Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 198

• 0%

  Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

  From the TUCC's statement by current Rev. Otis Moss III:

  "Trinity United Church of Christ's ministry is inclusive and global. The following ministries have been developed under Dr. Wright's ministerial tutelage for social justice: assisted living facilities for senior citizens, day care for children, pastoral care and counseling, health care, ministries for persons living with HIV/AIDS, hospice training, prison ministry, scholarships for thousands of students to attend historically black colleges, youth ministries, tutorial and computer programs, a church library, domestic violence programs and scholarships and fellowships for women and men attending seminary."

  _____

  Does anyone have a problem with these accomplishments of the church? Is there anything here that diminishes anyone who is not black?

  Reply

  40 Replies

  • 0%

    DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

    I have a problem with it's race-based doctrine. I can't accept the concept of Black Revolutionary Theology as advocated by Rev. Wright. Jim Jones' People's Temple did a great deal to help its community also, before it morphed into a cult and well...we know how that ended. Jones used conflict between the races as a means to gather African-Americans to his church. Why not call someone out for doing the same thing again?

    Reply

    38 Replies

    • 0%

      Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

      There are several reasons not to be concerned about Rev. Wright, and particularly not to compare his church with Jim Jones'. And even more reasons not to be concerned with what a candidate who attends the Trinity United Church of Christ *might* do if elected.

      Jim Jones was far less conventional in his teachings, as well as in his church's acts, than Wright, and Jones didn't hand over his leadership position to someone else, as Wright did. (He is no longer the pastor at the TUCC).

      The United Church of Christ (with which the TUCC is affiliated) is also a much larger national organization. It's not a cult--it doesn't separate its members from their personal attachments to brainwash them, as, say, the Peoples' Church or the Scientologists do.

      Reply

      37 Replies

      • 0%

        Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

        And mainly because the TUCC doesn't actually do any of the things those who fear what you call its "race-based doctrine" are worried about. The story is calculated to spread fear of "the other"--in other words, race-based fear--among those who don't come in contact with the TUCC or its members, by making their philosophy and actions appear far from the mainstream. In fact, the TUCC is very popular. The TUCC "does no evil."

        Reply

        33 Replies

        • 0%

          DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

          If a denomination permits a pastor to spout such poisonous rhetoric from the pulpit, it de facto endorses him. If the denomination disagreed with Rev. Wright, it should have expelled him. What do you mean he doesn't come in contact with its members? He was preaching the sermons and they were listening.

          Reply

          32 Replies

          • OnionHeadComment removed: User banned.22 Replies

            • 0%

              DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

              Feel free but his views do nothing to excuse Rev. Wright's form of racism and the fact that Obama has tacitly endorsed these views through two decades of church attendance.

              Reply

              20 Replies

              • OnionHeadComment removed: User banned.2 Replies

                • 0%

                  DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

                  I didn't but nice try changing the subject. If you have any specific comments you would like to address, I invited you to do so.

                  Reply

                  1 Reply

                  • OnionHeadComment removed: User banned.
              • 0%

                Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

                I don't condone Obama's ignoring Wright's comments for all that time, IF he was aware of them. But I wouldn't call silence a tacit endorsement--he had no power to expel Rev. Wright from his own church.

                And I'd add that extremely few people agree with absolutely every utterance of the leader of any large organization that deals with as many varied topics as a church--one must balance the good that the organization does against the bad. In this case, I'd say the church has much more beneficent effects for its congregation and community than a few wrong-headed remarks by its former leader cause harm. it's like the way Catholics weight the acts of Catholic Charities against many of the statements of its leaders, the various supposedly "infallible" popes, over the many years of the Catholic Church's existence.

                Reply

                16 Replies

                • 0%

                  GHOSTWHOWALKS6 months, 3 weeks ago

                  While he may not have had the power to do anything about the preaching of Wright, he did have to power to get up and leave instead of just sitting there and doing nothing. To apologize no is to little too late. The time to do something was then, not now.

                  I can remember just such an incident. When my family heard the sermon they stood (two full pews) and walked out. Btw. We were not the only ones. Everyone has the right to speak, but that does not mean I have to sit and listen.

                  Reply

                  15 Replies

                  • 0%

                    DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

                    That put it nicely.

                    Reply
                  • 0%

                    ybdogsct6 months, 3 weeks ago

                    GHOST:

                    "he did have to power to get up and leave instead of just sitting there and doing nothing."

                    I don't think there's any documentation proving Obama sat passively during one of these particular sermons. Why would ANYONE think Obama is racist against white America when OBAMA IS HALF-WHITE HIMSELF and was raised by his WHITE MOTHER when his black father left his own family!

                    No, Obama is only associated with Wright because they share one common goal of serving the underpriveleged, the poor, and the underrepresented minority.

                    http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily...

                    "The only relevant question is: are Obama's beliefs represented by the handful of video clips of the most incendiary of Wright's sermons? I can find no evidence that he is. Give me a speech or a sentence or an off-hand remark in the last twenty years in which Obama has said such a thing or reflected such a worldview and I will gladly post it."

                    Reply

                    5 Replies

                    • 0%

                      amazed6 months, 3 weeks ago

                      and the most virulent anti-Italians I know are those who are half-Italian. Some of the biggest misogynists I have ever met were women. What's your point? You never heard of self-loathing?

                      Reply

                      4 Replies

                      • 0%

                        ybdogsct6 months, 3 weeks ago

                        AMAZED:

                        "and the most virulent anti-Italians I know are those who are half-Italian."

                        How could I have ever forgotten about the plight of the Italians? I must have missed the day in history class that covered the centuries-long systemic slavery of Italians.

                        AMAZED:

                        "You never heard of self-loathing?"

                        Do you have ANY proof that Obama self-loathes his white half? Do you have ANY proof that Obama loathes his white mother, who took care of him after his black father abandoned his family? Do you have ANY proof that Obama, who attended the predominantly white Columbia and Harvard Universities, is racist against whites?

                        Why don't you post YOUR PROOF that Obama suffers from self-loathing? Why don't you post a SINGLE STATEMENT Obama made that can be remotely characterized as racist against whites. Go ahead. I'll wait, although something tells me I shouldn't hold my breath.

                        Reply

                        2 Replies

                        • 0%

                          amazed6 months, 3 weeks ago

                          Where did I say that Obama is self-loathing? The point I was attempting to make is that just because one is a member of a particular group does not guarantee that they bear no ill will or prejudice toward that group.

                          I'm sorry if the subtleness of my post confused you.

                          Reply

                          1 Reply

                          • 0%

                            ybdogsct6 months, 3 weeks ago

                            AMAZED:

                            "Where did I say that Obama is self-loathing?"

                            Are you really going to make me quote yourself to you? AMAZED: "You never heard of self-loathing?" You were NOT talking about Wright, because Wright is black. You were CLEARLY referring to Obama's supposed self-hatred of whites.

                            AMAZED:

                            "The point I was attempting to make is that just because one is a member of a particular group does not guarantee that they bear no ill will or prejudice toward that group."

                            Oh is that the argument you were trying to make? Based on WHAT EVIDENCE?

                            I'm sorry if you're too lazy or too obtuse to dig up ANY evidence supporting your unsubstantiated charge of self-hatred. Apparently, facts are not your forte.

                            It sounds like you confused yourself. LOL.

                            Reply
                      • 0%

                        ybdogsct6 months, 3 weeks ago

                        You pathetic neocons have stooped to circuitously arguing that Obama should somehow be responsible for the words and actions of everyone he happens to know.

                        Your false outrage is even more laughable when you consider the neocon silence when bigoted Christian conservatives endorse Republican candidates. Where was your outrage when:

                        1) Pat Robertson, who regularly spouts homophobic diatribes, endorsed Giuliani.

                        2) Jerry Falwell, who called 9/11 an act of divine punishment on homosexuals, endorsed Huckabee.

                        3) Ann Coulter, whose regular homophobic, bigoted, and antisemitic comments have made her a CELEBRITY on Fox News, defends and endorses Bush.

                        4) George Allen called Indian journalist S.R. Sidarth "macaca."

                        5) Mitt Romney and Tony Snow uttered the racially-charged term "tar baby."

                        6) Bob Jones III, who banned interracial dating at his school and calls Catholicism a "cult," endorsed Romney.

                        Spare me your hypocritical false outrage.

                        Pathetic

                        Reply
                  • 0%

                    ybdogsct6 months, 3 weeks ago

                    http://voices.kansascity.com/node/729

                    "Rev. Wright has not said anything that has not been said or is not being said in bars, poolrooms, barber shops, hair salons or anywhere else more than three black people gather.

                    Rev. Wright is not the first black minister to condemn this country for its racist practices. The Rev. Martin Luther King called out America for what it did and was doing to people of color all over the world (slavery, discrimination, the Vietnam War). He did it in a more sophiscated way, but his message was the same. But Rev. King did not call for black people to burn the flag, to destroy property, to kill white people or to leave the country. And, as far as I can determine, NEITHER HAS REV. WRIGHT.

                    Rev. Wright is not leading nor advocating a revolution. He is just venting, and in many ways, preaching to the choir. Shouldn't a man or woman be judged more by his or her actions?"

                    (cont.)

                    Reply

                    6 Replies

                    • 0%

                      tkyrchncs6 months, 3 weeks ago

                      It is my understanding that when a man of the cloth in full regalia standing at his pulpit on a religious occasion says "God damn" something (in this case America), it is not just an expletive one might say on mashing his finger. It is calling down the Wrath of God. An appeal for a manifestation of God's condemnation. His right to speak, my right to speak against, and believe me, I do. Had I been there I would have spoken to his face before I walked out.

                      Reply

                      5 Replies

                      • Welfare_Made_Me_RichComment removed: User banned.4 Replies

                        • 0%

                          DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

                          That sermon was inappropriate by any reasonable standards and based on wild assertions on Wright's part.

                          Reply
                        • 0%

                          tkyrchncs6 months, 3 weeks ago

                          I certainly would have. I have before in another church, and once at a political rally. Christ calls on us to LOVE and BLESS those who do us wrong, and that is precisely what I would have said. I have made no comments on any other content of this speech or the other activities of this preacher, but he is a successful man living in a more than middle-class house (they showed it on tv) condemning the COUNTRY, not just some of the citizens, because he perceives himself as being treated poorly. For shame. Racist behavior is specifically forbidden by law and regulation in almost every context in America. That was not the case when I went to a "separate but equal" elementary school from my friend and neighbor. How can he claim that there is no progress? People are NOT going to change by lightening strike just to make him happy, especially with a mouth like his.

                          Reply

                          1 Reply

                          • 0%

                            tkyrchncs6 months, 3 weeks ago

                            I have been involved in the civil rights movement nearly as long as he has, and undoubtedly for similar reasons. But for the same reason I find it wrong to exclude and oppress someone because of race or other factors not in his control, I find it wrong to condemn a whole nation for what some of its citizens do. Being black does not excuse discriminatory behavior or rhetoric. And I reserve the right to call down my Christian brothers for un-Christ-like behavior, just as he does.

                            Reply
                        • 0%

                          lovemylibs6 months, 3 weeks ago

                          WOW, WMMR. You are starting to sound like a propagandist AND an apologist.

                          Reply
                  • 0%

                    ybdogsct6 months, 3 weeks ago

                    http://voices.kansascity.com/node/729

                    "Sen. Obama has done nothing to indicate

                    he is anti-American. In fact, his whole life is a testament to the American Dream.

                    And if Sen. Obama were to totally distance himself from every black person over the age of 30 who has at one time or another said or thought God damn America, he probably could hold his next campaign rally in a phone booth.

                    If you don't like Obama, fine. If you don't like his policies, fine. But let's not waste any more time over a made-up issue."

                    Reply
            • 0%

              AnteUp6 months, 3 weeks ago

              OnionHead ~

              Heck - those guys are mainstream pastors. They address

              AIPAC and appear WITH their candidates. No one seems

              ashamed of their pronouncements. They call for bombs

              to rain down on Iran - they call other religions a

              "wh*re" - natural disasters are Divine punishment for

              homosexuals............what's the problem - eh?

              My problem is - their support has been COURTED.

              Some candidates have WANTED to appear with them.

              Those candidates didn't just attend services at

              their church - NO - they wanted their endorsement.

              Obama has already disassociated himself with those

              remarks currently being shown of Wright - Can the same

              be said for the other guys? Surely not - they have

              been too busy kissing their butts.

              Reply
          • 0%

            Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

            I didn't say Wright didn't come in contact with his church's members.

            I said the story about Obama's association with the Rev. Wright is calculated to spread race-based fear among those who don't have any knowledge about the TUCC or its members.

            You have a point about the denomination's implicit tolerance of Wright's inflammatory remarks. But there is still no evidence tht Obama has some sort of secret agenda for the country that is based on Wright's beliefs or comments. Obama is not one of those politicians who takes orders from his pastor, or anyone else.

            Reply

            8 Replies

            • 0%

              DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

              I don't want to imply that Obama fully subscribes to Wright's views, but it disturbs me to hear what his pastor of two decades has said from the pulpit.

              Reply

              7 Replies

              • ScrimshawComment removed: User banned.6 Replies

                • ScrimshawComment removed: User banned.5 Replies

                  • 0%

                    Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

                    Here's why I gave you a negative vote, Scrimshaw.

                    1) Calling a name is pointless, and that particular one doesn't really make sense in your context; there's no commonality between Wright, who spoke possibly offensive words, and Tyson and Simpson, who broke laws and expected to be treated differently than ordinary criminals.

                    2) The n-word is a noun, not an adjective.

                    Reply

                    4 Replies

                    • ScrimshawComment removed: User banned.3 Replies

                      • 0%

                        Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

                        Obama's speech was excellent. (And of course it contained a political component--it was given in Philadelphia where the coming primary is very important.)

                        AA? You don't mean Alcoholics Anonymous, do you?

                        Your definition of the "n-word" isn't in the dictionary either. You can look it up here, and this site clearly defines the word as a derogatory term used for all black people for no reason other than their skin color. In other words, by their definition, it's a racist term:

                        http://www.yourdictionary.com/

                        Or you can look it up here, and find a slightly more forgiving take, though certainly its primary meaning is derogatory:

                        http://www.merriam-webster.com

                        It makes me uncomfortable to write or utter what I call the "n-word," as other people feel about swearing. My meaning was clear in context, though, dictionary definition or not.

                        Reply

                        2 Replies

                        • ScrimshawComment removed: User banned.

                        • ScrimshawComment removed: User banned.
      • 0%

        DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

        Jim Jones didn't start out as a radical cult leader. My point is that he fanned the flames of racial hatred to mislead people. It was a gradual process of creating a cult but that mentality can lead to it.

        Reply

        2 Replies

        • 0%

          Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

          Again, not a cult. And actions speak louder than words. When you read about the TUCC ministry's actions, you still can't pinpoint anything that denigrates non-blacks, regardless of what rhetoric Wright may have used. And again, he's no longer the pastor--I'm not certain of the circumstances of his departure, but if you wanted the congregation to expel him, the result would be the same as it is now.

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

            ...after decades of being the pastor. He should have been expelled a long, long time ago. Clearly, no one called him out on his rhetoric until recently.

            Reply
  • 0%

    NoSpinDave6 months, 3 weeks ago

    I guess Hillary better stop with the TOTALLY LEGIT attacks then.....for dare she may be branded a racist.

    Attack Barak, and you are a RACIST!!!

    So when did TOTALLY LEGIT attacks become "smears"? The word "smear" suggests the accusations are baseless......which we ALL know isn't true.

    I am still waiting with great glee for one of the usual suspect, left wing extremist trolls here to call Hillary an eeeevil CON. Now that will make my whole day!!!

    Reply
• 0%

  jordan116 months, 3 weeks ago

  My best advise for those who are sick of this, is to turn off the media and notify the companies who advertise with them you won't be buying their products. If this were done en mass, all the nonsense would cease.

  Reply

  7 Replies

  • 0%

    cushi6 months, 3 weeks ago

    As a matter of fact, I've been doing just that as of this weekend, Jordan. I am sick and tired of the media fanning the flames of a nonsensical, vicious, visceral, hypocritical attacks on Barack Obama, his retiring pastor, and his church!

    "Blessed are you when men shall revile, persecute you, and say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake! " That is scriptural. Barack is a Christian; his pastor is a Christian, his church family is Christian...all of these false and inflammatory accusations against them are going to work in their favor in the long run. Be not deceived, God is NOT mocked. He doesn't like ugly, and He ain't too fond of pretty, either.

    Reply

    3 Replies

    • 0%

      DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

      You are taking that verse out of context. People aren't criticizing Wright for being a Christian, quite the opposite. He is receiving criticizm for the "unChristian" things that he has said.

      Reply
    • 0%

      cushi6 months, 3 weeks ago

      That verse applies to anyone falsely accused, which I believe they all have been. I point out that they are Christian because it is particularly disturbing to me to see fellow Christians being demonized by many people on this board.

      Reply
    • 0%

      jordan116 months, 3 weeks ago

      I turned the media off more than a year ago. Have watched a couple of 'specials' on CNN is all, in that time. It's quite freeing, & has increased my understanding of world events by actively seeking other venues for news. Of course I haven't a clue what's going on with starlets in Hollywood, but I'll survive, lol.

      Reply
  • 0%

    cushi6 months, 3 weeks ago

    As a matter of fact, Jordan, I have done just that as of this past weekend! I am sick and tired of hearing CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, etc. fanning the flames of discord and aiding and abetting in the crufixion of Barack Obama, Rev. Wright, and their church! It is vicious, visceral and disgustingly hypocritical! Scripture says you are blessed when men revile, persecute and bare false witness against you. God will judge who is right and who is wrong, not one of us, and I would not be surprised if all this piling on works in their favor in the long run.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      cushi6 months, 3 weeks ago

      Propeller working extremely slow, hence the double post! Sorry.

      Reply
  • 0%

    NoSpinDave6 months, 3 weeks ago

    you can bury YOUR head in the sand and prentend all of this isnt true, Hillary isnt going to though

    Reply
• 0%

  not2needy6 months, 3 weeks ago

  Would any of the protestors have wanted to attend this church? I doubt if the protestors attend any church, or have an affiliation period.

  Some people are just so filled with hate, they have to find someone new to hate regularly.

  I find nothing wrong with what this church has done for their community. God knows, there was certainly no agencies going to go into those communities and do what this church has. I guess it's wrong that they didn't stay as oppressed as some would have liked!

  Reply

  18 Replies

  • 0%

    MajJohn6 months, 3 weeks ago

    Of course there's nothing wrong with what the church has done for the community, it's the hate filled racially baited statements I part with.

    Reply

    8 Replies

    • 0%

      cushi6 months, 3 weeks ago

      Get over yourself. I'll bet you didn't have a problem with what Geraldine Ferraro said, or even Don Imus!

      Reply

      5 Replies

      • 0%

        MajJohn6 months, 3 weeks ago

        Off base again, Imus is a pervert and should have been taken off the air years ago. I don't like Ferraro at all, I believe what she said was blown out of proportion. And you mean, get over myself, in what context? I appreciate thoughtful criticism, but I perceive this to be a personal attack, what's your problem?

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          cushi6 months, 3 weeks ago

          Neither of your statements address the issue at hand, which is whether or not Rev. Wright, and Barack Obama, by association, are racist because of the remarks Rev. Wright made, as opposed to how quickly and definitively Geraldine Ferraro has been defended as not being racist or making racist remarks when she definitely did, and Don Imus being a racist but defended to the hilt and then, after the heat died down, rewarding him with reinstatement despite his patently racist remarks.

          Reply
      • 0%

        NoSpinDave6 months, 3 weeks ago

        last time I checked, neither one of them were McCain's "spritual" advisors.

        Keep reaching Cushi, keep reaching.

        Reply

        2 Replies

        • 0%

          cushi6 months, 3 weeks ago

          Wrong as usual NoSpinDave, he considers them both spiritual advisors.

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            NoSpinDave6 months, 3 weeks ago

            who me a direct quote where he says that. Its a totally different relationship that Obama and Wright (who married him, baptised his children, been his friend and pastor for 20 years.

            TOTALLY DIFFERENT, but I expect nothing but the usual intellectual dishonesty from the left wing extremists here at libscape

            Reply
    • 0%

      Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

      Those are Obama's sentiments as well, MajJohn.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        MajJohn6 months, 3 weeks ago

        The problem is, guilt by association will be heaped upon Obama and he'll have to clarify his positions or be placed into a political scrapheap. For those who thought he was getting a free pass from the press while the attacks continued upon Hillary, what think you now? It appears the press enjoys tearing down the front runner.

        Reply
  • 0%

    DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

    ...and hate whites, blaming them for everything. Churches exist to worship God, not glorify races and perpetuate racist views. Rev. Wright fabricates stories about how Whites invented addicting drugs to victimize blacks. He also adhere's to crazy 9-11 conspiracy theories and generally spouts "hate America" rhetoric as often as possible.

    Reply

    7 Replies

    • 0%

      cushi6 months, 3 weeks ago

      There you go baring false witness again! They do NOT preach hatred of whites. There are whites who attend the church, are you saying that they are stupid enough to attend a church that hates them and doesn't mind saying so?

      Reply

      6 Replies

      • 0%

        DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

        There you go misquoting scriptures, taking them out of context. Sure, there are whites on the Left who think it's enlightened to listen to this type of propaganda. The church advertises itself as "Unashamadly Black". In the videos of church services I have seen, there were no whites visible.

        Reply

        3 Replies

        • 0%

          tchef6 months, 3 weeks ago

          Do you listen to Anne Coulter or Rush? There's some serious hate speech for you.

          Reply
        • 0%

          cushi6 months, 3 weeks ago

          You are full of it, and I don't mean the Holy Ghost!

          Reply
        • 0%

          cushi6 months, 3 weeks ago

          Every scripture repeated is out of context! That does not mean they aren't applicable to the situation at hand. In this, the shoe fits!

          Reply
      • 0%

        aniokly6 months, 3 weeks ago

        There are no whites attending that particular church, and they would not be welcome if they tried.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          tchef6 months, 3 weeks ago

          One again you have no idea what your talking about. Have you ever been to that church? Have you ever heard anything from the Rev. Wright other than what's been played on the news?

          Reply
  • 0%

    NoSpinDave6 months, 3 weeks ago

    and hate the white race

    Reply
• 0%

  cherev6 months, 3 weeks ago

  "Nearly three weeks before the 40th commemorative anniversary of the murder of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the Reverend Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.'s character is being assassinated in the public sphere because he has preached a social gospel on behalf of oppressed women, children and men in America and around the globe."

  Linking Dr. King and Wright's Jew-hating, America-bashing statements. And the libbies line up to justify it. What a shock!!!

  Reply

  18 Replies

  • 0%

    Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

    There is a big difference, as Obama and others have pointed out, between condoning the STATEMENTS of Wright and approving of the ACTIONS of the church. Again, is there anything in what the TUCC's uplifiting acts for the community that deminishes those of any race?

    It's kind of like the distinction between condoning Bush's statement after 9/11 that the U.S. is fighting a "crusade" and approving of the way the government has fought its war on terror. (Though as I'm sure you know, I support neither of those.)

    Reply

    17 Replies

    • 0%

      DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

      No, any church that allows a pastor to say things like that for decades is tacitly endorsing his positions. That is wrong.

      Reply

      11 Replies

      • 0%

        Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

        So, anyone who doesn't denounce Bush's "crusade" comment tacitly endorses that position?

        Reply

        10 Replies

        • 0%

          DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

          Having lost one argument, you are moving to another.

          Reply

          9 Replies

          • 0%

            Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

            No, your argument is that remaining silent is a tacit endorsement of a position.

            I'm making the analogy, not to bash Bush, but to help you and others who read this understand how to make your argument consistent across political lines.

            Reply
          • 0%

            DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

            I don't really draw the same connection because the Iraq War is such a complex issue and is not analygous to race relations. While I don't agree with the massive expenditures of the war, it did topple a murderous regime so there is a basis for pro and con arguments.

            Reply

            7 Replies

            • 0%

              Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

              I'm not arguing the merits of the Iraq war, and that's not the point I was making. I'm using that example to illustrate the overly simplistic logic you use to condemn Obama.

              If Obama's remaining silent while his pastor made offensive comments that Obama didn't agree with automatically means that the Senator is a moral failure, then any Bush supporter's remaining silent while Bush made the crusade comment makes that supporter similarly morally wrong.

              Using the logic you propose about "tacit endorsements," you could also use previous popes' statements about Jews to malign modern-day Catholics who do not denounce those statements; failure of atheists to denounce inflammatory statements about the religious by Christopher Hitchens or Richard Dawkins to denounce them as intolerant; failure of the French to speak up against France's cooperation with Nazis in WWII to bash all French citizens of the time; etc.

              Reply

              5 Replies

              • 0%

                Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

                I chose to use Bush's "crusade" speech to demonstrate my point that remaining silent is not always the same as endorsing a position, in the hope that the parallel would sink in.

                Reply

                4 Replies

                • 0%

                  DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

                  In the case of a church, I think you have the option of attending church elsewhere. In any case, sermons should be spiritually edifying and if they aren't you shouldn't be sitting through them for two decades.

                  Reply

                  3 Replies

                  • 0%

                    Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

                    I'm certain you're not a member of his church, and I'm certain you haven't watched the complete boxed set of DVDs of Rev. Wright's sermons.

                    You are doing EXACTLY what the statement released by the church says is unfair: judging all 207,792 minutes of Wright's sermons by a couple of 15- to 30-second sound bites.

                    Weren't you complaining above about scripture taken out of context? Do you get that you're taking Wright's statements out of context?

                    Reply

                    2 Replies

                    • 0%

                      DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

                      The fact that he took even a few seconds out of his sermon to say such ignorant things is unacceptable. I could give other examples of outrageous comments on his part. There are plenty.

                      Reply

                      1 Reply

                      • 0%

                        Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

                        Please do. Then we can total up what percentage of the 207,792 minutes of sermons contained controversial speech.

                        Reply
            • 0%

              cushi6 months, 3 weeks ago

              Race relations is an equally complex issue. It, too, is a battle that is being fought right here on American soil.

              Reply
    • 0%

      DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

      See youtube and look up every Wright video, she who shall not think for herself (Tessylo).

      Reply
    • 0%

      cherev6 months, 3 weeks ago

      "Again, is there anything in what the TUCC's uplifiting acts for the community that deminishes those of any race?"

      I didn't say anything about that, but nice try. The Church is justifying Wright's statement AND tying them to MLK. Is that OK with you or not?

      "It's kind of like the distinction between condoning Bush's statement after 9/11 that the U.S. is fighting a "crusade" and approving of the way the government has fought its war on terror."

      I don't see any possible connection, but that's OK.

      Reply

      3 Replies

      • 0%

        Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

        It's NOT okay to make the statements we've all heard that Rev. Wright made. Senator Obama agrees.

        The analogy I made about remaining silent about Wright's remarks and Bush's remarks was addressed to someone who was saying that remaining silent is tacit endorsement of the comments. The analogy was meant to address only that argument.

        We can go around and around about how long Obama waited to speak up, but that doesn't have to do with the argument I was making--that despite some of Wright's statements, the church Obama attends does many good works.

        Reply

        2 Replies

        • 0%

          cherev6 months, 3 weeks ago

          I recognize that you like to bring up things that are irrelevant. I never said one word about Obama, did I? Yet, you choose to bring that up.

          But thanks for your clarification on your analogy. I don't agree, but that's OK.

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

            Irrelevant? The part about Obama was included to anticipate an argument many out here have already made, but you didn't. It was also a clarification of my argument; much like the analogy, I guess it didn't apply specifically to you.

            It's much like the original statement you made that was irrelevant to the story and didn't apply to me--that "libbies line up to justify" "Wright's Jew-hating, America-bashing statements." I posted the story to show the TUCC's good works, and to distinguish between them and their former leader--not to justify Wright's statements.

            I guess you're as guilty of bringing up things that are irrelevant (to the story) as well, don't you?

            Would we be talking about the TUCC if Obama wasn't running for president? (I know I wouldn't have posted this story--if it had ever been written--if he weren't.)

            Reply
• 0%

  kboy6 months, 3 weeks ago

  Hitler also did well by some people at the expense of other people. Someone that claims to be a uniter cannot support a divider. Maybe it is time to have public disclosure of all religions that are bigoted against one group or another. Preaching hate is a terrible thing.

  Reply

  10 Replies

  • 0%

    Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

    You're right, preaching hate is a terrible thing.

    But again, delaying the denunciation of inflammatory remarks is not divisive. At worst, it's negligent. And it by no means shows support of Wright's remarks--especially when he has now (even if late) emphatically denounced the comments in question.

    And your comparison to Hitler is absurd. Hitler ACTED against other races, religions, etc., rather than just spewing hate-filled rhetoric. And as far as I know, Hitler performed absolutely NO good acts for Germany or anyone else in the world. Unlike the TUCC, which did quite a bit for its community, as listed in the statement included in the article.

    Reply

    9 Replies

    • 0%

      DropkickaLib6 months, 3 weeks ago

      Hammas and Hezbollah have provided services to their communities but I can't buy the whole package they offer.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

        Right. And neither does Obama buy the whole package offered by Rev. Wright.

        Reply
    • 0%

      Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago

      Gee, automan909, I ususally don't call out negative votes, but I can't help it in this case.

      You negged the comment I made that stated that preaching hate is a terrible thing and that Hitler did nothing good for the world.

      Do you disagree with those assertions?

      Reply
    • 0%

      cherev6 months, 3 weeks ago

      "Hitler ACTED against other races, religions, etc., rather than just spewing hate-filled rhetoric."

      Actually, Hitler didn't ACT. His followers followed his hate-filled rhetoric and directives. Has Wright told others to act? Have others acted on his words? We may