Talking about social justice and moral issues seems acceptable. Unfortunately too many pastors go further than that. I remember an issue several years ago where the pastor told his congregation if they didn’t vote republican they weren’t good Christians. Several members got up and walked out.
Incidents like that prompted Jim Wallis to write God’s Politics
I would like to amend all previous posts in this thread and any other and state that (IMHO) Obama should be held accountable (to some degree) only for the beliefs of the congregation that he is a part of and the preachers and speakers of that congregation.
It took two pages to finally get to the actual point, which was weaselly hidden, of the OP. From my view, the entire concern over Obama’s church boils down to it’s black liberation theology, and “certain people” are concerned over the black liberation theology espoused by the TUCC. It is, to my mind, just another attempt to build up the fear of Obama among white voters.
amen.
Here’s the details I was speaking of that makes a poor attempt at setting standards through which Obama looks bad but allows republicans to weasel out of their association with jerks like Hagee etc. It’s a ridiculous game.
I have an amendment to suggest. It’s simple and I think it might work. Let’s hold our candidates responsible FOR THEIR OWN BELIEFS, which we can determine by making an effort to listen to their words and comparing those words to their actions.
It requires a little thought on our part and and a determination to not accept sound bite knee jerk emotional responses as rational conclusions. If we hear something that raises a valid question we can do a little investigative research ourselves rather than allowing the talking heads to tell us what to think.
Seem reasonable?
I really hope so.
I have been referred to as a weasel (and worse) before. However, I’d be willing to swear on a stack of Korans, subject to every Guantanamo “torture” (although I’m not wiling to subject myself to the fun and games of radical Muslems), that I’ve never meant to suggest that Obama should be held accountable for the beliefs of his entire denomination.
Only that he has some accountability for the beliefs and actions of his congregation, their (and his self-selected) preacher, and their invited guests if they clear embrace the words of the latter.
It’s up to each individual voter to decide how much accountability based on how close and how long he is tied to them.
- What’s wrong with the beliefs of Obama’s congergation?
- Why should Obama be accountable for anyone’s beliefs but his own?
Why is insulting? Who does it insult? What message are you getting that you so afraid of? It’s a marketing strategy just like anything other. Are you saying anyone can steer people to any business they want to, except in those instances where the word “black” is used, or only if they don’t say it out loud but, instead, silently accept the same thing being done because it’s been done for years?
Of course it is your right not to do so, but it is telling that you did not address this point or call those who do so, and have done so, for a long term Klansman:
“Establishing and building from familiar connections is always what’s tacitly going on the executive-laden golf courses of America and its top brass and decisionmakers and it has been for many years, right? I don’t see you excoriating them for builidng on the natural connections they’re used to and calling them grand wizards.”
You already do so. It’s just not spoken. Institutionalization of such a system makes it’s easy for one in that group to sit and enjoy the benefits of it and not be critical of it.
Again, why does the public nature of the statements, as opposed to their being private, tacit or institutionalized, make a difference? The end result is the same. See unanswered quote above.
While I might have used a bit of shorthand to describe movies that relate to a black experience – individual or collectively – surely you’re not saying there no stories (novels, histories, biographies, films) that come from a personal viewpoint? And that includes a black experience. Think of that experience in America alone – in the 1940s, 2008 (my previous police story) or even 2505. Yes, good stories ultimately have universal themes, but surely you have to acknowledge that such a theme comes out of telling the truth about a particular experience, and not out of attempting to scrub that story clean of any personalized truth in the pursuit of a misguided anti-PCness and a willful blindness to an individual’s reality.
Even if he did, who had the heavier weight in that choice? Even he has stated that his experiences in this society forced him to choose a label for who he is, rather than simply be all the things he is.
Agreed. See unanswered quote.
Again you’re trying to argue that a problem doesn’t exist. You can try to restate the problem in debate form to make yourself feel better, but in the end the problem is still there and you’re left scratching your head as to why the world doesn’t rotate around you.
You can debate public opinion until hell freezes over and the opinions will still be there. Obama has association issues with Reverend Wright. That is not debatable. He attended a church that supported Wright and is thus associated with issues the public thinks poorly of. Again, this is not debatable.
This might come as a shock to you, but no one actually gives a rat’s ass about Reverend Wright. It’s really not a “problem,” no matter how much the right would like to make it into one. Outside of the right wing media echo chamber, no one cares.
Well, that’s just factually incorrect. 19% of registered Democrats and 18% of Independents say that Rev Wright has made them think less favorably about Obama. 21% and 18% say it will matter “some” or “a lot” in their decision of whom to vote for in Nov. Link. You are often telling us how stupid American voters are, so this should be no surprise.
I’ll make one additional point about the United Church of Christ. It is congregational. Each congregation is autonomous and makes their own decisions about their pastors, their church, and even their interpretation of theology. Churches left the congregation over the decision to support same sex marriage. There are congregations which self identify as open and affirming, which means they agree with the decision and they welcome people of all sexual orientations. Other churches have not made this decision.
Most churches are small. Trinity is one of the largest. Visit the list of UCC churches here and look at the web pages of the UCC churches in your area. They will look very different from Trinity.
By the way, the UCC traces their roots back to those radicals called the Pilgrims.
And yet, Obama has publicly addressed the issue. Strange he would devote valuable face time in front of a camera talking about something nobody cares about. It would lead one to conclude that he thinks it’s a problem that has to be addressed.
If you don’t understand this I can’t explain it. I think you do and won’t admit it.
I’ve played the executive game and have never heard anyone ever discuss doing business based on race. It would be the end of their career.
No, I’ve never associated with a business based on anything beyond their services and I’ve never seen a religious leader suggest this.
Well since I’ve never had a conversation about shopping somewhere based on the owner’s race/religion/ethnicity I assume that behavior of other people until proven otherwise. Are you telling me you search out businesses based on race and actively discuss this with your friends?
I’m not sure where you’re going with this. Historic depictions with a black theme are made: Amistad, Glory, The Tuskegee Airman, The Color Purple. Autobiographies: Malcolm X, Ray Charles. I don’t see a shortage of movies in relation to population demographics but I wasn’t keeping score.
No, I don’t understand why it’s insulting. Answer the question and you won’t have to assume there’s something I won’t admit.
You do understand the words “tacit” and “institutionalized,” and by extension “status quo” right? And, are you telling me there is nothing in the publish concerning historic interrelationship between golf, restricted clubs and the chances for advancement/making connections in business?
They’re lying.
That should be “in the public record concerning the historic interrlationship.”
Are you calling Obama a liar for addressing the issue?
Obama just resigned from Trinity.