Rev Wright's 'Hate' Sermons

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous' started by pettyfog, Mar 13, 2008.

  1. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    As opposed to the rants of I assume a number of Hillary backers and the usual suspects on the right, I dont find Wright's sermon's all that 'racist' or even 'hate-filled' for that matter. Hannity's playing them, and labeling them race/hate' for everyone he interviews on his radio shows and I assume on H & C.

    So I heard them plenty today because I wanted to hear his interviews with Joe Lieberman and Mitt Romney.

    What they ARE are the typical whinings of the 'victim class' ...which are the distillate of decades of Democrats and Liberals of all stripes, especially the Marxist/Socialist breeds assuring Blacks that they were still under the thumbs of "The Man".
    But then again, it's a United Church of Christ congregation so it's no less or more than I would have expected from it. Except for the difference being the good Rev is pointing out his OWN congregants as the victims, rather than those "poor others".

    I'm not the only one who thinks that way
    {via Instapundit}
    - That lady's pretty perceptive

    Added: This puts Michelle Obama's recent comments into perspective, though, doesnt it?

    She's been listening to this drivel for 20 years.
  2. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    This guy, however, says 'Anchoress', Glen Reynolds {and I} are wrong. Then goes on to make our point:
    That this is a ..
    War between Victim Identity Groups

    I recommend reading his essay, nonetheless. It points out what is increasingly becoming clear; that Obama, in appealing to all, really can identify with none.
    Others have said it, before.. he's like an empty slate, asking to be writ on.

    Michelle Obama, however, HAS found her identity in that Church. She wrote in her senior thesis that she never felt she really belonged with any group. Now, judging from her recent strange comments, she does.

    This has much larger portents, though. Like the writer in the link, I see no way that the Dems can overcome this. Barack is between a rock and a hard place, he HAS to choose sides, but in doing so will create a chasm that will be permanent and cause a deterioration in race relations, whichever he chooses.

    It would take Solomon, himself, to fix this.
  3. Lyle

    Lyle New Member

    Jan 21, 2007
    I think Obama is in big trouble because of this. I like him personally, but how can he claim to not know what his preacher has been saying over the years? Why has he subjected his children to this man's message?

    I was raised Catholic and thankfully most of the priests who held mass weren't ideologues, but if they were (precisely 2 were) my parents never attended mass at that church again. Who the hell wants to indoctrinate their children with a message of hate, bitterness, and victimhood; particularly if they themselves are about coming together, forgiveness, and unity?

    Why did he not leave that church years ago?

    He's not going to be able to get either Hillary or the GOP to not attack him on this.
  4. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Lyle, perhaps I need to explain my view:
    BESIDES the fact it's hard to imagine a Catholic priest using 'Thunder-Preaching' fact, this politico-theological course has been followed in a few RC churches in the past.

    In the early days of the country, it was actually the Evangelicals/Baptists who pushed for the separation clause and freedom for ALL religion. They looked at Calvinists in New England and the Roman Church in Maryland and didnt like what they saw.
    And I think we can assume they were aware that even the type of speech seen in Wright's Congregation would be protected under it.

    We cannot condemn, outright, his right to say those things..he does not advocate the actual overthrow of the US. ANd he does not advocate violence, and you will notice that Wright uses the inclusive 'WE' when referring to what the US did in the past. Thus Wright considers himself American.

    THAT said, I ALSO defend his rights so I can safely point out my absolute disgust and disdain for Wright's following the party line of the UCofC... and my absolute CONTEMPT for that Churches theological hierarchy.

    They do not FOLLOW Christ's teaching and they dont CARE about Christ's teachings if it doesnt follow their party line. Which can be summarized in the abstract: "Jesus was a Socialist".

    Which if you read the passages on the Passion... is exactly how and why the Pharisees lobbied to have Jesus crucified.

    I FULLY agree Obama is in trouble... but neither he or Wright is especially 'Racist'. They BOTH point to 'The Man' as responsible for all black community troubles instead of understanding how bad results can be traced to exactly the kinds of remedies they seem to seek.

    Notwithstanding UCofC excellent advocacy for the poor and homeless IN THE COMMUNITY, they promote federal government intervention as the answer.
    See THIS
  5. HatterDon

    HatterDon Moderator

    Mar 18, 2006
    Peoples Republic of South Texas
    Lyle, in Pettyfog's post above, there's tremendous insight into your question to me about "what true religion" I talking about.
  6. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Why dont you say what you mean Don... is it your view, or not, that Jesus was a social activist?

    I think that would clarify your murky references.

    I will clarify mine. He WAS NOT.

    He told his followers to care for the poor, not to petition Rome for it. We are all answerable for what WE do, not for what our government does.
  7. Lyle

    Lyle New Member

    Jan 21, 2007
    None of this is about religion or theology, it's about being anti-American. Rev. Wright claims that the U.S. started AIDS. He claims the U.S. got what it deserves on 9/11. He claims our military purposefully murders people.

    Yet, Obama argues he didn't know Wright said these things? Yet, he didn't stop going to this church? Even if it isn't Obama's views, but more of his wife's views... he's still in trouble.

    The reason America loves him is that he isn't a complaing, "I'm a victim", black man. Yet, he attends a complaining, "we're victims" black church.

    It's bad enough he attends an Afrocentric church, but one where the leader believes the U.S. started AIDS to keep black people down. Oh Jesus!

    My gut tells me he joined this church for political reasons... to make himself "more black", so that he could safely enter Chicago politics and not get hammered as the "half-black" guy by other black Democrats.
  8. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Okay.. Wright sees himself as American. I explained why I say that. If we say he's 'Anti-American', then we have to disqualify a good 20-25% of the socialist lemmings that follow ANSWER, Code Pink and the other idiot groups.

    OF COURSE that's why he joined that church. There's nothing wrong with that.. or in the church being Afro-Centric. That's how churches SHOULD be, the first duty of a church is to its community.

    I'll rant on HOW they address what they say are the SOLUTIONS, not the PROBLEMS to solve within the community.
    - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - -
    As a catholic, perhaps you've read of the new list of mortal sins the Vatican has blessed you with.

    That list ascribes a weight to real problems. But the Vatican has no business judging fellow christians on THEIR beliefs, if YOU want to be judged by the Pope instead of God, that's your business... but I'll venture there's a LOT of Popes and a WHOLE lot MORE Cardinals not gonna make it to paradise. I wont let the President of the Southern Baptists judge me, nor the leaders of UCofC, certainly not some wonk in Rome, claiming to be 'infallible' or not.

    Does that mean Catholics are idiots? No.. Heaven's going to be chock full of Catholics, IMO.
    But that's why we have Freedom of Religion.
  9. HatterDon

    HatterDon Moderator

    Mar 18, 2006
    Peoples Republic of South Texas
    Here's what I mean; pay attention: One minister makes an ass of himself in a pulpit and you condemn his entire religion. A minister of this religion says it, therefor the entire religion sucks.

    Conversely, the religion you claim -- but can't be bothered to get off your dead ass and attend on a Sunday -- is most closely represented by Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. Should I then condemn the entire Southern Baptist religion because these idiots embraced AIDS as God's revenge on homosexuality, called for the assassination of foreign leaders, and claimed that various tornadoes and hurricanes were God's wrath on America for allowing abortion and homosexuality?

    No, it would be stupid, narrow-minded, and bigoted of me to do that. Nobody should ever be held to account for his or her religious beliefs based upon what one -- or several dozen -- people who share that religion do or say. That goes for Southern Baptists, UCCs, and Muslims.

    The only way this ISN'T religious bigotry, is for Pettyfog's chosen religion to be THE ONE TRUE RELIGION and all the others -- including evidently other Christian faiths that don't pass his "purity test" to be apostate and deserving of scorn.

    So, which is it? Is Pettyfog's post an example of religious bigotry? Or is the Southern Baptist Church the sole possessor of "the truth."

    That's what was on my mind when I posted.
  10. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    I'm not making excuses for myself. I relaize your head's spinning because I parse the congregation away from the denomination's theology but I'm thinking you'll be hard pressed to show where I believe ONE belief triumphs over another.

    I grew up in the UCof C and I saw it change to social activism. I became a Southern Baptist and I saw IT change the OTHER way, becoming more centralized and exclusive in their theology.
    But they had one thing in common in that change.. they BOTH became more Judgemental.
    Since the conservative faction took over the SBC, I lost interest. sorry. Still.. the BEST people I know and far more compassionate and caring than I could ever hope to be are Southern Baptists. Most of those, however, act on their own and dont consider their politics and religion to be melded.

    So you can lump me in with Falwell and Robertson all you want. You can lump me with Hagee or even Ian Paisley for all I care.

    I know wherein I saw them right and I know where I saw them wrong. Rave on all you want, but Jesus NEVER said 'Petition Rome with your grievances".

    THAT is the base of my complaints.
  11. HatterDon

    HatterDon Moderator

    Mar 18, 2006
    Peoples Republic of South Texas
    As I said, I would never do that. It's not my business, my job, nor my inclination to belittle the politics, religion, or moral precepts of others. It does, however, seem to be almost a full time avocation for some folks.

    Enough of this crap. We won a football match today, and I'd like to be happy with the state of mankind for at least a few more hours.
  12. Lyle

    Lyle New Member

    Jan 21, 2007
    I'm not criticizing Jeremiah Wright's right to preach whatever, I'm asking why Obama didn't know about what his preacher was saying and why he didn't leave that church. There are political ramifications for a politician who is a member of a church that argues AIDS was started by the U.S. government to harm black people.

    I'm agnostic, but was raised Catholic. However, in defense of the Catholic Church I don't think they published a list of new sins. The media reported it as such, but they misquoted a cardinal (not the Pope) who was talking about traditional sin and modern vices.

    Irregardless, the Vatican and/or Pope's word is not law and a Catholic isn't required to follow his or their lead. Catholics actually disagree with one another as much as Democrats and Republicans do. There simply isn't one path to follow for all Catholics. The Pope is not a Catholic's boss unless you want him to be.

    For example, although the Church is pro-life, many lay persons are pro-choice.

    ... and from what I know Catholic school girls are on birth control from a very early age.
  13. andyns

    andyns New Member

    Jul 28, 2005
    Halifax, Canada
    Bruce Bawer is one of my favorite writers. He said this, I totally agree.

    Think about it. This woman adored him, helped raise him. She's not a public figure. She didn't yelp racist fantasies from a pulpit. On the contrary, she was a white woman from Kansas who in the 1960s and 70s unhesitatingly embraced her half-black grandson and made real sacrifices for his sake. Partly thanks to her selflessness, Obama went on to an extraordinary, magical career.

    And his grandmother, in return for her years of loving devotion (a devotion Obama never received, by the way, from the Kenyan father whom he lionized in his memoir), has now been given her reward, her moment in the sun: she's been memorialized forever and ever in the most important speech of her grandson's career - a speech that will go down in American history - as a woman who said racist things. Period. All this as part of a cheap effort by him to justify his devotion to Jeremiah Wright.
  14. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Wright wont go away

    After telling the NAACP in Detroit that 'no one tells a Kennedy they talk funny, but they tell a black child they talk wrong'...

    Patently WRONG, since 1960

    .. he is speaking at the National Press Club.

    He is a gifted apeaker and spent his speech time explaning Liberation Theology (The Screed of the UCofC) and Reconciliation Theology.

    He claims that attacks on him are attacks on the black church.

    He is an outright flaming liberal... close to Leftist as you can get and still be christian, and only speaking as an identified minority. It's interesting to me that he says a lot about reconciliation and forgiveness as a christian but all his rhetoric is about the unenlightened past sins.

Share This Page