Father Pfleger? Here we go again.

Parent Cafe
21

<p>“There are congregants and congregants. Some show up twice a year, some come occasionally. Some sleep through sermons, although Barack isn’t one of them. Most thinking people disagree with specific points in the sermon (the whole idea is to awaken people’s thinking) but there are no exit polls to determine which element of the sermon is agreeable or not to each parishioner.”</p>

<p>There have been enough videos of enough sermons and congregants reactions to those sermons to conclude that anti-white rhetoric is highly endorsed by the church members. If I ever found myself in a church with such inflamed rhetoric against any group of people (whether it be racial or sexual orientation or other theologies), I would not come back and would never think of joining them and having my kids exposed to such thought.</p>

22

<p>P3T,</p>

<p>He did take the time to dissociate himself from his pastor’s youtube remarks and spoke well on how it pained him to do so, that he felt personally betrayed and hurt; but I guess that is not the question that bothers me at a political level. Certainly I understand his personal drama, but it is not my central concern when voting.</p>

<p>Rather, I wonder how he felt about the churches politics which were by any standard very far left politics --to be honest, well outside the mainstream-- during the time he was an active member. This concerns me more than the dynamic of trust and betrayal between Rev Wright and Sen Obama. </p>

<p>I actually believe he could address this well; but I think he will need to address this head-on before this campaign is over or he will come up short in November. As would John McCain if he was a member of a far-right church that engaged in political discourse as a matter of course. Something we know was true at Trinity United since its theology, the core of its message, was liberation theology preached by one of the foremost purveyors of not only liberation theology, but black liberation theology --there are also numerous recorded sermons; which, as I understand is a bit more militant than the generic variety. Reverend Wright is actually quite famous within these circles. A very well known quantity and a very good preacher to boot.</p>

23

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually, you just convinced me. I think if Obama would lose that many independent or thoughtful right-of-center voters because of doubts such as you expressed (and with care, thought), and if those could be eased by another big speech, he should try. </p>

<p>It’s possible that such folks are being written off as “no amount of explanation will help; they’re entrenched; he could stand on his head and it wouldn’t help…” but that’s a political judgment that campaign managers make.</p>

<p>I doubt he’d lose a vote by trying, even if the attempt is futile.</p>

<p>So you convinced me on that point. I’m ready for another brilliant Obama speech, anyways…it’s been weeks.</p>

<p>Similarly, following Mini’s line of reasoning, John McCain owes everyone a MUCH biggerr explanation of how he could possibly have chased Hagee. I’ll listen to both speeches, but really, both need explanation if one does.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Since the tone has improved on this thread, I’m really asking this as an intellectually honest inquiry: is Hagee’s church actually defined by the limits of bricks and mortar, or is it more of a national impulse? After all, he was really a national figure before all this began. Do you belong to his church by living in his neighborhood, or by sending him contributions from far-flung states? </p>

<p>It depends on what your definition of “member of a church” is, I guess. Mother Theresa had many followers and fans who never set foot on her country’s soil. Billy Graham was a TV evangelist who brought in people through that medium who felt that they belonged and ascribed to his views. Now with Internet…if you support Hagee from afar, you belong. He’s a movement.</p>

<p>So I am not sure ascribing to Hagee’s views and seeking his endorsement for political points (huge numbers of them) is actually a closer relationship to Hagee’s ideology than sitting in the South Side neighborhood church. </p>

<p>Either way, I’m up for TWO speeches of explanation, if one is requested.</p>

24

<p>Which one of McCain’s pastors called the Catholic Church,
“the great whore” ??</p>

25

<p>LOL, if someone asks something provocative after my lonnng posting, please understand I’m running out to buy coffee for my H, who has to write a sermon that might keep people awake. FOrgive me in advance and know I’m not dodging.</p>

26

<p>Social change for the poor is wrought by radicals. Period. That has been true going back to Biblical times. Jane Addams was a radical – Martin Luther King was a radical – the suffragettes and abolitionists were radicals. It has also been true throughout history that the leaders of a movement are always a lot more radical than the rank and file members. It has to be that way. That’s why they’re leaders.</p>

<p>Anybody on the South Side of Chicago knows that the strongest organizations fighting to make things better for the poor people there are run by Rev. Wright and Fr. Pfleger (and their fellow radicals). If you care about getting that work done, you work with those guys. Obama said no to Wall Street, academia, and lots of prestige and money to work on the South Side because he actually gave a damn. If he’d gone to some big firm like I did, he wouldn’t be “tainted” by his association with the people making a difference on the South Side. But because he was actually devoted to public service, we get this guilt-by-association BS. It’s bizarre.</p>

27

<p>For me, it’s not a race issue but more of an issue of radicalism that concerns me. Any candidate that falls too far to the right or too far to the left concerns me. It’s not Obama’s race that concerns me. It’s the people that seem to cling to him that causes me to question his ability to lead. Do these radicals see Obama as their way to further their own agendas or does Obama secretly have the same agenda? I honestly don’t know. This is why I’m interested in what other people think about this issue.</p>

28

<p>Obama was not in attendance during this sermon! He was giving a commencement speech (as a substitute for Ted Kennedy) at a college in Connecticut. Yup, I am sure he was responsible for what the guy said though. </p>

<p>The Clinton campaign is somehow hoping that this will sway the DNC committee and finally convince them that Obama is not electable.
ABC’s George Stephanapolus is still one of Hillary’s biggest cheerleaders. I just saw an article where he tried to suggest that the timing of this “disaster” was horrible for Obama because of the DNC meeting…:confused:</p>

<p>The only disaster is that Hillary hasn’t already conceded.</p>

29

<p>Whether he was in attendance or not is irrelevant. Pfeger is a close associate of Obama (even counseled him on the morning of his Philadelphia speech) making him yet another person who Obama likes to associate with but whose beliefs are at extreme odds with the persona that Obama tries to portray. Obama has also said that he really enjoys the company of the people at Trinity - the same people who whoop and holler whenever “the white man” is skewered from the pulpit.</p>

<p>And to Hanna, it’s not that these preachers and congregants are just “radical” it’s that they base their radicalism on demonizing an entire race of people. This is no more acceptable than the KKK which uses the same techniques.</p>

30

<p>“demonizing an entire race of people. This is no more acceptable than the KKK which uses the same techniques.”</p>

<p>You can’t be serious.</p>

<p>You get to mention the KKK again when somebody gets murdered in the middle of the night. Till then, they have zero to do with the conversation.</p>

<p>I have a proposal. I and members of my white atheist Jewish family have been warmly welcomed with Christian love at the churches in question. Let’s send a black scout to a KKK meeting and see if he has the same experience. If he does, then I’ll agree that the KKK rightly belongs in this conversation.</p>

31

<p>YAWN.</p>

<p>I think it is the NEWS MEDIA that is getting desperate here. They no the democratic primary race is about to be over and they’re going to lose all the political rating boosts they have been getting. This is them frantically trying to refuel the fire with a false controversy. </p>

<p>There is no meaningful relationship between this guy and Barack Obama, just like there is no meaningful relationship between pastor Hagee and and McCain. </p>

<p>Neither of the two pastors are bad people nor did they say anything that was that offensive. It is very historically viable that Clinton could be upset about a black man taking “what is owed to her”, its not like he was saying it to her face. </p>

<p>It is also supported by biblical evidence that if you follow a strict interpretation of the bible that the holocaust may have been caused by God for the creation of Israel. </p>

<p>If everybody would stop TRYING to be offended by what other people say, and start thinking about how they’ve reached that conclusion, maybe the entire world wouldn’t think Americans are idots…</p>

<p><em>OMG did he really say people think Americans are idiots!? How unpatriotic!!!</em></p>

32

<p>I just saw the footage of Father Pfleger’s insulting remarks, and I must say I was shocked. He basically came right out and said Hillary Clinton is a racist, and was extremely mean spirited about it to boot. It was worse than anything I’ve heard said by Jeremiah Wright:eek: (and that’s saying quite a lot:rolleyes:) I’m not a Hillary supporter (though there are things about her that I do admire), but my sense of fairness was offended by the Priest’s comments. If I were Obama, I’d be ticked as hell, as this can’t possibly be good for his campaign. If anything is clear by this point, it is that Barack Obama will be blamed for this guy’s words.</p>

<p>One has to wonder if this Priest really is an “Obama supporter”. I mean, come on! How stupid can you be?! Surly he must have known that footage of any incendiary election commentary coming from out of this church would soon be liberally aired on both TV and the internet, that it would insult a lot of people and fan the flames of division and controversy. I wonder what motivated this man to do this—what was his incentive?</p>

<p>Though Hillary was the subject of insult, it was Obama who got slimed by this Priest’s performance. No doubt, the knowledge of this will soften any sense of outrage Hillary might be feeling tonight.</p>

33

<p>I certainly hope I am never held personally accountable for the words and or actions of those I have known over the past 20+ years. Really now, this is getting to be a bit much.</p>

34

<p>There is a reason that there is a separation of church and state. And we are seeing it now. Enough already.</p>

35

<p>I’m starting to think that Obama’s “supporters” are trying to sabotage his campaign. Why don’t they just keep their mouths closed? He doesn’t need help.</p>

36

<p>Trinity Church ,the gift that keeps on giving, If I were McCain I would send them a contribution with my gratitude for delivering the election to him. Allelujah Father Pfleger keep it coming! I wonder who the next guess speaker will be at Trinity Church. I can’t wait!</p>

37

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Tyler, your second quotation, which accurately sums up Hagee’s theology, is exceptionally offensive. </p>

<p>The modern State of Israel was already in process of being established as of the late l9th century. The Holocaust wiped out one-third of world Jewish population and two-thirds of European Jewish population within 5 years. Had it not occurred, the State of Israel would have likely been established more slowly and organically, as pioneers chose to bring their families across the Mediterranean. It would have been filled with the brilliance of the greatest minds of Europe, healthy and strong. Instead it was built upon ashes, and had to mend the bodies and spirits of a pitiful number of remaining, broken survivors from concentration camps. </p>

<p>“Biblical evidence” – even interpreted by fundamentalists and evangelists – is that all humans were created with free will and can choose good or evil (the essence of the Adam and Eve story). </p>

<p>The Holocaust was a choice of humankind, to conduct it, continue it, and finally (thanks to the Allied forces, especially the United States) to crush the government that was conducting organized mass genocide in gas chambers and crematoria, right up to the final weeks of the war. </p>

<p>Hagee couldn’t have said anything more cruel if he had personally consulted with Eichmann. </p>

<p>So please don’t justify it with the Bible, or repeat it, or even suggest on these boards that it is not an offensive thought.</p>

38

<p>Personally, as a white and middle-aged woman in Hillary’s target demographic (although I am college-educated), I’ve come to find her constant harping on how only she can attract white voters to be racist. She keeps saying that she’s more electable–and the subtext, and it’s not subtle, is that a white woman is more electable than a black man–because she’s white.</p>

39

<p>My reaction to Father Pfleger is that he is just one more extreme left-wing liberal who just happens to be a religious leader. However, his presentation is very entertaining. His expressions and demeanor almost suggests we are watching a cartoon. His audience supports Obama and it looked like he was simply playing to his audience.</p>

40

<p>

</p>

<p>I think it’s interesting how supporters of both camps, Obama’s and Clinton’s, insist that it is “the other candidate” who is shamelessly playing the race card.:rolleyes: There’s an inherently low threshold for the introduction of race into this campaign, because, given the sociological and historical role of race in this country, it is essentially unavoidable. The same is true of the issue of gender, and these are historic circumstances, to put it mildly. Politics has and always will be a blood-sport, and the politics of race and gender in the US have always been minefields of hate and discontent. Put them front and center in any election, and it’s like chumming shark infested waters. What we’re witnessing isn’t pretty, and I would venture to say that at this point in time, it couldn’t be otherwise. </p>

<p>Hillary, in my estimation has been openly trying to exploit to her advantage, both the issues of race and gender in this campaign. It is she who has personally argued that her race makes her “more electable”, and that she has been the victim of unbridled sexism. She has basically said, “more people will vote for me because I’m white.” as well as that, “people should vote for me because I’m a woman.” Given her arguments, it would appear that she feels that the advantage of her race will trump any disadvantage her gender might pose. As a black woman, I have to say that her arguments reflect a sociological truth. </p>

<p>Obama has had to be very careful about what he says in regard to either race, or gender. If he had ever, at any point, argued that people should vote for him because he is black—well, you can just imagine… :rolleyes: But Hillary has time and time again, shamelessly claimed that her gender alone should be reason enough to vote elect her as President. Her race makes her “more electable” than that of her opponent (with no side comment as to whether that should actually be the case), and her gender provides an valid ideological reason for why she should be elected President.</p>