| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration will allow you to join in the discussion which is amazingly free of personal rancor and trolls! We are currently looking for posters from both the left and the right who have a demonstrated capacity to discuss fervently without letting personalities get in the way. Is that you? We need more staff. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Racist Church? | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Dec 20 2006, 08:31 AM (881 Views) | |
| Post #1 Dec 20 2006, 08:31 AM |
|
|
A poster on another site found this and posted it. Some thought it was not racist and that members of the church should not necessarily be thought badly of because they might not believe in all of the church's teachings. What do you think? Could someone be a member of this church and not be legitimately thought of as a racist?
|
Administrator
  ![]](http://z2.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
 
|
 |
| Post #2 Dec 20 2006, 09:52 AM | Son N Law |
|
Racist? I'm not entirely sure. Maybe. I mean, I guess it depends upon their intent. Isolationist and ignorant, though? Yeah, I feel a bit better slapping them with that label. Replace "White" with "Black" or "Latino" and yeah, I guess it does take some of the sting out of it -- blacks and Latinos aren't exactly in control of this country, after all -- but it's still just as isolationist and, in my opinion, ignorant. |
Fool, apparently
|
|
|
|
| Post #3 Dec 22 2006, 12:26 PM |
|
|
As I understand it "racism" involves not just supporting your own race but in persecution or subordinating other races. Thus, technically I don't see racism here. What I do see is an environment that is fertile ground for racism to sprout. But, if I subsittute the word Christian or the word Jew for the word white, could that document be a part of a church or temple? Hmm, it makes me pause... Perhaps we should all be careful to ensure our religious institutions are espousing raising ourselves up without bringing others down. It also makes me feel blessed that I live in a country where we are free to discuss the difference between group pride and racism. |
Civil Servant
|
|
|
|
| Post #4 Dec 22 2006, 12:42 PM |
|
|
You all don't think that white supremacist groups don't, on an official level, assert that they are just promoting and protecting their race? Of course they do! To me (and I am sure to most), any overt actions that involve different treatment based on race (to include selective promotion by commission and selective exclusion by omission) is, by definition, racism. Don't get me wrong. The form of racism practiced by this church is perfectly legal (and should be, despite its immorality). I just don't think we should be electing officials who could belong to such an organization. I think any politician's membership in this church should be announced publicly and renounced loudly. Don't you? |
Administrator
|
|
|
|
| Post #5 Dec 23 2006, 08:04 PM |
|
| Absolutely, I agree with you. My asserting anyone's right to participate in this kind of thing is quite different than my voting for anyoe who belongs to such a group. |
Civil Servant
|
|
|
|
| Post #6 Dec 23 2006, 08:14 PM |
|
| Well, I guess I should admit to a little deception here. The actual description has the word "black" where ever the word "white" appears. The politician is Barak Obama. I cut and pasted the above from the "About Us" page (with the confessed edit) of his Chicago church. |
Administrator
|
|
|
|
| Post #7 Jan 20 2007, 12:46 PM |
|
|
In either case, white black or otherwise, it is certainly racist and has no place in the Christian Church. Any kind of partiality in the Church promotes division and schism, and that is one of the worse things discussed by the Apostle Paul. He suggests we not even eat with such a person (a divisive person). "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Galatians 3:28 |
Civilian
|
|
|
|
| Post #8 Jan 20 2007, 03:10 PM |
|
| I am flabbergasted at the number of people that I have encountered who think it is not racism. Dingo had a even-handed opinion though. He said it was not racism regardless of the use of the word "white" or "black." I disagree with him a lot, but he is quite reasoned in his opinions. (Dingo used to post here using his "thevoice" name.) |
Administrator
|
|
|
|
| Post #9 Jan 20 2007, 03:56 PM |
|
|
Well, it is not the outright kind of racism that is often seen and rightly condemned out in the world. But it is a kind of racism nonetheless. It does not necessarily denigrate other races per say, but raises one race above the others as prominent and to be considered first above all others. This is referred to in scripture as partiality or favoritism and is seen as schismatic. Passages that come to mind other than the Galatians passage I quoted above are: Philippians 2; Romans 12; Ephesians 4 All of which are grounded in "Love your neighbor as yourself". |
Civilian
|
|
|
|
| Post #10 Jan 20 2007, 04:03 PM |
|
|
Its lack of outrightness accounts for some not thinking it is racism. However, its subtle quality makes it more dangerous, because it is still racism, however it is perceived as acceptable. It is racism-light. However, like light beer that still gets one drunk (just, theoretically, not fat), this form of racism still has a separating effect, raising one group unreasonably above another (just, theoretically, does not make one feel guilty about it). |
Administrator
|
|
|
|
| Post #11 Mar 14 2008, 07:44 PM |
|
| With Senator Obama's pastor finally making the news, I thought it was time to bump this 15-month old thread. It's amazing how long it takes the mainstream media to get a clue. |
Administrator
|
|
|
|
| Post #12 Mar 15 2008, 11:52 AM |
|
|
I can't comment on that church itself. But when a white person in the United States says they support "white power," I tend to believe they are a racist. When someone says, "black power," I do not necessarily think that they are a racist. The reason is that it is a white supremacist country where the 'black people' still face the effects of racism. Thus, "black power" can be a progressive stance just meaning they want to organize for equal political representation, while "white power" is often a reactionary stance and a means to continue white supremacy and undo progress. Nonetheless, it's not simple because there are black supremacists. Consider this example: A white person says, "we white people need more white people representing us in Washington." Wouldn't you say that seems very racist? In contrast, consider someone saying that black people need more representation in Washington; that does not strike me as racist. In this country, if a white person says he is "committed to the White Community," I will think he means to say he is a white supremacist. If a black person says he is committed to the black community, I generally think it probably means he wants to help the black community achieve political equality.
Like Schwarzenegger might do if you asked him about his father being a Nazi, Obama expressed disagreement with his pastor: "I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy," Obama wrote. |
Civilian
|
|
|
|
| Post #13 Mar 15 2008, 03:47 PM |
|
|
Racism is racism, whether it is pro-white, pro-black, anti-white, or anti-black. Whatever happened to the colorblind society that King envisioned? It sickens me that black racism can be excused because it is somehow "making up." To me, that just smacks of retribution, which does not make racism any more palatable. BTW, one more thing, excusing blacks for black racism is racism in and of itself. It infantilizes an entire group of people, saying that they are somehow different and in need of a dispensation one would not give to others. |
Administrator
|
|
|
|
| Post #14 Mar 18 2008, 12:24 PM |
|
I agree. But whether or not a statement is racist depends on the meaning of the statement, and the meaning depends on the context. Regardless of the race of the group, for an oppressed sociopolitical group to demand that they organize for sociopolitical power in a society that oppresses them is, I believe, more often than not a demand for equality and not one for supremacy. In the case of a sociopolitical group defined by the social construct of race, it is more often than not a demand for racial equality and not racial supremacy. In contrast, for a sociopolitical group that has gained supremacy to demand power, in the context of a society in which they are dominate, is more often than not a demand to continue dominating or to have even more dominance not a demand for equality. Racism is not to be excused, you are right. But it is not racism for a dominated "race" to demand racial equality, whereas it is racism for a dominate "race" to want to be dominate. I'm glad you invoke Dr. Martin Luther King, who wrote: "Black Power, in its broad and positive meaning, is a call to black people to amass the political and economic strength to achieve their legitimate goals. No one can deny that the Negro is in dire need of this kind of legitimate power. Indeed, one of the great problems that the Negro confronts is his lack of power. From the old plantations of the South to the newer ghettos of the North, the Negro has been confined to a life of voicelessness and powerlessness. …The plantation and the ghetto were created by those who had power both to confine those who had no power and to perpetuate their powerlessness. The problem of transforming the ghetto is, therefore, a problem of power – a confrontation between the forces of power demanding change and the forces of power dedicated to preserving the status quo." He also said, "Black Power is a call for the pooling of black financial resources to achieve economic security. …If Black Power means the development of this kind of strength within the Negro community, then it is a quest for basic, necessary, legitimate power. Finally, Black Power is a psychological call to manhood." And he said, "Black is beautiful and as beautiful as any other color. When we believe that, this is something very necessary, this is something very constructive and very creative. So, the concept of Black Power is something we are certainly able to understand and accept. …So as we talk about power, we must always see power as the right use of strength." Please note, whether or not that particular Church is demanding equality or supremacy is not of my knowledge, but--considering the context of the so-called Black people's status in the United States--the principles quotes in the first post seem more like a call for working towards racial equality and not racial dominance. Thanks, Scott |
Civilian
|
|
|
|
| Post #15 Mar 18 2008, 06:53 PM |
|
|
They are advocating separatism. (That has zero to do with anything Dr. King ever preached!) And, when you add the context of the hateful things Wright says, there is clearly hatred of all things white. The church is racist. Disgustingly so. Shame on Senator Obama for belonging to that church for as along as he has and for tolerating the hateful bile that comes out of that church. |
Administrator
|
|
|
|
| Post #16 Mar 18 2008, 07:47 PM |
|
Eh he's a politician. The reason he goes to that church was it probably helped him get elected to the Illinois legislature and senate. I wonder how often any of these guys would attend church if the voters didn't care about it. I'm not saying it's right, it's just a pretty slimey career. |
Civilian
|
|
|
|
| Post #17 Mar 21 2008, 04:05 PM |
|
| Whether the Church is racist or not is not known to me. From the principles listed in the first post, considering the context, it does not lead me to conclude that the Church is racist or that it is probably racist. I don't know about the Church, but those 12 principles seem (to me) to be advocating "Black Power" like Martin Luther King said. |
Civilian
|
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| « Previous Topic · Religion · Next Topic » |
4:37 PM May 20