As in whoever drafted those capitalized talking points What pasted.
No idea what you’re trying to say.
Here is what the UCC themselves say about race in the church.
Sunday morning is the most segregated time in the United States.
For starters, see post #63. Then we’ll try step two.
Read it. Make your point.
I don’t know whether “we” expect that or not, but that has nothing do to with whether or not they actually do provide detailed policy analysis. If they do, then I’d like to see it.
Taken with your original post, I made it.
This thread is about the what the difference between two churches and what that says about two candidates.
You brought up “diversity” and characterized UCC with the following:
Seems to me, the North Phoenix Baptist Church, and most white churches in general, can be characterized by what I wrote
which was a simple re-phrasing of what you wrote to emphasize the historical segregation in religion in America. Nothing hard there.
Can you refute that history would support that view and, if not, why, in your “melting pot” upbringing, you have a problem with UCC 40-odd years of “diversity” but not with a 400-year history of non-diversity, including whatever number of years PBC has been comprised as it no doubt has?
No good liberal can vote for Ted Kennedy! His Church is against abortion! And gay marriage! And ordaining women!
But that is NOT what you asked. You asked if moderates would care. I said I would not, as far as I know, no other moderates have responded to the thread. YOU are the one interacting with the Liberals in the thread, and you have heard from a few Conservatives. Again NOT what you asked for. So my response to your posed question—Moderates don’t care about this issue. It is only an issue to those who would not be voting for Obama anyways. So does this thread have an actual point, or is it just a way to get a rise out of the Liberals?
Why do you think this is interesting? Do you have a problem with youth centers being run by Catholic Priests? Oh wait…never mind…
Yes, interesting indeed.
Ooo a penny!
I’ve never been to a white church. I just went to a church. If a minister every talked in terms of living a hyphenated-American lifestyle I would leave in the middle of his/her sermon.
Not sure what you’re asking here. I live in a country that has taken in people from all over the world. As the historical timeline moves forward the different groups have melted together. My grandparents were immigrants. While they carried their culture with them (to some extent) they made every attempt to integrate into society and insisted their children (my parents) live as Americans.
My parents were discriminated against when they were young. But this isn’t 1940, it’s 2008. Times have changed. I understand the background Wright came from be he’s living in the past and taking his congregation with him.
It’s different for AAs. Most of them, for most of their history, were not allowed to set a toe in the melting pot, and for the most part that remains true now.
If you study history you’ll know that it was like that for everybody (more so with Negro’s).
I disagree.
I know it’s not 1940 and I believe you were taught what you say you were taught. I grew up in the same country as you did and, while times have changed (to an extent I’ve posted several times that I’m proud of), I know that “Sunday morning is the most segregated time in the United States” is not a myth. Since the OP is framed around the difference between two churches and specifically their philosophies (although he enumerate, partially, only one) and you mentioned and you touched on that, I devoted my question to those aspects.
In addition to that bare fact of segregation (or separation if you prefer) on Sunday morning, I’d like to mention the following (I am not making this up).
I was sitting on my porch (stoop in New York-ese) last night when two white cops pulled up, shined the light on my face and asked if I lived there and could prove it. I did and asked him why he “stopped” me. He said there’d been shady characters and trespassers, etc., walking around the area.
Later, within 10 minutes, two separate cars carrying young black people were pulled over, within 50 feet of where I was sitting, though ultimately I saw no tickets issued. Also, a neighbor of mine stood across the street at her gate, talking to her boyfriend and three patrolman stood on my side of the street watching them until she went into her house. Guess that was more shady trespassers who could be spotted by the way they drove, or chatted, or something.
I’m not angry and I’m not hinting at police brutality but as a black man living in the same America you do and damn proud of it, I don’t feel we’re quite where you want to assert we are yet – on Sunday morning or Thursday night.
Negro[e]s?
I’m not going to deny reality and say things are perfect, particularly in large cities. I think police should be specific when they respond to questions. If they were looking for suspicious characters they should have a general description such white/black and should tell you such. If they’re driving around asking every black person they see then I can see the problem. I’ve had my own run ins with a bad cop. He ended up in the newspaper years later for being a dick. If I could go back in time and kick his ass I’d do it.
And as an FYI, I use “Negro” and “Caucasian” to represent race versus cultural terms such as black/white or AA. In my earlier post I wanted to convey that discrimination against AA’s was racial. And apparently I can’t spell.
I’ve been to Italian Catholic, German Catholic and Polish Catholic churches - they were not so inclusive as to be “white” churches. (In Minnesota there are also German Lutherans and Scandanvian Lutherans). Of course, all these churches were technically inclusive - they wouldn’t throw out someone who was French (been in a French Catholic church too, come to think of it) nor someone who was Black, Latino, Asian or Jewish if they showed up. But people would - and did - go six miles to the next town to go to the church that had the right ethnicity. That’s changed a lot in my lifetime as parishes have consolidated.
I did not miss anything. The OP included an extremely vague question without any context without bothering to provide an actual point to discuss. I was hoping to prompt him to actually set forth a point to discuss rather than letting the thread slide into some rut with no direction. I was also hoping, (apparently in vain) that the OP was not simply going “Ooooh! Look at that church where people are different from me. Let’s all be concerned about that.”
Thought I’d throw in my voice as a moderate. Don’t give a crap about the churches that either candidate goes to. Don’t care what their respective religious leaders say.