Marshall Manson thinks it’s unfair to castigate Obama for the things his pastor said:
I go to church, and like Senator Obama, I’ve sat quietly in my seat listening to my pastor say things which with I’ve disagreed, oftentimes strongly. But that doesn’t mean that I believe him to be any less a man of God.
God is perfect. Men are fallible. Which means men like Pastor Wright are fallible, too. Pastor Wright brought Barrack Obama closer to God. That’s his life’s purpose. He is not a man of politics. That’s Senator Obama’s territory. And to hold Senator Obama responsible for Pastor Wright’s views is, in my view, totally unfair.
Cam Edwards disagrees with Marshall. Jim Geraghty jumps in as well. I have to side with Cam and Jim on the issue. I could probably stand to hear one or two whacked out things from my pastor, but I doubt I’d stay at a church with a pastor that said the things Wright has said. Disagreement I can tolerate, but based on Wright’s statements, it’s hard for me to avoid coming to the conclusion that he hates his country, and quite possibly a lot of the people in it. If Obama is content to be around that message, and associate it with his campaign, I think it’s appropriate to ask whether he’s the right person to represent all americans, whether they be black, white, hispanic or jew.
I dunno. The church my wife drags me to is all afraid of gay cooties. I’m not afraid of gay gooties.
Cam Edwards states: Well, if liberation theology in general can be described as Christian Socialism, then black liberation theology could best be described as Christian Socialism with a specific emphasis on social equality for blacks.
Compare this to the Apostle Paul in Galatians 3:28: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
There is far more Malcom X than Martin Luther King in Jeremiah Wright.
There was a woman, who happened to be black, on Bill O’reilly the other night who said to the effect, “If you are in a church that is not preaching the Word, get out!”
I agree that one will usually be able to overlook a few things, even big things, that one disagrees with from your pastor. Just like how you won’t always agree 100% with your family and friends, you won’t always agree with what the people in your church think, how they interpret scripture, or how they word their sermons.
But there is a line, and it can be crossed because one big difference is irreconcilable and it can be crossed because many little things are irreconcilable. In both cases, it should be apparent that you’re in the wrong place. If you don’t put distance between yourself and those opinions, you are (in the very least) giving the appearance of non-disagreement.
My opinion on this particular issue with Obama and his pastor isn’t a terribly strong one, but I do find Obama’s defense of things to be fairly shabby and non-convincing.
I think it’s more telling that he chose to involve Wright in his campaign. Not only did he associate with him for 20 years, but he asked him to be part of a campaign committee. That’s a problem for me. If he knowingly seeks that kind of divisive political messenger as part of his team, I don’t think I want that team in the White House. (Granted, I don’t want it there because of other policy issues as well.)
Well, I can’t think of a minister I didn’t have some disagreement with. But, if I was sitting in a service where the minister was a complete nutjob spewing hate ( which I suspect is not very Christian ), I would be out of there before the sermon was over.
People choose their church because they agree with the message the church promotes. It makes perfect sense that Barack chose a church that promotes black liberation theology that God has to be black, and that gives an Afro centric focus. The theology is nothing less than black Marxist nationalism. The subtext is that whites are the fault of all their problems and to hate the white folks.
Now many blacks get seduced by this ideology and Barack was trying to identify himself as a black to get acceptance in south side black Chicago for his political ambitions. It worked for him in the local sense.
It is just for a national campaign, being identified, as a member of Black Nationalism is similar to a white being affiliated to the KKK.
This is deadly to his national campaign if he gets to be the nominee.
Now on the personal issue, if Barack did not agree with the philosophy, then why stay with the church for 20 years and decide to allow his children to be brought up in this hate speech environment. Barack did not have the moral courage to walk out or to address his disagreements with Rev. Wright. Now either Barack agreed or did not have the courage to disagree. Shows a flawed character. How can he stand up to America’s enemies?
Also the church has a decided anti Israel and pro Palestinian slant. Note that Hamas, a terrorist organization had a pastoral letter published by the church.
The impact of the videos has a devasting impact on the voters. This is a deal breaker.
What I cannot understand is how he thought this would not come out as the church sold the DVD’s. Perhaps he never thought his candidacy would go so far and then he was stuck. He could not bring it up and as long as the Clintons did not he thought he might be safe. The month before he was addressing a Jewish group and got a question from the audience that quoted Rev Wright and asked for an explanation. Barack gave the answer that Rev. Wright was like a crazy uncle and shrugged it off.
I would never vote for a candidate that willing and voluntarily chose to affiliate for 20 years with and anti American group and that hated whites and pushed Black nationalism. Most of Americans would not also.
I agree with Rah. Obama stayed with the church for 20 long years and still is a part of the same group. Also Obama claims his right to be the president for his decision of Iraq. But a ma who has made all this decisions of staying with his pastor and the pastor being his religious and political mentor, plus his association with shady characters like Rezko (inspite of knowing about FBI checking on Rezko..). I do want to know.. is that the judgement he will bring as president…
Finally why is not called as BARRACK HUSSEIN OBAMA. THat is his name – right. Recently, i saw and heard the ruckus created when a right wing comentator took his complete name. Why are the press handling him with kid gloves while Mccain and Clinton gets harsh treatment.
Obama also was involved in canvassing for a relation of his in kenya ho wanted to bring islamic rule in Kenya. Why has the press been silent on that.
Why has the press not asked him the hard questions. Obama had a good life and enjoyed all the privelges and now if he claims support from characters like his pastor, then he has to think twice.