Comments for A Church Under Attack Says "No" to the Political Smears »
Posted By Beau7890 1 year, 8 months ago in NewsThose who seek to discredit Barack Obama by bashing his former pastor are not just attacking the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., they are attacking Trinity United Church of Christ and its highly successful ministry. On Palm Sunday, the Trinity community responded with a statement issued by the Chicago church's current pastor, the Rev. Otis Moss III
Read Full Story at thenation.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 154 of 208 Comments
-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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-
Neutral
DropkickaLib1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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-
Neutral
DropkickaLib1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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-
OnionHeadComment removed: Retracted by user22 Replies
-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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 -
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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 -
-
-
-
-
Neutral
NoSpinDave1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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
-
-
-
Neutral
cushi1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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-
-
Neutral
cushi1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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 -
Neutral
jordan111 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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
-
-
Neutral
cushi1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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 -
-
-
-
Neutral
not2needy1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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-
-
-
Neutral
MajJohn1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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-
Neutral
cushi1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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
-
-
-
-
Neutral
NoSpinDave1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
MajJohn1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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
-
-
-
Neutral
DropkickaLib1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
...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-
Neutral
cushi1 year, 8 months ago
-
Neutral
DropkickaLib1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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 -
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
cherev1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"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-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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-
Neutral
DropkickaLib1 year, 8 months ago
-
-
-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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 -
Neutral
DropkickaLib1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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-
-
-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
cherev1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"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-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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-
-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
kboy1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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-
-
-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
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 -
Neutral
cherev1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"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 never know.
"And as far as I know, Hitler performed absolutely NO good acts for Germany "
At that time, the Germans felt that he did. And, had he won the war (a distinct possibility at that time) they would have looked up to him as a savior. There were a lot of people around the world who felt that he did a good thing. Especially the Arabs.
One wonders just how different this reverend is from Hitler given his attitudes towards Jews.
Reply -
-
Neutral
amazed1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, the reason the Nazis came into power was precisely because they were good for Germany, in fact, until Hitler started unveiling the "final solution" and invaded the Sudetenland in 1938, he was one of the best things to happen to Germany. When the Nazis took power, the worldwide Great Depression was on, inflation in Germany was rampant -- people were carrying money in wheelbarrows to get groceries, and Germany was feeling especially downtrodden because of the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. The Nazis, much like Roosevelt, instituted many programs that helped lift Germany out of her depression -- of course, the main thing that worked was the disregard of the Treaty and the re-institution of the German military machine.
He also gave the world the original Volkswagen Beetle.
Reply
-
-
-
Neutral
nostalgia1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
To understand Dr Wright you need to read about Black Liberation Theology. Black Liberation Theology started with Jim Cone and Dwight Hopkins. The writing of these men is what Wright follows
Some of it is very controversial NOTICE I said "SOME"
Reply-
Neutral
MajJohn1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"controversial"? Couldn't you have come up with something more accurately descriptive? "some" of the sermons were hate filled and full of prejudicial statements. What do you think Jessie Jackson, for example, would say about a KKK White Domination Theology? He'd correctly condemn it. The same thing applies to Dr. Wright's statements. Such hate filled commentary can only lead to violence and an end to a promising political career for Obama, who unfortunately will be found guilty by association.
Reply-
Neutral
nostalgia1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm not talking about the Wright sermons
I'm talking about Black Liberation Theology - SOME of that particular theology is controversial
This seems reasonable: Cone says that black power is a phrase that represents both black freedom and black self-determination "wherein black people no longer view themselves as without human dignity but as men, human beings with the ability to carve out their own destiny."
This is controversial: Cone does not advocate armed revolution against white society. But some violence, he says, seems unavoidable. He points out that "the Christian does not decide between violence and nonviolence, evil and good. He decides between the lesser and the greater evil. He must ponder whether revolutionary violence is less or more deplorable than the violence perpetuated by the system." Injustice, slave labor, hunger, and exploitation are all violent forms that must be considered against the cost of revolutionary violence.
Reply-
Neutral
nostalgia1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What you are hearing in the Wright sound bites are the more controversial aspects of Black Liberation Theology, Wright style
As far a Jesse Jackson, look at the area where Wright's church is located: home to controversial figures like Louis Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson, Carol Moseley Braun and institutions like the University of Chicago. The University of Chicago is important - Dwight Hopkins teaches at the Uni of Chicago divinity school.
Reply-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The University of Chicago and Carol Moseley Braun are/were not controversial in any similar sense to Farrakhan or Jackson.
Braun showed excessively poor judgment in her relations with Nigerian dictator Sani Abacha, and in her campaign financing. She's African-American, but never to my knowledge denigrated those of other races on the basis of their color.
The U. of C. is a huge institution that has produced or hired some of the most conservative thinkers of the 20th century, Leo Strauss and Milton Friedman among them. If anything, when you take into account Dwight Hopkins, you might say the university presents many diverse points of view and lets its students decide about their validity.
Reply -
-
-
Neutral
MajJohn1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You made the connection, "To understand Dr Wright you need to read about Black Liberation", The preaching that some violence is unavoidable, is what? To say that the Christian chooses between the lesser and the greater evil is what? It's the denial that good exists and that revolutionary violence is necessary to achieve justice and freedom from want. Such thinking denies the teachings of Dr Martin L King and Gandhi.
I for one chose the path of the latter and feel I'm n good company.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
DropkickaLib1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So you didn't go to youtube, eh? Not smart enough to find the website? Wright has accused whites of creating addictive drugs to victimize blacks, has advocated crazy conspiracy theories and basically plays the race card as often as possible. He's violated IRS rules by endorsing a candidate from the pulpit as well.
Reply
-
-
-
-
Neutral
amazed1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
blending religion with Marxism always results in a WTF???? moment for me when I see it or hear of it.
Wasn't Marx the guy who coined the phrase "opiate of the masses", to refer to religion and one of the basic tenets of Marxism has been atheism.
It cracks me up that so many liberal churches embrace Marxism. If they got their way and Marxism was instituted, their churches would be the first to go.
Reply -
-
-
-
Neutral
DropkickaLib1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't know why you posted a question to me under someone else's thread. Wright was the pastor for decades so this qualifies as political damage control. I have never heard any white person suggest that whites invented addictive drugs to enslave blacks. No one who isn't wearing a straight jacket should be saying anything like that.
Reply -
-
Neutral
cushi1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That applies to the majority of white baptist churches in this country! Here where I live, we are constantly inviting white churches to join with us to celebrate important religious observances such as Christmas, Easter, Revivals, Watch Night Services, etc. And we NEVER get any kind of response except for an occasional, oh, uhhh, well, we have other plans.
On the other hand, we have whites who attend our predominantly African American church and we welcome them on the basis of their Christianity just as we welcome each other. I don't know of ANY black church, including Obama's, that segregates people according to race or any other type of credentials. History will confirm that we are far more open, forgiving, and willing to mend fences than the caucasian race has ever been! So if you want to start pointing fingers, begin with the biggest offenders.
Reply-
Neutral
DropkickaLib1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There are plenty of black churches where whites would feel distinctly uncomfortable. A friend of mine was asked to leave one in fact. Personally, I have always attended integrated churches and was taught growing up that God doesn't make distinctions based on race. I don't condone any church that makes people feel unwelcomed through its rhetoric and Wright definitely does this.
Reply-
Neutral
cushi1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well who owns the problem, DKAL? That's not the fault of the black churches! We have always been more willing to open doors to other races.
You site ONE incident, if it is, indeed, true. But statistics will show that black churches are more open to other ethnic groups and always have been.
Reply
-
-
-
-
Neutral
moxxxxxxxxxx1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
THE GENERATIONAL GAP SHOWS ITS UGLY HEAD AGAIN
Rev Wright's agenda sets America back 40 years. He represents the generation gap in American. People over 50 lived the experiences he preaches against. Young people have different life experiences. He fails to take into account the many successes of black Americans. Wright's sermons only oppress the very people he is trying to uplift. Obama is a young educated man who understands the needs of all Americans. ALL OF US have older people in our lives who can't get beyond their lfe experiences and keep trying to teach us about how "bad" things were. But we respectfully listen and understand their history rather than guide our lives by their expectations. Try telling your grandma who lived through the Great Depression she's crazy for hoarding everything.
Reply -
Neutral
Commodore11 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well he is using a church to spread hate and I think that is one of the most arrogant and terrible things a person can do. So the church may suffer the consequences for his actions. I think they eject him from the church and put someone in there who is less of a big mouth. I don't like him and disagree completely w/what he says. I think he would make a great psycho Muslim and he should go to Iran or someplace like that and be one. To me he's nothing better than a loud mouth chump.
Reply-
Welfare_Made_Me_RichComment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
-
-
Neutral
DropkickaLib1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That's not the whole story and you know it. You are not telling the truth. You can't tell me that anyone who spouts Wright's rhetoric would make his church appeal to whites. That's ignorant. Play the race card elsewhere. Give me a break.
Reply-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The church does not segregate. Tessylo is telling the truth, and the whole story as it applies to the article to which this thread is attached.
You may not like Tessylo's style of arguing or the insults, but he or she isn't playing the race card any more than you are in linking Wright's statements to the actions of the TUCC.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
DropkickaLib1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Liar! If I choose to sit in a church where the pastor spouts off that kind of rhetoric, I am tacitly endorsing that position. Sermons containing rhetoric like that are not spiritually edifying and I would have to wonder about anyone who feeds not only his or her mind, but his or her spirit, that kind of poison.
Reply-
Welfare_Made_Me_RichComment removed: Retracted by user3 Replies
-
-
Neutral
Mutainia1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Supposedly, Wright is a moderate when it comes to this sort of preaching in the Black community. Being so the case, I can understand why so many blacks are switching to Islam now. Apparently, the "Nation of Islam" is just another black church, but, one that talks more about the Quran more than the Bible.
Reply -
Neutral
automan9091 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So far as Obama not being in the church when those things were said, It just came out that a reporter was in a sermon in that church during one of those racist sermons and was sitting right down from guess who? Thats right...Obama.
Now that qualifies Obama as a bare faced liar.
Even without the witness that saw him there, I sure wouldn't want him as my president if he is so stupid not to know the racist views and goings on over a 20 year period.
Liar liar pants on fire
Reply-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It didn't just come out. The story is from August 9, 2007.
You're confusing the fact that NewsMax, which originally published that story, has just come out and stated that it's wrong:
http://www.propeller.com/viewstory/2008/03/17/n...
You may want to check your facts before calling people liars.
Reply
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Albmore1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There are two mistakes being made here. Fisrt calling this place a church. They do not teach what the bible says, 2nd they honored Farrakan who is one of the biggest anti Jew/ Islamic spreading characters in the US. A Christian Church does not help spread the teachings of Islam.
The 2nd would be calling this man who is so full of hate and racism a Christian. Yes maybe the church does social work, so does the Red Cross, But the Red Cross dont preach hate messages.
I was a supporter of Obama for the dems til now. I did have my doubts on this subject though. I am glad it has come out and was reported. Not to confuse anyone I will never vote for Hillary! Amazing how the true racist characters have came out on both side on this democratic race. This and the fact that they are unable to even run there election correctly should show many the change they promise is worse than what we have now.
Reply-
Neutral
MacR1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You are right, no church would ever, that is "Never", that claims to be a christian church, to spread Islam. Farrakan, is Islam, he isn't a christian preacher, he is a "Teacher" of Islam, well according to him that is.
Not to burst any of your's bubble here, but, don't you think that MLK. Would not be happy, about a church that is backing up a man, who is not even of the, "Christian Faith"? Do you not find it just a bit of hypocracy? Seriously, what MLK preached and what Farrakan has preached are night and day in comparission. What Wright has been videod preaching and the old tapes of MLK are different as night and day.
If you were to take the words "White" out of those sentences that he shouts, insert the word "Black". Dub it over a KKK rally and you would go nuts. It is the same hate, the same silly phrases but from a different source.
Reply -
-
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
-
-
Neutral
NVRob1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama may not have given the sermon in question, or use that type of rhetoric, but he certainly didn't speak out against it.
Unless, maybe this rhetoric only happened that one time when Obama missed church.
I've been going to the same bar every Friday night now for twenty years. They play the same music week after week and I can't stand it, I don't drink, and I can't stand being around drunks.
Makes a lot of sense huh?
Reply -
Neutral
BB641 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So if I were to preach the same materials he uses but reversing black for white, I would be labeled a racist, a hate monger and I'm sure much worse. Why is it when someone black preached hate it's acceptable? I don't care if you're white, black purple or pink, hate is hate and you should be treated as a racist is you're a racist.
Reply-
Neutral
BB641 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks for the negative Tessylo, when I see how you vote, I realize the only right answer is to vote exactly opposite of you. Then again, you never make a comment yourself so rarely can anyone comment. Then again, working part time at McDonald's and living in your mommy's basement, you do live a rather exciting life.
Reply -
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.