Religious Resignation

[Jester]

The point that I was making with Wright, and I believe Pete and Occhi are trying to make is that his words if transmogrified into White on Black speech would sound exactly like Duke. Now, Duke is a racist, Nazi, SOB. But, the part that is important is the racist part. The same kind of black racism exemplified by the "Hymie Town" comments of Jesse Jackson. Is Wright a racist? I'd say yes.

This ground was trampled hundreds of times in the last thread, so I won't go over it again. Needless to say, I don't think that Wright, if "transmogrified" into "White on Black" sounds anything like David Duke. Swapped "Black on White," Duke would be more extreme than Louis Farrakhan. I challenged you to find anything of Wright's that fits into that kind of category, and I can't say what you came up with was particularily convincing.

My other prior point you refused to see, was that for a religious leader to diverge from the accepted doctrine of his denomination is something that people like Jim Jones did. I'm not implying that Wright is going to haul off his congregation to a Kool Aid party in Guyana, just that its an indication of fringe beyond the fringe when you do that type of thing. By definition, he is a heretic to protestantism, but is he dangerous? I'd say no.

This was also hashed over in the other thread. I don't think this argument makes any sense at all. How is he a heretic, and who are you to say so when the church he is "heretical" from, the UCC, seems to still think he's just dandy.

Back to my original point. Obama used this church for political gain, and denounced it for political gain. You think he's the candidate for change? Because, that is exactly the kind of userous behavior I'd expect from the Clintons. It's all about Obama, and him not facing either the reality of saying "This is who I am, and what I believe", or saying "I really wasn't a believer in either Wright's politics or his heretical Christianity". So which is it Jester?

I like how you put your "heretical" argument in Obama's mouth. Very nice way to slip that in.

First, I don't think people who attend a church, any church, can be considered carbon copies of their pastors in all things. If you agree with 85% of what your pastor says, couldn't care less about 10%, and find 5% to be kooky, I don't think that's a particularily unusual situation.

Obama is clearly much more moderate than the firey, strident Wright, and he's from a different generation and cultural background. I think he was deeply attracted to the anti-poverty work, the anti-Apartheid and other anti-racism message, and the anti-violence message. Trinity United is inclusive and supportive of rights for gays and lesbians, for women, for people of all ethnicities. (How very David Duke of them.) Obama obviously found that attractive. It's a kind of Christianity that offers a lot of hope, even if it is served up with a side dish of a few conspiracy theories. This is true of, and worse in, a lot of churches.

The theology, I have no idea, but I obviously disagree with you that this is some kind of heresy, so I don't think that would be any particular issue for Obama. Seems pretty normal to me.

I suspect he probably heard some things in church, every few months, that raised an eyebrow. However, like most people in a church that's more radical than they are (in any sense) he likely just shrugged it off as a difference of opinion. I don't disown friends who believe the occasional kooky thing, Obama probably doesn't either.

Now, if you take all the nuttiest things Wright has said, broadcast them a zillion times, that's going to make him look bad. The last straw for Obama was when Wright, obviously a proud and opinionated man who enjoys the limelight, insisted on defending every one of his least-correct beliefs on television, notably the AIDS conspiracy, and the extremely bizarre belief that Black people are better at music because they think with the other side of their brain. (This, by the by, is one of the few examples of actual racism I can find from Wright, in the sense of a belief in fundamental differences between "races".) When it was all put together, and Wright was not apologetic for these beliefs, but rather was arrogant and belligerent about it, that was the end.

Did he decide to leave the church to protect the church from the media crapstorm? Out of disillusionment with Wright over his public stupidities? To make his own life easier on the campaign trail? I would suspect it was a little of all three, though I suspect the third made the first two seem a lot more pressing. I think he was gracious enough to give Wright some space to correct or shut up about his crazier beliefs, and instead he called a press conference and shouted them at the top of his lungs. I think Obama only gave him that space out of respect and long friendship, and I don't see him as having dealt with this opportunistically.

-Jester

[Occhidiangela]

Duke is a Neo-Nazi. Neo-Nazi, are a type of Nazi (as long as they believe in Fascism) and more to the point Racist. Does Duke's hate speech result in a positive, non-violent future? I'd say no.

Is that what he calls himself, or is tha what YOU call him?

Nazi is a subset of racist, racist is NOT a subset of Nazi.

As to the guy with the armband, Jester, he's obviously a self proclaimed Nazi, and chooses to present himself as such.

If either of you can demonstrate to me that David Duke has stated that he is a member of the American Nazi party, please do so, and I'll knock it off with the carping.

Once again: hating Jews does not a Nazi make.

Occhi

[Jester]

Is that what he calls himself, or is tha what YOU call him?

Nazi is a subset of racist, racist is NOT a subset of Nazi.

As to the guy with the armband, Jester, he's obviously a self proclaimed Nazi, and chooses to present himself as such.

If either of you can demonstrate to me that David Duke has stated that he is a member of the American Nazi party, please do so, and I'll knock it off with the carping.

Once again: hating Jews does not a Nazi make.

Occhi

...

That guy with the armband IS David Duke.

-Jester

[kandrathe]

How is he a heretic, and who are you to say so when the church he is "heretical" from, the UCC, seems to still think he's just dandy.

The core of the main heresy is that the major tenet of all Liberation Theology is that "God" is only concerned with the oppressed. Maybe because the TUC is the largest UCC congregational church. And, who knows why they cast a blind eye to the truth?

Wright metaphorically characterizes the US government as the biblical Rome, and all who stand with the US as the biblical Roman oppressors. Also, the handy anti-semitism in this characterization is that it was the Jews who called for the crucifixion of Christ, thereby you can package all your struggle/troubles into either anti-americanism or anti-semitism. The dangerous parallel that is a haunting similarity of this metaphor is what is preached by radical Islam everyday. This is why Michele Obama has never been proud of her country, and why Jesse Jackson in an ad lib moment let his racist slip show.

Here is what is reported; The last straw was the Rev. Michael Pfleger, a Roman Catholic priest who, while guest preaching at Trinity, mocked Hillary Clinton for feeling entitled to the presidency because she's white and the wife of a former president.

Obama, in explaining why he had left the church, said the Pfleger controversy had convinced him that, as long as he remained in the congregation, he would have to respond to things that were said from the pulpit -- no matter who said them -- and that the issue would continue to be a distraction for his campaign.

I say he is a man of expedience and political savvy, not unlike his rival Hillary. Check out; Sen. Obama's Dreams from My Father--Is he really different from Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jr.?

[eppie]

This ground was trampled hundreds of times in the last thread, so I won't go over it again. Needless to say, I don't think that Wright, if "transmogrified" into "White on Black" sounds anything like David Duke. Swapped "Black on White," Duke would be more extreme than Louis Farrakhan. I challenged you to find anything of Wright's that fits into that kind of category, and I can't say what you came up with was particularily convincing.
This was also hashed over in the other thread. I don't think this argument makes any sense at all. How is he a heretic, and who are you to say so when the church he is "heretical" from, the UCC, seems to still think he's just dandy.
I like how you put your "heretical" argument in Obama's mouth. Very nice way to slip that in.

First, I don't think people who attend a church, any church, can be considered carbon copies of their pastors in all things. If you agree with 85% of what your pastor says, couldn't care less about 10%, and find 5% to be kooky, I don't think that's a particularily unusual situation.

Obama is clearly much more moderate than the firey, strident Wright, and he's from a different generation and cultural background. I think he was deeply attracted to the anti-poverty work, the anti-Apartheid and other anti-racism message, and the anti-violence message. Trinity United is inclusive and supportive of rights for gays and lesbians, for women, for people of all ethnicities. (How very David Duke of them.) Obama obviously found that attractive. It's a kind of Christianity that offers a lot of hope, even if it is served up with a side dish of a few conspiracy theories. This is true of, and worse in, a lot of churches.
'
The theology, I have no idea, but I obviously disagree with you that this is some kind of heresy, so I don't think that would be any particular issue for Obama. Seems pretty normal to me.

I suspect he probably heard some things in church, every few months, that raised an eyebrow. However, like most people in a church that's more radical than they are (in any sense) he likely just shrugged it off as a difference of opinion. I don't disown friends who believe the occasional kooky thing, Obama probably doesn't either.

Now, if you take all the nuttiest things Wright has said, broadcast them a zillion times, that's going to make him look bad. The last straw for Obama was when Wright, obviously a proud and opinionated man who enjoys the limelight, insisted on defending every one of his least-correct beliefs on television, notably the AIDS conspiracy, and the extremely bizarre belief that Black people are better at music because they think with the other side of their brain. (This, by the by, is one of the few examples of actual racism I can find from Wright, in the sense of a belief in fundamental differences between "races".) When it was all put together, and Wright was not apologetic for these beliefs, but rather was arrogant and belligerent about it, that was the end.

Did he decide to leave the church to protect the church from the media crapstorm? Out of disillusionment with Wright over his public stupidities? To make his own life easier on the campaign trail? I would suspect it was a little of all three, though I suspect the third made the first two seem a lot more pressing. I think he was gracious enough to give Wright some space to correct or shut up about his crazier beliefs, and instead he called a press conference and shouted them at the top of his lungs. I think Obama only gave him that space out of respect and long friendship, and I don't see him as having dealt with this opportunistically.

-Jester

One of the best posts on the lounge, period.


Pete, Occhi, Kandrathe I have the idea you are just looking for something to justify your dislike for Obama.

I don't support Obama, he is much to religious for me (and where religion starts, common sense leaves....but you know my opinion on this matter) but claiming that he is in one way connected and therefor is himself in a certain way a racist is just ridiculous. Your discussion strategy of nitpicking certain remarks another person (jester in this case) made and thereby diverting from the real subject is not helping nice discussions here at all (this last part is not aimed at Kandrathe because he generally shows being able to understand what the opponent in a discussion is saying).


Another point more on the topic of this thread (at least of the 10 last posts) the racism question of certain people/groups. There is a big difference between a racism of say Hitler, that is in power and uses it to commit genocide, and the racism of a member of a lower class community that tries to give 'his people' some pride. Both ways are not good but there is a difference. E.g. the black panthers, obviously a racist group that committed crimes and had leaders that were in it for the power...but they still played an important role in emancipation of blacks. Comparing this; the KKK, that just went around and kill blacks and doing this without being held responsible because of support in politics and the police force is a different thing.
I am not sure that the all of the panthers would have done the same (KKK) thing if they were belonging to the 'ruling class'. For sure a part of them would.....like I always say 'you have bastards in every social class/race and religious group', but trying to connect Obama with these things is just not right., it doesn't make sense.

[Jester]

The core of the main heresy is that the major tenet of all Liberation Theology is that "God" is only concerned with the oppressed. Maybe because the TUC is the largest UCC congregational church. And, who knows why they cast a blind eye to the truth?

So, because they believe in Liberation Theology, they are heretics, full stop? That's the argument?

That sounds rather intolerant to me, leaving aside the whole point that it's not your call to make.

Edit: But it is the UCC's to make. From the UCC wikipedia page:

The motto of the United Church of Christ comes from John 17:21: "That they may all be one." The denomination's official literature uses broad doctrinal parameters, honoring creeds and confessions as "testimonies of faith" rather than "tests of faith," and emphasizes freedom of individual conscience and local church autonomy. Indeed, the relationship between local congregations and the denomination's national headquarters is covenantal rather than hierarchical: local churches have complete control of their finances, hiring and firing of clergy and other staff, and theological and political stands.

Theological and political stands are at the discretion of the individual church, and this is the orthodox doctrine of the UCC.

Wright metaphorically characterizes the US government as the biblical Rome, and all who stand with the US as the biblical Roman oppressors. Also, the handy anti-semitism in this characterization is that it was the Jews who called for the crucifixion of Christ, thereby you can package all your struggle/troubles into either anti-americanism or anti-semitism. The dangerous parallel that is a haunting similarity of this metaphor is what is preached by radical Islam everyday. This is why Michele Obama has never been proud of her country, and why Jesse Jackson in an ad lib moment let his racist slip show.

Methinks you're reading a heck of a lot into this stuff. Do you have any evidence for your charge of anti-semitism being "packaged" into Wright's speeches? Or is that just supposed to be self-evident? I can't say I've found anything he's said "hauntingly similar" to radial Islam. Your ellision of anti-semitism and anti-americanism is disturbing, to say the least.

And now we're bringing in Jesse Jackson! What connection does he have to this whole mess? Oh, yeah. He's black. I guess that's enough.

-Jester

[Occhidiangela]

One of the best posts on the lounge, period.
Pete, Occhi, Kandrathe I have the idea you are just looking for something to justify your dislike for Obama.

Eppie

You are an idiot.

I don't dislike Obama.

Occhi

[Occhidiangela]

...

That guy with the armband IS David Duke.

-Jester

Really?

Care to back that up?

Jesus wept. Read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Duke I have gone to some pains to explain to you the nature of David Duke, and all you can do is stick you fingers in your ears and cry "Nazi." The guy is a White Nationalist. It is what he is, what he calls himself, and what he pours his energy into these days. His talent, it seems, is to stir up hate and discontent along racial lines. Bully for him, but he hardly makes the world a better place.

Yuo seem to confuse a symbol with a person. How about that: you are a NeoCon. You must be, since you exhibit all of their traits, which includes the inability to look objectively at what you are dealing with, and your obssession with Nazis.

Color me stunned.

Occhi

[Thenryb]

FWIW you can see it here:http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/duke.asp


(of course, I do not know how to actually post a link properly. Perhaps I should learn. Or not.)

[eppie]

Really?

Care to back that up?

Jesus wept. Read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Duke I have gone to some pains to explain to you the nature of David Duke, and all you can do is stick you fingers in your ears and cry "Nazi." The guy is a White Nationalist. It is what he is, what he calls himself, and what he pours his energy into these days. His talent, it seems, is to stir up hate and discontent along racial lines. Bully for him, but he hardly makes the world a better place.

Yuo seem to confuse a symbol with a person. How about that: you are a NeoCon. You must be, since you exhibit all of their traits, which includes the inability to look objectively at what you are dealing with, and your obssession with Nazis.

Color me stunned.

Occhi

David Duke was not a member of the national socialist party during the times of the third reich. Hence he is not a nazi. End of discussion.


Thank you for, through the use of cunning arguments, convince us that David Duke indeed is not a 95 year old WW2 criminal.

[Jester]

Really?

Care to back that up?

Well, I got that picture from http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/duke.asp. The Anti-Defamation League good enough for you? I don't think it is in dispute that this is a picture of David Duke. This kind of behaviour, walking around in a Nazi uniform, distributing Neo-Nazi literature, vocally denying the Holocaust, and whatnot, were apparently par for the course for Duke when he was at Louisiana State.

Do you need further confirmation? The guy writes for Stormfront.org, the largest Neo-Nazi nutcase fringe website on the internet. It was founded by friend, successor as Grand Wizard and former American Nazi Party member, Don Black. He apparently used to sell copies of Mein Kampf from his Louisiana legislative office.

It is frankly stunning that you're able to sniff out a whiff of Black Panther from the Trinity website, but are unable to identify the gigantic flashing neon pink sign in front of you that reads "DAVID DUKE IS A NEO-NAZI". I don't get it.

For a couple references amongst hundreds:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...n=&pagewanted=3

For the spot-on phrase "Neo-Nazi with a Nosejob":

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport...icle.jsp?pid=65

And, just to paint the lily, read your own link, please:

Duke studied at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge and in 1970, he formed a White student group named the White Youth Alliance, which was affiliated with the National Socialist White People's Party. That same year, to protest William Kunstler's appearance at Tulane University in New Orleans, he became well-known for a demonstration in which he appeared in Nazi dress. While picketing and holding parties on the anniversary of the birth of Adolf Hitler, he became famous on campus for wearing a Nazi uniform.

-Jester

Edit: It's never too late to be polite.

[Hammerskjold]

It was founded by friend, successor as Grand Wizard and former American Nazi Party member, Don Black.

Most unintentionally hilarious name\life combo, For T3h Win!

In close tie, Eppie's follow up.

David Duke was not a member of the national socialist party during the times of the third reich. Hence he is not a nazi. End of discussion.


Thank you for, through the use of cunning arguments, convince us that David Duke indeed is not a 95 year old WW2 criminal.

I don't always agree with Eppie, but funny is funny.

Now I'm just waiting for the German Nazi waiter and caterer named Dieter Kraft to show up. Preferably played by a goose stepping John Cleese.

[Occhidiangela]

Well, I got that picture from http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/duke.asp. The Anti-Defamation League good enough for you?

No. Care to tell me why you hold them in high regard?

They are a racialist organization. Their whole raison d'etre is Identity Politics along ethnic lines. (In their case, Jewish.)

How does that make them special, or any better than Nation of Islam, the Klan, or the French Nationalist Party, or Bossi's crowd in Italy?

Here's another clue for you: politics is increasingly tribal. I used to call this "Balkanization" but I think I missed a few tricks. Iraq and Bosnia have taught me better.

As to its never being too late to be polite:

True.

[Occhidiangela]

Most unintentionally hilarious name\life combo, For T3h Win!

In close tie, Eppie's follow up.
I don't always agree with Eppie, but funny is funny.

Glad to see you like morons. You must be a politician.

[Jester]

No. Care to tell me why you hold them in high regard?

They are a racialist organization. Their whole raison d'etre is Identity Politics along ethnic lines. (In their case, Jewish.)

How does that make them special, or any better than Nation of Islam, the Klan, or the French Nationalist Party, or Bossi's crowd in Italy?

Here's another clue for you: politics is increasingly tribal. I used to call this "Balkanization" but I think I missed a few tricks. Iraq and Bosnia have taught me better.

As to its never being too late to be polite:

True.

I trust them enough to identify a picture of David Duke. They say it's David Duke. It fits the when, where, what and why of David Duke in the 1970s. It looks like David Duke. I've never heard anyone but you claim it *isn't* David Duke.

I think the ball's in your court.

-Jester

Afterthought: I also don't recall the last time the Anti-Defamation League left a burning Menorah on someone's lawn.

Link for the interested: David Duke, in 1997, on his own involvement in the Kunstler ("Chicago 7") protest, basically admitting that this is, in fact, himself in that picture wearing the Swastika armband.

http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Others/Oth...thHateWatch.htm

He, of course, dissociates himself from his Nazi past, and claims to have moved on to bigger and better things. I frankly could care less what he says about himself, as he is among the least trustworthy people on the planet. But if the dude in the picture is a Neo-Nazi, or being as charitable as I possibly can be, only *was* a Neo-Nazi, and is now only an all around freak, he is very far from a reasonable comparison with Rev. Wright.

[Chesspiece_face]

Back to my original point. Obama used this church for political gain, and denounced it for political gain. You think he's the candidate for change? Because, that is exactly the kind of userous behavior I'd expect from the Clintons. It's all about Obama, and him not facing either the reality of saying "This is who I am, and what I believe", or saying "I really wasn't a believer in either Wright's politics or his heretical Christianity". So which is it Jester?

There's a much more simpler explanation: That being that once Obama became a highly public figure the leaders of the church got big egos and started feeding off the extra attention leaving Obama sitting there saying "WTF mates?!?!"

Edit: Given your obvious feelings towards reverand Wright I would think it would be much more rational to ascribe the usery in the reverse. That Wright is much more likely to use Obamas prestige to further his own agenda in ways he may not have had the opportunity to before.

[Hammerskjold]

Glad to see you like morons. You must be a politician.

I just have to laugh at the absurdity of a white nationalist who happened to have 'Black' as a last name.

And nah, I'm no politician, unless someone is offering me a vice presidency office. Then I'm certainly willing to play one.

[Occhidiangela]

I think the ball's in your court.

-

I see. You like biased sources, you like to cherry pick, you won't bother to look past the surface, and you don't have any time for the care I take in using something other than a pigeon hole, reductionist label for something a bit more complex than your, and the NeoCons', favorite bogey man.

Fine, suit yourself.

A brain is a terrible thing to waste.:(

The point was racist and racialist poitics, but you could not resist burrowing into the irrelevance of the Nazi bogey man. Duke as an example of a racialist nationalist, just as Wright is a racialist Afrocentrist, was and remains an apt comparison in America national politics due to the issues of AMERICAN POLITICS and AMERICAN political uses of race. You cherry pick a non substantive bogey man in an attempt to derail or discredit a point, and Nazi once again, Jester, is not the issue. Race politics is there, it is real, and it can't be wished away.

Davie Effing Duke has been in both the Democratic and Republican parties as an American politician from Louisiana. Your idiotic fixation on teh Nazi bogeyman is blinding you to the discussion at hand, and the simple point I was making.

Jesus Wept, in part because he knew how stupid people can be.

See you in a few weeks, you are making me sick.

Occhi

[Jester]

You, sir, have serious issues.

-Jester

[kandrathe]

So, because they believe in Liberation Theology, they are heretics, full stop? That's the argument? That sounds rather intolerant to me, leaving aside the whole point that it's not your call to make.

I'm pretty conversant in discussing Gustavo Gutierrez(have his book too), and in fact devoted an entire semester course at University studying Liberation Theology in Latin America. The biggest fallacy of Liberation Theology is that it confuses earthly liberation with salvation. This link is a good overview.

Theological and political stands are at the discretion of the individual church, and this is the orthodox doctrine of the UCC.

Which is why I said only the TUC's doctrine is apostasy and heretical. I think the entire UCC leadership is questionable, and has questionable positions.

Methinks you're reading a heck of a lot into this stuff. Do you have any evidence for your charge of anti-semitism being "packaged" into Wright's speeches? Or is that just supposed to be self-evident? I can't say I've found anything he's said "hauntingly similar" to radial Islam. Your allusion of anti-semitism and anti-americanism is disturbing, to say the least.

Never mind that Wright gave Louis Farrakhan a life time achievement award. Or, printed in the June 10th, 2007 TUC bulletin an open letter to Oprah (page 8) from Ali Baghdadi. The same Ali Baghdadi who help post bail for Rezko (link) and who lists in his credentials ;"Middle East advisor to the Honorable Elijah Muhammad the founder of the Nation of Islam, as well as Minister Louis Farrakhan; visited more than 80 countries throughout the world and met with many of their leaders, including Mandela, Castro, Saddam Hussein, Hafez Assad, Qathafi, Abdallah ibn Abdel-Aziz, Rafsanjani, Ayatollah Khamenei, etc."

Back to the topic of Obama's moral courage... Here is a commentary by Jeffrey Lord a Reagan White House political director and author, he lives in Pennsylvania where he serves as president of a UCC church council and where he will shortly be installed as a board member of the United Church of Christ's Penn Central Conference.