[ExI] safer now;

[Gary Miller]

Olga said:

<< I never said all black churches preach this way - many inner city ones
have and do (but, certainly, not all the time ... from what I've read
someone had to dig deep to find those few remarks of Wright's.  Comparing
inner city black church rhetoric with Klan rallies is wrong and not helpful
in this context. >>

I don't think they have to dig too deep.  All of these sermons are for sale
by the Church so they must be proud of them.

Some of them are starting to make their way onto YouTube but I'm sure the
Church will claim copyright infringement just like the Scientologists and
have YouTube pull them so they don't hurt Obama any worse than they already
have.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video_log/2008/03/brian_ross_reports_on_oba
mas_c.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAYe7MT5BxM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNTGRL0OJWQ&feature=related


Olga Said: 

<< Unfortunately, profiting by exploiting people is what churches do.  I
personally hate to pay taxes to the special exemptions religions
institutions get (although - I know it's heresy to say this on this list - I
don't mind paying some other taxes).  You can add Falwell, Santorum, Billy
Graham, Swaggart, and hundreds of other preachers to your list (why single
out the ones who happen to be black?). >> 

Because I've not heard any of these other preachers preach hatred towards
blacks or claim that blacks get unfair advantages in jobs and getting into
colleges in society because of equal opportunity laws and the quota system.
I have heard no white ministers blaming black for bringing AIDS to the
United States from Africa. And I have heard no white ministers saying that
there are so many blacks in prison that it is bankrupting the United States.
If they did they would be preaching Klan Rhetoric and it would make front
page news the next day!

And yet these are the same problems that Wright blames on whites.  And the
arguments are just as ridiculous and divisive.

And the white preachers you mention do exploit the fear of hell and the
guilt of their parishioners to fill the collection plate, but they are not
teaching the children to hate their own country and blame all of their
problems on people who are of a different color than they are.  And that is
the part that I consider vile.  

And what if Obama in his innermost heart believes this vile rhetoric which
he was indoctrinated with every Sunday growing up?

Was it this rhetoric that motivated him to want to be president?

What changes might he have in store for this country?

Olga asked: 

<< Isn't free speech wonderful?  I never ever stand up for the anthem, and I
never ever do the pledge of allegiance myself.  Does this make me a traitor?

I love it that America can tolerate diverse opinions.  Do you think America
should not be criticized? >>

I agree free speech is wonderful.  But a church in order to keep it's tax
exempt status must not be a front for a political organization.  And yes I
feel that America can both tolerate diverse opinions and does need to be
criticized when it strays too far from the will of the people and the
constitution.  But indoctrinating what are essentially political and
activist agendas into little children and people who have come to church to
hear religion is not religion.  It is a misuse of religion to further a
political and activist agendas.