Obama’s Creepy, Race-Obsessed Church
One of the obvious differences between Democrats and Republicans is the role that religion plays in their presidential campaigns. For instance, every Democrat, while pretending to believe that “separation of church and state” actually appears somewhere in the Constitution, must also insist that religion plays an essential role in his or her life. But just about the only time you see them going to church is when they’re posing for the cameras while addressing a black Baptist congregation. What’s more, when questioning these people, the liberal media kindly limits itself to a yes or no question regarding the existence of God.
However, when the candidates are Republicans, you might get the idea that the members of the MSM were boning up for their theology exams. Is Huckabee too Christian? Does he actually believe the universe was created in six days? When he was a governor, did he go out of his way to commute the sentences of felons because he was a sucker for anyone who announced in the slammer that he’d found Christ? Is Giuliani, who contributed to pro-choice organizations, flying under false colors as a Catholic? Does Romney really believe that Satan and Jesus are brothers, or at least third cousins, once removed?
Why is it, I wonder, that nobody is asking Barack Obama about his religious convictions? From what I’ve gathered, they’re far more fascinating than Mitt Romney’s.
For over 20 years, Sen, Obama has been a faithful member of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ. The other day, I paid a visit to Trinity’s website. There I read that the vision statement of the TUCC is based upon something called the systematized liberation theology that began in 1969 with the publication of Dr. James Cone’s book, “Black Power and Black Theology.” Dr. Cone believes that black Christians should not follow the “White Church,” as it had failed to support them in their struggle for equal rights in America. I suspect that most white Christians would disagree.
Trinity United boasts that it is a congregation “Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian.” What’s more, “it is a congregation with a non-negotiable commitment to Africa. We are an African people, and remain true to our native land, the mother continent, the cradle of civilization.”
Its pastor, Reverend Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., has referred to “white arrogance” and “the United States of Whiter America.” To my ears, that sounds unashamedly black, but I’m not so sure about the unapologetically Christian.
Furthermore, Rev. Wright’s church publishes a magazine, The Trumpet. Not too surprisingly, all things considered, the recipient of the 2007 Lifetime Achievement Trumpeter Award for Social Justice was none other than Louis Farrakhan, the fellow who plays the race card even better than he plays his violin.
Now, my own reasons for hoping that Sen. Obama is not elected president next November are pretty much the same reasons I object to Hillary Clinton and John Edwards. I consider all three of them to be anti-military, tax raising, left-wing flyweights who would bury this country in entitlements while essentially ignoring Islamic fascism. I regard them as three run-of-the-mill hacks who would bring tears to the eyes of John Kennedy if he were around to see what’s happened to his party’s leadership over the past 45 years.
That being said, I have no idea how a member of a black church that apparently feels it owes greater allegiance to Africa than to America and that pays homage to a bigot like Farrakhan, has the gall to present himself as the one candidate who can bring us all together.
Television writer Burt Prelutsky is the author of Conservatives Are From Mars, Liberals Are From San Francisco (101 Reasons Why I’m Happy I Left the Left).
First, the reason there exists a Black Values System is because it was founded at a time when Black people in this country were not allowed to attend church with White people. One thing to note about Trinity is that it is an inclusive church that allows all ethnicities, backgrounds and sexual orientations to attend it’s services and does recognize gay marriage.
You can watch the church service online at http://www.tucc.org and make your own decision about how ‘extreme’ or ‘separatist’ this church is.
Also, How can you say the mainstream media hasn’t talked about his church?
Tucker Carlson: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nleckpQVyE
Fox News: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEAC_PcqxaM
Hannity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYkI_0Dn4Uo
It has been discussed and there is a disparaging email being circulated about it as well. Apparently, Americans believe everything they read in chain emails.
Please set your hate and bias aside for a moment and get all of the facts so you can make a truly informed decision this election cycle about who and what is best for this country. Thank you.
Democrats are never expected to explain or justify their religious beliefs. That would be unconstitutional.
There are numerous examples of activists hiding behind religion, using it as a shield to camouflage their agenda:
‘Reverend’ Jesse Jackson
‘Reverend’ Barry Lynd
‘Reverend’ Al Sharpton
‘Reverend’ Fred Phelps
If this church is an honest church and if they are true to The Word, they should be celebrating their message being carried to the masses and Obama should be proud of his association with that message. If not, then something else is going on.
Well, come on! Anyone who claims that African Americans are never racial bigots is just being ridiculous. Al Sharpton, for example. Jessie Jackson, for example. Both claim to be ordained ministers [Sharpton was ordained at the age of NINE by an "independent" Pentacostal preacher]. However, the fact that any African American would attend a church whose values reflect his/her community isn’t doing anything most other American ethnicities don’t also do. Note that most whites attend predominately white churches; ditto for Koreans and Vietnamese. Nothing new in that. But to deny that their is racial bigotry in the black community is just stupidity run riot.
Personal religious beliefs should not matter. When religious beliefs directly influence policy decisions then questions can legitimately be raised. Obama has a 12 year legislative record. Is their any evidence that is personal religious beliefs have directly influenced his public policy decisions? If not the topic should be dropped.
Huckabee’s religious beliefs were placed front and center by him and most of the attacks on him have come from his primary opponents, not from the Left. If there is evidence that he has made public policy decisions based on religious faith rather than rationality then that is a reasonable discussion. If that evidence is absent the subject should be dropped.
The attacks on Romney’s religion have likewise come from his primary opponents rather than the Left. I have seen no evidence that his personal religious beliefs have interfered with his policy decisions, so it should be a non-issue.
The same was done to Kerry and both times the questions originated for the Right. This should not be an issue, though it invariably becomes one for any pro-choice Catholic (mostly Dems).
The evolution question was asked of all candidates of both parties with the exception of Fred.
It seems you are seeing bias against your guys because you want to see it.
Now that everyone is whipped into a state of frenzy about voting for change, its leading candidate on the Democrat side belongs to a church that hasn’t evolved … or changed to recognize current United States cultural realities.
Interesting.
Maybe he should join up with the Episcopal Church … they are evolving, and fast.
I never make a political judgement based on a candidates faith. The media forces that issue but really I could care less. I think there are a plethora of reasons why Obama should go back and take his seat in the Senate and leave the presidency to the capable. His faith is not one of those reasons. One good reason is that he has taken opposing foreign policy positions. First he says we should talk things out with our enemies. Then he says he would force our way into Pakistan which is an ally. That’s a real head twister. No. Go sit down Obama and practice your empty idealistic rhetoric. You are not capable of being the most powerful man on earth.
Ayn Rand has written, “Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism. It is the notion of ascribing moral, social or political significance to a man’s genetic lineage-the notion that a man’s intellectual and characterological traits are produced and transmitted by his internal body chemistry. Which means, in practice, that a man is to be judged, not by his own character and actions, but by the characters and actions of a collection of ancestors.”
It seems to me that until now voters have been willing to judge Sen. Obama by his own character and actions, avoiding racist standards.
However, after looking at the Trinity United website for myself, it is openly racist. The phrase, “Unashamedly Black,” is precisely that – appealing to genetic lineage.
Trinity United’s statement that “”it is a congregation with a non-negotiable commitment to Africa. We are an African people, and remain true to our native land, the mother continent, the cradle of civilization,” – is even more unsettling.
This is not religion – this is blatant racism.
If Sen. Obama expects to be President of the United States, he owes this country an explanation, not for his lineage or for his religion, but for his association with a racist organization that pledges allegiance to a foreign land.
Watch Farrakhan getting his award from Obama’s pastor at the 2007 Trumpet Gala held on November 2, at the Hyatt Regency Chicago here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXS_YrYp07Q&eurl=http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-mentor-gives-farrakhan-his-award
Now reportedly (as in allegedly), since becoming a national candidate, Barack Obama has distanced himself from Pastor of Trinity Church, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright Jr., and Wright’s Dr. James Cone’s “Black Power and Black Theology” rants.
And reportedly, Pastor Wright (credited with dreaming up the phrase the “audacity of hope”) said about Barack’s…distancing…
Once this history came to light, Obama started publicly distancing himself from his spiritual mentor, disinviting Wright from various Obama campaign events. Wright rationalized his current persona non grata status by stating that otherwise
“a lot of his Jewish support will dry up quicker than a snowball in hell”
The anti-semitic component to “liberation theology” and adherents to the thinking of the Muslim Brotherhood is troubling, to put it mildly.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/03/barack_obama_and_israel_1.html
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/obamas_glaring_ambiguities.html
As is the anti-Caucasian component.
Churches are built in neighborhoods. Most churches welcome any and all from that neighborhood to participate in their services. It is my understanding that B.O.’s church TUCC welcomes blacks only.
So now we have the Muslims trying to turn America into an Islamic Nation. The Blacks trying to turn America into Africa and the Mexicans trying to turn America into Mexico. It is rough being a White American non sombrero wearing Infidel.
This is the number one thing you must realize about Barack Obama’s support from the black activist crowd: they will be enraged if Hillary Clinton wins the nomination! Either Obama captures the prize—or there will be hell to pay. A good size number of blacks will not vote on election day. The Republican presidential candidate should therefore win easily. Even a relatively small drop from the normal 90% of black support for the Democratic Party’s candidate is enough to guarantee a disaster.
Perhaps we should ignore Obama’s racist, bigotted, socialist, militant, American-hating church….for now. If he becomes the Dem candidate, even if Americans want more taxes, socialism, anf erosion of our institutions and security, then this revolting revelation will surely secure the Republican White House in ’08.
As I’ve said elsewhere, in my view, the most alarming parts of Obama’s Church’s “10 Point Vision” are 4 and 10.
“4. A congregation with a ‘non-negotiable’ COMMITMENT TO AFRICA” (emphasis in the original).
If I offer to sell you my car for $30,000 and I tell you that the price is “non-negotiable” that means that either you pay me $30,000 or there’s no deal-take it or leave it. “Non-negotiable” leaves no room for ambiguity. “Non-negotiable” means non-negotiable.
Therefore, since there’s NO DISPUTE that he’s a member of the “congregation”, and that the congregation has a “non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA”, it is impossible for him to faithfully take his Oath of Office as a United States Senator, President, or any other public office for that matter. Toward that end, there can be little doubt that the interests of the United States and the interests of any one of the nations of Africa, or any other nation, are perpetually in dispute, at one level or another. By definition, you can’t have both a non-negotiable commitment to the United States and to the continent of Africa.
If the words “Black” and “Africa” were replaced on Obama’s Church’s website with “White” and “Germany”, this man would be labeled a “White Separtist” by the media, and his political career would immediatly be over.
“10. A congregation working towards ECONOMIC PARITY”
By definition, economic parity means communism-plainly.
So, in sum, Mr. Obama belongs to a Black Separatist Church that is working toward communism. It’s their words, not mine.
This ought to do a lot to allay the fears of people who believe that Obama is a left-wing radical (sarcasm intended).
Please read this response from the UCC:
http://www.ucc.org/news/thomas-denounces-smear-1.html
I don’t mind that Obama belongs to a black nationalist church, although it’s not very much in keeping with his “we are all Americans” sales pitch. What I mind is the hypocrisy and double standard — we all know that if any of the other candidates belonged to a “white nationalist church,” their career would be over. I’m very, very sick of the “everybody gets to be racist except whitey” double standard.
Burt, et al,
The United Church of Christ doesn’t appreciate these sorts of smears coming from conservative quarters and has responded thusly to the malarkey coming from you and other conservatives.
What? It’s ok for Irish Catholics, Swedish Lutherans and German Congregationalists to celebrate their heritages with various events but it’s not ok for a historically black congregation to want to help folks in the black community?
Seems like quite the double-standard, and much too close to the “race-baiting” you appear to decry. (Then again, the “race-baiting” you rant about doesn’t actually exist at Trinity United Church of Christ, whose members include not just black people, but also white folks and Christians of other races as well.)
You can discuss Sen. Obama’s faith all you want — just be honest about it instead of sounding like a dimwitted crybaby who has been obviously misinformed.
What I find interesting is how white racists(the soon to be “Paul-Bearers”) can barely mount a 1 point tally in national polls, while black racists and self hating whites (and their related dupes) amount to at least 20% of the voting pubic.
Actually, it’s less interesting than it is horrifying. They do sound remarkabley similar in their rationalizations though. Maybe that does make sense considering all racists believe that, “a man is to be judged, not by his own character and actions, but by the characters and actions of a collection of ancestors” to quote the quote of Ayn Rand from this comment: http://pajamasmedia.com/2008/01/obamas_creepy_raceobsessed_chu.php#c086362
Once again Burt expressed some of my same thoughts. I think it’s great for people to come together to worship Jesus. I went to the website and could only think if it was a church devoted exclusively to whites, Al Sharpton, et al would be all over it. I agree with Burt, why is it that the Rep’s. religions are discussed to such lengths, that this church and it’s mission is hidden, and never brought up to Obama? I believe I only heard a mention of it from one conservative pundit.
I feel Obama has nothing to offer and his lack of experience is frightening. But I believe in my gut that Jesus would want us to worship Him together, no separation of color or nationality. I tend to feel that those who cry racism are the most racist.
Rob_N: Nobody is complaing about Irish, Swedish or German Americans–or black Americans, for that matter — celebrating their heritage so long as they don’t announce that they are committed exclusively to Ireland, Sweden, Germany or Africa. If a white presidential candidate were to belong to such a church, he would be pilloried in the press. And if he dared suggest that he was the one person who could bring us all together, he’d be laughed off the stage.
Burt Prelutsky
If you look at the article’s accompanying video you will see Mr. OBama shaking hands with people. He is among other men. It is very quick; however, you cannot miss his smiling face. Check the video out.
Burt,
Where does the word “exclusive” come up? You have added that just as other conservative partisans have misinterpreted Trinity United Church of Christ’s tenets to somehow be about bussing or other completely unrelated baloney.
As for being “committed” to Africa — the continent has significant areas of deep, persistent poverty and disease. Many other Christian congregations also focus their charity on the continent. Indeed, Pres. Bush even promised a hefty chunk of aid to the continent to combat disease, etc.
The “Afrocentrism” listed in the church’s tenets is simply an acknowledgement of the heritage of the majority of its congregants. If you are truly fine with this church’s members celebrating their heritage than you’ve lost your own argument.
Your claim (it is your claim, not a claim made by the Trinity congregation) of some sort of “exclusivity” is bogus in light of the facts, not the least of which is that white folks also worship at that very same church and a great many white congregations within the UCC support Trinity UCC in opposing what the smears such as your false labels of “creepy” and “race-obsessed.”
Unfortunately for you, the fact you can’t bother to actually look into the history of “Afrocentrism” as it relates to Christianity says much, much more about your own obsession with “race”.
Obama is a sexist!
The fact that he’s so blatantly shown this bias is enough to prove that he’s not ready to be President.
Perhaps if Obama offered something other than platitudes, people would not be so rightly compelled to dig so deep.
Nature abhors a vacuum.
It’s not such a big topic of debate at the moment, but could I suggest adding the Employee Free Choice Act to the list of reasons to avoid all three Democrat candidates?
It’s listed in all of their manifestos as a priority. In a nutshell, it removes the secret ballot from union elections (when a company’s workers decide whether to join a union and which one to join).
In other words, it turns huge sections of America over to organised crime. Most American private sector unions today are dominated by decent people who care deeply for their members. Once intimidation starts to be the way to win elections, expect the face of America to change considerably.
Only semi-on-point, but in my head this was going to be a 2 sentence comment. Sorry.
This is the first time I have heard any of this about Obama’s church and I think if it gets out in the mainstream press that it will be the end of his candidacy. He is being incredibly hypocritical and if people understand this, there is no way they will want him to be their President.
In 1994 the Rev. Wright and Farrakahn paid a visit to Libya.
Wright has already said that despite many years of friendship with Obama that Obama might have to disavow his church.
I wrote and linked at:
Trinity United Church of Christ
If you want an eye-opening experience, drop by an “afrocentric” bookstore and browse the shelves. You’ll find that much of the material bears a strong resemblance to the stuff that Klansmen and neo-Nazis write, with merely a reversal of races.
I had heard a few odd things about Obama’s church but didn’t think much of it until I read through the website of Trinity United Church of Christ, particularly The Black Value System. If the followers of this church and Barack Obama do not wish to be perceived as racists they should change their rhetoric, which basically comes across as that of the Nation of Islam in Christian robes.
As Burt and others note and TUCC’s defenders avoid, if another church had the same focus on the White Race, the European homeland and gave a Lifetime Achievement Award to David Duke, the rest of us would know that it was a racist church
If Americans read through the TUCC’s website, I think it would sink Obama’s candidacy and rightly so.
obama is not black. No more than he is white. Who cares? Everyone should when the race card is being played. Beware anyone who puts anything in front of being an American.
Newsweek, fearing that Obama might be hurt by such revelations, devotes seven pages attempting to defend him and “debunk” similair claims circulated in an email:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/91424
Nope. There’s no favorites in the mainstream media.
Cough.
It’s my understanding that TUCC has revised its website recently toning down its message just as scrutiny of the site began to increase. I’m quite certain that somebody has the original site captured somewhere but I’m not sure where to look for it.
the fact that he belongs to a “church” that would give a lifetime achievment award to a racist,islamic supremacist,hate filled insane man,should be enough to destroy any campaign he ever hopes to run.however,for now anyway,he has the PC mainstream media in his pocket.
Little question the charter of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ is racist. If you simply substitute the word “white” for “black” an honest person would see the church for what it is. As a “white” person I don’t see Jesus as “white” or “black”, He was a Jewish man … and fully God. Jesus wasn’t a female either. So much for a gender-neutral Savior.
And I think it fair to say that Mr. Obama has worked very hard to cover up his Muslim heritage. He’s lied about his mother being a “Christian” when she was in fact a white atheist from Kansas and both his father and step-father were Muslims though he has tried to portray them as essentially apostate Muslims … which is even more troubling.
But the bottom about about Barack Obama is this: Given Barack’s total lack of accomplishments on the national scene as a U.S. Senator, he’s a bona fide empty suit spewing empty rhetoric which apparently resonates with those suffering the most from anti-Bush Derangement Syndrome on the left.
“Unfortunately for you, the fact you can’t bother to actually look into the history of “Afrocentrism”…”
Afrocentricism refers to the belief that in order to compensate for European racism, the members of the ‘pan-African community’ (however the writer defines it) must meet it with racism of thier own, claiming not merely to be the equal of Europeans, but to be better. Supposedly, once equality is achieved, the ‘prop’ of Afro-centricism is to be discarded.
The problem of course is that racism once adopted into your culture is not so lightly discarded again. Additionally, afro-centricism has led (as racism often does) to alot of mythic contructs to justify its belief systems, eventing cultural achievements, cultural identities, and civilizations where convienent even if those aren’t really part of the historical record. Personally, I don’t find historic bad European scholarship promoting race to justify modern bad scholarship promoting race.
I know abit about Afrocentricism both as a theoretical matter and by practical experience. If I might ask, just what do you think is the history of Afrocentrocism? I find it to be a fairly ugly doctrine with an even uglier legacy of psuedo-science, psuedo-history, and racism. For example, I once had a fellow Christian from one of these Afrocentric congregations tell me without irony that the reason that white people were (his words) “inherently evil” was that they had “no souls” and hense where not eligible for salvation. Now I’m not saying Obama’s congregation is that extreme, but they do espouse the same general class of racist philosophy.
I agree with the part where you say that not one of the Democrat front-runners is fit, on merit, to be President. The tragedy here is that apparently these are the best the party has.
And what gets me is that many people out there will vote for one of these over the Republican candidate because “the Democrats are for the working people”. And said voters will not get it that “their” party no longer stands for what they value, nor do they approve of what “their” party or “their” candidates stand for.
You gotta love it when Kennedy or Kerry or Gore or Edwards (not that Obama or Clinton are poor) gets out there and claims to be ready to “soak the rich” and protect the middle class. You gotta love it when the voters believe that!
Meanwhile, I suggest we not get into a slugfest over such things as Obama’s church (leave that to the other candidates). If we had an otherwise worthy candidate, that might become an issue (rightly or not).
Obama’s relationship with his church and its pastor was addressed a long time ago in the MSM. Pity that Pajamas Media doesn’t bother with a basic Google before declaring that “nobody is asking Barack Obama about his religious convictions.” Try something as basic as the pastor’s wikipedia entry, and you’ll find MSM coverage that goes back to March of last year and earlier. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Wright
PG,
The MSM is not the final arbiter of truth. That was proven long ago – and many times over. The MSM forfeited its credibility some time ago – to the point where anything they present is immediately suspect of being agenda driven commentary. Truth is not their highest priority.
People are correct to engage their own minds.
PG — I’m sure that Burt knows how to use Google. In fact I’m sure that most participants in this thread know how to use Google. Our criticism of the mainstream media is not that they have never, ever covered Obama’s church but that they have not done so in a way that would make the radical, black power nature of Obama’s church common knowledge as they have, for instance, Romney’s Mormonism.
Here’s one of the riper quotes from “The Black Value System”, in which TUCC frames American race relations as a captor/captive relationship in which blacks are killed off, placed in “concentration camps”, or encouraged to kill each other off.
IMO, this is sick, wacko stuff and I was genuinely shocked that Obama was foolish enough to embrace a church espousing views that sound like they were written by Angela Davis using a Christian church as a vehicle for her propaganda. Maybe that works for you, but it wouldn’t work for most Americans if they were aware of it.
Obama’s refusal to show respect for our flag and to join in the Pledge of Allegience (publicly) was enough for me to not vote for him. I think I see why now, because of his church’s afro-centrist/islamist beliefs. (so much for his beliefs don’t affect his behavior)
If Louis Farrakhan (an islamist & racist) is so highly honored as to qualify as the model for his church’s beliefs, one could hardly claim his church is actually a “Christian” church. Check out what the koran says about “the People of the Book”. (Christans & Jews)
As a Christian (Vietnam vet) & having read the koran, hadiths and suras, I do NOT believe islam is an actual religion. It’s an Arab-supremisist screed, bent on world domination through intimidation and terror. ANY “Christian” church that aligns itself with this philosophy must be in denial of Christ’s teaching.
If you sleep with wild dogs, expect to wake up with fleas.
According to Mickey Kaus, Obama’s and TUCC’s pass from the press is about over. Good.
Newsweek has an article rebutting the email, but there is no way to rebut The Black Value System. It says what it says.
It is obvious by the landslide of negative posts to this topic that most dedicated viewers of this show demonstrate their own racial bias. When people disagree or hate without trying to understand the premise of the opposite view, the mayhem lives on. If our children are acting out of the “norm”, the only way to resolve the matter is to get to the root and try to understand them, to force our views on them, the problem is only repressed. As for the T.U.C.C.’s comment on being pro Africa, that can hardly be a threat when Africa is a continent of sovereign nations not “a” soverign nation such as ours. Is it any wonder that in the midst of white america always asking is it ready for a black president, that many in black America constantly try to reinforce their self worth by wanting to have ties to somewhere that they feel they “should” feel at home, just as jews look to israel, mexicans to mexico etc…
factvsfeeln — As usual for a defender of TUCC here, you avoid responding to the question of how one would characterize a church that focuses so heavily on being Black and lionizes an obvious racist like Louis Farrakhan.
Obama, TUCC and its defenders are welcome to focus on racial identity, and to see America as a captor society victimizing blacks. I just don’t think anyone who subscribes to such priorities and beliefs has any business running for President of the United States for all Americans and claiming to stand for unity.
I do think all Americans should be aware of TUCC’s positions on race and have the chance to draw their own conclusions about TUCC and about Barack Obama.
If your religious beliefs do not govern your lifestyle and choices, the religion you have chosen is worthless.
huxley,
Um, the NYTimes had a cover article on Pastor Wright in April 2007. In that article, the Times noted Wright’s radical politics, his visit to Cuba and to Libya to visit Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, his association with Louis Farrakhan, his potentially racist-sounding “black liberation theology,” his assertion that Zionism has an element of “white racism,” and statements he made about Iraq and about 9/11 that some people called anti-American.
The fact that the Times did not frame Wright as the SCARY BLACK SEPARATIST headline that you would prefer does not mean that they did not cover the story.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/30/us/politics/30obama.html
Last year, the publication of Chicago’s TUCC honored Louis Farrakhan.
Farrakhan (not long for this Earth) and his supporters haven’t managed to rationalize or effectively conceal the virulent anti-Semitism at the heart of the Nation of Islam/Muslim Brotherhood.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/14/AR2008011402083_pf.html
PG — You said:
I love folks who begin posts with “Um.” It sounds so intelligent! As you might have noticed in my previous reply to you, I said:
I say make sure all Americans know about TUCC’s support for leaders like Farrakhan and TUCC’s statement “The Black Value System” and let Americans draw their own conclusions.
A few missing facts about America’s heritage from David Barton’s, “God: Missing in Action from American History:”
“In 1762, the king vetoed the charter for America’s first missionary society; he also suppressed other religious freedoms and even prevented Americans from printing an English language Bible. How did Americans respond? They took action; and almost unknown today is the fact that Declaration signers such as Samuel Adams and Charles Carroll cited religious freedom as the reason they became involved in the American Revolution… almost half of the signers of the Declaration (24 of 56) held what today would be considered seminary or Bible school degrees.”
[...]
The greatest moral issue of that day was slavery; and after several of the American colonies moved toward abolishing slavery in 1773, the King, in 1774, vetoed those anti-slavery laws and continued slavery in America. Soon-to-be signers of the Declaration Benjamin Franklin and Benjamin Rush promptly founded America’s first abolition society as a direct response against the king’s order…
[...] Texts now forcefully assert that the American founding produced the first intentionally secular government in history – even though the Declaration officially acknowledges God in four separate clauses…
[...] the legendary Minutemen.. their leader, the Rev. Jonas Clark, is no longer mentioned – nor the fact that many of the Minutemen were deacons in his church. And the Rev. James Caldwell is no longer acknowledged as a key leader of military forces in New Jersey – nor the Rev. John Peter Gabriel Muhlenberg (who led 300 men from his church against the British) as one of Washington’s most trusted generals.
Regrettably, we no longer know much about the indispensable role of pastors and Christian leaders in the founding of our civil government. Americans have been subjected to “revisionism” -
[...]
Having now come to believe that economics is what created and made America great, it is not surprising that few Americans commented on the fact that, during the 2004 presidential debates, “jobs” and “economy” were mentioned hundreds of times but “marriage” less than a dozen. Nor is it surprising that over the past decade, 45 percent of evangelical Christians say that economic issues are more important than moral issues when it comes to voting.
There is so much of our wholesome, God-centered American history that we no longer know today. This is especially true when it comes to the average American’s knowledge of African American history.
Consider, for example, African American achievements during the American Revolution. Few today know that almost 5,000 of the patriots in the fledgling Continental Army were African Americans – that, for example, a hero of the Battle of Bunker Hill was African American Peter Salem. His heroic actions saved the lives of scores of Americans, and he was honored before General Washington for his courage.
And Pastor Lemuel Haynes was involved in several major Revolutionary battles and became an ardent admirer of George Washington, regularly preaching sermons on Washington’s birthday. This patriot preacher was the first African American to be ordained by a mainstream Christian denomination (the Congregationalists, in 1785), to pastor a white congregation (a congregation in Connecticut), and to be awarded an honorary Master’s Degree (by Middlebury College, in 1804). Yet who today has heard of Lemuel Haynes?
Or who has heard of James Armistead, the courageous spy at Yorktown whose remarkable service considerably shortened the War? Or Oliver Cromwell and Prince Whipple (depicted in several famous Revolutionary War paintings) who served directly under General Washington and the general staff? Or Jordan Freeman, the gallant soldier to whom a monument was erected for his heroic service at the Battle of Groton Heights?
Then there is also African American church history – including the amazing story of the Rev. John Marrant, the first African American to evangelize successfully among American Indians; the Rev. Richard Allen, who gained his freedom from slavery, served in the American Revolution, became a preacher in a church of 2000 whites, and founded America’s first black denomination; and the Rev. Harry Hoosier, who delivered the first recorded Methodist sermon by an African American and drew crowds larger than the great Methodist Bishop Francis Asbury.
And consider African American political history. Who today knows the story of the Rev. Hiram Rhodes Revels, the African American missionary who became the first black U. S. Senator? Or the Rev. Henry Highland Garnet, the first African American to deliver a sermon in Congress? Or Joseph Hayne Rainey, who overcame slavery to become the first African American elected to the U. S. Congress, even presiding over the U. S. House? (In the picture of the first seven African Americans elected to the federal Congress – all as Republicans – the Rev. Revels is the first from the left, and Rainey is second from the right.) Or who today has learned that nearly every southern Republican Party was started by African Americans – or that the first 190 African Americans elected to office in South Carolina (and the first 112 in Mississippi, the first 42 in Texas, the first 127 in Louisiana, etc.) were all Republicans, and many were ministers?
I have spent years collecting thousands of original and priceless documents from American history in general and black history in particular; God’s fingerprints are evident throughout. I have been asked why I, as an Anglo, would spend so much time in the study of African American political history. The answer is simple: I am an American; and since the story of African American history is part of American history, it therefore is part of my own history. Furthermore, I am inspired by all stories of sacrifice, courage, and Godly character – regardless of skin color. The stories of African American heroes such as Phillis Wheatley, Francis Grimke, and John Roy Lynch are as thrilling to me as are the stories of Lewis & Clark, Helen Keller, and Alvin York.
More: http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=121
Obama’s going to bring us all together to hate America like him. We are all going to be united against “the Man”. We’re going to demand what is ours from the big corporations and the Rich. We’re going to unite against American imperialism and get out of Iraq NOW. We’re going to join the third world peoples, the authentic peoples and dialog with the Iranian Mullahs, with the chinless Opthalmologist in Syria and do more to uplift Africa. We’re going to stop ruining the world with our pollution and over-consumption.
You know, in a way, I would like for Obama to win the election. It would end up destroying the Democrat Party, which is totally dumbed down.
Prelutsky’s article about Obama’s church affiliation represents a vulgar sign of the religious right’s ineptness to juxtapose race, religion and politics tailored to the evangelical belief structure. Just what really is that structure? Does anyone know? Does this mean all people of color, Christians, Jews and those who are accused of being non-believers are going to hell, just as he implied the people of Obama’s Church of Christ faith are going? How about Jews (reformed and orthodox), Roman Catholics, shouting hell-fire and brim-stone Baptists, Missionary Baptists, Eastern Orthodox, Mormons, 7th Day Adventists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Church of the Nazarene, revisionist Episcopalians, born again Christians of all denominations, United Bretheran, Bahia Faith congregations, and there are many more! Who’s right? Who is Prelutsky to say who’s right? It’s all too easy to forget the blasphemy of Bush “faith-based initiatives” and non believers like Dick Cheney, the Cheney’s gay daughter, Halliburton, war in Iraq, and, on and on –clear back to those wonderful Reagan years of “trickle down economics” (for the wealthy), Ollie North and Iran-Contra. It’s disgusting and insulting to his readers that Prelutsky, a journalist whose claim to fame is being a Hollywood movie critic, who obviously has gone to too many movies –to be touting his version of the Conservative Agenda. People in glass houses should pull down the shades!
Cy Bolinger
Get religion out of politics altogether!