Tucker Carlson on Obama's church: "[I]t's hard to call that Christianity"
During the "Obameter" segment on the February 7 edition of MSNBC's Tucker, host Tucker Carlson criticized Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), a presumptive candidate for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination, for being a member of a church that Carlson claimed "sounds separatist to me" and "contradicts the basic tenets of Christianity," a subject Carlson said he was "actually qualified to discuss." Carlson was referring to the "Black Value System" advocated by the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, of which Obama is a member. A February 6 Chicago Tribune article reported that "conservative critics have seized on Trinity's 12-point Black Value System, especially the portion relating to 'middleclassness,' as evidence that Obama is a divisive candidate who rejects mainstream American values and is primarily focused on the black community." Carlson pointed to the "disavowal of the pursuit of 'middleclassness' " in the church's tenets, calling the church's mission a "racially exclusive theology" and "a theology that ministers to one group of people, based on race." Carlson claimed that Trinity's theology is "racially exclusive" and "wrong," adding that "it's hard to call that Christianity."
Carlson also stated that Trinity's "Black Value System" "calls for congregants to be 'soldiers for black freedom.' " In fact, Trinity encourages parishioners to be "soldiers for Black freedom and the dignity of all humankind [emphasis added]." The Tribune said that the church's "value system" was adopted in 1981 to hold "black Christians accountable for taking care of their own and for continuing to fight oppression." Further, the Tribune reported that according to Melissa Harris-Lacewell, a professor of politics and African-American studies at Princeton University, "the 'disavowal of the pursuit of middleclassness' is simply an argument against materialism and the pursuit of the American standard of wealth. Many white Christian churches also preach against materialism."
From the February 7 edition of MSNBC's Tucker:
CARLSON: Time now for the daily check of our "Obameter." On Saturday, in Springfield, Illinois, Senator Barack Obama will officially toss his hat into the presidential ring, which will mark open season for his political opponents and others to scrutinize just about every breath he's ever taken, or plans on taking, before he took those breaths, and what every one of them implies about him. Can he survive the unprecedented scrutiny?
Here to discuss it: Republican strategist Leslie Sanchez and former Democratic congressman from Maine and national director of Win Without War, Tom Andrews. Welcome to you both.
So Barack Obama is a member of a church called Trinity United Church of Christ. It's a predominantly black church in Chicago, that espouses something called the "Black Value System," which includes calls for congregants to be "soldiers for black freedom" and a, quote, "disavowal of the pursuit of middleclassness." Now, it would seem to me, Tom, not to make a broad sweeping statement here, but a racially exclusive theology, a theology that ministers to one group of people, based on race, kind of contradicts the basic tenets of Christianity, and is worth talking about. Wouldn't you say?
ANDREWS: Well, let's look at what those values actually are. We're talking about hard work, self-reliance, belief in God, and if you have made it to the middle class, you have an obligation to those who have not. Now, those sound like pretty good values to me, black, white, or whatever, and I think that Barack Obama should not be ashamed of having those values and being part of a church.
CARLSON: Again, those are great values, that I, you know, that I hope I embody.
ANDREWS: Good.
CARLSON: However, it's the word before them, black. It's making them racially specific. Again, Christianity -- this is something that I am actually qualified to discuss -- is, it seems to me, almost explicitly anti-racial. The idea is that we are all equal in the eyes of God. And when you espouse a theology that is racially exclusive, as this appears to be, it's hard to call that Christianity. I think it's pretty easy to call it wrong.
ANDREWS: Well, I don't think it's exclusive. I don't see anything exclusive about it. This is a church --
CARLSON: Soldiers for black freedom? How about -- what about soldiers for freedom for everybody. What does that mean?
ANDREWS: Well -- fine. Black white, whatever, but in this particular case, these are soldiers for black freedom, and belief in God, and hard work, and self-reliance, and helping your brother and sister. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it. You knowthis -- I'll tell you: Opposition research is a growth industry.
CARLSON: Yeah, it is.
ANDREWS: And just fasten your seat belt, Senator Obama, because it's coming at you.
CARLSON: Well, I don't know. I mean, I could --
ANDREWS: It's coming at you.
CARLSON: I think this is fair, because I think this is -- trust me. I think a lot of opposition research, and I get a lot in my inbox -- it's crap -- but I ignore it, because who cares. But this is interesting because Obama has spoken so forcefully and so often about his own faith, and held up his membership in a Christian denomination as evidence of the pureness of his heart. He said, "Look, I'm a Christian, OK, period." So it's fair to take a look at his theology. And, you know, I like Barack Obama, and I don't think he's a scary guy, but this stuff sounds separatist to me, I have to say.
apparently being christian is tax cuts and helping the rich. in franken's lying liars, there is an extended cartoon called "supply side jesus". very funny.
To the 'colorblind' white racist below:
All White institutions are organized around white values. There is no longer a need for explicit statement of white values, they are implicit everywhere whites dominate. Because white values developed and crystallized around the theme of white supremacy and anti-blackness for hundreds of years, blacks oppressed by explicit and implicit white values have been forced to articulate a different set of values. Should they do so? Of course. Self-defense is an unalienable right.
Black Values
"The God who created the Sun which gives us light, who rouses the waves and rules the storm, though hidden beyond the clouds, He watches us. He sees all the White man does. The god of the White man inspires him with crime, but our God calls on us to do good works. Our God who is good to us commands us to avenge our wrongs. He will direct our arms and aid us. Throw away the symbol of the god of the Whites who have so often caused us to weep; and listen to the voice of freedom which speaks in the hearts of all of us." Papaloi Boukman, 1791, on the eve of the overthrow of Napoleon.
I have no idea is any of this is relevant to a President Obama, considering a person's religious beliefs and practices are their own business and should have absolutely no bearing on any public policy........however, this statement is divisive and separatist.
If Obama were a white candidate and there was a statement called "White Value System" within that person's church, there would be a major outcry.
Since you can't be bothered to read as far as the second paragraph of the article, how about I repost it for you. For some reason, Carlson missed some key bits. Go figure.
In fact, Trinity encourages parishioners to be "soldiers for Black freedom and the dignity of all humankind [emphasis added]." The Tribune said that the church's "value system" was adopted in 1981 to hold "black Christians accountable for taking care of their own and for continuing to fight oppression." Further, the Tribune reported that according to Melissa Harris-Lacewell, a professor of politics and African-American studies at Princeton University, "the 'disavowal of the pursuit of middleclassness' is simply an argument against materialism and the pursuit of the American standard of wealth. Many white Christian churches also preach against materialism."
"Many white Christian churches also preach against materialism."
And what, exactly, is a "white Christian church", oh Bitter One? If you can't see the obvious racism coming from this "church", you're beyond hope.
there IS NO racism 'coming from' this church, child....why don't you learn how to READ and formulate a LOGICAL discourse instead of just unscrewing your head, tilting it, and letting the prejudiced garbage spill onto the keyboard...
And what, exactly, is a "white Christian church", oh Bitter One? If you can't see the obvious racism coming from this "church", you're beyond hope.
----------------------------------------------------
White Christians are the people that enslaved Africans, colonized the African continent, and discriminated against black people since 1425.
You forgot the near total elimination of north American Indians, the original settlers of this land.
How could I forget? The list of peoples exterminated, enslaved, oppressed by whites is about as long as the list of people who are not white.
of course, none of those things are exclusive to whites and never were. and black africans took an active part in the slave trade.
of course, none of those things are exclusive to whites and never were. and black africans took an active part in the slave trade.
------------------------------------------------------------
Blacks, converted to Uncle Toms, even today take part in serving white supremacy through the Republican party. That does not diminish white culpability, it was always part of the plan for world domination.
The only people in the history of the world who exterminated people on several continents, stole their land and enslaved a race to work it for them?
Nobody but white people.
you have heard of rwanda? nor is slavery anything that was exclusive to whites. i have no problem with pointing out injustices of the past, and i said on the other thread that the government should issue an apology for any involvement in slavery, but you seem to think that only whites did them. check out how countries like china, the philippines, and korea feel about the atrocities commited by the japanese.
The Rwandan genocide was ultimately caused by the Belgian colonization and indoctrination to the point that the people were driven insane. What do you expect from black people divided by devils and brainwashed to believe in a criminal white god?
The white race remains the only group of people who have stolen whole continents and enslaved an entire race. Congratulations.
rwanda was independent in 1962. the mass killings were 32 years later. and you seem to have some geographic hangup. as if something is confined to one continent, then it is somehow understandable. the fact is that most blacks were sold into slavery after being captured by other black tribes. it's called the history of the world, wars, oppression. unlike you, i don't think it was limited to whites. nor is it at this very moment.
Mefirst,
However much I would rather agree with you than Heru (who I consider a blatant racist), Heru may have a point about Rwanda according to wikipedia:
[A]n alternate theory, that the Hutu and Tutsi were originally one people, but were artificially divided by German and then Belgian colonists so the Tutsi minority could serve as local overseers for Berlin and Brussels, has received support among those supporting Rwandan national unity.[7][8] Still others suggest that the two groups are related but not identical, and that the differences between the two were exacerbated by Europeans[9] or by a gradual, natural split as the those who owned cattle became known as Tutsi and those who didn't became Hutu.[5]
Of course, according to wikipedia, the origin of Hutu and Tutsis is debatable, but it is likely the Germans and then the Belgians used the differences to their advantage in keeping control. The Tutsi's were often considered colaborators with the colonial government, while the Hutu's were shutout of the colonial government. This resentment created by the Belgian colonial government carried over to the eventual genocide in the 1990's.
White Europeans arguably cannot be excluded from what happened in Rwanda. Maybe some better examples would be Pol Pot or Genghis Khan. They both killed massive amounts of people while not being white (or white people having anything to do with it).
I generally regard the argument as moot anyway. Whites have generally been the oppressors in history. To argue that whites are inferior in some way is simply a racist position. It implies that other groups are somehow superior for not doing the same thing, just because they didn't have the opportunity. I would argue that there is nothing to indicate any ethnic/racial group that would have been in the same position (as oppressor) would have done anything differently.
i don't doubt that there are still lingering problems from colonialism. but it's speculation to say something occured only because of it. his point seems to be that it was a peaceful loving world everywhere before whites came. i already pointed to the example of the japanese in ww2. there is still a huge resentment across much of asia today because of their atrocities. in this hemisphre, the native peoples battled and stole land from each other, long before whites came. and i do not find it a moot argument either. not when you have people such as him making these arguments. i not minimizing anything whites did, but as i said, that is the history of this world. he wants to say it's not.
You're a fool, Heru. Check out Sudan TODAY if you want to know about genocide. But, hey, it's blacks that are doing it so you close your lazy eyes. What a pathic thing you are.
YOU are so stupid its painful. You NEVER know what you are talking about yet call someone ELSE a fool. It is the Arabs who are committing genocide against the blacks in the Sudan not the other way around. Your ignorance apparantly knows no bounds.
Total misrepresentation. FIRST, since there was no corraborative relationship between Saddam and al Queda it would be more like he was at the same restaurant with unsavory characters. SECOND. There is no evidence he ever tried to buy a gun ( since being convicted and becoming a felon) It is more like there were RUMORS he had a gun but his home and place of business were searched and THERE WAS NO GUN. (why do you guys keep pretending there WERE WMDs in Iraq when we invaded?) In fact ALL evidence seen by both Kay and Duelfer the cops investigating this murder reported that he gave up having guns shortly after released from prison.
This next is a purely delusional attempt at an argument
How do I know he was shopping for "another" gun? Because you forgot to mention that he shot and killed Rusty's dog several years ago. Additionally, he has shot repeatedly at my dog. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
There can be no reasonable skepticism about Khartoum's use of these militias to "destroy, in whole or in part, ethnic or racial groups" -- in short, to commit genocide. Khartoum has so far refused to rein in its Arab militias; has refused to enter into meaningful peace talks with the insurgency groups; and, most disturbingly, has refused to grant unrestricted humanitarian access. The international community has been slow to react to Darfur's catastrophe and has yet to move with sufficient urgency and commitment. A credible peace forum must be rapidly created. Immediate plans for humanitarian intervention should begin. The alternative is to allow tens of thousands of civilians to die in the weeks and months ahead in what will be continuing genocidal destruction.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A3559-2004Feb24¬Found=true
Oops computer literacy meltdown. Somehow I melded this post with an answer to Wesely.
Sure, Solon. Just like a Leftie; blame you inadequacy on someone/something else. How sad.
Another fine example of your reading comprehension
" It is the Arabs who are committing genocide against the blacks in the Sudan not the other way around. Your ignorance apparantly knows no bounds. "
Irregardless of who did what to who in this case, Hero's assurtion that ONLY whites did the dirty deeds is misguided. I didn't know that Arabs were white. So, perhaps Hero has a few words for you now that you claim that a non-white civilization is committing horrible acts to blacks. Somehow I doubt he'll catch it and his complaints against whites will continue to flow unfettered.
I have to start with one of my pet peeves. Isnt it redundant to put the negative prefix IR on the word regardless to mean basically, regardless? I wasnt speaking to Heru's post. He has an obsession with white racism. Its his onus. He does have a point about Rwanda. The Hutus and Tutsis before the colonization by Belgium didnt have traditional racial hostility between them. What I was speaking to was Getntobed calling Heru a fool while making a point that was factually incorrect. Arabs would be a subset of the Semetic race identified mostly linguistically. I think most people consider them like the Hebrew people also Semetic as white. I am not sure this is relevant in any meaningful way. I DID think it relevant to make the point if you are going to call someone ELSE a fool it MIGHT help to have some dim conception what you are talking about and Getn2bed hardly ever does and certainly doesnt in THIS case
Devils never cease to amaze me. Whites are the ones obsessed with white racism, not blacks. We suffer because of your sin.
" We suffer because of your sin. "
You (personally) suffer because of your own inadequacies. In the current day and age, blacks are as equal as whites. The only thing you can hold on to is the past, which you do very well. If you suffer it's because you choose to suffer, no one is holding you down. You have as much opportunity as the next person.
and you know that whites are equal to blacks because? The Civil Rights Act? I'm just wondering because many of the minority folks and woman that I associate with deal with issues of inequality on a regular basis and would find your statement humorous. Do they let it stop them? Of course not, but to pretend that everything is equal is utterly preposterous.
I find your statement interesting because issues of inequality are issues that ALL of us need to work on to solve as ALL of us are part of the problem or have been benefiting from inequality and are part of the continuation of the problem. I really think that people like you pretend that inequality doesn't exist, therefore you can absolve yourself of any responsibility and can continue taking all the benefits of being a white man without feeling guilty. Yes you worked hard for everything you have and struggled so much... Anyone with a little resolve could do it to, right? Do you have an idea what its like to be a minority person in the US? Keep telling yourself that you have no advantage in society and other "people" don't have as much because they must be lazy or inadequate in some manner. Does that help you go to bed at night?
" Do you have an idea what its like to be a minority person in the US? "
A rich minority or a poor minority? Do you think you are the ONLY minority in America?
Of course $ is another type of inequality in the US, but I think we both know that your attempting to change the topic because you cannot or will not acknowledge racial inequality in the US. The direction your heading with this argument isn't going to suit your purpose as you obviously have not read up on the distribution of wealth in the US. Why don't you take a trip the US department of Labor website and look at how income is divided by race before we continue our discussion.ad up on. Why don't you also look up the figures on how many minority families fall into what you consider rich?
I find it amusing that you assumed I was a minority given the context of our argument and the fact that I never stated that I was
"I am not sure this is relevant in any meaningful way."
If you're talking about yourself, Solon, you are absolutely correct.
The bottom line, Solon, is that human beings are made in the image of God. You and the other Lefties here like to divide people based on their "race" bod God doesn't.
Irregardless of who did what to who in this case, Hero's assurtion that ONLY whites did the dirty deeds is misguided. I didn't know that Arabs were white. So, perhaps Hero has a few words for you now that you claim that a non-white civilization is committing horrible acts to blacks. Somehow I doubt he'll catch it and his complaints against whites will continue to flow unfettered.
---------------------------------------------------
Stop being childish. When a child is exposed in wrongdoing he always tries to point the finger at someone else. "What about what HIM...WAAA...WAAA...He bad too daddy!"
Yes, the Arabs have also committed atrocities against Africans. This does not change the fact that only one group of people, the white race, has ever stolen whole continents from others and enslaved an entire race.
" White Christians are the people that enslaved Africans, colonized the African continent, and discriminated against black people since 1425. "
While you're very good at complaining about the white race being successful at the expense of the black race, can you prove they were "Christian"? It seems you get to denegrate two people for the price of one. When you can prove all the whites harming your ancestors were Christian then you have a point. Until then keep your racism strictly to the white/black theme and leave religion out of it.
Sorry pal, I don't have to prove that every last pale person who oppressed black people was a tithing member of the Church in order to indict white Christianity. All I have to do is refer to canon law.
It was the Pope who, in the name of Jesus and Peter and on behalf of the entire Church, issued a papal bull authorizing and legitimizing the white enslavement of blacks forever. According to the bull, it was irrevocably binding in earth and in heaven for perpetuity.
The "Pope"? And, what did Jesus say on slavery? Don't you think you should follow what Jesus says and not what a man's interpretation says? Isn't that what all the fringe religions do? Take some aspect of a religion and base their sect on it? How many different denominations of Christianity were present during Christ's time on earth? How many 'suddenly' appeared afterward as offshoots of His teachings? All calling themselves "Christian" while changing what is taught by God to better fit their ideals. You could read Matthew 23 to get an idea of what Jesus thought of 'religious leaders'.
Your mythology doesn't matter. There's no proof Jesus ever existed, but there is proof that Pope Nicholas IV did and that he, on behalf of the ENTIRE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, gave whites an inalienable right to enslave blacks forever. I suggest you people at least revoke this "holy" law if you want to keep pretending that your religion had nothing to do with slavery.
" on behalf of the ENTIRE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, gave whites an inalienable right to enslave blacks forever "
So, you think every white person is a Christian? Just lump everyone in together just because they are white. That makes sense. Using your ideology, I can say all blacks are muslim and enslaved every woman forever. I don't say that though because I know better.
" no proof Jesus ever existed "
If that's what you believe, then it speaks for itself on your point of view towards social issues between the races.
So, you think every white person is a Christian?
-----------------------------------------------
No, I don't. So what.
----------------------------------------------
Just lump everyone in together just because they are white. That makes sense.
----------------------------------------------
Whites defines themselves as a race. Don't blame me.
-----------------------------------------------
Using your ideology, I can say all blacks are muslim and enslaved every woman forever. I don't say that though because I know better.
-----------------------------------------------
Good for you. Blacks were enslaved by Muslims too.
------------------------------------------------
" no proof Jesus ever existed "
If that's what you believe, then it speaks for itself on your point of view towards social issues between the races.
------------------------------------------------------
That there is no proof Jesus ever existed is not a belief it is a fact.
" Good for you. Blacks were enslaved by Muslims too. "
So, what you're saying is that you don't care about discrimination of others, you only care about discrimination of blacks. And you don't care if a race of color did the discriminating you only care about the white discrimination of blacks. Hypocrit!
That isn't what he is saying and for you to pretend otherwise is very disingenuous.
Why can't you just acknowledge the failings of the Church/Christainity and work on making things better?
Yes! That is exactly what he's saying. Heru is a racist of the worst kind and you give him a pass because he speaks out against religion. I don't. And, apparently, you don't like it when people take a stand. Too bad! That's what democracy is all about, people advocating different opinions. Heru can't back up any of his statements, simply makes hateful/racist statement after hateful/racist statement (the kind you would not let savage get away with) yet you say he is in the right for making his statements. How hypocritical of you, too!
Oh' stop being ridiculous!! Considering that it is non-black people (most likely just like YOU) who would be the first to say that Black people are inherently lazy or suffer from a sense of entitlement and should help themselves before asking anyone else for help, there is absolutely NOTHING WRONG with prefacing the 12-points with the descriptor BLACK! It is a simple matter of Black people encouraging BLACK people to help those of us who have fallen behind because they WILL not be helped along (not willingly or without stigma) by others.
And for the love of GAWD... don't come back with a lie about how you don't think negative things about Black people in America (or Africans throughout the diaspora). If you didn't you wouldn't have latched onto such illogical criticism!
This post brought to you by someone who read excerpts of Barack's book and would NEVER vote for him, but who knows the ugly face of bigoted hyper-criticism when it rears its head!!
There are candidates who espouse "The White Value System:" it's the norm. They don't have to call it that because it is the majority. All this whining about black this, gay that, hispanic this, women that - always from straight white males - because they simply have never considered their priviledge. Carlson is disingenuous. Big news there.
No, Kelletim. Those of who are color blind are fed up with hate mongers like you who continue to divide Americans into smaller and smaller groups. You really ought to see America without your race filters on. It's a beautiful place. Try it sometime.
EXACTLY, sleepy.....JUST LIKE TUCKER IS DOING!!!!!
Funny how white racists always claim to be "colorblind" and never are. We don't need color blindness we need color respect.
It's also funny how the "colorblind" white racists are always the first to bring up color.
" We don't need color blindness we need color respect. "
That is a very true statement. Can it be achieved from BOTH sides? I sure hope so.
That would be the ideal. Kind of like a good tasting calorie free chocolate. I think that day will come, I have to, I believe in people. I am not so sure it will come anytime soon
Who was it that said New Orleans is "chocolate" and always will be "chocolate" (or something like that)? Oh, that's right, it was the "black" mayor, another racist who needs to go away.
What I often hear from the "color blind" right in this country is about how blacks are supposed to do this or that, generally with regards to "pulling themselves up by their bootstraps." So now, when a church has as one of its tenets a desire to help its community and all humankind, those same "color blind" wingers cry racism.
Did YOU just call someone ELSE a hatemonger???? If this were a just world your head would have exploded from the unintentional irony
One of Tuckie's many errors is to claim that this Black Values thing is "theology." Of course he needs to make that "error" so that he can support his ludicrous assertion that Obama isn't a Christian. And he gets to play the laughable "colorblind conservative" race card while he's at it.
Tucker never claimed that Obama isn't a Christian. He is questioning this values statement as it relates to Christianity. There is nothing wrong with discussing it fairly.....there is no race card being played here by Tucker.
come on. carlson never said he's not a christian. but he clearly questioned his christian beliefs if he belongs to this church. more game playing.
TOMMY.....NO race card being played..???? TUCKER SAID OBAMA'S CHURCH IS RACIALLY EXCLUSIVE- that IS PLAYING THE RACE CARD...!!!
The statement is racially specific and divisive, no doubt. If you are comfortable with it, fine.
"dignity of all humankind". sounds pretty inclusive to me.
Look at the entire statement and substitute "white" for "blacK' and then tell me if you still think it's still all inclusive.
It is adressing the black community, Tommy...what is your problem with that??? It's like being a human AND in the PTA for your kids' school, or in some OTHER organization...
So you think if it were a "White Values System", you'd be perfectly fine with that? If so, you are consistent.
If whites had been historically oppressed, yes.
Makes no difference. What about a "Japanese Values System", or a "Woman's Value System", or a "Native American Values System", or any dozens of oppressed people throughout history?
That would be fine. What's your point?
Nothing now.
Your point was always nothing.
Tommy
I think more reasonable question for TC to ask is what do they mean by a black value system in the first place. While I find your sentiment about looking at all people as individual noble, you cannot pretend to ignore the past or its influence on society. Don't you realize that much of what shapes us as individuals is influenced by our race and other people's perceptions of said race?
While I find your sentiment about looking at all people as individual noble, you cannot pretend to ignore the past or its influence on society.
Sure he can. In Tommy's view, the second Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, blacks and whites were on perfectly equal footing in the world.
A little newsflash, if the unequal footing that exists in your life today is the fault of circumstances from Abraham Lincoln's time - then I suggest you emancipate yourself.
Uuumm....you don't get it.....AFTER emancipation, there IS STILL inequality....'emancipating yourself' won't get rid of it...
How do you account for minorities or anyone who comes from an incredibly unequal backround of horrible childhood circumstances, the worst possible strikes against them from everywhere - but manage to work hard, avoid moral mistakes, stay in school, and out of trouble and become a successful and happy person? Luck? Their inequality should have had them screaming for equality, but instead they decided to do something about it instead of blaming somebody else.
If you do say luck, I would imagine that person would be incredibly offended, and should be.
you are not addressing what I wrote in response to the above thread, mainly INEQUALITIES STILL EXIST!!! And, in response to yours, there are MANY REASONS why those who have the short end of the stick do well in life: family support, education, mentors, communty support, hard work, not getting addicted to anything, etc., and luck helps, also...just look at bush...
I certainly addressed your point about inequalities. We are not in an equal society on many levels. In spite of that, people from all socioeconomic backrounds overcome the inequities thrown at them and succeed anyway......the beauty of America. However, people have the opportunity through their own hard work to be whatever they want to be......just look around.
NO- you did NOT address the post about inequalities....YOU said if what happened in Lincon's time is affecting you today, emancipate yourself....and then I said that makes no sense AND that inequalities STILL exist after emancipation....YOU then DID NOT answer my post about inequalities...YOU then started on how some people OVERCOME inequalities and do well...THEN I said, yes, that happens but you DIDN'T answer my post about inequalities STILL EXISTING TODAY..!!!
I JUST DID. There are plenty of inequalities in our society. So what? The point is, for the last time, people can overcome them through their hard work. They don't blame them for their lot in life.
OK...since you STILL haven't responded to my earlier post, let's just move on...To say 'So What?' to inequalities still existing today and say 'people overcome all the time' is callous and snooty...SOME people DON'T overcome inequalities PRECISELY because the playing field IS UNEVEN....power to those who can overcome, but it shouldn't HAVE to be an uphill climb for those who are disenfranchised...GETTING RID of inequalities is what we all SHOULD be trying to do to help ALL of our citizens prosper...as it says in Sidhartha, (paraphrased) 'is not the one who SEES the obstacle in my path and does nothing to remove it before I get there also to blame for my stumbling over it...?' Learn to empathize with the less fortunate, Tommy, and it will open up your eyes...
" ...SOME people DON'T overcome inequalities PRECISELY because the playing field IS UNEVEN.... "
Yeah inequalities exist. But not for the reasons you think. IMHO inequalities are between rich/poor. You rich blacks discriminate against poor folk just as much as rich whites do. Poor whites are discriminated against just as much as poor blacks. Tommy answered your question and added more to it. The snooty attitude you get is coming from those rich white folk from massechusetts (kennedy, kerry) and the rich black folk (jackson, sharpton)
You have no idea what real inequality is as both of you have had white male privilege your entire lives. And before you start laying out the sob story on how much you've struggled to get to where you are in life, most minorities in the U.S. will have to struggle with the same issues with the added burden of bigotry, racism, sexism, etc. To pretend it isn't so continues to show your lack of understanding or is it willful ignorance?
No one is suggesting that minorities should not continue to try or work hard. However you seem to be dismissing the history of our society and the forces that our currently in play which is ignorant and insulting. Just keep telling yourself "everyone is equal" so you don't have to take responsibility or do anything to fix the situation.. You can continue to blame minorities for all of "their" problems instead of realizing that the problem are caused by and is effected by ALL of us.
" the history of our society and the forces that our currently in play which is ignorant and insulting. "
You say caused and affected by ALL of us, yet you insinuate that only the whites are the cause and only the blacks are the affected with the statement I highlighted. Which is it? All of us, or just between races?
There were black people during slavery and segregation that overcame the odds and were able to live the American dream. Although there are more opportunities for black people today doesn't mean the there are still obstacles that are systematic that must till be overcome. There will always be people that overcome the obstacles and those people shouldn't abandon those that haven't. It seems like the Christian thing to do is to help those people that the system has left behind to achieve the American dream.
There are plenty of inequalities in our society. So what? The point is, for the last time, people can overcome them through their hard work. They don't blame them for their lot in life.
---------------------------------------
So what??? That's real easy for a white skinned individual in a white racist society to say.
Sure, we have, can and will overcome the destructive forces unleashed upon us by white racism. Like the Jews will never forget the Holocaust (which is over), we will never forget white racism (which is not).
I certainly addressed your point about inequalities. We are not in an equal society on many levels. In spite of that, people from all socioeconomic backrounds overcome the inequities thrown at them and succeed anyway......the beauty of America. However, people have the opportunity through their own hard work to be whatever they want to be......just look around.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I see that white morons from George Bush to Glenn Beck and Ann Coulter can become national celebrities, even President, because of the paleness of their skin. If he's a KKK Republican, a white pedophile can even chair a Congressional Committee on pedophila, what a country!
" If he's a KKK Republican, a white pedophile can even chair a Congressional Committee on pedophila, what a country! "
Don't forget about your white kkk democrats (Sen. Byrd) and your white democrat pedophiles (Gerry Studds).
No you didnt. The fact that exceptional people exist and excell doesnt obviate the FACT that things are unequal and the average person of one color finds it much harder than the average person of another color. You pretend we are all running a race and the fact that the finish line is the same for all means its equal when in fact SOME people start ten yards from the finish line and others run with weights on their ankles. Things are never going to be completely equal but we can do some things to negate the most onerous and unfair disadvantages
How do you account for minorities or anyone who comes from an incredibly unequal backround of horrible childhood circumstances, the worst possible strikes against them from everywhere - but manage to work hard, avoid moral mistakes, stay in school, and out of trouble and become a successful and happy person? Luck? Their inequality should have had them screaming for equality, but instead they decided to do something about it instead of blaming somebody else.
If you do say luck, I would imagine that person would be incredibly offended, and should be.
--------------------------------------------------------
To your white racist society, that's "one that got away."
Do you know anything about African American history and culture at all???? Or do you just swollow what you see on TV??? African American history is American history and until mainstream culture changes to include the accomplishments of people of color, your idoitic bable will continue to flow.
If I am expected to know European history, but why are you not expected to the histories of people who make up close to 35% of the population of this country? Native American, African American, Middle Eastern- American (Did you know that Thomas Jefferson had a Middle East Foriegn Policy?) Hispanic/Latino and Asian American history education should be in every school in this country. So that people like you could have more to say than this ridiculous "blame game" rhetoric.
So that people like you could have more to say than this ridiculous "blame game" rhetoric. "
Who expects you to know european history that doesn't include black history? What part of america do you live in? You have black history MONTH, all about teaching and making aware of the black history. You want equality, where's american indian month? Where's latino month? Quit your whining about ineqaulities between races, the only inequalities are between those rich folk and those poor folk. You whine about the "blame game" yet continue to blame the white for holding blacks down and keeping blacks from achieving like everyone else. Get over it! Give me some CURRENT examples of blacks being discriminated against that aren't pursued in the court of law! I doubt you can do that. The only race discrimination is in your mind!
Tell me why do women with the same or higher education level get paid less the their male counter parts? Why do men on average get paid more working in fields that are dominated by woman (i.e. nursing, waitress, clerical, etc) You can find and read all of the studies online (Department of Labor)
I just did a project last semester. We read a study about individuals that auditioned for a symphony. They put up a screen so the judges could not see the race or sex of the individual. With the screen up, women and minorities were (don't know the exact percentage) more likely to be selected for the symphony and got better positions.
Why do you refuse to acknowledge that inequality is still an issue in the US?
Yes Tommy we all need emancipation from this white supremacist society. Give it a try.
Yes it DOES make a difference those WITH the power have a different dynamic to deal with than those WITHOUT power. When those with power talk about their values its seen as being exclusionary, that we need to KEEP the upper hand. When those without power talk about their values its talking about SHARING in that power, and getting part that is a fair share of the power. That is inclusionary. Your constant talk about we need to be colorblind NOW is an excuse to maintaing privelege. WHEN things are on an even playing field THEN we can be colorblind that day is not today.
There's no need to promote the white community, it has the bulk of the wealth and influence in society as it is.
It's like the difference between "White Power" and "Black Power". The former is a cry to keep the money and power they have, to put others (including jews and arabs) down. The latter is a cry to get what they deserve, a better place in society, to rise up. For those reasons, it's easy to imagine the willingness to accept support from people of any color (inclusive) while you can't expect anyone of another race to support a "white" group (exclusive).
Sure if it refers to lingering problems in the white community that the church can help with. By conservative logic MLK was a separatist for focusing on black issues.
So you think if it were a "White Values System", you'd be perfectly fine with that? If so, you are consistent.
------------------------------------------------
It is your white values system that makes you portray the Son of God as a pale white man.
sounds like a conservative wet dream, tommy. blacks helping each other.
I have attended Trinity United Church of Christ and am familiar with the ministry of Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Tucker Carlson does not know what he's talking about. It's congregation is sophisticated and sincere and wouldn't give a white person a second look if they walked through the door. So when did you attend?
Tommy, I have attended the church. You and Tucker Carlson don't know what you're talking about. You would be welcomed there. Maybe you'd be surprised to know that Black people are not obsessed with white people all the time. But we do live in a white supremacists society that does not put a high value on our humanity. Its something we have to do for ourselves. That doesn't mean that you're excluded. The only thing standing in your way is your own prejudice and fear.
I have been to a predominantly white church many times. Have you ever been to a predominant African American church? Know a little about our history and our culture, which by the way is American, before you even fix your hands to type the meaningless phrase "the race card"
Tucker never claimed that Obama isn't a Christian.
Oh, right. He just said that it's hard to call Obama's religion Christianity. Big difference.
The race card Tuckie is playing is the "look at me, I'm the above-it-all colorblind conservative." Commonly played, by some.
Anyone who discusses race from any other viewpoint other than a guilt ridden liberal is playing the race card? Good one.
No, anyone who pretends that we live in a colorblind world is an idiot. But by pretending, one can overlook all the distasteful questions that might come up about one's own skin privilege. It's painfully transparent, but clung to fiercely - by some.
Absolutely agree, we do not live in a colorblind world. However, to pit one race against each other by racial discrimination, reverse or otherwise, rather than judging people by their character is a also distasteful and painfully transparent........and still played by some, sadly.
I agree. Fortunately this Black Values thing is not anti-white.
Cool. The next time a white values thing comes across the board, you will be the first to say it's not anti-black.
Cool. The next time a white values thing comes across the board, you will be the first to say it's not anti-black.
----------------------------------------------------------
Reality check, Mr. Reverse Rhetoric. Get a new trick. White values have been anti-black since the 15th century. This is a matter of historical record. On the other hand, black values have never been anti-white. To assert black freedom as a value in response to white supremacy values only makes sense. Only a white racist interprets this as anti-white because of its tendency to stop whites from achieving total black annihilation.
Human rights is not a zero-sum game. Blacks (or any other group of people) can achieve rights without a single other person losing any of theirs.
What the white racists are afraid of is that they have less control over someone who shares their rights and isn't afraid to stand up for them.
" What the white racists are afraid of is that they have less control over someone who shares their rights and isn't afraid to stand up for them. "
"White racists", and just WHO does that include? Every white person, as heru thinks? Or, are you saying the same thing as heru, that every white person is a racist? If so, then you have as much credibility as heru....none!
PC - the only person that continues to lose credibility here is you, as you continue to make stuff up as you go along.
I have read all of heru's posts and I'm wondering if you could point out the place were he said that and in what context?
Absolutely agree, we do not live in a colorblind world. However, to pit one race against each other by racial discrimination, reverse or otherwise, rather than judging people by their character is a also distasteful and painfully transparent........and still played by some, sadly.
--------------------------------------------
White people created and maintain racism. Thus Blacks organize themselves in self-defense. Fortunately, organizing in the Black community around Black values does not depend on what white racists think of it. The more you don't like it, the better it probably is for us.
Tommy claims "[t]here is nothing wrong with discussing it fairly." But what's "right" about discussing it (Obama's religion) at all?!?? Article VI of the Constitution expressly states that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." So, what does it matter what the precepts or tenets of Obama's church may be, other than to perpetuate a (very) personal attack on the man. What Tucker is essentially saying is, "Well, he may not be a Muslim, but he's not a real Christian either."
I had an alternative explanation, something having to do with Chrisitianity and racism being mutually exclusive. However, given the recent accusations with respect to Obama's education, I find your explanation quite plausible...and likely accurate.
One of Tuckie's many errors is to claim that this Black Values thing is "theology."
Rusty, after reviewing the church's website, I'm not so certain this is an error. http://www.tucc.org/about.htm I'm reminded, in particular, of liberation theology, with which the Black Values System appears to share many ideas.
As with liberation theology, it appears to be rooted in very Christian concepts. Yet, there are some statements on this church's website that strike me as being non-Christian or ever un-Christian, with a potentially racist edge. This would not be the first time liberation theology has been stretched beyond what I see as its original intent.
To clarify, I am not opposed to liberation theology. In fact, I am often critical of the Catholic Church's remaining silent on important social issues. (Of course, I don't mean abortion.) However, as with Christianity in general, it is often twisted to the purpose of individuals or select groups.
That is a good point, CD. To me, that stretches the meaning of theology to include politics, but that's just my opinion and I could be wrong.
As I understand it, that was part of the Vatican's criticism of liberation theology; i.e., that it extended into political involvement. Of course, it's hard to miss the hypocrisy of the Church's actions with respect to abortion and political candidates in recent elections.
This is a protestant church, Christiandemo, so the Vatican is irrelevant. I have attended Trinity on many occasions and have had a good time. You would too.
The Forum General has determined that responding to the end of a thread without having read the earlier entries may result in nonsensical posts.
ChristianDemocrat: I would take issue with your statement that there is something "racist" about the what the Trinity United Church suggests on its website. Frankly, I think it is what is generally wrong-headed about this whole discussion. What I think you intend to suggest is that there may be racial element to the beliefs espoused, though I don't see that as valid either.
I read the concepts on this website as not at all different from the belief systems of just about any cult -- and by cult, I really mean any religion. It seems pretty clear that the TUC is suggesting that its adherents (like every religion) are, in fact, the only true chosen people of whatever flying spaghetti monster they believe in.
I see nothing racist suggested here. If you think that it is because the TUC is a black church, where does it say that those who not black are excluded solely because they are not black. In fact, I don't see where Black is defined on the website. Now whether they are christian or not. Sure they are. They say they are christian, as do many many other sects and cults (think methodists, unitarians, trinitarians, baptists, calvinists, lutherans, protestants, catholics, etc....).
What I think you intend to suggest is that there may be racial element to the beliefs espoused
Actually, racist edge, as in a racist secondary quality, is exactly what I meant.
I read the concepts on this website as not at all different from the belief systems of just about any cult -- and by cult, I really mean any religion. It seems pretty clear that the TUC is suggesting that its adherents (like every religion) are, in fact, the only true chosen people of whatever flying spaghetti monster they believe in.
And if those beliefs are centered in race, then you've just made the case for racism. Of course, I don't see anything quite so blatant, which is why I used the word "edge."
Where does it say that those who not black are excluded solely because they are not black?
You're redefining racism. Are you playing the Red Queen today?
There is absolutely nothing racist about the Church's statement. It is necessary because of the evil world the white Christian collective created for us.
Thanks for having the decency to check the website. I have attended Trinity when I lived in Chicago, The congregation would not give a white person a second look if they walked through the door. Tucker Carlson does not know what he's talking about.
I looked up "race card" to see what the consensus definition is for the term. From wikipedia...
Playing the race card is an idiomatic phrase, referring to an allegation raised against a person who, the accuser feels, has unnecessarily brought the issue of race or racism into a debate so as to obfuscate the matter.
So, the key question is, did Tucker unnecessarily bring the issue of race into the debate? Had this been something burried in the church's past, my answer would be, "yes." However, given its prominence on the church's website, it's an inevitable point of question.
Is it relevant to bring up prominent aspects of a religion when speculating about a candidate?
I don't know. Obviously candidates often differ from the stated beliefs of their churches. Some candidates support the Iraq War while their churches may be against it. There is the abortion issue, which many candidates may differ with their church.
My main problem is that people like Carlson don't start by talking to the candidates. It may be a legitimate question to ask Obama to his face, but it is the speculation that Obama necessarily believes everything his church espouses that bothers me the most.
True enough. Of course, tabloid trash thrives on speculation, not answering questions.
The racism in this "church" stinks to high heaven.
So does the racism in your statement.
Care to make a point Easy or drivel on as usual? That's what I thought.
uummm....he did....you are a racist, sleepyboy...
"That's what I thought."
-----
You thought? Well, there's a first time for everything...
"Care to make a point Easy or drivel on as usual?" --tubed
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The irony is simply lost on some people.
You first, YOU have yet to make a single point in any post you have ever made. Just spouting hatemongering idiocy doesnt count as a point
The racism in this "church" stinks to high heaven.
-------------------------------------------
I'm glad to know you hate it so much. That means they are definitely on the right track. I would join myself but I have a problem with worshiping the god of our oppressors no matter what.
Have you been to a black church in your entire life????? Go to one for a month and then maybe you might be able to make a lucid comment on this subject. I am Catholic so I have been in plenty of all white churches, so let me nip your next comment in the bud.
No, Bas, I have never been to a "black" church. And I've never been to a "white" church either. The church I attend doesn't focus on race. You and the other racists here really ought to stop categorizing people by the amount of melanin they posess and start seeing people for what they are: Another human being just like you, created in God's image.
You and the other incredibly ignorant bigots LIKE you ought to pitch in and buy some brain cells so you can actually understand a simple concept. It probably wont happen but you gotta have a dream
So when did you attend? I have and you and Tucker Carlson dont know what you're talking about. The fact is you would be welcomed and you would have a nice time. But because you live under the assumption that just because an institution is pro-black that its anti-white. We must have a value system that helps us cope in this white supremacist society and so do you.
Tucker's two main areas of expertise: religion and dancing.
Well, Tucker is a right winger so of course his own definition of christian is even more off-the-mark.
Right-wingers think Jesus taught to screw the poor in favour of the rich. In fact, screw everyone BUT the rich. They think society is better off if the rich have more power and money. They think faith-based initiatives are more imortant than honesty. They refuse to admit to being wrong. They promote war and the death penalty for even the slightest provocation. They encourage hatred and divisiveness and anger and violence and treating women and gays and other races as something to look down upon.
Frankly, Obama's view of Christianity is a million tiems closer to the truth than the right-wing's. After all, I firmly believe if most of the right-wingers were really christian they would become liberals...like Jesus (the christ in Christianity) actually was.
Rosencrantz!!
Oh no! you just broke the 11th commandment! (written by Pat Robinson/Jerry Farewell/etc).
11. Who shall not believe Jesus was a liberal and did not preach love. Jesus, the son of god, said buy more guns, help the rich and kill the innocent.
Frankly, Obama's view of Christianity is a million tiems closer to the truth than the right-wing's.
Based on Obama's own writings, I generally agree. As for Tucker, I find his assertion of being an authority on Christianity...umm...to be polite, I'll just say questionable.
Yet another Strawman...
It's clear that Carlson excluded the "and the dignity of all humankind" part of the church's values statement to support his "this stuff sounds separatist" bullschit.
Tucker is the worst kind of bigot: the kind that uses subtle themes like "Barak Hussein", "racially exclusive theology", "Muslim upbringing" and other wink-and-a-nod words to spread their bile.
Tommy,
You have to view "Black" and "White" in context. In America, Black typically means the descendants of Africans who were brought here as slaves. The reason it is referred to as a "Black Value System" is because the Church is primarily focused on helping the African American Community.
Typically, "White" refers to anyone who is caucasian, regardless of cultural background. It is an umbrella term that doesn't really speak to people who share a cultural history as much as skin color, which is significantly different from the way we use the word "Black" with regards to race, which is why a "White Value System" would be offensive while a Black value system is not.
Also, you really have to view this in the context of Americans who are defined as Black being denied equal treatment and rights through legalized means. White people in America have never been on the recieving end of legislated bigotry that defines an individual as property, to be listed with farm equipment.
Statements such as these are a church's perfect right, if they choose. However they only foster divisiveness and the "us vs them" mentality. If Obama wants to be a member of this church, then we have a perfect right to ask him about it for his clarification.
"I have no idea is any of this is relevant to a President Obama, considering a person's religious beliefs and practices are their own business and should have absolutely no bearing on any public policy"
who said this?
I did. Asking for clarification is just that. Why, are these questions out of bounds for you?
Tucker muddied the water, MMFA clarified, and you don't like it. Tough.
And you make no sense.
"And you make no sense."
-----
Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle.
But Tommy you are forgetting to read the whole thing. He is attacking Obama and his church by saying that it isn't very Christian.
Or the fact that it advocates for the "dignity of all humankind." Are you saying its racist because it tries to reach out to the black community to appeal to them to be better christians?
We heard the same arguement here in Michigan with affirmative action. The language of the bill could make it illegal for state programs to target women for breast cancer screenings. One anti-affirmative action guy even began to argue that the screening programs were sexist because they target only women (yes I know a few men do get breast cancer, but what population is most at risk?)
How does a program that says, "we are black, so we want to help other black members of our church become better christians and better cizitens in our community," become racist? I didn't read anywhere where it says, "Black people only!"
Also lets compare the intolerance of the major churches here in the US. I'm sure this program, even if it were racist would be at the very bottom of the list.
Defend this racist "church" all you want but you can't get away from the fact that they focus on RACE which, BY DEFINITION, makes it a racist organization.
- gttntoobed5295
for someone that SO adamant about this church being RACIST, you might want to look up the DEFINITION of RACISM. Focusing just on race doesn't make an organization RACIST.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+racism
Take your pick there are at least 20 + entries and none of them fit your definition.Yeah, I'm thinking you don't know what "racism" means.
Yeah, and I'm thinking you and MHK are desperate to keep racism alive, just like this "church".
AND I'm thinking you have a little.....mind....they are NOT trying to perpetuate racism, sleepyboy...
Yup, I didn't think you knew. Just more idiotic blather.
If Trinity were racist, they wouldn't let you through the door. But thats not the case. I have been there. But you just can't get your head around the fact that Black people can indeed focus on themselves and their condition with out being exclusionary. It is very difficult for many whites to see in this white supremacists culture that they are not the center of everybody's universe.
Sorry FDEBEAR but for some people, the color of their skin IS the center of their universe. Unfortunately for this "church" it's their "gospel".
Yes and some people believe in the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, Santa Clause and that inequality vanished and race doesn't matter in America because of the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
Promoting a certain type of value that is positive for a community of people and one that doesn't discriminate against another group of people of a different race does not make it racist. The reality is that RACE does shape who and what we are as individual people and to pretend otherwise is just silly. You do understand that many people in the black community have a common experiences that has shaped them because of the fact that they're black, right? I'm not black therefore I will not fully understand what it's like to be a black person in the US, just like a black person will not fully understand fully what its like to be a white person in the U.S.
In order for people to get along and play nice we need acknowledge, understand and accept our differences before we can move forward.
Have you spent any time outside of the US in a culture that is really different then it is here? I'm just curious because when you immerse yourself within a community of people were you're the one outside of the majority, I think you will start having a better understanding these issues.
I desperately want to keep racism alive by showing you the correct definition of racism? I can assure you sir that is not case. I would be happy to continue having a conversation with you about why you have a problem with a church that promotes "black values", but we need to get on the same page ok? It's like you keep saying the world is flat, when it is in fact round. It does not make them racist by the very definition of the word. You did read the definitions right? I went through all that trouble posting the links for you and I'm getting the impression that you didn't even bother looking at them from your follow up posts.
You really need to aspire to some form of higher brain funtion perhaps one day you MIGHT have some dim conception of what you are talking about. I wont hold my breath
Then you should also be comfortable with a statement saying "we are white people, and we want to help other white members of our church become better white members of our community".
Because it's the same thing.
YES, it is...and if a 'white' church had the same VALUES as Obama's church, there would be no problem....
To be honest, as long as they did not say they do not include any other races in their program, I would have no problem with that program.
If the population of the church is all white, and they say lets be better members of society, that's fine with me. No where in the info I've pulled up in my google search does it say "Black only" its an open program, started at black churches.
Its a program that seeks to help others within its church become better people within the community. And its target population is the population within its church.
Then you are intellectually honest and I admire that.
So Tommy, you are arguing that if say I started a program that targets men only, to teach them to be better husbands, that is sexist. So I should shut it down?
Since I am male and a husband, that is my population. I am not able to teach women about being better wives. I know nothing about being a wife or a woman. But to not be sexist I would have to change the program to include all sexes and to teach subjects I do not understand?
The arguement you are making is very similar
You are free to have any program you want. Or any target audience you want. Anything you want. That is irrelevant.
The point is if this statement were "white" instead of "black", the race charge would be hauled out so fast your head would spin. And they would probably have a point. It is a church and they have the perfect right to put this out, but don't tell me it's not divisive, because it is. The point is Obama, and I have already said that his personal religious beliefs are his own........but he will be asked about this for clarification and there is nothing wrong with asking him about it.
"The point is if this statement were "white" instead of "black", the race charge would be hauled out so fast your head would spin. And they would probably have a point. It is a church and they have the perfect right to put this out, but don't tell me it's not divisive, because it is. The point is Obama, and I have already said that his personal religious beliefs are his own........but he will be asked about this for clarification and there is nothing wrong with asking him about it."
You mean like exactly whats happening now in this instance? Tommy I think you may be jumping the gun on this church. I already posted this, but if it was a white church with the same values and I spent a few minutes actually learning about the church I would be perfectly fine with it.
...the race charge would be hauled out so fast your head would spin.
The race charge WAS hauled out so fast it made my head spin. It was hauled out, yet again, by a CONSERVATIVE.
The hypocrisy lies in the fact that if this was a "white" statement it would be hauled out by a LIBERAL.......but because it soothes their guilt by being "black", it's no big deal and just a color blind conservative race card game. Another good one.
The hypocrisy lies in the fact that if this was a "white" statement...
If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry Christmas. You are welcome to your idle speculation, but that's all it is.
"White Presidential Candidate A belongs to a church putting forth "White Value System".......
2 seconds later you would be the first to post hauling out the racist charge. I can pretty much bank on that.
Again, there's no societal need for helping white people over any other people. It's possible that someone could start a genuine program like you're talking about, but it's about a million times less likely than a genuine program for minority groups. You keep acting as if they would be the same thing, but a basic perception of society shows why they wouldn't be similar at all.
Oh I get it. The way, in your view, to stop discrimination against one group, is to swing the pendulum the other way and direct it towards another.......the very definition of affirmative action.
And the way to do it in your view is to close your eyes, plug your ears, and sing "there's no such thing as racism."
I'm not seeing where I said or implied anything about discrimination towards anybody. Perhaps you're working off your assumption that the "black values" group doesn't accept help from other people.
The point is that "what if it was a white group" just doesn't apply. They are two different groups in completely different circumstances, which make your example highly unlikely to be anything but a racist organization.
"Oh I get it."
-----
No, you certainly don't.
Tommy, If whites were an historically oppressed minority by slavery and Blacks were the dominant and oppressive culture, then I would approve completely of a candidate having a "White Value System". I don't think anyone would (although, your role would necessarily be replaced by a black man).
The thing you want to avoid for some reason is the context of a history of slavery and oppression that influences the reality. Your argument completely ignores relevant context in an apparently desperate attempt to "expose" some sort of imagined hypocrisy.
Well put. Unfortunately, your post is so dead-on that he won't be able to acknowledge ever reading it.
that is typical tommy. when someone calls his bluff, he moves on in the thread and just repeats his argument.
So your saying that when my father's (and my) ancestors came to this country, lived in the Irish getthos (even though they were Scotish) and recieved help from the irish american groups of the time; that was divisive? Because they only helped irish americans who showed up in this country.
These people lived in a world that was 85% irish american (it was a gettho). They came from a country that was, at the time, 99.9999999% Irish, if not more.
Or put it this way. If you Tommy were the first conservative to post on this blogg, and you went through hell (aka, slavery, Jim Crow laws) and you decided that you would start a program to help other future conservatives to become better bloggers and debators (I really wish you would). You set up a seperate blogg, the home page does not say "no liberals allowed" but because of its location and content liberals just don't go there.
If you only dealt with conservative bloggers and had a site where only conservative bloggers go, is that wrong?
"...if say I started a program that targets men only, to teach them to be better husbands,..."
It's called "Promise Keepers". The Left likes to make fun of this group.
It's called "Promise Keepers".
The knock on Promise Keepers is not that is calls on men to be better husbands, it's the actual content of the program, a significant part of which says being a "better husband" means telling your wife to be quiet and do as she's told because the Bible says the husband is in charge.
Thus, the left criticizes Promise Keepers not for using the phrase "better husbands" but for what it actually advocates. The right criticizes the church here not for what it actually advocates but for using the word "black."
A clear illustration of one difference between left and right. Thank you for raising the point.
"...the left criticizes Promise Keepers not for...Blah, blah,blah,blah freaking blah".
The Left critcizes EVERYTHING that's based on the Bible. You've got your secular humanism. Enjoy it. Just don't try to force in on "unbelievers".
No the left just criticizes the sort of blatant ignorance and bigotry that define you. I know you LOVE being an ignorant bigot and actually think that blah, blah is clever. I pity you
Tommy - Who do you think predominantly white churches in predominantly white communities are helping?
I find it interesting that your getting hung up on the mission statement instead of looking at the fact that much of our society places the blame and the responsibility to fix the issues in the black community, on the black community. So this church has a mission statement in-line with the comments made by the "personal responsibility" crowd and now your complaining about that?
That's an excellent point, considering the number of times Tommy has espoused "personal responsibility" himself in the past.
Because whiteness and blackness have traditionally been interchangeable in American history. There's no difference, its just that black people get away with being racist, right?
<----------sarcasm
What I consider ironic is that he is acknowledging in one breath that the church is predominantly Black and then complaining in the next that he is part of a church that is seperatist. But pardon me but how can a church that is not all black be seperating itself it is only predominantly black then that would inidicate that it would have some members that are not black. How about we ask them why they would subscribe to a value system that was intended for another race. Perhaps because they are smart enough to realise that the message is intended for particuliar audience but has a universal theme that we can all take to heart regardless if we are a part of the intended audience. Another Example was the message of MLK It was intended for blacks but it was a universal message to live by. It would seem that Tucker should stop worry so much about the "black" audience and more about the message that is within the value system.
Actually Dottiemae, MLK's main message is that we judge all people by the content of their character, not the color of their skin.
Tommy
That was one of many of MLK statements Most of his work was working with the african community. He gave a lot more speaches then just the I have a dream Most of his work was toward blacks, He taught about tolerance, charity, and ture meaning of Christainity to the Black community. Because above all else he was a minister.
So dont give me some pathetic retort. I know what his message was. It didn't start or end with one speach.
Tommy is like an AEI wind-up doll.
So judging people by the content of their character and not the color of their skin is a "pathetic retort"? I guess in the land of victimhood, that would be true.
<i>MLK's main message</i>
Thank you for sharing your expertise on Dr. King.
However, the actual full quote was
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."
The obvious point being that they did <i>not</i> live in such a nation at the time - nor do any of us now. To demand that no one say anything that takes notice of that continuing divide is to perpetuate it. You cannot overcome an evil by pretending it does not exist.
Thank you for raising the point.
WRONG again as usual MLKs main message was that he had a DREAM of a world where that was how it worked not that this WAS such a world
"...the message is intended for particuliar audience..."
Yes, those who wallow in the delusion of "victimhood" and those who make their living "rescuing" the "victim".
And if you pay attention to the message, you see that it teaches the Black audience not to persue this path so what is your grip
My gripe is that this "church" focuses on RACE which, by defintion, makes it a RACIST, SEPERATIST organization.
I think maybe you don't know the definition of racism.
He obviously doesn't know the definition of racism.
As I stated in a prior post look it up...
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define:+racism
or racialism is a form of discrimination based on race, especially the belief that one race is superior to another. Racism may be expressed individually and consciously, through explicit thoughts, feelings, or acts, or socially and unconsciously, through institutions that promote inequality between races.[link to www.kids.net.au] color="#008000">www.kids.net.au/encyclopedia-wiki/ra/Racism
(Audre Lorde): The inherent belief in the superiority of one race over all others and thereby the right to dominance.[link to www.uihome.uidaho.edu] color="#008000">www.uihome.uidaho.edu/default.aspx
The belief that one 'racial group' is inferior to another and the practices of the dominant group to maintain the inferior position of the dominated group. Often defined as a combination of power, prejudice and discrimination.[link to www.bl.uk] color="#008000">www.bl.uk/services/learning/curriculum/voices/refglos.html
The doctrine that race is the basic determinant of human abilities and that, therefore, the various racial groups constitute a hierarchy in which one group is properly regarded as superior to others. Racism has also been defined using the following formula: Power+Prejudice=Racism. Racism has also been defined as a "system of advantage based on race."[link to www.unk.edu] color="#008000">www.unk.edu/offices/aaeo/index.php
Where is Obama's church esposing a belief in black superiority?
And more to the point, where is Obama himself espousing such a belief?
Tommy?
Kernel?
Anyone?
No those with an actual functioning cerebral cortex, thus excluding bigotted morons like YOU
I have attended Trinity and am very familiar with the ministry of Reverend Jeramiah Wright and Tucker flat out wrong! And for you to assume that its message is about "victimhood" just because most of the congregants are black like me means you need to get a handle on the facts. He doesn't know what he's talking about and if you truly knew you'd be ashamed at what you said.
Tucker: "Christianity -- this is something that I am actually qualified to discuss -- is, it seems to me, almost explicitly anti-racial. The idea is that we are all equal in the eyes of God."
Really, Tucker? All equal in the eyes of God? When did Christians finally decide to adhere to this tenet of their faith - back in the 1960's during the civil right's movement?
Why is the religious right exempt from observing the 'all equal' tenet, when it comes to gay people, or atheists?
"The Idea is that we are all equal in the eyes of God."
-----
Since Allah and God are one and the same, I wonder if Tucker believes we are all equal in the eyes of Allah, too.
CARLSON: However, it's the word before them, black. It's making them racially specific.
True.
Again, Christianity -- this is something that I am actually qualified to discuss --
Whoa, does this mean he's admitting he's not actually qualified to discuss the other things he discusses? Furthermore, what makes him qualified? Has anyone ever heard what Tucker personally believes?
is, it seems to me, almost explicitly anti-racial. The idea is that we are all equal in the eyes of God.
True enough.
And when you espouse a theology that is racially exclusive, as this appears to be, it's hard to call that Christianity. I think it's pretty easy to call it wrong.
What's wrong, Tucker, is your view of what Obama's church does. In addition to the theology it teaches, it also espouses the Black Value System, which is not theology itself, but a means of making improvements in a traditionally oppressed group. It is not racist to do so, any more than it was when abolitionists used pulpits to preach against the evils of slavery in former centuries. And notice Tucker's little sleight-of-hand: first the church was racially "specific," and now it's racially "exclusive."
Furthermore, if it doesn't impinge on the basic tenets of the faith, then yes, it's still Christianity.
...but this stuff sounds separatist to me, I have to say.
Okay, fine. But many Christians consider themselves to be separatists, and quote Scripture to justify that view (John 15:19, for instance). Apparently Tucker is trying to claim that the terms are mutually exclusive. Again, it would be nice to see just how "qualified" he is to speak on these matters.
Tucker is trying to make Obama out to be some racial segretist...he is a bad man, that Tucker is...
Yeah, it's not as if Obama ever said the world would be a better place and we wouldn't have all the problems we are having now if Strom Thurmond had been elected President.
Wait, Trent Lott, a real racist said that, and the Republican party just gave him back a prominent position in the party.
Interesting...Conservatives are always saying Blacks shouldn't be dependent on govmnt and shouldn't be blaming Whites for their "plight" (victim mentality)..They should be looking inward and doing something to 'fix their own.'
Appears to me that this is exactly what this church is doing...Now the cons start waving the racist/exclusionist label? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.
Tucker still has a show?
That's what news to me here.
"Christianity -- this is something that I am actually qualified to discuss -- "
Well, well, Tucker... ain't you the Christianity expert. Tell us about how the Southern Baptist Convention was founded. Had something to do with promoting slavery in the South through the pulpit, as I recall. Seems some of the the Baptists in the North disagreed. Despite its pro-slavery roots the Southern Baptist Convention is pretty respectable today. Do you have any comments about them, Tuck?
As far as Obama's church, what's the big deal. Yea, it would be nice if we lived in a country where there isn't such a racial divide, but I fail to appreciate what's so bad about Obama's church promoting non-materialism and blacks taking care of each other. However, Tucker, please come back and tell us when Obama's church is revealed to teach hatred of white people. In fact, check with InsightMag because I'm sure they will also have found that Hillary Clinton was behind exposing Obama's hatred of white people.
Why do I even bother to read this crap...?
There are many issue in the Black community that predominately Black churches address in their sermons. Specifically addressing the black community on certain issues is not racist.
If this was a predominantly white church addressing whites specifically with the same value system there actually wouldn't be anything wrong with that at all. I would say this church is more "focused" as opposed to being "exclusive". Many of the people posting on this topic that have a problem are truly not looking at the context.
http://www.tucc.org/mission.htm
(BTW I am not a religious person, but respect the traditions of many religions around the world.)
If that is your position, then I respect that. So the next time a "white" church proclaims it's exclusivity and promotes white values, you are fine with it.
TOMMY...!! Again, READ THE VALUES.....they are NOT exclusionary...they are adressing issues in the black community that need to be dealt with internally...they do NOT divide or exclude or mentioning anything remotely like that....
there would be a problem if it was promoting exclusivity. that's not the case, merely your opinion. and the fact that you and tucker focus on one part and not the other is relevant.
"If that is your position, then I respect that. So the next time a "white" church proclaims it's exclusivity and promotes white values, you are fine with it"
1: At which point did this church proclaim exclusivity? Why can't Black values be taught in addition to Christian values and when you actually look at the values are they really inherently bad?
2: It would completely depend on what those values were. I have no issue with white people teaching other white people to be better human beings.
( Again just to be clear I have many misgivings about organized religion, but I think most people who participate in them are good people.)
So the next time a "white" church proclaims it's exclusivity and promotes white values
Oh for goodness sake. Tommy, this has gone past tendentious straight into boring.
No matter how many times someone replies by noting that there is no claim of exclusivity and either "yes, if the values are the same" or, more significantly in my view, there is a difference between oppressor and oppressed, you in virtually the next breath repeat the same claims. I realize that simply repeating an argument over and over again no matter how many times it's been answered is a standard right-wing tactic, but you've clearly overplayed you hand here."So the next time a "white" church proclaims it's exclusivity and promotes white values, you are fine with it."
-----
I don't remember seeing the word "exclusivity" anywhere in the Church's position.
The next time you make things up out of whole cloth to support a position you know is untenable, I won't be fine with that, either. Learn to read for comprehension before you post things that don't exist.
Also, as I said this may be irrelevant to me regarding whether I would vote for Obama or not, I would want to hear his clarification however........but you would give the same consideration to a white candidate who belonged to a similar white church?
this has been answered 3 or more times by people here, Tommy...as long as the values are the same, sure, no porblem....
Yes I would give that same consideration and I mean that sincerely. Tommy I think your making the assumption the this church is exclusive to Black only. I used to attend black churches regularly (I'm black btw) and we always had plenty of white members or visitors and the churches have always been very gracious and welcoming. I think you have a warped perception of what actually goes on in these churches.
Be certain, there are plenty of black racist, but you would be doing yourself a disservice if coming to that conclusion for these christians without any due diligence on your part.
As I said above. If the circumstances were exchanged and blacks were the historical oppressive majority and whites were the enslaved minority, then I wouldn't have a problem with it.
Ignoring the relevant context as you are trying to do is a silly way to frame this debate.
Tucker is one the worlds biggest asshats. He will glady bend over any chance he gets to carry on about his imagined hypocrisy from African Americans. This is just another example of his many attempts to cry racism! at someone other than white people. He can't for a second imagine why African Americans should be able ask for racial solidarity because when white people do the same they are attacked. His pea brained 1950's mentality doesn't understand the concept of a "racial minority". He likes think he is somehow morally enlightened by claiming we live in world were equality for all man should be obvious and guaranteed. Then he goes blames minorities for perpetuating racism because they can't "get over it". This is really a straw man because people like Tucker refuse to hold whites accountable for anything they do. Slavery? not the US's fault it was the Spanish and the Portugese. Etc, etc. Tucker is the ultimate white apologist, He probably never met a black person until he went to college. Everytime time he brings this crap up he should be vilified. Noone else on MSNBC brings this kind of stuff up. He tried to go after the Black Caucus awhile back because they didnt want to allow a white guy in. "But it's Black Caucus?" someone noted "I don't care its Racism!!" he cries. What an idiot.
You can't be serious? You're so wrong. You thought the bowtie was just some kind of white, elitist, pseudo-Ivy League schtick. No, he's actually showing his solidarity with the Nation of Islam.
Tucker said: "It's a predominantly black church in Chicago"
"PREDOMINANTLY BLACK"? Ohhh... so they allow other races to attend too? So it's not an exclusively black church? Tuck, maybe there are white people just trying to pass as black attending the church. (They must be liberals, I'm sure.) Better check that out.
This is so silly. I'm not a big fan of organized religion but I still respect that aspect of any belief system that encourages people to do the right thing... and I surely don't see anything offensive in Obama's church, as reported here, in that respect. But I guess it's in the eye of the beholder...
A thought occured to me.. how often do we hear the talking heads, "Blacks need to stop blaming whites and stand up for their own kind?" Well, this is exactly what is being called for.. blacks should help their own and fight against all oppression. However, when that happens, it's "RACISM!" I don't know, coming from Whitey Cornfeld, er Tucker Carlson, it just doesn't sound as convincing...
You got it, Sasami-
Black people should be solving their own problems- just out in the open where we can keep an eye on them, and under our supervision.What's wrong with that? ;oD
When did the Bush administration ban "Freedom of Religion"? It's a shame that these media types keep getting away with this unhealthy retoric and un-justified accusations. The war on the truth is still alive and well with these malcontent motor mouths. And to sit there and call themselves "Christians"! And therein lies the reality of their mockery. If they do believe in Christ as their Lord then they must believe in his teachings. The one that comes to mind is that we will ALL be judged on our words and deeds. I guess they don't mind writting their own ticket straight to hell.
"contradicts the basic tenets of Christianity" Tucker, Tucker, go sleep. America has come to represent nothing but a great contradiction to the basic tenets of Christianity. America as a nation commits all deadly sins and even invents some new ones in the process. Our president is about as anti-christ as you can get, but sure... point your finger at the black 'stranger'.
Hey, Tucker, you want a basic tenet of Christianity? Read Matthew 5. It'll open your eyes right up.
Checked out the PDF. Looks like Tucker was right on target.
"Checked out the PDF."
-----
Too bad you didn't understand it.
It's hard to call Tucker Carlson a serious journalist or television host.
THANK YOU.
njguy93@yahoo.com
What's even harder is to call lil' Tuck a journalist, or legitimate critic, ar anything else that wouldn't get bleeped.
You guys get some interesting and exciting wingnuts in here, who I'd love to hang around and aggravate, but the comment interface is tedious, having to page through a thread 20 posts at a time.
Looks like there's a very good job being done of battling them anyway - keep up the fight - Ignorance is the real enemy.
Given its history of racial oppression, its hard to call Christianity Christianity.
Any church is going to build into it's core value the uplifting the community that it serves. You would see the same statement in an Irish-American Catholic Parish or an Israeli-American Jewish Synagogue. If these churches state that they are soldiers for the communities that they serve, why can't Trinity?
These Republican mouthpieces are a huge problem.
O'Reilly's last evil comment that the kidnapped boy enjoyed his captivity during which he was raped on a regular basis is the last straw. And a great opportunity for us to start holding him accountable for his deluded, hateful spewing. www.newshounds.us/2007/01/24/contact_the_advertisers_on_the_oreilly_factor_about_his_comments.php Here are O'Reilly advertisers and contacts: 1-800-PetMeds customerservice@1800petmeds.com could find no corporate email address Sandals Vacations [link to www.sandals.com] /> Lunesta Sepracor Corporate Headquarters 508-481-6700 84 Waterford Drive Marlborough, MA 01752 info@sepracor.com Sepracor Investor Relations & Corporate Communications 508-481-6700 84 Waterford Drive Marlborough, MA 01752 investor@sepracor.com Scottrade mediarelations@scottrade.com LensCrafter (no email address) Corporate Contact Information LensCrafters, Inc. 4000 Luxottica Place Mason, OH 45040 513-765-6000 PGA Tour Title Sponsors: Jared Rice 904-273-3453 jaredrice@pgatourhq.com Kohler todd.weber@kohler.com mirjam.lippuner@kohler.com tabitha.steinbock@kohler.com victoria.hafenstein@kohler.com Sears www.SearsMedia.com Vonage Email: marketing@vonage.com [link to ir.vonage.com /> Time Warner Cable richard.d.parsons@timewarner.com Chairman, CEO ETrade E*TRADE FINANCIAL Corporate Services 135 East 57th Street New York, NY 10022 General Inquiries: CSG@etrade.com Crest (this is from Procter & Gamble's HomePage) P&G is committed to social responsibility. We are always seeking ways to better integrate economic progress, social development and environmental concerns to ensure a better quality of life for future generations. We demonstrate our commitment to social responsibility by providing products and services that improve consumers' lives, in terms of health, hygiene and convenience. On a smaller scale, we contribute to the economic and social well-being of our employees, our shareholders and the local communities in which we operate. On a larger scale, we are involved in regional, national and international development. P&G contributes to social responsibility both in principle and in action. [link to pg.custhelp.com] /> Mercedes-Benz Mercedes-Benz USA corporate Web Site [link to www.MBUSA.com] and [link to www.maybachusa.com /> Lowes investorrelations@lowes.com. Zetia (MERCK) Merck & Co., Inc. One Merck Drive P.O. Box 100 Whitehouse Station, NJ 08889-0100 USA Phone: 908-423-1000 Monday-Friday 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM ET Coricidin Global Headquarters Schering-Plough Corporation World Headquarters 2000 Galloping Hill Road Kenilworth, N.J. 07033-0530 Telephone: (908) 298-4000 For those who scoff at such actions, or merely wonder if they do any good, here is a reply received by our reader and contact compiler CW: Thanks for bringing this to our attention. We will certainly address this with Fox and restrict further advertising from The O'Reilly Factor. Dick Wechsler President, CEO MPG Direct
The consevatives really do not know anything about people of color. The most segregated hour of the week is 11 o'clock on a Sunday morning. They are trying to make Barak Obama seem less American. Something as a Caribbean African African, I live with everyday. It will backfire terribly on them. I pray that no one will try to shoot Obama, because of this garbage. As an Illinois resident I plan to volunteer as soon as his headquarters are set up in southern illinois and hope that the racist towns out here who do not celebrate MLK day, will not try to bomb it.
My message to MSNBC:
To the management of MSNBC:
I wish to register by outrage at the remarks made by Tucker Carlson about Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, Illinois. His characterization of the tenents of this long standing community-centered institution was an insult to those of us who have attended that church and the ministry of Reverend Jeramiah Wright. I lived in Chicago for 35 years and am now a professor at Bowling Green State University in Bowling Green Ohio. As a black college student at Northwestern University and thereafter I attended Trinity and loved the community there and particularly its focus on the worship service which has an African-American flair. There is absolutely nothing exclusive or divisive about its ministry. In fact no one would give Tucker Carlson a second look if he entered the doors of that church. I wonder if I my experience would be the same if I attended his church. The only thing that would keep him from attending is his own elitism, prejudice and fear. I am particularly offended because he has never attended any services or talked to any member of the church -particularly Reverend Wright. He's never been to our community on the south side of Chicago, He would learn that it has been there doing what it has been doing long before Mr. Obama and his family joined. Why do you allow this man to make comments without doing his homework? I am asking that he be severely repramanded, offer an apology to the church and take his behind to Chicago and see for himself. I'd be shocked if he did because he comes from a very "exclusive" background and community and has what I would characterize as an elistist attitude. He has admitted that he lives in a bubble. I would be deeply disappointed if MSNBC allowed this to go unchallenged. If he has questions about the Christian validity of Trinity he needs to take it up with the United Churches of Christ and seek the truth. This kind of "talk" just substantiates my reasons for tuning to CNN when his program is on. I watch Keith Olberman every evening I can and The Most occasionally. Frankly he's a snotty white boy who gets on my nerves, but this made me hit the ceiling because what he's doing is flat out wrong and racist. It is important that he understand the consequences of his remarks-that it is more than playing "gotcha!" on Mr. Obama - but he is perpetrating disrespect for my community. I have always admired Reverend Wright. He and his members have developed one of the nicest edifices in a struggling community with a style of ministry that recognizes the unique identity and needs of African-Americans. It is a wholesome environment with wonderful people, a great choir and a message that builds self-esteem and an inspiration for community service in the spirit of the serman on the Mount. Please advise him of my feelings on this matter. If he took the time to visit the church instead of jumping to conclusions and citing material out of context, he would hang his head in shame. Shame on MSNBC if you allow him to make these remarks uncontested.
Sincerely,
Tucker is such a punk. It's hard to take anyone seriously who looks like Howdy Doody and dresses like PeeWee Herman.
Since the "Obama went to a Madrasa" lie was proven false, the pit bulls (in Tucker's case, cocker spaniel) are now attacking his Christian credentials. This is pathetic, even for little Tucker.
As for Carlson's Christian credentials, he belongs to a denomination that was stated by an adulterer and murderer, and bishops who were more than happy to legitimize his adultery and murder for political gain. Excuse me if I question his credentials to judge what it means to be Christian.
Religion is pretty much handed down from parent to child and whatever mom and dad believed and wherever they worshipped the offspring usually follow. The Black church was created because white people would not allow Black people to worship with them. Because most of our parents and grandparents went to Black churches most of us do also. Religious institutions are slow to change, so the messages of the past about using the church to combat racism and discrimination encountered by Black people are still present today. I'm no longer attend any religious institution but I was baptised African Methodist because that is where my grandmother attended. These institutions were born out of necessity and to criticize them is to not understand history or (Our)story.