Originally posted by: brencat
Agree with this observation. Weird though they seem not to care about making it more difficult for him to win.Originally posted by: Robor
It almost seems like this church staged this last incident as a 'you're with us or you're against us' stance to test his loyalty.
The fact that the President of the United States attends your church would be one hell of a way to promote ones self.Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: brencat
Agree with this observation. Weird though they seem not to care about making it more difficult for him to win.Originally posted by: Robor
It almost seems like this church staged this last incident as a 'you're with us or you're against us' stance to test his loyalty.
What does Trinity care of Obama wins? This is nothing but a publicity stunt for them. IMO all they and any other church cares about is promoting themselves.
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The fact that the President of the United States attends your church would be one hell of a way to promote ones self.Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: brencat
Agree with this observation. Weird though they seem not to care about making it more difficult for him to win.Originally posted by: Robor
It almost seems like this church staged this last incident as a 'you're with us or you're against us' stance to test his loyalty.
What does Trinity care of Obama wins? This is nothing but a publicity stunt for them. IMO all they and any other church cares about is promoting themselves.
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: sandorski
So far, every criticism levelled against Wright has had a totally different meaning than what he was accused of saying.
Proof?
Originally posted by: sandorski
So I ask again, what context was such a staement said?
You never asked me directly for context. You said you would like to see the context. So if thats the case, feel free to start searching.
Nah, go ahead and quit avoiding it.
What a weak argument. You know you never asked me directly for the context.
So what? It's your claim, prove it. Blogs, hit pieces, Editorials need not apply. Full Transcript or Video preferred.
We both know there is no full transcript or video of the sermon on the internet.
We do? I guess you do. So I suppose that makes your accusation unverifiable. Quite convenient.
If there were a full transcript of what he said in that sermon, someone would have already gone through it to try to prove that the comment was out of context.
We've all heard the soundbite of him claiming the US invented AIDS to put genocide on black people. We've all heard him defend it at the National Press Club. No need for context.
What type of context do you need that to be in for it to be acceptable??The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. The government lied.?
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Put yourself in the shoes of a preacher.
IF he is sincere then he believes what the little voice in his ear is saying comes from God. IF he hears nothing but concludes one thing or another so long as it don't conflict with his church's dogma then it must be a revelation given him by God.
IF he has lived under the pressure of being of color subjected to or witnessed or grew up believing a myriad of issues some true some false and all denied you might take advantage of the spot light to enlighten folks too distant from the source about the reality of life in his shoes. Or the shoes of similarly stead folks... Perhaps
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Put yourself in the shoes of a preacher.
IF he is sincere then he believes what the little voice in his ear is saying comes from God. IF he hears nothing but concludes one thing or another so long as it don't conflict with his church's dogma then it must be a revelation given him by God.
IF he has lived under the pressure of being of color subjected to or witnessed or grew up believing a myriad of issues some true some false and all denied you might take advantage of the spot light to enlighten folks too distant from the source about the reality of life in his shoes. Or the shoes of similarly stead folks... Perhaps
Then again you might not if there were on the scene a hopeful messenger of change who came from your church and might accomplish more good then you or your church alone could ever do and by sounding off with inflammatory rhetoric you stabbed that hope in the back. God, I should think, would look around and judge the context and effect of any real message he whispers in your ear, or so I would hope.
Yeah Obama underestimated the desperation of his opponents going after him because of the Church he attended.Originally posted by: brencat
I go to church every week, including if I'm on vacation. Prior to me getting married 11 yrs ago, I was a holiday Catholic so my wife was definitely a positive influence on my life. With that out of the way, let me say to Hafen that you're right...what Pfleger said about Hillary was damn funny if you like sexist humor and my 'racist' sermons comment was directed more at Wright and all the stuff being held onto that will likely be released by the dirt-digging groups in the coming months before the election.
But both preachers styles and content are totally alien to what I'm used to in Catholic masses -- and wholly inappropriate too. And what most other Protestants/Catholics are used to I'm betting which covers about 55 - 60% of the U.S. population right there. I have a problem with a guy who wants to be president that doesn't have the sense to walk out of that relationship years earlier. I wouldn't have that problem if he wasn't running for a high-level public office. Double standard? You betcha...and an important one too.
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: Robor
No. You called homosexuality a 'sin' in another thread. You used your faith to defend that belief. Why is the bigotry preached in another church different than the bigotry preached in yours?
It's not. You're both wrong.
Edit: I forgot to say YOU'RE A HYPOCRITICAL TOOL again.
Believing something is a sin is not bigotry.
Meh. I believe your beliefs are a sin. And I seriously mean that as an agnostic.
edit: got my words out of place
Thats fine with me. I believe what the Bible says.
Everything or just what you pick and choose to interpret and apply to here and now?
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Yeah Obama underestimated the desperation of his opponents going after him because of the Church he attended.Originally posted by: brencat
I go to church every week, including if I'm on vacation. Prior to me getting married 11 yrs ago, I was a holiday Catholic so my wife was definitely a positive influence on my life. With that out of the way, let me say to Hafen that you're right...what Pfleger said about Hillary was damn funny if you like sexist humor and my 'racist' sermons comment was directed more at Wright and all the stuff being held onto that will likely be released by the dirt-digging groups in the coming months before the election.
But both preachers styles and content are totally alien to what I'm used to in Catholic masses -- and wholly inappropriate too. And what most other Protestants/Catholics are used to I'm betting which covers about 55 - 60% of the U.S. population right there. I have a problem with a guy who wants to be president that doesn't have the sense to walk out of that relationship years earlier. I wouldn't have that problem if he wasn't running for a high-level public office. Double standard? You betcha...and an important one too.
What's so bad about it? Is it because it's Priest has made social commentaries that you don't agree with? How about the other stuff, you know, the shit about Jesus and being saved and helping you fellow man and the charities it runs and all that which is 99% of what it's about. Do you agree with that stuff?Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Yeah Obama underestimated the desperation of his opponents going after him because of the Church he attended.Originally posted by: brencat
I go to church every week, including if I'm on vacation. Prior to me getting married 11 yrs ago, I was a holiday Catholic so my wife was definitely a positive influence on my life. With that out of the way, let me say to Hafen that you're right...what Pfleger said about Hillary was damn funny if you like sexist humor and my 'racist' sermons comment was directed more at Wright and all the stuff being held onto that will likely be released by the dirt-digging groups in the coming months before the election.
But both preachers styles and content are totally alien to what I'm used to in Catholic masses -- and wholly inappropriate too. And what most other Protestants/Catholics are used to I'm betting which covers about 55 - 60% of the U.S. population right there. I have a problem with a guy who wants to be president that doesn't have the sense to walk out of that relationship years earlier. I wouldn't have that problem if he wasn't running for a high-level public office. Double standard? You betcha...and an important one too.
Well when you base your campaign on "judgement" you are going to get nailed on anything that shows bad judgement. This would be one of them. A bad judgement call he made for over 20 years.
Originally posted by: sandorski
I still maintain that there was nothing wrong with what Wright said. Obviously it was being used as a distraction and Obama did the right thing in removing that distraction. Perhaps the issues will be discussed now?....but I wouldn't hold my breath on that.
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
What type of context do you need that to be in for it to be acceptable??The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. The government lied.?
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
What's so bad about it? Is it because it's Priest has made social commentaries that you don't agree with?
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
How about the other stuff, you know, the shit about Jesus and being saved and helping you fellow man and the charities it runs and all that which is 99% of what it's about. Do you agree with that stuff?
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
What type of context do you need that to be in for it to be acceptable??The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. The government lied.?
The context in which it was said.
Can you prove that the church is more concerned about making racially and politically charged comments than spreading the gospel?Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
What's so bad about it? Is it because it's Priest has made social commentaries that you don't agree with?
What Trinity has shown is a pattern of making controversial statements about race and government. Neither are something that should be screamed about on a Sunday morning from a Church platform.
What Obama has shown is a pattern of making excuses for whom he associated with from that Church, then backing out of those excuses and throwing them under the bus when he realized it was hurting his chances of being the next President.
Not only does it show poor judgement, which Obama has run his whole campaign on, it also shows that even though he claims he is somehow transcending old politics, he right there in the middle of it.
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
How about the other stuff, you know, the shit about Jesus and being saved and helping you fellow man and the charities it runs and all that which is 99% of what it's about. Do you agree with that stuff?
All of that is great, and what a church should be about. The problem here is that the church seems to be more concerned with making racially and polically charged comments, rather than doing that which you suggest.
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Can you prove that the church is more concerned about making racially and politically charged comments than spreading the gospel?
Or more precise, you guys make it seem like it.Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Can you prove that the church is more concerned about making racially and politically charged comments than spreading the gospel?
No, and thats why I said "it seems like it".
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Or more precise, you guys make it seem like it.Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Can you prove that the church is more concerned about making racially and politically charged comments than spreading the gospel?
No, and thats why I said "it seems like it".