Quote:
Originally Posted by filtherton
Try listening to the quote in context. The christian denomination that Wright belongs to doesn't prescribe the existence of hell, so what do you suppose the phrase "god damn america" means when said by someone who doesn't necessarily believe that god damns people in any sort of traditional sense? Do you think its possible that you missed the point of what he was saying?
|
I get the gist of what his point is but to say more than once "God Damn America" in your sermon to me is unacceptable. I firmly believe if you bring that negativity into a church, which is supposed to give hope (that's a major selling point on religion HOPE), you do this over time (which Wright seems to have done) you have very affectively taken hope and optimism out of the church and sold nothing but your own propagandized message. Hence militants coming from denominations and sects of "peaceful religions".
The Robertson, Falwell, Wright, Sharpton, Farrakhan types are just as successful at this.
Quote:
If you don't think that Wright's church was active in working towards solutions to social problems then you don't know what you're talking about.
|
I'm sure Robertson/Falwell can show that they have helped find solutions for social problems also. Doesn't make their messages any more positive or right, does it?
Quote:
What does where he lives have to do with it? To my knowledge, he never took a vow of poverty. I agree it is perhaps not in keeping with particular interpretations of the ideas of christ, but that isn't really what this is about, is it?
|
It has a lot to do with it, in this case. If you are going to talk about the oppression of the black man, how wronged you have been and yadda yadda yadda..... then why are you living in a $1.6 million home on a golf course in a gated, predominantly white neighborhood? I thought the rich white man is holding the black man down.... so why are you living amongst them?
Quote:
What power? What are you talking about?
|
Does Wright affect the way many vote? That's power isn't it?
If I stand up in a church and tell my people how nothing is their fault, it's the government's, it's the white man's, it's everyone's fault but theirs. They will listen to what I say because no one likes to have to accept responsibility for choices that adversely affected them.
"You dropped out, you failed in life because you put a crack pipe to your lips.... the US of KKK A did that. The government did that not you." Be surprised how many addict use this as their excuse.
Why not preach hope, self responsibility and help build self esteem?
Meanwhile it's affecting suburbia just as badly, but that's ok, the whites deserve it.
"We live in communities where our men impregnate our women and disappear, refusing to take care of the families they have created. Not your fault.... it's the government's, they propagate this among our communities, they did this to us."
"The government planted AIDS in the black man's community." Really? Hmmmm than why do whites have it? If I as a pastor talked about how maybe this should be a sign of all our failings and that perhaps it shows we need to get back to family or at the very least promote safe sex..... that puts the problem on the person's behavior. can't do that.... sooooo we'll blame the government.
And so on.
Quote:
Obama said that if anyone on his staff had said what Imus said he would have fired them, and that he hoped Imus' bosses would do the same. In context, what Imus said was mean, petty, and if it wasn't racist, it was pretty fucking close. It is fairly reasonable to presume that there has been no point in Don Imus' life where he was subjected to institutional racism perpetrated by minority populated women's basketball teams. In context, what Wright said was a reflection of his experiences before, during and after the civil rights movement. Both of them have every right to say what they said, but I would argue that when placed in context, the significance of what each of them said is completely different.
|
So racist hatred is ok in some cases and can be forgiven because those people have a right to be and who is allowed to be. But should you complain about the racist messages of those we have ok'd we will tell you how you don't understand, how ignorant you are, how racist you are.
However, if we don't like the message we'll put pressure on and force them to lose their jobs, maybe even get government involved and infringe on his free speech.
In context Imus said a very poor joke that maybe back 30 years ago may have gotten a laugh.
In context, Wright used his pulpit to continue hateful, racist, anti-governmental, anti-semitic conspiratorial messages.
Quote:
Probably not. Obama would seem to be a very glaring exception to the things you think Wright stands for. If Obama agrees with what you think Wright believes then he would need to deny his own existence.
|
How is his disagreeing with the hate, racist messages from Wright denying his own existence?
Quote:
Isn't this scenario implicit in your first "either"?
|
No, first scenario states he believed the hate. Second scenario says he doesn't but used the church to further his own political and social gains.
I do think 2 and 3 of my scenarios are more closely attached if not the same
Quote:
I like your choices here. Either Obama is a liar, a backstabbing liar, or an Uncle Tom trying to trick black people into voting for him. I think you've left a few possibilities out.
|
Where did I mention Uncle Tom? Or are you are now admitting that successful black men and women that are conservatives are "Uncle Toms" to you?
Quote:
I'm going to put a couple forward, and you feel free to tell my why they are implausible.
1) It could be possible that Obama was attempting to gain insight into the black experience in America because he wanted to understand it, but couldn't relate to it very well.
|
Then why pick a church that promotes racism and hatred? Because Wright is among the powerful elite in Chicago.
Quote:
2) He just happened to find jesus, and decided to attend the church of the man who helped him find that jesus and that the words of that man concerning non-jesusey things aren't that important because Obama recognizes that that man isn't necessarily an expert in non-jesusey things.
|
I'd believe that.....but naming the guy his "spiritual mentor", having dinners at his home, godfather of his children, and having him on his election committee are not things I would do with someone I didn't agree with.
Maybe my definition of spiritual leader is different.
Quote:
3) Obama, being a grown man capable of forming independent relationships with other people, forms friendship with and receives spiritual guidance from a man with whom he disagrees on nonspiritual matters.
|
Same as #2.
Quote:
4) Some combination of these.
|
What combination?
Quote:
I'm not saying you're interpretations aren't valid, just that they seem to be very heavily weighted towards the "Obama is a lying sociopath" side of the issue, a fact which is more a reflection of who you are then what is actually going on with Obama.
|
I honestly think he may be.
Quote:
That's a shame, I'm sure the Obama campaign has been banking on the support of people who weren't going to vote for him anyway.
|
No, but I am sure there are many Hilary supporters that would have voted for the Dem. nominee but because of all this, find they can't.
I supported Edwards..... I went to Hilary.... I can say I would have gone to Obama... but then Billy Cunningham had his job threatened because he said "Barack Hussein Obama" and people demanded his job. From there I looked at things I dismissed, the lapel flag pins, the refusing to put the hand on the heart, then I looked at what Wright was saying..... and now, now there is no way in Hell. I believe him to be the worst candidate on numerous issues, but this closes the door.
I am wrong a lot, I run on my emotions, read and believe what I CHOOSE to and make my own decisions.
I maybe wrong here and now and if elected, for our future I hope I am very wrong about the man and I will happily admit such.
So he only lost my vote..... but wait..... how many Hilary supporters is he disenfranchising by having his people tell her to quit.
But he has "Charisma and talks about change and has street cred, he's no Uncle Tom." so he doesn't really need any of Hilary's supporters come Nov.
So what if 20% of her supporters decide for various reasons decide to vote for McCain?