Diogenes the Cynic writes:
> While DC is not the biggest majority black city, I think it has the biggest MARGIN
> of majority of any big city (70+% black).
Your information is about thirty years out of date. Washington has been decreasing in its proportion of African Americans for the past thirty or thirty-five years. It peaked in its proportion of black residents in the 1970’s and has been slowly been turning more white.
My friend Dave and his then-boyfriend went to the same church as President Clinton for several years. He said it wasn’t a big deal. For day to day stuff, the Service doesn’t seem to do that much on a pre-screening basis; instead, they seem to rely mostly on watching the crowd immediately before and during the prez’s appearance. But given certain characteristics of the current president (skin color) and current characteristics of some minority of his political opponents (bat-shit crazy), perhaps things are different these days.
–Cliffy
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/26/2622000.html Detroit is around 82 %. I am well aware that Obama has lots of black churches from which to choose. But the politics fit in. There are some churches that would get him vilified by the right. If he went to white church ,the blacks would be pissed. He needs one that is not too white, not too black , not too radical and not too establishment. He has to avoid politics in his selection, but it wont be easy.
When gonzomax says Obama needs a safe church he appears to mean one that is safe politically. However I think he’s overestimating the number of people who give a damn (and stereotyping more than a little). How many people know which church born-again George W. Bush attended while he was in office? Regardless I’m sure there’s no shortage of options.
No stereotyping at all. He is a political hot topic for the right. He can make no correct decisions for the Fox Gnus group.But he has the added problem of the blacks wanting him to do the right thing by them. How does he do something as simple as attending church without it becoming a political problem. Bush and Clinton could just pick a connected white church and have no problems.Life is a little more complicated for Obama.
I disagree. But I don’t want to drag your thread off-topic.
I’m a 48 year old conservative Catholic, for those few who didn’t already know. I went to a Catholic grade school and a Catholic high school. I’ve been going to Sunday Mass since I was 5 or 6.
Pssst… ask me how many times I heard sermons about abortion.
Answer: once a year, right around January 23, the priest would read an anti-abortion letter from the local bishop. It always felt like a formality. The rest of the year, I never heard a word about abortion.
How about porn? Birth control? Homosexuality? No non-Catholic ever believes me, but I NEVER heard a word about any of those subjects from the nuns I studied under or from the priests at a single church I’ve gone to.
So you see, it doesn’t surprise me a whit that so many Catholics are unaware of Church teachings on such matters, because the Church has spent precious little time teaching its members what it stands for.
Gonzomax, like many self-styled heathens, obviously thinks churches dwell on such matters a LOT more than they really do.
In any case, Washington has dozens of “mainline” Christian churches that are either unconcerned with such issues or flat-out liberal. Heck, the United Methodist Church (to which George W. Bush belonged) was VERY liberal. The Obamas could fit into such a church neatly.