The Gift That Keeps On Giving: Obama's New Pastor Claims Wright was LYNCHED!

Which is why I acknowledged "paternalist" racism is racism without hate. Paternalism is the racism that allows you to control another based on your belief that it is in their best interests, which, no doubt, is how many Southerners would've regarded their slaves. That's how we are with pets, although that's really "specieism." I think.

The way more fundamentalist Muslems treat women is similiar. It's unquestionably sexist, but the sexism isn't out of hatred for the women.

We'll rue the day Fido finds out he has a right to bear arms. "Now we're gonna see you fetch, motherfucker!"

Not at all. Matters of repentance and forgiveness are personal affairs. It's nothing anyone should ever expect.

There are various churches who have a hatred of many subgroups, gays chief among them. Some family members of gays are church members. Even some gay people themselves are church members.

Most people belong to a church because they believe in God or whatever deity the church worships, not specifically to indulge a hatred.

Agreed, for a person. For an institution like the state, however, "forgiveness" must, in a sense, be automatic, otherwise the person is deprived of their rights of citizenship.

And I suspect that's true of Obama and all the other people who attend Trinity Church. However, racism is a taint; it doesn't matter how little it's present in Trinity Church, it's still present.

Which brings us right back to post #40 (I think...it was so long ago ).

Everyone will make their own assessment about Obama and how this affects it for themselves.

Then isn't everyone racist, and this entire shitstorm is meaningless?

Well, your example was about a person...yourself.

That's a good point too. It's safe to say that at least one person in everything from the SGA to the NRA to the PTA holds racist sentiments

So if guilt = membership :flow2:

No, it was about either a person or an institution.

We argued whether the U.S. was racist because it once had racist policies.

I've pointed out (and you've agreed) that a person is not a racist if they no longer hold racist views. I submit that by the same principle, the U.S. as a state is no longer a racist nation.

But, you said, whether other choose to accept that is a personal decision. And I agreed.

As near as I can see, that brings us back to: "The U.S. is not a racist state, but Pastor Wright can still be angry about it because it once was."

Fine.

And irrelevent. His anger, or the righteousness thereof, is not at issue. It is his racist and untrue statements that are.

Unless you assert that anger justifies lies.

On this:

It gets back to the lagging indicator bit again. As long as he and others remember when it was, they're entirely free to talk about it. And that it would lead to anger is wholly unsurprising.

Two examples:

#1: You belong to Club A. Club A has no racist agenda and does no racist deeds. It's purpose is, with regard to race, completely benign. However, in Club A, there is another member, X, who is overtly racist.

#2: You belong to Club B. Club B has a mostly none-race agenda, however, they do support legislation that prohibit blacks from marrying whites.

I would say that you are not tainted by racism by belonging to Club A; charging you with racism is merely promoting guilt by association.

If you belong to Club B, however, you are open to the charge of racism. Even if you DON'T AGREE with Club B's stand on the law, you still support the club.

Assuming you were a seeker of public office, the only legitimate way I see for you to remain in Club B would be if you were a vigorous, public opponent of the racial portion of the club's agenda.

What about supporting legislation that prohibits teh gayz from marrying?

List them.

Even if I take this bizarre fringe theory seriously, I fail to see how a handful of scientists being sloppy in the pursuit of the first polio vaccine is "White America killing blacks with AIDS!"

Espousing such a racially inflammatory view, preaching it as gospel in a church as a spiritual leader and as such lending authority to the comments, to practice understatement...is a bad idea.

The new pastor, no matter how you want to nitpick the definitions, also chose to use racially inflammatory rhetoric with the use of "lynching". None of you can in all honesty believe that this man meant e-lynching...seriously.

Obama is a man who is running for president witht he platform of hope, change and unity. Particularly, racial unity...but he seeks spiritual council in a place that is clearly, at best, full of racially charged ideas and hyperbole.

It can't help but bring all kinds of questions and suspicions to the forefront.

The recipients of that sloppily "white-made" polio vaccine were black african natives in the Belgian Congo. It was administered without their informed consent. It's pretty well agreed upon that America (and most of the world) didn't take the AIDS seriously epidemic seriously at first. If one subscribes to the theory, I can see how someone could oversimplify it into "White America kills blacks with AIDS!"

If I did believe in that hypothesis (I do not), I'd attribute it to laziness and apathy on the part of those responsible, rather than any sort of evil conspiracy. But that's just me.

This is true. Mind you, I don't see Wright making it the centerpiece of his sermons, he's just mentioning it as an aside.

What would you call it then? It seems like he's been e-lynched to me.

Fair enough. That's one of the best assessments I've seen so far.

As far as I'm concerned, I don't really have a problem with Obama associating with people who endorse controversial ideas, so long as he's willing and able to see both sides of the issue and make up his own mind.

I'm no longer looking for any explanations from you 14thDoctor. You have clearly shown where you stand on the issue. The above statement was quite clear. There was also additional information that followed what you chose to include.

If Obama truly wants to demonstrate he doesn't support racism in this country he will need to cut his ties with this church as well as with Wright. As long as he continues to donate thousands of dollars to that church he is endorsing and supporting racism and hate.

I somehow doubt you ever were.

He's cut political ties with Wright, but that hasn't stopped you from continuing to complain. Do you really expect anyone to believe you'll take Obama at his word if he cuts all personal ties with Wright and the church tomorrow?

I don't believe you would. I believe you'd still attempt to use his past associations to paint him as a "hateful racist."

You still haven't proven these "racism and hate" allegations to me, unless you think being proud of your heritage is "racist," and criticizing government policy is "hate."

Oh, my.

http://www.tucc.org/black_value_system.html

Which means absolutely nothing. Words from a politicans are empty. Action is the only thing that can clearly show they mean what they are saying.

I don't really care what you believe or do not believe 14thDoctor. I do not take any politicians at their word. Action is the only true measure of a politican and what they say. Obama sounded great with what he said about Wright. But, it means absolutely nothing if he continues his friendship with the racist man and continues to support the church.

That really doesn't matter. What you believe, or do not believe really isn't relevant at this point. You have yet to prove any of your rash statements, especially your ridiculous claims about other churches having similar racist statements in their mission statements.

You still haven't proven these "racism and hate" allegations to me, unless you think being proud of your heritage is "racist," and criticizing government policy is "hate."[/QUOTE]
That is because there is nothing that will convince you. The fact that you have chosen to turn a blind eye to the actions and statements of Jeremiah is your own problem. The fact that you chose to make ridiculously stupid claims about churches in the US without the ability to back up those claims is also another problem at this point.

To Tamar: What?

I see a lot of "We Blacks need to work hard, commit to our families, and get our shit together."

And Obama acted when he fired Wright from his campaign.

But that's not enough action, is it?

You really enjoy misrepresenting my previous statement, don't you? If you were telling the truth, you'd be best to quote me directly at every opportunity. You're not doing that because that's not what I said.

I really said some churches intentionally minister to groups that aren't normally well-served by "mainstream" churches. Other than you, no one has had a problem with that assertion.

Convince everyone else, then.

You keep saying that. Why not quote exactly what I said and repost it?

Oh, that's right... because you're misrepresenting me.

Oh, my.

http://www.tucc.org/ministries.htm

And?? Does that some how change what either Wright or his replacement have been saying? I think not.

Does it show they're about far more than the "racism and hate" you claim they preach?

Yes, yes it does.

I see, it is okay to be racist so long as there are charitable events taking place for the "black community" at their church.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

I think at this point, I am through discussing this topic with you. I've seen a side of you that is quite frankly disgusting. Anyone who is willing to go to the lengths that you are to defend racists really isn't worth my time, or energy.

Good day.

If you can't see what is implied here:

and why it's offensive and divisive, I doubt there is much I can add to it to make you understand.

Right.

Of course you would expect me too....actually you would 'want' me to see both sides of the coin if I went to a white supremacist church.....but chances are my viewpoint is already too skewed for that.

I think a lot of people are ignoring the fact that Oprah left because of racial issues, and she's been a mouthpiece for black people a hell of a lot longer than Obama has.

She hasn't, to my knowledge, come out and defended him since this all began either...I'm guessing she was aware of his membership all along.

marathon really is right, the only thing that is left is to make your judgment, pro or con, on Obama's choice of association.

That is always the bottom line.

However, discussion can only make things more enlightening for everyone.

There is really nothing more he can do, or at least nothing more he is willing to do. So the ball is in the court of each individual now.

From what I've seen here and in RL, there aren't many people who are against him now that weren't before.