RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation

RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity

Message

rulemylife -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/28/2008 5:20:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado 'Obama fever'...sort of like Jungle Fever? And lay off the pipe? A crack reference for an 'Obama worshipper'? My, you sure do have a way with words, when you can't answer the questions. Ok, so let me see here. Everything I say, if not fully supportive of Obama, makes me a racist . You need to take off the racism goggles, huh? If it was Hillary I would have said Clinton fever. Crack is smoked by everyone, white and black, and too much by you I fear. Pose an intelligent question and I'll try to answer. The only thing you have done so far is to try to make me defend things I have never said and have no connection with. I've quoted you directly and asked specific questions as to what you said, why won't you answer the questions, and why the straw arguments to distract from that? Ok, I take back my last post because I missed one of yours. You did ask some specific questions. My apologies. What I said was hero worship. There seem to be far too many people who "like" the guy but are asking far too few questions. Hell, I like the guy, I just don't see a lot of substance in what he is saying. It's wonderful to say you want change but I have yet to hear him tell me exactly how and when he plans on accomplishing those changes. We've already seen him turn his back on one of the pillars of change he campaigned on, public financing. As far as Rev. Wright goes, what can be said? He's a nutcase. Just like Falwell did, and Pat Robertson and others continue to do, he uses religion as a tool to create division instead of using it to unite people. You need to do some reading on your next topic. The government never infected anyone with an STD. They did something almost as horrible by not informing or treating those who had the disease for the sake of scientific research. Rev, Wright, and you, want to turn this into a racial argument. Yes, in this case the participants were all black. There were many other "scientific studies" conducted during the same time period on all white participants. I think someone in an earlier post mentioned Bikini Atoll where soldiers were subjected to ground zero radiation fron atomic tests so the government could learn the effects of radiation to the human body. We had/have a government out of control, that's not an issue of race

sub4hire -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/28/2008 5:26:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly quote: ORIGINAL: sub4hire This is my problem with the church....they are not focused on the American black population they are focused on the African black population. damn...all this time i thought the focus of a church was God. Silly me. Good post, holly. Not really it wasn't. Considering the Trinity Church of Christ church is not about God on most days. Some churches..yes. Others no. But hey, I've got no reason to argue about it..all it takes is someone to actually read and do fact checks.

celticlord2112 -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/28/2008 6:56:39 PM)
quote: I still don't see a logical basis for equating the two. The KKK doctrine states that the white race is superior. Although I know some blacks talk the same trash, the Trinity church text does not. It seems to me to be calling for middle and upper class blacks to not just get caught up in accumulating stuff but to use some of their resources to address black social problems. It seems that that would benefit us all. Would you prefer that that not happen? Applying the value system within Trinity's congregation, or even within black communities overall, the issue is quickly becomes none of my concern. Trinity must minister to its congregation the best way it knows, and in that effort they are answerable only to God. So it is with any faith community. The issue arises when one of Trinity's members (now former member) moves beyond that congregation and aspires to the US Presidency. Even presuming merit for the value system within a black community, there is no escaping that the United States is not a black community--it is not a white community, nor an asian, nor a latino, nor even Christian nor Muslim nor Jewish nor Buddhist community. It is a community of all of the above (and more). Does a race-centric value system--regardless of its efficacy within one community--equip a man to be a leader of all communities? If Obama does win the Presidency, will his focus then be on addressing black social problems? Is that the prudent and proper discharge of that office? Would it be the proper discharge of the office of President to focus on "white" social problems? Or of "asian" social problems? Or of "latino" social problems? Or of "Christian" social problems? Or of "Muslim" social problems? Each of these labels could be substituted for "black" within the value system document, and each label would, in a national context, pose a similar challenge to the American electorate. That is where Trinity's value system document becomes an issue for me. Ultimately, the word "black" is itself immaterial. On the national political stage, the presence of race-centric language is cause for concern regardless of the specific race being celebrated.

TheHeretic -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/28/2008 10:16:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domexplorer I thought this thread was about ... LOL. It may have started there, Domex, but my reply was to the appalling double standard that these things are only rascist when white people do them.

N4SDChastity -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/29/2008 11:08:37 AM)
OP, American Presidents have been administering to the American "community," for a couple hundred years, now. The instances when one presidential candidates church affiliation has presumptively disqualified them for the highest office are statistically microscopic. What, pray (pun intended) tell, leads you to break out the magnifying glass at this time? I labelled you a prevaricator of the 1st order a few pages ago, and you have provided me no reason to reverse that prognosis in the intervening pages. Face your fears... What, exactly, are you afraid will happen? Feel free to imagineer as much as you feel you need to support your specious platform.

cjan -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/29/2008 11:43:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: I still don't see a logical basis for equating the two. The KKK doctrine states that the white race is superior. Although I know some blacks talk the same trash, the Trinity church text does not. It seems to me to be calling for middle and upper class blacks to not just get caught up in accumulating stuff but to use some of their resources to address black social problems. It seems that that would benefit us all. Would you prefer that that not happen? Applying the value system within Trinity's congregation, or even within black communities overall, the issue is quickly becomes none of my concern. Trinity must minister to its congregation the best way it knows, and in that effort they are answerable only to God. So it is with any faith community. The issue arises when one of Trinity's members (now former member) moves beyond that congregation and aspires to the US Presidency. Even presuming merit for the value system within a black community, there is no escaping that the United States is not a black community--it is not a white community, nor an asian, nor a latino, nor even Christian nor Muslim nor Jewish nor Buddhist community. It is a community of all of the above (and more). Does a race-centric value system--regardless of its efficacy within one community--equip a man to be a leader of all communities? If Obama does win the Presidency, will his focus then be on addressing black social problems? Is that the prudent and proper discharge of that office? Would it be the proper discharge of the office of President to focus on "white" social problems? Or of "asian" social problems? Or of "latino" social problems? Or of "Christian" social problems? Or of "Muslim" social problems? Each of these labels could be substituted for "black" within the value system document, and each label would, in a national context, pose a similar challenge to the American electorate. That is where Trinity's value system document becomes an issue for me. Ultimately, the word "black" is itself immaterial. On the national political stage, the presence of race-centric language is cause for concern regardless of the specific race being celebrated. This, m'laird is jnust another version of the well worn and discredited argument that a Catholic, ala JFK , would takes his cues from the pope , or that say, Al Lieberman would be Israel's puppet. It is a poorly masked attempt by bigots of any stripe to arouse mistrust and unfounded paranoia amongst those susceptable to such manipulations. It was nonsense then and it remains nonsense now. Give it up, it ain't flying anymore.

Level -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/29/2008 11:53:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sub4hire quote: ORIGINAL: Level quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly quote: ORIGINAL: sub4hire This is my problem with the church....they are not focused on the American black population they are focused on the African black population. damn...all this time i thought the focus of a church was God. Silly me. Good post, holly. Not really it wasn't. Considering the Trinity Church of Christ church is not about God on most days. Some churches..yes. Others no. But hey, I've got no reason to argue about it..all it takes is someone to actually read and do fact checks. Were churches created to study the problems of black people? No? Created to focus on God? Yeah, I think so. Now, a small minority of churches may choose to focus elsewhere, but generally speaking, the focus is indeed on God. *Edited to add: I'm not trying to be snarky, and I know that a church can be whatever its parishioners make it, but overall, I'm right [8D]*

rulemylife -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/30/2008 5:59:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cjan quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: I still don't see a logical basis for equating the two. The KKK doctrine states that the white race is superior. Although I know some blacks talk the same trash, the Trinity church text does not. It seems to me to be calling for middle and upper class blacks to not just get caught up in accumulating stuff but to use some of their resources to address black social problems. It seems that that would benefit us all. Would you prefer that that not happen? Applying the value system within Trinity's congregation, or even within black communities overall, the issue is quickly becomes none of my concern. Trinity must minister to its congregation the best way it knows, and in that effort they are answerable only to God. So it is with any faith community. The issue arises when one of Trinity's members (now former member) moves beyond that congregation and aspires to the US Presidency. Even presuming merit for the value system within a black community, there is no escaping that the United States is not a black community--it is not a white community, nor an asian, nor a latino, nor even Christian nor Muslim nor Jewish nor Buddhist community. It is a community of all of the above (and more). Does a race-centric value system--regardless of its efficacy within one community--equip a man to be a leader of all communities? If Obama does win the Presidency, will his focus then be on addressing black social problems? Is that the prudent and proper discharge of that office? Would it be the proper discharge of the office of President to focus on "white" social problems? Or of "asian" social problems? Or of "latino" social problems? Or of "Christian" social problems? Or of "Muslim" social problems? Each of these labels could be substituted for "black" within the value system document, and each label would, in a national context, pose a similar challenge to the American electorate. That is where Trinity's value system document becomes an issue for me. Ultimately, the word "black" is itself immaterial. On the national political stage, the presence of race-centric language is cause for concern regardless of the specific race being celebrated. This, m'laird is jnust another version of the well worn and discredited argument that a Catholic, ala JFK , would takes his cues from the pope , or that say, Al Lieberman would be Israel's puppet. It is a poorly masked attempt by bigots of any stripe to arouse mistrust and unfounded paranoia amongst those susceptable to such manipulations. It was nonsense then and it remains nonsense now. Give it up, it ain't flying anymore. No, actually it is not. Think back to 2004 and the issue of John Kerry's Catholicism. Several Catholic Bishops in various regions said on record that Catholics should not not vote for him because of his support of abortion and stem-cell research. There was even one who suggested Kerry be banned from the church for his views. To his credit, he did not let it influence him, though he easily could have. A candidate's religious influence, right or wrong, IS an issue.

cjan -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/30/2008 6:40:39 AM)
quote: Rule quote: No, actually it is not. Think back to 2004 and the issue of John Kerry's Catholicism. Several Catholic Bishops in various regions said on record that Catholics should not not vote for him because of his support of abortion and stem-cell research. There was even one who suggested Kerry be banned from the church for his views. To his credit, he did not let it influence him, though he easily could have. A candidate's religious influence, right or wrong, IS an issue. Influences are everywhere, rule. Or haven't you noticed ? What's far more relevant is a person's character and history of how they deal with issues in a sea of influence. By your standard, everyone would be suspect to those influences and judged according to each of our own. A rather sticky wicket, eh ?

domexplorer -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/30/2008 4:36:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: domexplorer I thought this thread was about ... LOL. It may have started there, Domex, but my reply was to the appalling double standard that these things are only rascist when white people do them. Another segway. First skinheads, then panthers, now double standards. All hot buttons designed to reach conclusions without thought. The internet has great potential to assist us to exchanging ideas and learning from those from different backgrounds and bridging traditional gaps. The lady nor I said anything about skinheads, panthers, or whites. Just that the text did not sound racist to us. You have a learning opportunity but I doubt you will take advantage of it. Broad brushing and leaving out the same door you came in is much easier. If reading the text is to hard, I invite you to attend Trinity. If you are afraid to do so I offer to attend with you. I'm sure this would lead to more clarity. If clarity is of interest to you.

domexplorer -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/30/2008 6:35:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: I still don't see a logical basis for equating the two. The KKK doctrine states that the white race is superior. Although I know some blacks talk the same trash, the Trinity church text does not. It seems to me to be calling for middle and upper class blacks to not just get caught up in accumulating stuff but to use some of their resources to address black social problems. It seems that that would benefit us all. Would you prefer that that not happen? Applying the value system within Trinity's congregation, or even within black communities overall, the issue is quickly becomes none of my concern. Trinity must minister to its congregation the best way it knows, and in that effort they are answerable only to God. So it is with any faith community. The issue arises when one of Trinity's members (now former member) moves beyond that congregation and aspires to the US Presidency. Even presuming merit for the value system within a black community, there is no escaping that the United States is not a black community--it is not a white community, nor an asian, nor a latino, nor even Christian nor Muslim nor Jewish nor Buddhist community. It is a community of all of the above (and more). Does a race-centric value system--regardless of its efficacy within one community--equip a man to be a leader of all communities? If Obama does win the Presidency, will his focus then be on addressing black social problems? Is that the prudent and proper discharge of that office? Would it be the proper discharge of the office of President to focus on "white" social problems? Or of "asian" social problems? Or of "latino" social problems? Or of "Christian" social problems? Or of "Muslim" social problems? Each of these labels could be substituted for "black" within the value system document, and each label would, in a national context, pose a similar challenge to the American electorate. That is where Trinity's value system document becomes an issue for me. Ultimately, the word "black" is itself immaterial. On the national political stage, the presence of race-centric language is cause for concern regardless of the specific race being celebrated. No a race-centric value system does not equip a man to lead all communities. My point is that is does not necessarily hinder him from doing so. If the system teaches the superiority of a race it probably will hinder him. If its grounded in community service it may well serve him. I deliberately avoided the issue of Obahma candidacy. But since it has come up...he already holds a national office. I don't think that he would be running for president if he only addressed black social problems as a senator. I am not aware of any complaints from his majority non-black constituency that he has not represented them. The logical conclusion seems to be that his affiliation with Trinity has not caused him to only focus on black social problems. So do we go with the logical and concrete experience or hold on to therotical fears? Senator Obahma did not bring race-centric language to the national stage. His political opponents did. I am more concerned with the labeling of black self-help efforts as racist or anti-white. Where does this fear come from?

TheHeretic -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/30/2008 6:53:42 PM)
Well, I'm sorry to hear you feel that way, Domex. I'm going to pass on your invitation to visit Trinity. I sat through enough Jeremiah Wright sermons, drawing my own conclusions about those reports, to get a pretty good feel for the place. Now if you want to toss in a couple first-class plane tickets, a nice hotel, and dinner in one of those Chicago steakhouses I've heard are so good, I might reconsider. You said: quote: ORIGINAL: domexplorer The internet has great potential to assist us to exchanging ideas and learning from those from different backgrounds and bridging traditional gaps. The lady nor I said anything about skinheads, panthers, or whites. Just that the text did not sound racist to us. The text did not sound rascist? It mentions "Black" in each of the 12 points. I think we must define "rascist" in very different ways. Perhaps you'll find this another bothersome segue that isn't covered in your talking points, but would it sound rascist to you if it said "white" instead? Spare me the standard crapola about needing a hate component. Value number 8 requires adherents to reject integration into society and blames all the ills of the community on malicious outsiders (would the "they" be whitey in this case?). That's textbook hate propaganda. I don't raise the other things to change the subject, I make comparisons, offer similar ethical questions through a different lense. Forest instead of tree, all the chess pieces, or a whole bar of hotties, instead of one great pair of tits. Shouldn't the internet be a place to see the big picture? Do you apply the same standards of behavior to other race-focused organizations? If not, wouldn't that make you the rascist? In the words of Reverend Wright, "I am still in the text."

Alumbrado -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/30/2008 7:52:04 PM)
So all you have to do is call the dictionary definition of racism 'crapola', and that makes those scary black people racists? OK, but why?

N4SDChastity -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/30/2008 8:04:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic ~ but would it sound rascist to you if it said "white" instead? Here's the part you an the OP will never quite understand, the "white" part is implicit in all that isn't specifically identified as other-than-white. Why, tell me, when the media reports a Man having done something wrong, is the Man's race ONLY used as a qualifyer IF the Man is other-than-white? If I start a joke with, "A Man walks into a bar...", why, tell me, do you ASSUME I am referring to a white man, unless I go the extra step of identifying my foil as OTW? Why can I travel to a country as ethnically singular as Lithuania and be spoken to, treated, seen as simply a Man; but, the minute I walk into a resturuant in Bloomington, IN, USA, in the middle of summer (when all the athletes are gone), to have my lunch, EVERY body in the joint STOPS talking, eating, going about their business, and focuses on ME? I ain't that damn good looking. Guess what color ALL of them were. Why is the common assumption (here is where you get to join your fellow prevaricator and swear that YOU NEVER fall prey to such shrotcommings) that the welfare rolls are generally populated with OTW when, numerically, Whites' enrollment numbers FAR outweigh OTWs? Why is it that, whenever anything that directly benefits OTWs is put forth people like you and the OP trot out your snideisms and falsecusations in a transparent attempt to sling slime without getting any on yourselves, or agendize your lies under the guise of "seeing" through anothers' eyes? I asked the OP, and he (<--note, lower-case) has yet to answer; and at least one other poster has also asked in general, and no one owns the cojones to pony up to the REAL issue, here... WHAT are you afraid of?!?!? SPIT IT OUT ALREADY so we can help you past your latent issues. But, you won't, will you? Either of you. You offer misdirection and pretend your position is worthy of public scrutinity. Who is the real threat, here? Your ilk who hide their true colors behind pointing out the color in others? I think we have our winner... Show of hands, who thinks I am right?[sm=waves.gif]

BitaTruble -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/30/2008 8:49:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: N4SDChastity I ain't that damn good looking. Um, yeah. Actually, you are. Opps.. highjack. [8D]

TheHeretic -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/30/2008 9:01:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: N4SDChastity Show of hands, who thinks I am right?[sm=waves.gif] Gee, Chas, I hope this isn't being settled by a popularity contest. I'm really good at pissing people off. You sure do think you know a lot about me... (because all white people are alike???) Yes, actually, I have had conversation stop when I walked into a place where I wasn't the right color, and was told they didn't serve my kind. Not a pleasant experience. Gaijin. Such events only deepened my resolve to not make race a factor in how I view the people I share the world with. Nor do I visualize, when I hear a good joke. Your assumption about how my brain processes things is as flawed as your leap to what I think. Now if it's the one about Superman and the drunk in the skyscraper bar, I might get a quick flash of Superman as a dark haired white guy, but if I visualize the drunk at all, it will be as a red blotch. Again, with the welfare example. Our current system, and its calamitous consequences, is one of my pet-peeves around these boards. Please go find a post where I have said what you say. The closest you'll get will be a link to the amount of money LA county spends on payments to illegal immigrants. Trash comes in all colors. The entitlement mentality speaks with many accents. If the only way you can see the world is as white and other-than-white, then we are still a long way from Dr. King's dream.

N4SDChastity -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/30/2008 9:41:36 PM)
Herry, Show me where I charcterized you as BEING white... I addressed the underlying mantra that pervades American society. I never SAID you WERE white. Not once. BUT, I can tell,. from the tone of your posts that you buy into the White is Right chorus. Since you alluded to it... Are you? And, still I ask, WHAT is your REAL fear? (not just to YOU, but to ANY reading these words) I'm not pissed, BTW. 30 years ago, I may have been, when having this type of convo. Now, I am just here to point out the details. The things people like you (self-centered and sure of their superiority; nothing to do with whatever color you happen to be, never was) often miss. Like the fact that I was pointing out your inability to see into that which you apparently can only see out of, not the color of your skin. My argument is about mentality, not race. Race is something you and teh OP keep swinging back to, while accusing others of doing that same thing. Oh, and, maybe you slept through poly-sci, that day but, concensus has nothing to do with popularity[8\|] Bita..., you should hold off your favorable judgement until you see me without my makeup... I look a little like--->[sm=alien.gif]

Alumbrado -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/30/2008 10:07:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife As far as Rev. Wright goes, what can be said? He's a nutcase. Just like Falwell did, and Pat Robertson and others continue to do, he uses religion as a tool to create division instead of using it to unite people. You need to do some reading on your next topic. The government never infected anyone with an STD. They did something almost as horrible by not informing or treating those who had the disease for the sake of scientific research. So the women and unborn children who were infected with syphillis during the Tuskegee experiment were not deliberately infected by the actions of the government? Are you saying that the CDC doctors who specialized in STD study didn't know that would happen? And Wright is a nutcase for thinking it did happen? (Or for quoting Peck?) quote: Beyond the direct trauma of participants and their families, the infamous study contributes to a deep suspicion of official medical studies among minorities, according to public-health experts. Blacks have lower-than-average rates of participation in clinical studies of treatments for diseases ranging from cancer to HIV, for example, and are less likely than whites to donate organs. A national poll survey conducted for Emory University's Institute of Minority Health Research in February found that 36 percent of blacks believed it was "very likely" they would be used as unwitting guinea pigs in medical research. That bleak view was shared by only 16 percent of respondents in a predominantly white group. http://www.tuskegee.edu/global/Story.asp?s=1209864 And I need to work on my reading? You hang on to that belief, I will continue to believe differently.

TheHeretic -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/30/2008 10:36:04 PM)
First, just for clarity since you have pics posted, and I don't, yes, I'm white. Nobody would question for a moment that I'm Scotch/Irish. The real mix is a lot more complicated than that, but the Chickasaw/Cherokee contribution to my DNA really doesn't show up on the surface. Honestly though, unless you are assigning my values and beliefs based solely on my pigmentation, that should be irrelevant. Does my skin's sensitivity to sunlight determine my personality? What is this "fear" you are on and on about? There are those things that keep me awake some nights, but none of those passing thoughts have anything to do with race. My nightmares are inspired by George Orwell, not Tom Metzger. It sounds like a desperate attempt to change the subject to me. Oh, and I didn't mean you were pissed in particular. I'm an equal opportunity, contrary sonofabitch, and that seems to piss some folks off, just in general.

BitaTruble -> RE: Why Obama still needs to explain Trinity Church affiliation (6/30/2008 11:31:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: N4SDChastity And, still I ask, WHAT is your REAL fear? (not just to YOU, but to ANY reading these words) My hope is that one day those who come after us will realise how utterly ridiculous it truly is to even argue over what type and how much melanin a body has in their genetic make-up. My fear is that dialogues such as these will be forgotten and that history has the possibility of repeating itself should that happen. quote: Bita..., you should hold off your favorable judgement until you see me without my makeup... I look a little like--->[sm=alien.gif] As a Vulcan wannabe, that didn't help. I adore aliens! IDIC! Live long and prosper [;)]

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

7.800293E-02