying to claim night is day.

[silverbear]

Here's my question-- how exactly is what the Reverend Wrong said different from that fool of a preacher who protests at the funerals of our soldiers, saying the war in Iraq is God's punishment for our "tolerance" of homosexuality??

If that jacka$$ is preaching hatred, then so is the Reverend Wrong... both of them are perverting the concept of God...

[Hostile]

Here's my question-- how exactly is what the Reverend Wrong said different from that fool of a preacher who protests at the funerals of our soldiers, saying the war in Iraq is God's punishment for our "tolerance" of homosexuality??

If that jacka$$ is preaching hatred, then so is the Reverend Wrong... both of them are perverting the concept of God...Where did anyone sanctify, ratify, endorse, or in any way justify what that guy preaches? Honestly, is it necessary when you condemn the actions of one to systematically also catalog everyone else who should be condemned for similar actions in order to avoid all assumptions? That would be a daunting task.

[Sasquatch]

Listen and judge for yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdlnzkeoyQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvMbeVQj6Lw

Thanks for the links. Very interesting.

[Hostile]

Listen and judge for yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdlnzkeoyQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvMbeVQj6LwI watched both. I appreciate you sharing the entire videos. One of the 2 things that offended me still offends me. The other was not in the footage shown.

He's obviously a passionate man, and I can appreciate that. I can even appreciate some of his message. I've never said he was evil, nor have I said Mr. Obama should be judged by this man's sermons. I stand by that.

I still do not respect the two things he said that are clearly offensive. One is right at the last minute of the 2nd video. I cannot condone that. I will never condone that. Nothing in the world is more offensive to me than to take the Lord's name in vain. I will always find that offensive. I promise you that if I was ever in a church where that happened I would stand up in the middle of the sermon and I would walk out the door and I would never look back.

The question asked before is still valid. If he did not say anything offensive then why has his friend Barrack Obama denounced these messages? To save his skin? If that is the reason, is it honorable? I think he denounced for exactly the right reason, because some of the things he is preaching are flat out wrong, out of line, and above all offensive.

I will never agree with this man's philosophies, but I would defend to the death his right to have them. That's the greatness of our nation. It's too bad that a man of his obvious intelligence and influence and dare I say eloquence can't focus on that great blessing and realize that if he were not here he'd probably be killed by his own government for those very philosophies.

That is the true travesty here.

[jay cee]

I do not include Senator Obama in my disgust for this. I have taken him at his word and appreciate his stance against these messages of hate, because that is exactly what they are.

Hate for who, Hos? Who exactly was Wright's "messages of hate" against.

[jay cee]

Highly innapropriate and racist... easily...

What race was he attacking?

[Hostile]

Hate for who, Hos? Who exactly was Wright's "messages of hate" against.If you don't know, I can't help you.

[jay cee]

If you don't know, I can't help you.

I must say, I expected better from you than that Hostile. That's a Bill O'Reilly or Limbaugh move IMO. I don't have a real answer, so I won't even attempt one.

I have not seen all the videos of what the man said, but from what was shown on television, he never attacked any group in particular.

So again I ask, can anyone tell me who Wright's hate speech was against.

[Hostile]

So again I ask, can anyone tell me who Wright's hate speech was against.If it wasn't a hate speech why did Barrack Obama denounce it as one? Who it was against is irrelevant to me. His actions and comments, are not.

I'm not going to be a grasshopper on your shoulder playing your conscience, and I won't dance to whatever tune you think you're going to play with me.

I will not dignify the rest of that garbage with a comment.

[trickblue]

What race was he attacking?

I must say, I expected better from you than that Hostile. That's a Bill O'Reilly or Limbaugh move IMO. I don't have a real answer, so I won't even attempt one.

I have not seen all the videos of what the man said, but from what was shown on television, he never attacked any group in particular.

So again I ask, can anyone tell me who Wright's hate speech was against.

You're kidding... right?

Please don't tell me his comments were ambiguous and devoid of accusation against whites...

[Dallas]

What race was he attacking?


Whitey.

Crackers.

The Man.

Conky's :D

Honkey's

Ghosts

Hillbilly's

Mayonaise

Mice

Palefaces

s

Saltines

White Trash

White Chocolate

Wonder Bread

Rednecks

White Devils


Just keepin it real for Pastor Wright. :confused:

[silverbear]

Leave it to mostly the Libs to be so willing to find a way to say he did not say anything all that bad.

And leave it to a slack-jawed fanatic to label everybody who disagrees with him "libs"...

And yet, I'M one of those you constantly refer to as a "lib", and I agree that what the Reverend Wrong (that's how I plan on referring to him every time I have to talk about him) said was hate speech...

You reveal the shallowness of your political acumen when you substitute idiotic insults for debate... it doesn't say a lot about your intelligence either, it leaves the clear impression that you CAN'T argue on the facts...

Ad hominem is your ONLY game... you have yet to contribute anything of substance to the political dialogue in this forum...

[silverbear]

Where did anyone sanctify, ratify, endorse, or in any way justify what that guy preaches?

Most don't, some do... just like with the Reverend Wrong...

I think my comparison was apt, both are engaging in what I consider to be utterly contemptible hate speech...

Honestly, is it necessary when you condemn the actions of one to systematically also catalog everyone else who should be condemned for similar actions

Yeah, Hos, I've always considered it legitimate to catalog everyone else who should be condemned for similar actions... I find that to be an eminently fair thing to do...

Is it necessary?? Perhaps not, perhaps the point can be made in other ways... but I think it's legitimate to draw such parallels, when in my mind there are close similarities...

That would be a daunting task.

Perhaps, but I've got broad shoulders and a strong back, I can carry a heavy load... :D

It seems like no matter WHAT position I take in here, I get in trouble... if I have a problem with the righties, it causes a fuss, but now, when I pretty much agree with the righties, I STILL cause a fuss... damned if I do, damned if I don't, LOL...

[silverbear]

He's obviously a passionate man, and I can appreciate that. I can even appreciate some of his message. I've never said he was evil, nor have I said Mr. Obama should be judged by this man's sermons. I stand by that.

A stand that I completely respect-- if you have a problem with the Reverend, don't take it out on one of his parishioners, no matter how important he might be...

I still do not respect the two things he said that are clearly offensive. One is right at the last minute of the 2nd video. I cannot condone that. I will never condone that. Nothing in the world is more offensive to me than to take the Lord's name in vain. I will always find that offensive. I promise you that if I was ever in a church where that happened I would stand up in the middle of the sermon and I would walk out the door and I would never look back.

A minister, saying that?? In church?? You're absolutely right, his congregation should have fired him...

I will never agree with this man's philosophies, but I would defend to the death his right to have them. That's the greatness of our nation.

We've talked about that before, recently, you know I agree with you completely on that one... now, everybody else does, too...

It's too bad that a man of his obvious intelligence and influence and dare I say eloquence can't focus on that great blessing and realize that if he were not here he'd probably be killed by his own government for those very philosophies.

That is the true travesty here.

Amen... he could do more good by positive action, rather than by negative speech... if he feels "his people" are getting a bad deal, work to improve things... any damned fool can stand up and rail against the system, DO SOMETHING about it...

All he accomplishes with that kind of rhetoric is to piss people off, of all color, and cause even greater division between the races...

Fine thing for a "man of God" to be doing... I respect the tradition of preachers being social activists, but the way the Reverend Wrong goes about it is both offensive, and counterproductive...

[silverbear]

I must say, I expected better from you than that Hostile. That's a Bill O'Reilly or Limbaugh move IMO. I don't have a real answer, so I won't even attempt one.

I have not seen all the videos of what the man said, but from what was shown on television, he never attacked any group in particular.

So again I ask, can anyone tell me who Wright's hate speech was against.

"God D*MN America"...

You can't figure out who his hate speech was against, jay cee?? Seems pretty obvious to me...

[Hostile]

Most don't, some do... just like with the Reverend Wrong... The only people I have ever seen defend that church group are that church group. I have not seen one other solitary soul on the planet do it. Not extreme anti-gay Conservatives, and not extreme freedom of speech Liberals.

I think my comparison was apt, both are engaging in what I consider to be utterly contemptible hate speech... Yes, but again, both are being condemned for it. Maybe if you can show me where someone has defended that church group I would understand.

Yeah, Hos, I've always considered it legitimate to catalog everyone else who should be condemned for similar actions... I find that to be an eminently fair thing to do... Man I don't. I think it's pretty safe to assume that when someone speaks out against an oppressive, blood thirsty dictator like Adolf Hitler that they probably also do not like someone like Saddam Hussein. I can usually draw that line without a 24 page discourse decrying all dictators past, present, and gearing up for the job.

Is it necessary?? Perhaps not, perhaps the point can be made in other ways... but I think it's legitimate to draw such parallels, when in my mind there are close similarities... Again, maybe I would understand this if I saw even one person who supports that guy and his church. I haven't.

Perhaps, but I've got broad shoulders and a strong back, I can carry a heavy load... :DCan I borrow your back? Mine's a little on the busted up side at the moment.

It seems like no matter WHAT position I take in here, I get in trouble... if I have a problem with the righties, it causes a fuss, but now, when I pretty much agree with the righties, I STILL cause a fuss... damned if I do, damned if I don't, LOL...I didn't say you were in trouble. I just think using that guy is a bit extreme because I've never heard anyone condone his words or actions.

[Hostile]

A stand that I completely respect-- if you have a problem with the Reverend, don't take it out on one of his parishioners, no matter how important he might be...

A minister, saying that?? In church?? You're absolutely right, his congregation should have fired him...

We've talked about that before, recently, you know I agree with you completely on that one... now, everybody else does, too...

Amen... he could do more good by positive action, rather than by negative speech... if he feels "his people" are getting a bad deal, work to improve things... any damned fool can stand up and rail against the system, DO SOMETHING about it...

All he accomplishes with that kind of rhetoric is to piss people off, of all color, and cause even greater division between the races...

Fine thing for a "man of God" to be doing... I respect the tradition of preachers being social activists, but the way the Reverend Wrong goes about it is both offensive, and counterproductive...You know what gets me too, the outright hypocrisy of his own words. In one of the videos posted he praises Bill Clinton as a friend of the Black man in America. In the one where he demonstrates Bill "riding dirty" with Monica Lewinsky he says, "Hillary is married to Bill and Bill has been good to us. No he ain't. Bill did us just like he did Monica Lewinsky. He was riding dirty."

Which is it?

Throughout History men and women have made social commentaries in an effort to seek better circumstances for their people. When they have truly had success and respect and honor for their efforts is when those social commentaries were strictly about bettering their people and the responsibilities their people would have. Let me use one of my favorite examples of this.

A 'No' uttered from the deepest conviction is better than a 'Yes' merely uttered to please, or worse, to avoid trouble.

A man who was completely innocent, offered himself as a sacrifice for the good of others, including his enemies, and became the ransom of the world. It was a perfect act.That's right folks, a Hindu man, praising the sacrifice of . That is social commentary aimed at bettering his people.

An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.

Are creeds such simple things like the clothes which a man can change at will and put on at will? Creeds are such for which people live for ages and ages.Good question.

Be the change that you want to see in the world.That is the key. Something I believe another favorite of mine understood when he said this.


But there is something that I must say to my people who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice. In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.


We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force. The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. They have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone.

And...

I have a dream.Amen.

[vta]

The talk of context is a bogus proposition, for anyone able to discern the true message a man is imparting. The good Reverand was quoting another fellow who implicitly said those things for a reason -because he know's of their relevance to his point.

Which was: the Good Lord told him, after 9/11, to do some self-reflection. Reflection of his relationship with God, and with his faith.

The implication of this can only be...?
That the Good Lord has punished thee for thy transgressions.

The individual being a metaphor for the collective; the chickens have in fact, come home to roost for the United States. The relationship between the United States and God has wrought such punishment.

Not much different in it's message from what - who was it, Falwell, Roberts? - had said about 9/11, only in a more eloquent and subversive fashion.

Bravo! We are a creative bunch indeed.

[silverbear]

The only people I have ever seen defend that church group are that church group. I have not seen one other solitary soul on the planet do it. Not extreme anti-gay Conservatives, and not extreme freedom of speech Liberals.

Yes, but again, both are being condemned for it. Maybe if you can show me where someone has defended that church group I would understand.

Oh, now I see what you were getting at... well, I have read where some black ministers have attempted to defend what he did, claiming it's part of the black tradition... that's what I was referring to...

Can I borrow your back? Mine's a little on the busted up side at the moment.

You'd have to take the rest of the package-- diabetes, blood pressure, bad knees and extreme, make babies cry ugliness as well...

I didn't say you were in trouble. I just think using that guy is a bit extreme because I've never heard anyone condone his words or actions.

Should have stuck that cheesy grin smiley after that one... those words were tongue-in-cheek...

[silverbear]

The talk of context is a bogus proposition, for anyone able to discern the true message a man is imparting. The good Reverand was quoting another fellow who implicitly said those things for a reason -because he know's of their relevance to his point.

Which was: the Good Lord told him, after 9/11, to do some self-reflection. Reflection of his relationship with God, and with his faith.

The implication of this can only be...?
That the Good Lord has punished thee for thy transgressions.

The individual being a metaphor for the collective; the chickens have in fact, come home to roost for the United States. The relationship between the United States and God has wrought such punishment.

Not much different in it's message from what - who was it, Falwell, Roberts? - had said about 9/11, only in a more eloquent and subversive fashion.

Bravo! We are a creative bunch indeed.

Hey, Hos, now you've seen someone outside of the Reverend Wrong's church who defends him... :D

[vta]

Hey, Hos, now you've seen someone outside of the Reverend Wrong's church who defends him... :D

:eek:

That reads as a defense of him?

[REDVOLUTION]

He has never preached hate. Ever.

If you play the audio backwards you can hear him singing... chanting.... kumbayah

:rolleyes:


It can be spun many ways... he may even have some valid points.. but there is hatred in there.

[iceberg]

Oh, now I see what you were getting at... well, I have read where some black ministers have attempted to defend what he did, claiming it's part of the black tradition... that's what I was referring to...


if that's the case how come they can preach hate but white people can't?

neither side should do it. period.

[silverbear]

if that's the case how come they can preach hate but white people can't?

neither side should do it. period.

Oh, I most assuredly concur on that, ice... I hope you didn't think I was offering any defense of the Reverend Wrong...

[WoodysGirl]

if that's the case how come they can preach hate but white people can't?

neither side should do it. period.It's not a matter of whether black people preach hate and white people can't.

It just seems there's a huge misunderstanding as to what is taught in a black church. Hate is never taught nor is it generally part of any ministry from the pulpit. And based on snippets from one minister, now there seems to be this thought black churches teach hate.

There have been several articles posted as to how ministers, not just from black churches, feel about Rev. Wright's comments and the message he was trying to convey. I'd honestly like to see more than a few snippets before I can say one way or the other how I feel about it all. I just like to see entire things before saying "Oh yeah, that guy missed the boat"

I think the point that is universally missed by many, whether you agree certain things should be preached from the pulpit, is that current events and world politics have always been part of a black church's experience.

It's not heavily-filled with political rhetoric, but when something in the world happens, I feel ministers are duty-bound to address their congregation, even if I don't necessarily agree with their positions or how they present them.

[ZeroClub]

On several of today's (Sunday) morning news shows many of the talking heads said that they were surprised by how little the Rev. Wright "news story" has hurt Obama.

Apparently, many are seeing through the story.

And Obama may just have the Teflon that Reagan used to wear.

[Hostile]

It's not a matter of whether black people preach hate and white people can't.

It just seems there's a huge misunderstanding as to what is taught in a black church. Hate is never taught nor is it generally part of any ministry from the pulpit. And based on snippets from one minister, now there seems to be this thought black churches teach hate.I don't know anyone who thinks that all Black churches preach hate WG. I know a lot of people who think that man did. I am extremely uncomfortable with his words.

There have been several articles posted as to how ministers, not just from black churches, feel about Rev. Wright's comments and the message he was trying to convey. I'd honestly like to see more than a few snippets before I can say one way or the other how I feel about it all. I just like to see entire things before saying "Oh yeah, that guy missed the boat"

I think the point that is universally missed by many, whether you agree certain things should be preached from the pulpit, is that current events and world politics have always been part of a black church's experience. I get what you are saying, but how is dredging up the past moving anyone forward? How did Reverend Wright's speech provide progress? I honestly can't see it. Simply put, I am scared to death of the man. No joke, I fear that man having a powerful voice in any community. Why? Because he is eloquent, and educated, and captivating and he has the power to sway masses. Swaying those masses with words filled with hate just frightens me beyond description.

It's not heavily-filled with political rhetoric, but when something in the world happens, I feel ministers are duty-bound to address their congregation, even if I don't necessarily agree with their positions or how they present them.It depends on how much influence they are trying to have over how the event in question is viewed. I don't find political commentary in the scriptures. I find messages about how to work on my own character and salvation.

If I want political commentary I'll read the Internet or turn on CNN (or whatever channel it is that you guys out there adhere to). If I want Reverend Wright's views on politics, I would ask him personally. Same for any Pastor of any church. If I want your political thoughts, I don't want to go to church to have to hear them. If I want to talk to you about God I'm not going to suggest we go to a topless bar.

There is a time and a place for everything, and at times I think we make bad choices about where we choose to confront things. I personally don't think church is the right place to denounce the President of the United States. I wouldn't do it if he walked right up to me and slapped me in the face. I just am not wired that way.

If his comments stuck to the social morass of the people in his flock, that would be one thing. Barack Obama hmself said it best.

But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial. They weren’t simply a religious leader’s effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country — a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.

As such, Reverend Wright’s comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems...Endemic means natural to. In other words, he is saying that Reverend Wright feels all Whites are racist. I can understand why he says this. It is exactly what I thought as I watched the transcripts of his speeches. I can't tell you how mortifying that is to me, a man who has taken pride in the fact that not only am I not racist, my children are not.

This is strong language by Senator Obama and it is directed right at a man who is his friend. If he, a close personal friend, and even an ally of Reverend Wright in some ways, sees this bent in those words, why is it so hard to understand why others would also? I like what he said about these messages elevate what is wrong about America above what is right about America.

That moves me. That makes me want to shake Mr. Obama's hand. That is the kind of message we need. That is the kind of thinking that could earn my vote.

If all you ever do is castigate a child for their faults, and never praise their goodness, that child will grow up feeling worthless. Why is that not also true of a generation, race, or ethnic group of people? I believe it is.

There's a huge dichotomy for me between Senator Obama's words of hope and Reverend Wright's words of hate. Because that's exactly the emotion I feel when I listen to him. I feel his hatred. Of me, of this country, of affluence among Whites. Is every rich White person in this country racist, and keeping the Black man down? That encompasses an awful lot of people doesn't it?

I mentioned Dr. King before and quoted a part of his "I have a dream" speech that isn't often part of the blurbs you see about it. That speech affected 2 men I have discussed in this post besides me. One is Barack Obama, and the other is Reverend Wright. I feel Barack Obama took those words to heart and has set out to make a difference in this world. I feel Reverend Wright turned his back on them and has neglected a gift that he clearly has.

No joke, honest to goodness fear. Sorry for the intrusion.

[Hostile]

On several of today's (Sunday) morning news shows many of the talking heads said that they were surprised by how little the Rev. Wright "news story" has hurt Obama.

Apparently, many are seeing through the story.

And Obama may just have the Teflon that Reagan used to wear.IMO it shouldn't "hurt" him. We need progress past those messages and he is a man who can hopefully make it.

[DFWJC]

If that was not hate speach, then there is no such thing.

[WoodysGirl]

I don't know anyone who thinks that all Black churches preach hate WG. I know a lot of people who think that man did. I am extremely uncomfortable with his words. I can respect that. What he said was very inflammatory.

I get what you are saying, but how is dredging up the past moving anyone forward? How did Reverend Wright's speech provide progress? I couldn't say whether it does or doesn't, because I haven't seen the entirety of his sermon. So while it's easy to simply denounce the words he stated, I'd really like to know in what context they were spoken. That's just me. Part of my background is as an information gatherer. So while I've seen all the vids, and I don't have to agree with what I've seen or what was stated, it was just like watching highlights of a football game to me. It doesn't tell the whole story. I want to know the whole story.

I honestly can't see it. Simply put, I am scared to death of the man. No joke, I fear that man having a powerful voice in any community. Why? Because he is eloquent, and educated, and captivating and he has the power to sway masses. Swaying those masses with words filled with hate just frightens me beyond description.As I stated before, I'd really like to see the whole sermon. In these days and times, a man doesn't become as successful as he's obviously been over the years by simply preaching hate. From reading a transcript of one of his sermons, and reading just a bit on him, it's obvious he uses his words to push the envelope. So I can understand that people might not want to read up on the guy to see if all he's ever taught is hate.

It depends on how much influence they are trying to have over how the event in question is viewed. I don't find political commentary in the scriptures. I find messages about how to work on my own character and salvation. Even we don't allow religious commentary in this forum, the biggest issue many of them find with that restriction is that their religous beliefs often drives their political beliefs.

If I want political commentary I'll read the Internet or turn on CNN (or whatever channel it is that you guys out there adhere to). If I want Reverend Wright's views on politics, I would ask him personally. Same for any Pastor of any church. If I want your political thoughts, I don't want to go to church to have to hear them. If I want to talk to you about God I'm not going to suggest we go to a topless bar.Well obviously that's your approach to your relationship with God, and there's not a thing wrong with it. It's just not something I see as an issue. I've learned from my parents the power of discernment.

There is a time and a place for everything, and at times I think we make bad choices about where we choose to confront things. I personally don't think church is the right place to denounce the President of the United States. I wouldn't do it if he walked right up to me and slapped me in the face. I just am not wired that way.

If his comments stuck to the social morass of the people in his flock, that would be one thing. Barack Obama hmself said it best.

Endemic means natural to. In other words, he is saying that Reverend Wright feels all Whites are racist. I can understand why he says this. It is exactly what I thought as I watched the transcripts of his speeches. I can't tell you how mortifying that is to me, a man who has taken pride in the fact that not only am I not racist, my children are not.

This is strong language by Senator Obama and it is directed right at a man who is his friend. If he, a close personal friend, and even an ally of Reverend Wright in some ways, sees this bent in those words, why is it so hard to understand why others would also? I like what he said about these messages elevate what is wrong about America above what is right about America.

That moves me. That makes me want to shake Mr. Obama's hand. That is the kind of message we need. That is the kind of thinking that could earn my vote.I think Obama gave a very good speech. One that needed to be said. But I don't buy his message 100%. I think for his political career, he needed to put Rev. Wright in a box.

If all you ever do is castigate a child for their faults, and never praise their goodness, that child will grow up feeling worthless. Why is that not also true of a generation, race, or ethnic group of people? I believe it is. Of coursee it is and we don't know that Rev. Wright or other ministers in that church have not praised this nation. All we've seen are soundbites.

There's a huge dichotomy for me between Senator Obama's words of hope and Reverend Wright's words of hate. Because that's exactly the emotion I feel when I listen to him. I feel his hatred. Of me, of this country, of affluence among Whites. Is every rich White person in this country racist, and keeping the Black man down? That encompasses an awful lot of people doesn't it?I can understand you feel that way. He used some very strong language. And it's obvious from the vids that he obviously has alot of anger in him. I don't agree with that stance, but I still would like to see these sermons in their entirety. For my generation, I don't believe that racism has prevented my success. It's like I stated in another thread, I think issues like this will slowly fade as past generations who were actively involved in imposing and those who were victims of racism are no longer around.

I mentioned Dr. King before and quoted a part of his "I have a dream" speech that isn't often part of the blurbs you see about it. That speech affected 2 men I have discussed in this post besides me. One is Barack Obama, and the other is Reverend Wright. I feel Barack Obama took those words to heart and has set out to make a difference in this world. I feel Reverend Wright turned his back on them and has neglected a gift that he clearly has.

No joke, honest to goodness fear. Sorry for the intrusion.I don't think you can really separate Rev. Wright's influence over Obama. Obama spiritual guide has been Wright all these years. Obama has filtered Wright's message, but the foundation was laid by Rev. Wright 20 years ago. You just don't gain the respect he has from people of all different walks of life by just preaching hate. I think that gets forgotten when looking at some of these vids on Youtube.

And just to be clear, this is not about supporting Rev. Wright or denouncing him, I just don't feel like the whole story has been told.

[Hostile]

As I stated before, I'd really like to see the whole sermon. In these days and times, a man doesn't become as successful as he's obviously been over the years by simply preaching hate. From reading a transcript of one of his sermons, and reading just a bit on him, it's obvious he uses his words to push the envelope. So I can understand that people might not want to read up on the guy to see if all he's ever taught is hate. Some men do WG. Adolf Hitler comes to mind immediately. Hate is a very powerful rallying cry. Please don't underestimate it.

I think Obama gave a very good speech. One that needed to be said. But I don't buy his message 100%. I think for his political career, he needed to put Rev. Wright in a box. There is a part of me that believes that could be very true. There is a bigger part of me that feels he means it. I might even say there is a part of me that longs for him to mean it.

I can understand you feel that way. He used some very strong language. And it's obvious from the vids that he obviously has alot of anger in him. I don't agree with that stance, but I still would like to see these sermons in their entirety. For my generation, I don't believe that racism has prevented my success. It's like I stated in another thread, I think issues like this will slowly fade as past generations who were actively involved in imposing and those who were victims of racism are no longer around.I wouldn't want to see any more. I hope I never see them again. Similar to the rantings of Reverend Jim Jones urging his followers to kill their children. He scares me that much.

And just to be clear, this is not about supporting Rev. Wright or denouncing him, I just don't feel like the whole story has been told.The sooner we move past this man's messages the better. No good can come from examining them deeper that I can see. I'd much rather focus on the words said in denouncing him. Whether that was an attempt at saving his political life or not, at least it was about hope.

[WoodysGirl]

Some men do WG. Adolf Hitler comes to mind immediately. Hate is a very powerful rallying cry. Please don't underestimate it.I don't underestimate it all. Call me naive, but that was in a different era. I just think in today's times, I don't know that you can build such a following, teaching only hate.

There is a part of me that believes that could be very true. There is a bigger part of me that feels he means it. I might even say there is a part of me that longs for him to mean it.Nothing wrong with wanting to believe Obama was sincere. I believe the majority of his speech was sincere. I just don't buy some of it as it pertains to Rev. Wright.

I wouldn't want to see any more. I hope I never see them again. Similar to the rantings of Reverend Jim Jones urging his followers to kill their children. He scares me that much.It's your right to be scared. I just think it's a bit overkill. In no way do I think Rev. Wright is on that level. That much I have discerned from reading certain articles.

The sooner we move past this man's messages the better. No good can come from examining them deeper that I can see. I'd much rather focus on the words said in denouncing him. Whether that was an attempt at saving his political life or not, at least it was about hope.It's ok to want to move past something. I prefer to study it. I'm not interesting in engaging in discussion with the man, but I just like to see for myself. See if someone is as one-dimensional as he or she is portrayed. If I have the time, I'll always try to go to a speech or forum to see what someone is about.

I do believe Obama is wanting to present hope to the country. I simply believe that he also had to do a little political spin, as well. His speech saved him.

[Hostile]

I don't underestimate it all. Call me naive, but that was in a different era. I just think in today's times, I don't know that you can build such a following, teaching only hate. The Church in Kansas that Silverbear mentioned is an example, though I acknowledge they are not exactly growing.

What about the radical elements of Islam that are perverting the words of their religious text and urging disenfranchised Muslims to join their cause with their very lives, while they themselves never offer their lives, and in fact when confronted give up?

I do believe Obama is wanting to present hope to the country. I simply believe that he also had to do a little political spin, as well. His speech saved him.Whether he is elected President or not, I hope he becomes someone who will push that message forward. If he doesn't, what a lost opportunity.

[Sasquatch]

"God D*MN America"...

My comments are limited to this particular phrase.

I think the quote needs to placed in its full context in order to have a more accurate discussion.

The infamous phrase was uttered as a condemnation of a litany of historical "crimes" committed by "America" (government, institutions, and individuals) against people of color: the systematic destruction of native American culture, dispossession of their lands guaranteed by treaties, and their confinement to bantustands/reservations, the systematic enslavement, degradation, and dehumanization of people of African descent, and the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII. The condemnation was conditional: "so long as America thinks she is above God and superior" or some such thing.

Is it racist if it doesn't condemn people for their skin color or for their sexual orientation but only for actions that have been deliberate, systematic, discriminatory, harmful to entire peoples, and, according to Reverend Wright, against the higher law of God, whatever that may be?

[WoodysGirl]

The Church in Kansas that Silverbear mentioned is an example, though I acknowledge they are not exactly growing.

What about the radical elements of Islam that are perverting the words of their religious text and urging disenfranchised Muslims to join their cause with their very lives, while they themselves never offer their lives, and in fact when confronted give up?Believe it or not, I was thinking only of US race relations.

I had not heard of the church in Kansas, but it wouldn't surprise me if there are some religious-based entities that do preach only hate. However, it still goes back to the question of how a man who has risen so high and was considered a well-respected minister until now to only preach hate. "only" being the operative word.

I haven't sat in on any of his sermons so I can't say what he preaches on a regular basis, but I just don't know if Hate is primary lesson being taught.

Whether he is elected President or not, I hope he becomes someone who will push that message forward. If he doesn't, what a lost opportunity.Well Obama was very active in the Chicago community before he became a senator, so I think he'll continue his work. My dad talks all the time about how he's met people who has worked with Obama on some community thing or other throughout the years. We'll find out soon enough if he doesn't win the presidency.

[jay cee]

You're kidding... right?

Please don't tell me his comments were ambiguous and devoid of accusation against whites...

My first response was deleted so I will try again, Trick.

Reverend Wright made specific accusations against the U.S. In the brief statements that I saw, He did not accuse white people of anything.

So how can he be preaching hate against White people only.

If you feel that way, IMO, you are suggesting that white's have more of a claim to America than others. I reject that viewpoint.

I personally feel that Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell are just as much to blame for the mess that is Iraq as Bush and Cheney. And that they are just as much Americans Bush and Cheney.

And deserve their share of criticism as Americans.

[Hostile]

Believe it or not, I was thinking only of US race relations.

I had not heard of the church in Kansas, but it wouldn't surprise me if there are some religious-based entities that do preach only hate. However, it still goes back to the question of how a man who has risen so high and was considered a well-respected minister until now to only preach hate. "only" being the operative word. I don't know WG. I can't explain Jim Jones either. I can't explain any other number of religious men who are able to use their words and sway masses of people and at times take their great gift of persuasion and us it to further ill will. I can't do it.

I just know a dear friend of this man has denounced his words as not being endemic or a true representation of the America he loves. I'm not a dear friend of this man so I am naturally more critical.

I haven't sat in on any of his sermons so I can't say what he preaches on a regular basis, but I just don't know if Hate is primary lesson being taught.I never sat in on Hitler's speeches either. I doubt every word he said was hateful, sinister, anti-semitic, and blood thirsty. But look where his speeches led.

Primary lesson, underlying theme, don't really care. Scared of the man.

[Jon88]

I never sat in on Hitler's speeches either. I doubt every word he said was hateful, sinister, anti-semitic, and blood thirsty. But look where his speeches led.

Primary lesson, underlying theme, don't really care. Scared of the man.


He's retired now. You know, he stands out in a crowd IMO. I wonder how well he'll be recieved by the general public when he gets back from vacation?

[WoodysGirl]

He's retired now. You know, he stands out in a crowd IMO. I wonder how well he'll be recieved by the general public when he gets back from vacation?
Just FYI, but he's not necessarily on vacation. He's had a series of sermons canceled due to security concerns. Basically, there were concerns not necessarily for him, but for the attendees. At least that's what I read from when they announced his speaking engagement in Houston had been postponed.

Just from what I've been reading, he still has several speaking engagements scheduled, just not sure if he's going to continue with them or not.

[silverbear]

It's not a matter of whether black people preach hate and white people can't.

It just seems there's a huge misunderstanding as to what is taught in a black church. Hate is never taught nor is it generally part of any ministry from the pulpit. And based on snippets from one minister, now there seems to be this thought black churches teach hate.

I certainly don't believe that to be the case, and if I conveyed that impression, let me quickly apologize... not all black churches are the same, just like white churches are not all the same... for that matter, I don't know if that church is still exactly the same, since the Reverend Wrong retired...

I've never believed that one man defines a church...

I think the point that is universally missed by many, whether you agree certain things should be preached from the pulpit, is that current events and world politics have always been part of a black church's experience.

It's not heavily-filled with political rhetoric, but when something in the world happens, I feel ministers are duty-bound to address their congregation, even if I don't necessarily agree with their positions or how they present them.

I don't quite agree, WG, but my disagreement here is evenhanded... I see the legitimacy of tackling social injustice head on from the pulpit, and sometimes that crosses over into politics... but I do not think ANY church should be involved in politics, if only because our political system calls for a separation of church and state... if that means government stays out of church business, it also means that church should stay out of government business...

But the worst offenders of that have always been white ministers, IMO, the Falwells and Robertsons of the world...

I think what I'm saying is there's a fine line that should not be crossed... I can't define where that line is, all I can say is I know it when I see it... perhaps one of the indicators is what is true in the Reverend Wrong case, where he's preaching anger, but not offering any solutions...

A good minister could have made any legitimate points the Reverend Wrong was trying to make without the angry rhetoric... to me, church is not an appropriate place to willfully set about making people angrier, it should be a place where angry people can come to find some peace, even if only briefly...

[silverbear]

This has turned into one of the best threads I've ever read in the Politics Forum, with a number of people "debating" in a calm and rational manner, and making excellent points... in particular, WoodysGirl and Hostile have nudged this in the direction of an extremely interesting dialogue...

I guess that's what happens when two intelligent people who have long liked each other disagree... it's clear that you're both looking more to understand each other, rather than pushing your own views in a defensive manner...

It's a beautiful thing, really... :D

[silverbear]

I don't underestimate it all. Call me naive, but that was in a different era. I just think in today's times, I don't know that you can build such a following, teaching only hate.

Isn't that Rush's modus operandi, to try to get his listeners to hate all things liberal??

He's not nearly as extreme as Hitler, it's true, but my point is there are a lot of folks on the fringes of politics who have made their name fomenting anger, even hatred...

It's a big part of what's wrong with politics these days, this "us versus them" mentality from our alleged leaders on both sides of the aisle...

It's your right to be scared. I just think it's a bit overkill. In no way do I think Rev. Wright is on that level. That much I have discerned from reading certain articles.

At this point, I don't see him as something to be scared of, but I could see him gaining great influence within a certain sector of our country as a result of the exposure his opinions have received... I see the potential for him to become a dangerous influence...

It's ok to want to move past something. I prefer to study it. I'm not interesting in engaging in discussion with the man, but I just like to see for myself. See if someone is as one-dimensional as he or she is portrayed. If I have the time, I'll always try to go to a speech or forum to see what someone is about.

That's to your credit, I think... you believe that in order to reach a valid conclusion, you need as many facts as can possibly muster...

[silverbear]

My comments are limited to this particular phrase.

I think the quote needs to placed in its full context in order to have a more accurate discussion.

The infamous phrase was uttered as a condemnation of a litany of historical "crimes" committed by "America" (government, institutions, and individuals) against people of color: the systematic destruction of native American culture, dispossession of their lands guaranteed by treaties, and their confinement to bantustands/reservations, the systematic enslavement, degradation, and dehumanization of people of African descent, and the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII. The condemnation was conditional: "so long as America thinks she is above God and superior" or some such thing.

Is it racist if it doesn't condemn people for their skin color or for their sexual orientation but only for actions that have been deliberate, systematic, discriminatory, harmful to entire peoples, and, according to Reverend Wright, against the higher law of God, whatever that may be?

And it doesn't strike you as wrong, a purported man of God, violating one of the Ten Commandments from the pulpit?? You do remember "thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain", don't you??

He could easily have made the point by saying "God will curse America" or "God will condemn America"... I still would have had a problem with that view too, but it went WAY over the top with "God D*MN America"... it appears that he doesn't realize that his congregation is all American, so he's calling down God's wrath upon his own flock...

Yeah, what a "man of God"...

Politics aside, if I'd been sitting in that congregation, I would have stood up and walked out, first making sure that everyone present knew that I thought this was WRONG... my voice carries, I'm pretty sure everybody would hear me... and I'd never set foot in THAT church again, until and unless they fired that minister's sorry a$$...

[silverbear]

Believe it or not, I was thinking only of US race relations.

I had not heard of the church in Kansas, but it wouldn't surprise me if there are some religious-based entities that do preach only hate.

I'm surprised to hear there's anybody in this country who hadn't heard about those jagoffs... they're the "congregation" (mostly consisting of the "minister's" relatives) that goes around the country protesting at the funerals of our soldiers slain in combat, expressing their belief that the war in Iraq is God's punishment for our "tolerance" of homosexuality... they disrupt the services, express their joy at the soldier's death, carry signs that say "God Hates F*gs"...

I used them as a point of comparison, but the truth is, they go FAR beyond the worst the Reverend Wrong has done...

However, it still goes back to the question of how a man who has risen so high and was considered a well-respected minister until now to only preach hate. "only" being the operative word.

I'll bet he's delivered a lot of sermons that none of us would find objectionable... it's probably only a few sermons out of thousands that are at the root of all of this... but they're bad enough...

[Sasquatch]

And it doesn't strike you as wrong, a purported man of God, violating one of the Ten Commandments from the pulpit?? You do remember "thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain", don't you??

My question was more about the racist content of those words.

What does it mean, by the way, to take the Lord's name in vain? That's a serious question because some seem to make a distinction between the word damn and condemn, whereas based on the clip, I understood damn to mean the same thing as condemn.

[Hostile]

My question was more about the racist content of those words.Once again, I quote Mr. Obama.

On the other end, we've heard my former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike.Sound like it was viewed as racist to you?

I'll keep posting this one until someone can dismiss it...

Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country - a view that sees white racism as endemic (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/endemic), and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America...This time I have provided the definition of the word endemic. Maybe it will finally not be the elephant in the corner. Then again, I won't hold my breath.

What does it mean, by the way, to take the Lord's name in vain? That's a serious question because some seem to make a distinction between the word damn and condemn, whereas based on the clip, I understood damn to mean the same thing as condemn.Don't ask Reverend Wright.

You know what the "good" Reverend said? That's what it means.

I doubt if a stranger said "condemn you" that it would upset you. However it might be different if he said "damn you." It is the inclusion of the Lord's name that makes it offensive to me.

[silverbear]

My question was more about the racist content of those words.

What does it mean, by the way, to take the Lord's name in vain? That's a serious question because some seem to make a distinction between the word damn and condemn, whereas based on the clip, I understood damn to mean the same thing as condemn.

To me, saying "god d*mn" anybody is taking the Lord's name in vain... and yes, I've done it, way too often... but I'm not standing in a pulpit, and if I ever was, I'd be real careful not to violate one of the Ten Commandments, especially not to make a rhetorical point...

I perceived some of what the Reverend said as racist, but I couldn't exactly tell you why...

[Sasquatch]

To me, saying "god d*mn" anybody is taking the Lord's name in vain... and yes, I've done it, way too often... but I'm not standing in a pulpit, and if I ever was, I'd be real careful not to violate one of the Ten Commandments, especially not to make a rhetorical point...

I perceived some of what the Reverend said as racist, but I couldn't exactly tell you why...

I haven't been in a church for some time, so I appreciate you guys (Hos and SB) answering the question in an even tempered manner.

I'm just trying to gauge what is informing people's reaction to the controversy.

[Dallas]

I haven't been in a church for some time, so I appreciate you guys (Hos and SB) answering the question in an even tempered manner.

I'm just trying to gauge what is informing people's reaction to the controversy.

You can always come to church w/ me Sassy. We could even do fellowship afterwards. I make a mean cobbler. :cool:

[Hostile]

You can always come to church w/ me Sassy. We could even do fellowship afterwards. I make a mean cobbler. :cool:I do too, but only in a Dutch oven over a campfire.

Dang, now I want to go camping really bad.

[Dallas]

I do too, but only in a Dutch oven over a campfire.

Dang, now I want to go camping really bad.


DUDE !!! That is awesome. I don't mean to get OT here but I watch the Campfire cookoffs the other day. It was held in AZ and they were doing the whole covered wagon thing and dutch ovens and cooking in the ground. Everyone was dressed up like the old west days.

It was AWESOME. I want to go down there next year and just watch them. They setup camp out in some barren valley and go to town on that food prep. They get judged on theme/prep/menu/authenticity in regards to everything from the wagon to the weels to the food to the utensils.

Looks really fun.

[Hostile]

DUDE !!! That is awesome. I don't mean to get OT here but I watch the Campfire cookoffs the other day. It was held in AZ and they were doing the whole covered wagon thing and dutch ovens and cooking in the ground. Everyone was dressed up like the old west days.

It was AWESOME. I want to go down there next year and just watch them. They setup camp out in some barren valley and go to town on that food prep. They get judged on theme/prep/menu/authenticity in regards to everything from the wagon to the weels to the food to the utensils.

Looks really fun.I have to find it, but I wrote a story about a man named Hosea Goodwin. He was an old cowboy in my hometown who was one of the last of the chuck wagon cooks in the old days of the trail herds, etc.

He was an artist with a Dutch oven and a story. I think you'd love it.

I learned some stuff from him, but I am not 25% of what he could do. He had a 3 way divider he made for his Dutch oven that made it so he could cook 3 different things at the same time in one pot. He could make beans in one, potatos and onions in another, and steak in the 3rd. He'd cook sourdough biscuits on the lid.

Man I miss him.

[silverbear]

I haven't been in a church for some time, so I appreciate you guys (Hos and SB) answering the question in an even tempered manner.

Hey, I don't have many allies in here, I'm not about to jump down YOUR throat... LOL...

I'm just trying to gauge what is informing people's reaction to the controversy.

I understood completely...

[silverbear]

I do too, but only in a Dutch oven over a campfire.

Dang, now I want to go camping really bad.

My blood sugar is elevating just reading this thread... you guys are tryin' to kill me, aren't you??

My sweet tooth is now officially in overdrive, thanks a bunch... get thee behind me, Satan... :D

[Hostile]

My blood sugar is elevating just reading this thread... you guys are tryin' to kill me, aren't you??

My sweet tooth is now officially in overdrive, thanks a bunch... get thee behind me, Satan... :DBlueberry cobler from a Dutch oven over a campfire after tinfoil dinners is my idea of heaven on a campout.

I think I'm going to go camping within the next 2 weeks. I think I'm going to need it after this thread.

[Dallas]

Blueberry cobler from a Dutch oven over a campfire after tinfoil dinners is my idea of heaven on a campout.

I think I'm going to go camping within the next 2 weeks. I think I'm going to need it after this thread.

My specia'l is Peach Cobbler. Ive not tried the Blueberry. It sounds superb though.

I tell you what. I will send you my mamas Peach Cobbler recipe tomorrow sometime.

Let me warn you. It will make you smack yo Gramma from the table its so good.

[big dog cowboy]

I had not heard of the church in Kansas
I have first hand knowledge of it.

You really don't want to go there WG.

[trickblue]

My first response was deleted so I will try again, Trick.

Reverend Wright made specific accusations against the U.S. In the brief statements that I saw, He did not accuse white people of anything.

So how can he be preaching hate against White people only.

If you feel that way, IMO, you are suggesting that white's have more of a claim to America than others. I reject that viewpoint.

I personally feel that Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell are just as much to blame for the mess that is Iraq as Bush and Cheney. And that they are just as much Americans Bush and Cheney.

And deserve their share of criticism as Americans.

I was basing it on the entire context, not that single quote...

I agree that AMERICANS should be held at fault for things in this country and not specific races/creeds...

[heavyg]

And it doesn't strike you as wrong, a purported man of God, violating one of the Ten Commandments from the pulpit?? You do remember "thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain", don't you??

He could easily have made the point by saying "God will curse America" or "God will condemn America"... I still would have had a problem with that view too, but it went WAY over the top with "God D*MN America"... it appears that he doesn't realize that his congregation is all American, so he's calling down God's wrath upon his own flock...

Yeah, what a "man of God"...

Politics aside, if I'd been sitting in that congregation, I would have stood up and walked out, first making sure that everyone present knew that I thought this was WRONG... my voice carries, I'm pretty sure everybody would hear me... and I'd never set foot in THAT church again, until and unless they fired that minister's sorry a$$...


WOW I can't believe I agree with you 100%. :bow:

[silverbear]

WOW I can't believe I agree with you 100%. :bow:

Had to happen sometime, wild man... LOL...

[Sasquatch]

Hey, I don't have many allies in here, I'm not about to jump down YOUR throat... LOL...

http://www.javno.com/slike/slike_3/r1/g2007/m03/x93135202333537155.jpg

:D

[Hostile]

If it wasn't a hate speech why did Barrack Obama denounce it as one? Who it was against is irrelevant to me. His actions and comments, are not.I continue to wonder if those who do not see Reverend Wright's comments as racist in nature will ever answer this. Why did Senator Obama denounce his comments as exactly that and say...

On the other end, we've heard my former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike.

...and...

Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country - a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America...

Where is the honest response to these points? I've responded honestly to every point asked of me except one which I saw as a transparent attempt to take the discussion down a slippery slope.

Endemic. Widen the racial divide. Not my words.

I'm not allowed to see Reverend Wright's comments as racial, but Mr. Obama is?

Tell me why.

[REDVOLUTION]

if that's the case how come they can preach hate but white people can't?

I think can be considered a general statement.
I think this is a valid question.

Agreed that it should not be done anyways.



It's not a matter of whether black people preach hate and white people can't.

In todays society it is true. One can say something and pretty much get a pass and the other cant. There is no denying that.

I dont like it. I dont like the divide. Racism and division is a creation of all mankind. It really is illogical.

[Dallas]

I think can be considered a general statement.
I think this is a valid question.

Agreed that it should not be done anyways.





In todays society it is true. One can say something and pretty much get a pass and the other cant. There is no denying that.

I dont like it. I dont like the divide. Racism and division is a creation of all mankind. It really is illogical.

With all do respect to my fav lady on the board WG, I completly agree w/ this.

[iceberg]

It's not a matter of whether black people preach hate and white people can't.

It just seems there's a huge misunderstanding as to what is taught in a black church. Hate is never taught nor is it generally part of any ministry from the pulpit. And based on snippets from one minister, now there seems to be this thought black churches teach hate.

There have been several articles posted as to how ministers, not just from black churches, feel about Rev. Wright's comments and the message he was trying to convey. I'd honestly like to see more than a few snippets before I can say one way or the other how I feel about it all. I just like to see entire things before saying "Oh yeah, that guy missed the boat"

I think the point that is universally missed by many, whether you agree certain things should be preached from the pulpit, is that current events and world politics have always been part of a black church's experience.

It's not heavily-filled with political rhetoric, but when something in the world happens, I feel ministers are duty-bound to address their congregation, even if I don't necessarily agree with their positions or how they present them.

hate is hate, wg. also, i'm not just talking about "hate" preaching. i'm talking about blacks in general can get away with racism simply because they were a victim of it for so long.

when are we even and when can we put racism down? when can i stop paying for the sins of those before me who were also white but may not have hated or owned any slaves at all? when do i stop paying for the past i never commited? when is enough enough? not with a major preacher preaching it and us accepting it because...well there's simply no reason to accept it from him, a jew, hitler, me, you - anyone.

if you find a way to excuse it for one man, you have to let everyone do it regardless of race and for reasons of their own we may or may not accept as a society. "you have to understand" doesn't just go one way. esp if one way is full of hate.

[iceberg]

also - born and raised roman catholic for whatever that is worth. in church, we studied God and and his word.

i don't recall any priest ever giving me a speech on nixon or carter or the like. not saying one is right or wrong, just saying i don't go to church to get into a political debate with someone who's view of the world is driven by a 2000 year old book written in a language not directly translatable to english.

on my own time i may talk to them about it and get their input, but i went to church to learn my religion, not why politics sucks. i learned that off the streets. : )

[BrAinPaiNt]

also - born and raised roman catholic for whatever that is worth. in church, we studied God and and his word.

i don't recall any priest ever giving me a speech on nixon or carter or the like. not saying one is right or wrong, just saying i don't go to church to get into a political debate with someone who's view of the world is driven by a 2000 year old book written in a language not directly translatable to english.

on my own time i may talk to them about it and get their input, but i went to church to learn my religion, not why politics sucks. i learned that off the streets. : )

Yah I said about the same thing earlier...not hearing political speak in church when I went.

However to be fair...I was not a minority with a history of abuse to my people either...so who knows, it probably is different and more widely talked about than what we are used to with our own experiences.

[iceberg]

Yah I said about the same thing earlier...not hearing political speak in church when I went.

However to be fair...I was not a minority with a history of abuse to my people either...so who knows, it probably is different and more widely talked about than what we are used to with our own experiences.

no, i agree there will be different experiences from culture to culture, or even church to church. but i simply can't fathom how you can excuse hate as being part of a history when that history is on both sides and not allowed for one.

the south was brought up that way, right? it was wrong, but if you go to that excuse it works all around, not just one way.

and i understand that history and i understand it's going to take time to "come back down" - that's a given. but in order to get there you can't hold your past as a defense for improper action today.

if it's wrong, it's wrong. if you excuse it, you keep it alive. that's just how i see it.

[BrAinPaiNt]

no, i agree there will be different experiences from culture to culture, or even church to church. but i simply can't fathom how you can excuse hate as being part of a history when that history is on both sides and not allowed for one.

the south was brought up that way, right? it was wrong, but if you go to that excuse it works all around, not just one way.

and i understand that history and i understand it's going to take time to "come back down" - that's a given. but in order to get there you can't hold your past as a defense for improper action today.

if it's wrong, it's wrong. if you excuse it, you keep it alive. that's just how i see it.

It will be another generation or two before it calms down to reasonable levels...IF, and this is a big IF, the parents learn enough or the kids just get tired of it. I kind of have my doubts just from hearing racist things on an almost daily basis.

[iceberg]

It will be another generation or two before it calms down to reasonable levels...IF, and this is a big IF, the parents learn enough or the kids just get tired of it. I kind of have my doubts just from hearing racist things on an almost daily basis.

agreed. i do think the 'youth' today is better at it and like i always say - evolution is slow. just not for the impatient at times. : )

i also think as long as people are "different" there will be suspecion. human nature.

[Hostile]

Dr. Charles Drew, the greatest reason ever why racism is ignorant.

For those not familiar, Dr. Drew was a pioneer in the methods of separating blood plasma for transfusions. He pioneered the storage of the blood and all kinds of things so that it could be used to save lives. The techniques he helped to create have saved hundreds of thousands of lives.

Dr. Charles Drew died on the doorstep of Alamance General Hospital in Burlington, North Carolina 58 years ago tomorrow. He died needing a blood transfusion after a car wreck. The hospital wouldn't take him. He was Black.

The methods he had dedicated his life to would have saved his life. He was the first Black surgeon ever to serve on the American Board of Surgery.

Anyone who thinks injustice and racism haven't shaped a harsh past for America is simply not in touch with reality. I agree however with Senator Obama that very real progress has been made. Is it a perfect nation? Of course not, but there is injustice beyond racism and IMO the words of Reverend Wright will never move anyone past racism, quite the contrary I believe those who are actually racist will feed on his words and make things worse.

58 years ago tomorrow, April fools day. You have some racist thoughts in you? Tomorrow's your day.

[vta]

Racism was not born in the United States, nor was slavery.
Not many countries are given to such self-scrutiny, let alone go to war with themselves, partly over abolishing the mal-treatment of other human beings, and partake in such exercises of self flagellation over it's past ills.

The United States is a nation built on rectifying it's wrongs and it's history of doing so is just as rich as are it's own past failings. The truth comes out and it gets fixed through conflict, dialogue and determination and because of that we progress.

We're free to be individual racist's and bigot's if we so wish, but this country's laws and institutions stand above the individual. Damn America all you want, you're allowed to. Thankfully.

[jay cee]

I continue to wonder if those who do not see Reverend Wright's comments as racist in nature will ever answer this. Why did Senator Obama denounce his comments as exactly that and say...
...and...
Where is the honest response to these points? I've responded honestly to every point asked of me except one which I saw as a transparent attempt to take the discussion down a slippery slope.
Endemic. Widen the racial divide. Not my words.
I'm not allowed to see Reverend Wright's comments as racial, but Mr. Obama is?
Tell me why.

Simple, Obama may really see just as you see it.

I happen to disagree with Obama's stance on this point. Are you saying that you agree with everything the man says.

Well I think it is alright for me to disagree with him on this issue, as I am sure that you probably disagree with his view on some other issues.

[jay cee]

I was basing it on the entire context, not that single quote...

I agree that AMERICANS should be held at fault for things in this country and not specific races/creeds...

What entire context? They showed the entire speech and he verbally attacked a specific race?

[REDVOLUTION]

It will be another generation or two before it calms down to reasonable levels...IF, and this is a big IF, the parents learn enough or the kids just get tired of it. I kind of have my doubts just from hearing racist things on an almost daily basis.


I agree it will take generations and it will eventually fall off.

Whats happening now and has been happening is the dilution of the pure ethnicities.

Everybody should just bop everyone(like they are doing) and then there will only be on multicultural race..... coming full circle in a way. We started off as one race and we end up as one race. The only division is the one's we created. We=ALL

[Hostile]

Simple, Obama may really see just as you see it.

I happen to disagree with Obama's stance on this point. Are you saying that you agree with everything the man says.

Well I think it is alright for me to disagree with him on this issue, as I am sure that you probably disagree with his view on some other issues.What a foolish question designed to do nothing more than spin control a weak argument. Don't waste my time.

[REDVOLUTION]

What a foolish question designed to do nothing more than spin control a weak argument. Don't waste my time.


Spinning...

The more Obama and his defenders talk about this reminds me of when I would fly a kite down the streets of brooklyn where there were many trees... at first I could outmanuever one or two trees... then it got caught in the branches and I pulled and pulled and it got more and more tangled.... but at the end of the day my kite was still stuck.

Keep talking Obama and co.

[Hostile]

Spinning...

The more Obama and his defenders talk about this reminds me of when I would fly a kite down the streets of brooklyn where there were many trees... at first I could outmanuever one or two trees... then it got caught in the branches and I pulled and pulled and it got more and more tangled.... but at the end of the day my kite was still stuck.

Keep talking Obama and co.Please note, at no time have I implicated Barack Obama or any of his followers in what Reverend Wright said.

If jay cee did not hear the racist remarks then he did not listen to the man's words, or he agrees with them and thinks he's being clever.

[iceberg]

What a foolish question designed to do nothing more than spin control a weak argument. Don't waste my time.

ladies and gentlemen, we define this as the quickest smackdown in modern online history.

[REDVOLUTION]

If jay cee did not hear the racist remarks then he did not listen to the man's words, or he agrees with them and thinks he's being clever.


And if that were the case then a person like that cannot truly be taken seriously.

Seriously.

[ThreeSportStar80]

I for one have no problems with Rev. Wright's opinions because he spoke a lot of truth...

[iceberg]

I for one have no problems with Rev. Wright's opinions because he spoke a lot of truth...

but was it also stereotyping? truth is easy when not very specific, isn't it?

the simple fact of the matter is if you want to stop hate, stop hating.

i don't hold obama accountable for his reverend. i just can't go there. to a large degree i admire him for holding his own while queen hilllary said whatever she thought she had to say.

and then went snipe hunting. i think she meant there were a lot of snipes in the area that day.

anyway - i don't care what he said either. just be responsible for it when it comes crashing down upon you.

[trickblue]

What entire context? They showed the entire speech and he verbally attacked a specific race?

You are praising the emperor's new clothes while most everyone else realizes he is wearing none...

[iceberg]

You are praising the emperor's new clothes while most everyone else realizes he is wearing none...

buck naked, your honor!

[WoodysGirl]

I think can be considered a general statement.
I think this is a valid question.

Agreed that it should not be done anyways.





In todays society it is true. One can say something and pretty much get a pass and the other cant. There is no denying that.

I dont like it. I dont like the divide. Racism and division is a creation of all mankind. It really is illogical.

With all do respect to my fav lady on the board WG, I completly agree w/ this.Actually I agree with this as well. I personally don't believe in being that hypocritical. But I do think that kind of talk belongs to all sides of that coin.

When first mentioning something like that, you automatically think of the n-word as we so eloquently put it. I don't use the word. I don't like it. I don't like what it stood for. And no matter how many discussions I may have with other black people, I can't convince them how stupid it is to try and justify the use of it.

OTOH, if I know that a word referring to another ethnic group or whatever is offensive, I won't use it. I remember when people would refer to Julius as Jujo, how trick would post something noting his displeasure. Knowing that, I would never use a term like that, even tho I'd never heard of it before trick posted that.

This is not to say trick refers to jewish people as that, but just that there are some terms that are tied to ethnic groups that are only acceptable amongst the group themselves.

hate is hate, wg. also, i'm not just talking about "hate" preaching. i'm talking about blacks in general can get away with racism simply because they were a victim of it for so long.I guess I don't see where a black person can anymore get away with racism than any other race. Racist speech is universal to any ethnic group, but racism and prejudice has never been imposed by black people onto another ethnic group and that's where there will always be a difference in how racism is viewed.

when are we even and when can we put racism down? when can i stop paying for the sins of those before me who were also white but may not have hated or owned any slaves at all? when do i stop paying for the past i never commited? when is enough enough? not with a major preacher preaching it and us accepting it because...well there's simply no reason to accept it from him, a jew, hitler, me, you - anyone.I've said it before and Brain even mentioned it. I think it'll take another generation or two, before this nation can fully move on. And I realize that you think African-Americans should move on and accept that times have changed. I would think that many African Americans would agree that times have changed. But I've said it before, it's hard to move on, when even in 2008, I can still be called "colored" or my little sisters are followed around in stores simply because of their color. There are still so many small injustices being played out against black people that are never publicized that it's hard not to be angry at the situation.

The biggest problems is that so-called African American leaders are considered jokes among their own. But that's a whole 'nother topic and it's too late for me to go into right now.

Yah I said about the same thing earlier...not hearing political speak in church when I went.

However to be fair...I was not a minority with a history of abuse to my people either...so who knows, it probably is different and more widely talked about than what we are used to with our own experiences.And that's the point that I think cannot be understated. From a U.S. historical aspect, that is exactly how church was used. As been taught in AA history, old Negro spirituals, as they were referred to, were how slaves learned the routes they needed to escape their slave master. During the civil rights movement, alot of the meetings held to discuss the movement were held in church. All of which were tied to having faith in God that change was gonna come. In my experience and also what I've learned, church was never just used as simply the threshold to spiritual guidance; it's always been more.

[REDVOLUTION]

The biggest problems is that so-called African American leaders are considered jokes among their own.



There are many(all races) leaders that their own consider them a joke.

[iceberg]

I guess I don't see where a black person can anymore get away with racism than any other race. Racist speech is universal to any ethnic group, but racism and prejudice has never been imposed by black people onto another ethnic group and that's where there will always be a difference in how racism is viewed.

i've had a good friend have to go to HR because he fired a black woman not doing her job and she called him racist.

my brother in law applied to be a policeman in the town he was living in. they tolld him unless he turns black and grows female anatomy parts, don't bother.

blacks can use the N word but a white man better never utter it or he's racist.

you can have the NAACP but not NAAWP or it's racist even if not close to it's intent.

you can have the united negro college fund but not united average white persons fund.

a black preacher can generalize rich whitey and damn them straight to hell but balks at return stereotypes.

please understand none of this is meant out of disrespect. but while a white person will never know what it's like to be black, that goes both ways. a black man can fight for the rights of a black man and be a hero but if a white man fights for the rights of a white man he's leading the KKK.

why can't we just fight for the rights of men and get over ourselves already? as long as people keep bringing up the past to guide the future the future will stay so far away.

i hate no man woman or child of any race, culture of anything of the like, but i sure do hate putting race before man for any reason founded by fear or hate. but that's where we are now and first and foremost it needs to be ok to talk it through on all sides w/o fear of either side being called racist.

hoping we can keep doing that.

[iceberg]

There are many(all races) leaders that their own consider them a joke.

like bush? no one in the political circle would ever consider bush a joke. :)

[iceberg]

I've said it before and Brain even mentioned it. I think it'll take another generation or two, before this nation can fully move on. And I realize that you think African-Americans should move on and accept that times have changed. I would think that many African Americans would agree that times have changed. But I've said it before, it's hard to move on, when even in 2008, I can still be called "colored" or my little sisters are followed around in stores simply because of their color. There are still so many small injustices being played out against black people that are never publicized that it's hard not to be angry at the situation.

that's not what i think, wg. i've also agreed we're a few generations out but headed that way. wish we could all get there sooner and we could *all* put it down and move on.

one side won't resolve it, that was never my intent to imply that.

[REDVOLUTION]

Originally Posted by WoodysGirl http://cowboyszone.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2020519#post2020519)
I've said it before and Brain even mentioned it. I think it'll take another generation or two, before this nation can fully move on. And I realize that you think African-Americans should move on and accept that times have changed. I would think that many African Americans would agree that times have changed. But I've said it before, it's hard to move on, when even in 2008, I can still be called "colored" or my little sisters are followed around in stores simply because of their color. There are still so many small injustices being played out against black people that are never publicized that it's hard not to be angry at the situation.



that's not what i think, wg. i've also agreed we're a few generations out but headed that way. wish we could all get there sooner and we could *all* put it down and move on.

one side won't resolve it, that was never my intent to imply that.


I do think it is time for everyone to move on. Black, white, pink, purple, yellow, magenta... whatever. It is good to know our individual history. But it is easy to get lost in it too.

The Great Dionne Warwick sang... "a fool will lose tomorrow... thinking back to yesterday" - truer words have yet to be spoken... or in this case.. sung....

To me... the BOTTOM LINE is.... neither side gets it or not enough from each side get it... yet.

The sooner we all get it... the sooner we can ALL move on to better things. Better things are on the horizon for all of mankind. WE(all of us) are delaying the inevitable good that is ahead.

[Viper]

What is really sad is that we are all the same color and man just can’t accept that fact. We are just different shades of that one color. If you produce a little Melanin, your skin looks white. If you produce larger amounts of Melanin your skin look brown.

Even when you look at one particular race (as man has defined it) you have different shades of the same color. Not all Whites are White ect… We are one race divided by ignorance.

[burmafrd]

Woodysgirl, if you cannot see that black people can say racist things and get a lot less flack about it then white people then you are blind. Too many blacks seem to be able to get away with spewing hate and it hardly raises an eyebrow. Looking at all those defending the Wrongs statement shows that. If he had been white he would have been run out of the country by now.
I remember Harry Belafonte calling Colon Powel an uncle tom- no one cared. Of course since Powel's a republican I guess you can call them anything you want so maybe that was why.

By the way, all the Wrong's defenders seem to be unwilling to comment about all his anti-semitic remarks.

[Sasquatch]

Woodysgirl, if you cannot see that black people can say racist things and get a lot less flack about it then white people then you are blind. Too many blacks seem to be able to get away with spewing hate and it hardly raises an eyebrow. Looking at all those defending the Wrongs statement shows that. If he had been white he would have been run out of the country by now.
I remember Harry Belafonte calling Colon Powel an uncle tom- no one cared. Of course since Powel's a republican I guess you can call them anything you want so maybe that was why.


Gosh, I never realized how badly I have it as a white male. I feel truly aggrieved. :)

[burmafrd]

Well, Sasqie, you feel aggreived about so much already.....

[jay cee]

What a foolish question designed to do nothing more than spin control a weak argument. Don't waste my time.

Don't waste my time by continuing to throw Obama's stance into the mix. He is not infallible, most of the guys on this forum have no plans to vote for the guy, so it is obvious that they don't agree with him on many things.

I have every right not to agree with him on this and other issues.

(In the spirit of full disclosure I admit that I have no plans for voting for him either).

I am at least courteous enough to give a response to your post without tossing insults. But you decide to take one statement out of that post to try and flame me.:cool:

Well since you keep throwing Obama's reaction into the mix.

Maybe you will answer this one. What about the white people that attend that church? Why would they go to a church where the minister is preaching hate for white people?

And remember before you start throwing insults, I did try to answer your question, you didn't like the response and called it spin that's your right.

[jay cee]

Please note, at no time have I implicated Barack Obama or any of his followers in what Reverend Wright said.

If jay cee did not hear the racist remarks then he did not listen to the man's words, or he agrees with them and thinks he's being clever.

I don't have to try and be clever. And I don't agree with his words. Because I don't believe God cares about America in the 1st place. I do believe in God, and I believe that people matter to him and not countries.

But I was brought up in the Baptist church and witnessed my father preach many a fire and brimstone sermons in which he profesied <sp> the downfall of America unless the nation changed its ways due to any number of ills. Including Idolatry, pornography, whoremongering and several others.

And he said it very much with the same fervor as Wright.

He was not preaching hate for white people, and until someone shows me specifically where Wright was attacking white people, I see it as a challenge to the nation as a whole. Just as my father was trying to challenge his members to turn away from what he saw as the sinful ways of the nation.

[Doomsday101]

Spin it as you will but Rev White and the KKK have something in common, they are racist. Wright words were filled with hate and had another person of a another color made simular comments I doubt anyone would sit there defending them.

[WoodysGirl]

i've had a good friend have to go to HR because he fired a black woman not doing her job and she called him racist.And that's why it's hard when real injustices are swept aside.

my brother in law applied to be a policeman in the town he was living in. they tolld him unless he turns black and grows female anatomy parts, don't bother.stupid stance by that town.

blacks can use the N word but a white man better never utter it or he's racist.As I mentioned in my other post, I don't agree with it. I think it's stupid, and they should stop. My friends know I don't agree with it and those that do use the word don't use it around me. Whenever I have children, they certainly won't use it around me.

you can have the NAACP but not NAAWP or it's racist even if not close to it's intent.

you can have the united negro college fund but not united average white persons fund.Honestly, you have to put this into perspective. The origins of the NAACP was founded in the early 20th century and the entire mission was to help black people get the rights that they'd been denied after slavery. It was very influential in pushing the civil rights movement. So while I think the organization has lost some of its luster, I always thought it has its uses.

As for the UNCF, again, it all goes back to the origin. Due to segregation and all matter of prejudices, black people could not attend a predominantly white school as well as being denied scholarships. You could say times have changed in this regard, but it certainly helps to have that as a resource.

a black preacher can generalize rich whitey and damn them straight to hell but balks at return stereotypes.Fire and brimstone speeches really mean nothing in the grand scheme of things to me. I heard alot of that growing up and it was just a filtering out the useless and getting to the meat.

please understand none of this is meant out of disrespect. but while a white person will never know what it's like to be black, that goes both ways. a black man can fight for the rights of a black man and be a hero but if a white man fights for the rights of a white man he's leading the KKK.No disrespect taken. From my perspective, I would only think a white man is leading the KKK if he's trying to oppress another ethnic group along the way. Racism in my view is all about oppression of another ethnic group.

I have no problem with an ethnic fighting for better rights or being proud of their culture. To me, saying I'm an African-American and being proud of my historical origins is not denouncing other ethnic historical contributions to this world. It's respecting a cultural thing.

why can't we just fight for the rights of men and get over ourselves already? as long as people keep bringing up the past to guide the future the future will stay so far away.You answered that in your other post. In a generation or two.

i hate no man woman or child of any race, culture of anything of the like, but i sure do hate putting race before man for any reason founded by fear or hate. but that's where we are now and first and foremost it needs to be ok to talk it through on all sides w/o fear of either side being called racist.

hoping we can keep doing that.I agree with the bold part. And I think a good dialogue has been shared in this thread. It's a matter of openly discussing it and not being afraid to understand that there are differences in our country, but it's not to be feared or hated.

[iceberg]

I agree with the bold part. And I think a good dialogue has been shared in this thread. It's a matter of openly discussing it and not being afraid to understand that there are differences in our country, but it's not to be feared or hated.

that's the first step, isn't it? open conversation with an open mind on what we can do to get over this and move on. like many have said, it's got several more generations to go.

thanks for your input wg - always respect that.

[Hostile]

Don't waste my time by continuing to throw Obama's stance into the mix. He is not infallible, most of the guys on this forum have no plans to vote for the guy, so it is obvious that they don't agree with him on many things.I will throw any stance into the mix that I want. Last time I checked you were not a grasshopper sitting on my shoulder pretending to be my conscience.

I have every right not to agree with him on this and other issues.

(In the spirit of full disclosure I admit that I have no plans for voting for him either).

I am at least courteous enough to give a response to your post without tossing insults. But you decide to take one statement out of that post to try and flame me.:cool: I consider that question ridiculous. I am pretty sure at one time in his life Adolf Hitler probably said "I hate snow." That doesn't mean I agree with every word Adolf Hitler ever said. It wasn't worth my time.

Forgive me if I don't believe for one minute that by evoking the names Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh that you were tossing me compliments. I'm just not that stupid. In other words you started the insults, not me.

Well since you keep throwing Obama's reaction into the mix.

Maybe you will answer this one. What about the white people that attend that church? Why would they go to a church where the minister is preaching hate for white people?What about them? How should I know why? I'm not a grasshopper sitting on their shoulders.

And remember before you start throwing insults, I did try to answer your question, you didn't like the response and called it spin that's your right.I don't believe you did try beyond saying you don't agree with Obama. You don't agree with him so he must be wrong. That's just plain silly and not worth my time.

[Hostile]

I don't have to try and be clever. And I don't agree with his words. Because I don't believe God cares about America in the 1st place. I do believe in God, and I believe that people matter to him and not countries.That would be fine if the only thing I objected to was what he said about America. It isn't, so it's hardly relevant to me at all. In fact, it just isn't.

But I was brought up in the Baptist church and witnessed my father preach many a fire and brimstone sermons in which he profesied <sp> the downfall of America unless the nation changed its ways due to any number of ills. Including Idolatry, pornography, whoremongering and several others.

And he said it very much with the same fervor as Wright.

He was not preaching hate for white people, and until someone shows me specifically where Wright was attacking white people, I see it as a challenge to the nation as a whole. Just as my father was trying to challenge his members to turn away from what he saw as the sinful ways of the nation.I already told you via PM that I have no intention of going back through the videos, finding the specific instances where he did exactly this, and provide them to you. I flat out have no interest in hearing that man's words again. Not worth the toilet paper that I flush.

Do your own homework.

[jay cee]

That would be fine if the only thing I objected to was what he said about America. It isn't, so it's hardly relevant to me at all. In fact, it just isn't.
Yeah, it's obvious to me whatever does not fit with your view isn't relevant.
I already told you via PM that I have no intention of going back through the videos, finding the specific instances where he did exactly this, and provide them to you. I flat out have no interest in hearing that man's words again. Not worth the toilet paper that I flush.

Do your own homework.

Even if you did look through the videos, you wouldn't find any evidence of him verbally attacking white people.

If there were some, I'm sure we would have already seen them.

[jay cee]

I consider that question ridiculous. I am pretty sure at one time in his life Adolf Hitler probably said "I hate snow." That doesn't mean I agree with every word Adolf Hitler ever said. It wasn't worth my time.That is a terrible analogy. And of course it wasn't worth your time, because it shows that you continuing to throw Obama's views as proof of anything is silly.

Forgive me if I don't believe for one minute that by evoking the names Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh that you were tossing me compliments. I'm just not that stupid. In other words you started the insults, not me.Oh, so now using O'Reilly and Limbaugh in a post regarding your response is insulting you? I find that to be totally laughable. How am I supposed to know what's going to offend you?

What about them? How should I know why? I'm not a grasshopper sitting on their shoulders.Well, If Obama agreeing with you proves your point. I can take the stance that those white folks comfortably sitting there with Wright as their pastor proves my point.

I don't believe you did try beyond saying you don't agree with Obama. You don't agree with him so he must be wrong. That's just plain silly and not worth my time.But you agree with him THIS TIME, so that proves your point.

[Maikeru-sama]

i've had a good friend have to go to HR because he fired a black woman not doing her job and she called him racist.

my brother in law applied to be a policeman in the town he was living in. they tolld him unless he turns black and grows female anatomy parts, don't bother.

blacks can use the N word but a white man better never utter it or he's racist.

you can have the NAACP but not NAAWP or it's racist even if not close to it's intent.

you can have the united negro college fund but not united average white persons fund.

a black preacher can generalize rich whitey and damn them straight to hell but balks at return stereotypes.

please understand none of this is meant out of disrespect. but while a white person will never know what it's like to be black, that goes both ways. a black man can fight for the rights of a black man and be a hero but if a white man fights for the rights of a white man he's leading the KKK.

why can't we just fight for the rights of men and get over ourselves already? as long as people keep bringing up the past to guide the future the future will stay so far away.

i hate no man woman or child of any race, culture of anything of the like, but i sure do hate putting race before man for any reason founded by fear or hate. but that's where we are now and first and foremost it needs to be ok to talk it through on all sides w/o fear of either side being called racist.

hoping we can keep doing that.

And for all the superfluous examples you posited, I can state just as many to the contrary.

Personally, naming the perceived advantages one group has over the other is really an excercise in futility.

To answer your question with regards to why we can't just fight for the rights of men, historically, humans have always doggedly searched for ways to distinguish themseleves so as to determine who is inferior and superior.

Whether this distinction is made through race, religion, money, family etc etc, it is an ugly stain upon humanity and I don't see it changing dramatically anytime soon because were human.

[iceberg]

And for all the superfluous examples you posited, I can state just as many to the contrary.

Personally, naming the perceived advantages one group has over the other is really an excercise in futility.

To answer your question with regards to why we can't just fight for the rights of men, historically, humans have always doggedly searched for ways to distinguish themseleves so as to determine who is inferior and superior.

Whether this distinction is made through race, religion, money, family etc etc, it is an ugly stain upon humanity and I don't see it changing dramatically anytime soon because were human.

superfluous? i'm not saying one pain is greater than the other, i'm saying it's not limited to one side vs. the other.

they were just as real as racism is to anyone else. you want to discount it as part of the problem so one problem can seem "bigger" - go ahead.

to me that's part of the problem itself.

we either need to quit using race as a weapon, or find a better way to learn to live with it. otherwise we sit and play "my pain is greater than your pain" for far too long.

[vta]

Oops wrong thread...

[Hostile]

Yeah, it's obvious to me whatever does not fit with your view isn't relevant.


Even if you did look through the videos, you wouldn't find any evidence of him verbally attacking white people.

If there were some, I'm sure we would have already seen them.Actually there is. You'll dismiss it though. Which is basically what I knew from the word go and dismissed the question for what it was. At every turn you've fulfilled exactly what I figured, and even told you via PMs.

It wouldn't matter if the whole world agreed that his words had racially charged language that is offensive to some. His words don't offend you, therefore he wasn't spreading a message of hate. I get it. I don't agree, and don't wish to take points form his talks that are offensive and discuss them. I keep telling you, I do not want to discuss his words.

[Hostile]

That is a terrible analogy. And of course it wasn't worth your time, because it shows that you continuing to throw Obama's views as proof of anything is silly.That's what I'm telling you. Your question is the exact same thing. I just used another person with a known name. There's no difference. My analogy was ridiculous because it was mocking yours, which coincidentally, I defined as ridiculous.

Oh, so now using O'Reilly and Limbaugh in a post regarding your response is insulting you? I find that to be totally laughable. How am I supposed to know what's going to offend you?Did I or did I not PM you that I considered it insulting? Now you've got to ask?

Pay attention.

Besides, if you say you meant those comparisons as a compliment I am going to bust a gut laughing. This isn't my first rodeo.

Well, If Obama agreeing with you proves your point. I can take the stance that those white folks comfortably sitting there with Wright as their pastor proves my point.

But you agree with him THIS TIME, so that proves your point.Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn.

Excuse me, what?

[jay cee]

Actually there is. You'll dismiss it though. Which is basically what I knew from the word go and dismissed the question for what it was. At every turn you've fulfilled exactly what I figured, and even told you via PMs.

It wouldn't matter if the whole world agreed that his words had racially charged language that is offensive to some. His words don't offend you, therefore he wasn't spreading a message of hate. I get it. I don't agree, and don't wish to take points form his talks that are offensive and discuss them. I keep telling you, I do not want to discuss his words.

You have no problem dismissing views that don't fit with yours. You have been been more than hostile to me even in the forum and via PMs. Pretty much what I expected from you.

You have already discussed his words and like I said there are none that specifically attack whites.

[jay cee]

That's what I'm telling you. Your question is the exact same thing. I just used another person with a known name. There's no difference. My analogy was ridiculous because it was mocking yours, which coincidentally, I defined as ridiculous.No, my question was in response to you holding Obama up as proof that all people should believe that
Wright was preaching hate for White people.
Did I or did I not PM you that I considered it insulting? Now you've got to ask?

Pay attention.You pay attention genius, that was AFTER I compared your RESPONSE to those guys.


Besides, if you say you meant those comparisons as a compliment I am going to bust a gut laughing. This isn't my first rodeo.Heck no it was not meant as a compliment, I thought your RESPONSE was terrible and showed unwillingness to respect a viewpoint that does not jibe with yours. That's the kind of things those guys do all the time.

But you IMO totally overreacted, responded like I made a verbal attack against you or your family or something. It's not like I said your "dog wears combat boots or something".


Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn.

Excuse me, what?Another non response. Of course, you don't get it. You never do when it does not agree with your view on life.

I'll be out of town for a few days, so I'll respond to your next post when I get back.

[Hostile]

No, my question was in response to you holding Obama up as proof that all people should believe that
Wright was preaching hate for White people.
You pay attention genius, that was AFTER I compared your RESPONSE to those guys. Yet that isn't what I said. You said it wasn't hateful. Yet a dear, close, personal friend of the man said it was. How do you reconcile that?

You then went the route of I must agree with everything he says. Do you agree with everything that anybody says? The safest person with whom to do that would be your wife. Do you agree with every word your wife says?

Heck no it was not meant as a compliment, I thought your RESPONSE was terrible and showed unwillingness to respect a viewpoint that does not jibe with yours. That's the kind of things those guys do all the time.Admission is good for the soul. Thank you. So if you acknowledge that it was meant to insult me, why act all hurt when I fire back?

But you IMO totally overreacted, responded like I made a verbal attack against you or your family or something. It's not like I said your "dog wears combat boots or something".Once again, I knew exactly where you wanted to take the conversation, I did not want to go there, and in the end that is exactly where you tried to take it anyway.

Another non response. Of course, you don't get it. You never do when it does not agree with your view on life.There was nothing to respond to. I read it three times and still have no idea what it was meant to say.

I'll be out of town for a few days, so I'll respond to your next post when I get back.Enjoy your trip.

[Hostile]

You have no problem dismissing views that don't fit with yours. You have been been more than hostile to me even in the forum and via PMs. Pretty much what I expected from you.

You have already discussed his words and like I said there are none that specifically attack whites.Yeah, there were, but by all means believe whatever you want.

[jay cee]

Yet that isn't what I said. You said it wasn't hateful. Yet a dear, close, personal friend of the man said it was. How do you reconcile that? That friend could be wrong on this particular point. I feel that he is. IMO, it was angry fiery rhetoric aimed at the U.S. powerbrokers, not whites in general. No one has shown any real evidence that it was aimed at whites in general.

You then went the route of I must agree with everything he says. Do you agree with everything that anybody says? The safest person with whom to do that would be your wife. Do you agree with every word your wife says?. To point out that Obama agreeing with the majority does not prove you are right. I don't agree with everything that anyone says.

That's why I make my own arguments and don't keep throwing up names of people that happen to agree with me. Because unless you agree with everything that person says, it does not matter if you agree with them on this particular point.

Admission is good for the soul. Thank you. So if you acknowledge that it was meant to insult me, why act all hurt when I fire back? Just because it was not intended as a compliment, does not mean it was an insult Hostile. There is wide gulf between compliment and insult. That statement falls somewhere in that gulf. I don't know why that is so hard to understand. It's just not that complicated.

Once again, I knew exactly where you wanted to take the conversation, I did not want to go there, and in the end that is exactly where you tried to take it anyway.That's where it already was. I just wanted everyone to spell it out and stop speaking in code.

There was nothing to respond to. I read it three times and still have no idea what it was meant to say. Sure, ;) Well there is no point in discussing it further.

[jay cee]

Yeah, there were, but by all means believe whatever you want.

That's great, they were there, but nobody can find them or point them out? Sounds like you believe whatever you want.

[jay cee]

I for one have no problems with Rev. Wright's opinions because he spoke a lot of truth...

That's how I see it. My views on America is very much in line with the critcisms Wright stated in those brief clips.

Now if he also said hateful things against people of any race, I would strongly reject those beliefs and statements.

[Hostile]

That's great, they were there, but nobody can find them or point them out? Sounds like you believe whatever you want.His ravings about "rich, White people" were saccharine huh?

No sir. If he had restricted it to rich people, you'd have a point. He didn't and you don't.

[Hostile]

Just because it was not intended as a compliment, does not mean it was an insult Hostile. There is wide gulf between compliment and insult. That statement falls somewhere in that gulf. I don't know why that is so hard to understand. It's just not that complicated.Your post just touted your right to believe what you want. Grant me that same right.

Have you ever stopped to consider that maybe just as you don't believe Mr. Obama someone else might not believe you? I don't. That usually happens when someone makes no attempt to apologize for a "misunderstanding" of intent. Any time I have unintentionally offended someone I have apologized. I feel it is a natural act to do so, especially if there was no intent to do so in the first place. You simply do not come across as sincere that you didn't do that expressly to offend. I flat out don't believe you. You aren't believable on that.