You like what he says and find him charming?

In its own way, this is even more bizarre than your announcement that the US is a terrorist nation - because I was prepared for that one by your other comments.

You have rendered me speechless. And that takes me some doing.

__________________
My good blade carves the casques of men,
My tough lance thrusteth sure,
My strength is as the strength of ten,
Because my heart is pure.

"Sir Galahad," by Alfred, Lord Tennyson (1834)

AHAAA...I knew it was Graccus...ha - in a different thread he said Wright should be quiet....which way is it TS??

__________________

The essence of tyranny is the denial of complexity; where everything is made simple, and in that simplification the truth is lost.

Hell yeah! He's a great speaker. Mind you, I don't even usually LIKE Christian preachers. I'm definitely not Christian myself. But this guy is funny, he's clever, he's charismatic, he has a great speaking voice, he's a pleasure to listen to, and if I translate his Christianese into my own spiritual language, I can even agree with the religious points he makes. As for the political points, I mostly agree with those, too, and if he's kind of out there in the way he makes them, that just makes me laugh.

You still haven't even begun to defend against the charge, either. Dresden? Hiroshima? Wounded Knee? The Contras? Carpet-bombing in North Vietnam? You don't think those were acts of terror? They certainly fit the standard definition: killing of civilians in order to induce fear and compel compliance with political wishes. Hiroshima even worked for the purpose. It was successful terrorism. What's the difference between these things and 9/11, other than the fact that 9/11 was done to us instead of the other guys? (And no, I'm not defending 9/11 or al-Qaeda. I believe ALL terrorism should be condemned. But if we really want to fight a "war on terrorism," we should start at home.)

Well, maybe you haven't answered because:



That was in this thread, and I answered you above. I suggest reading before posting.

Baloney. First, priest paedophilia was no secret. What was amazing was how it was so pervasive yet nobody dared mention it due to wilful denial and coverups to protect the church.

I can also cite plenty of other things, such as people leaving their property to the church upon death in order to get what they felt was a pathway to Heaven. I even had a granduncle who did that. He owned several valuable properties. On his deathbed, a local priest arrived. Unknown to his family, the priest cajoled him into donating his property to the church. The guy must have felt he was going to Heaven--in reality he got conned by a conman posing as a man of God.

Wright, Hagee and the other big RR guys, the Catholic Church all seem to be flush in cash, don't they?

It's no different when I have routinely heard all sorts of preaching not unlike Wrights in pew in many other or the same church. The very RRs who back the GOP of the televangelist, big power broker types (Falwells, Robertsons, Jones's, Swaggarts, Hagees, etc) go right on national TV and say outrageous things.

Yet, their huge church meetings--even stadia--are filled with tens of thousands of people with callers donating money, fawning on them, etc. They even tell their people who to vote for as a matter of divine direction. They are so powerful even people like McCain who know how toxic they are wind up having to kiss their arse to get their blessing to get their masses to vote for them in Pied Piper style.

Ireland had 700 years of religious strife due to minsitries claiming superiority and attacking others. How about the 9.11 attackers? What blinded and intoxicated them? Radical imams and such. Look at Iraq. People sectionalise and even attack on orders of their respective imams and sectarian beliefs. Other nations are pure theocracies with the masses following Whatever the religious leaders say, goes--even with hostile stuff.

People get blinded and/or intoxicated in clergy as a pathway to God. It's blinding and skews objective examination of them for many. They are 'Men of the Lord.'. Heck, so many will comply just to avoid the Hell so many clergy speaks of (follow me, obey me, give us money, etc, or face Hell).

That's one reason why my Quaker experiences, education and rearings before clergy schools I have found to be of such benefit. I've spotted what I believe to be this huge flaw of deference. Quakers have no clergy. Clergy are people, no better or worse than the next and can be right or wrong just like the next, and no more guaranteed to be in or out of touch with Christianity or spirituality and its experiences than the next. Clergy invites and is designed for group deference when, in Quaker opinion, each person has their own experiences with their relationship with God in which to share, explore, discuss, discover, improve, contemplate, etc with each other in Quaker 'Meetings for Worship.'

__________________

Disappointing. As for baloney - hmmm....read your own post.

I really am well aware at this point of your view of the clergy. There really is no need to go over that again.

But you did not actually respond to what I said about Obama and Wright. There is no comparison with any secret scandal - even if it is "secret" with quotes - and public sermons and speeches. The idea that Obama was not aware of Wright's views and beliefs and that he is suddenly "shocked" and "outraged" is ridiculous. It was only when he was attacked personally that Obama suddenly realized how wrong it all was.

Come on - I expect more from you.

__________________
My good blade carves the casques of men,
My tough lance thrusteth sure,
My strength is as the strength of ten,
Because my heart is pure.

"Sir Galahad," by Alfred, Lord Tennyson (1834)

And if any white politician was as stinging in their criticism of these whacko's as Obama was of Wright they would be accused of anti-christian intolerance and would most likely lose a chunk of support.

It was rather unprecedented, i thought, how Obama responded to Wright recently. When does a politician ever get to rebuke a popular Christian leader so forcefully and really get away with it?

Andrew

__________________
“...corporations and those who run them cannot stop exploiting resources and amassing wealth until they have... .I cannot finish this sentence, because the truth is that can never stop; like cancer, they can only continue to expand until they kill the host.”

-- Derrick Jensen

When the "popular Christian leader" behaves like a pananoid narcissist and puts together a one man traveling circus and attempts to destroy a presidential campaign and...need I go on???

__________________
My good blade carves the casques of men,
My tough lance thrusteth sure,
My strength is as the strength of ten,
Because my heart is pure.

"Sir Galahad," by Alfred, Lord Tennyson (1834)

So why can't we get the same response to Falwell, etc.... why does the media and politicians treat those morons more lightly than they do Wright?

Andrew

__________________
“...corporations and those who run them cannot stop exploiting resources and amassing wealth until they have... .I cannot finish this sentence, because the truth is that can never stop; like cancer, they can only continue to expand until they kill the host.”

-- Derrick Jensen

I did answer it. Obama has said he didn't hear those remarks but did hear controversial things at times. So what? I've heard such things plenty of times in churches. Ministers routinely call out what they view as the sins of people and even the nation. They are supposed to talk along the callings of the Bible and/or spirituality. They are not politicians--Wright is correct about that. When the US does wrong--and it has and has done plenty--it is the spiritual duty of a Christian to speak up about it along those beliefs.

Nationalism and nationalistic pride have no place in church--the God in the churches functions on different and higher law and criteria. So, when the US does something against God's laws in the Bible, it's the duty of a Christian to speak up on them. If that rubs the national pride of someone wrong, then tough ****. That is not even offensive to the concept of separation of church and state. Just because something may be done or allowed secularly does not mean Christians must be quiet about what they believe for themselves. The US has done many things wrong or potentially wrong scripturally speaking in the things he was citing. That even includes his Hiroshima comment because it did indeed target civilians, and he was speaking to the Book of Psalms about the evil in that and what it produces. People may reach a different spiritual conclusion, but his comments are not scripturally frivolous to make a case for his assertion. It's a legitimate scriptural debate.

What Obama has done--repeatedly--is state his disagreement with certain things Wright has said, and made his distance even more clear yesterday. That's fine with me. I hear stuff in churches routinely I do not agree with but yet I still go. I've had my ears filled with anti-contraception arguments, anti-homosexual arguments, anti-this-and that's. I still go anyway to churches. Even Quaker Meetings are filled with people with different views.

I go, like many, because I take what I feel is useful upon examination and reflection and discard the rest but with knowledge why others reach different conclusions. It's all part of spiritual growth and understanding.

Now, speaking of expecting more, let's cut the BS here Tim.

Wright is to Obama, at best, guilt by association. Yet, you've been crowing endlessly about this guy and playing the guilt by association game. Yet, I've pointed out the big GOP RR issue, including McCain wilfully seeking out hostile and belligerent ministers and gladly taking Hagee's endorsement and praising him in return.

I notice the double standard here. It's quite glaring with your hard core press on guilt by association despite Obama's denunciations whilst you minimise the wilful seeking and association with very hostile RR types by the boys in red that actually get them in government influence itself. If Wright bothers you so much, I'd think you'd be doing quadruple five alarm flips about the RR issue and its courted infiltration by the GOP right into the halls of government.

The reason why is easy for me to see--it's merely the political advantages to be gained here, not any real alarms on the subject.

Now, given McCain's sellout and actual courtship of Hagee and others, much worse than Obama given his denunciations of Wright's controversial sides and renunciations of endorsements like Farrakhan's, it's time for you likewise to put your money where your mouth is and not vote for him either come November unless he publicly renounces the Hagee endorsement and any other hostile RR ones he might receive. I mean, if this is so important to you, consistency would be apparent. Otherwise, this angle is just transparently politically motivated gamesmanship.

__________________

To be more accurate it is called "Endorsement by Association." Here are the facts:

1) Rev. Wright was Obama's "spiritual mentor" for 20 or so years; I find it hard to believe that Obama conveniently missed all of Rev. Wrights controversial sermons and was unaware of the mans value system?

2) Obama openly joined a racialist church and maintains membership in said church headed by the very Reverend Obama now rebukes; rebukes at a most convenient time.

If I felt such strong disgust for the views of my pastor; I would not accept him as my mentor but resign from the church in loathing.

People make me laugh sometimes.

They'll bitch and moan about Obama not rebuking Wright. Then, when he finally does, they attack Obama for rebuking Wright.

Can't make some people happy...

Jerry Falwell was called on his comments much like Rev. Wright has been called on his comments...

CNN.com - Falwell apologizes to gays, feminists, lesbians - September 14, 2001

And also permit me to remind you that when Falwell died; the American media had Christopher Hitchens appear on their shows to denigrate the fanatic as a hater.

When you've already made your mind up to dislike someone, you'll find fault in anything they do. I have this mental image of a hen-pecked husband being yelled at for two weeks to clean out the gutters. On completion of cleaning them out, he gets yelled at for taking so long to clean out the gutters and now the lawn needs mowing.

*shrug*

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

Lets use a better analogy; supposing (hypothetically speaking) that John McCain belonged to "Aryan Nations" but claimed that he did not agree with all of Pastor Butlers comments and even rebuked him during his presidential run when he was confronted with several of Pastor Butlers most inflammatory comments. Now imagine that John McCain refused to surrender his "Aryan Nations" membership in addition to openly acknowledging that Pastor Butler was his "spiritual mentor" before his run for office.

Tell me; would you believe that McCain did not truly endorse the values of Pastor Butler in spite of his refusal to end his affiliation with "Aryan Nations" and the convenient timing of the rebuke?

When the Aryan Nations admits its first black member, I'll agree that the analogy has at least started to be remotely appropriate.