Reply #69: Well, maybe I am stupid, I ignored the wrong person...

[casus belli]

Geez. Anyway, I will respond to this one more time, because I think it is important. There is no doubt that this pastor's words smack of racism, anti-patriotism and many other undesirable features. The point is, to this congregation, those underlying aspects ARE hidden. These sermons were given in the context of black unity, of having pride in your ethnicity. If you listen to the sermons, he was trying to compel his parishioners to question their place, to rise above their "designated seat", to question the authority that they feel has held them back from opportunity. But underneath that, there were more sinister things...darker messages. I'm guessing if you had asked anyone at that sermon after it was over if they had just heard a hate speech, they would probably say no. It's hard to see that quality in someone you admire and look up to, which makes it all the more dangerous.

I'm making no apologies for this minister. None. But, it isn't fair to say that someone who may have drawn some very positive things from this man, who may have had their faith strengthened by his message should be familiar with all of his motives, all of his past messages and all of his underlying beliefs. As I stated in another post, I had a priest who I admired as a teen. He took me under his wing and encouraged me to ask questions of my faith, to learn more about other religions. I consider him the paradigm shift in my way of perceiving spirituality. Turns out the guy liked to go to truck stops and pick up men in restrooms and so was let go from the church. Does that invalidate what he brought to me. Should I ignore the very important lessons he brought to me in my formative years? I think to paint with such a wide brush and such a narrow perspective is a dangerous road for progressive politics. To view a complicated issue in such a linear way, without taking into account all of the variables is exactly the type of thinking that makes outlets like Fox News such an appealing alternative to real journalism. If these were Obama's words, my support would be immediately revoked. But they're not. And I see no evidence that any of this minister's misguided thoughts have been transferred to Obama in any way. If anything, it appears to have resolved him to seek unity and to bridge divisions, not encourage them. I'm not willing to convict a man for an associate's views, unless someone can demonstrate that it's a view they share. And unless you really hate the guy, I don't know how you could draw the assumption that he is anti-patritic, or divisive.