Joseph Lowery's Racist Prayer

[jphelmet]

but i suppose this is what modern evangelism is all about -- narcissism.

that is very disheartening to hear any way that they think modern evangelism is about narcissism. how completely and totally backwards from what Jesus actually taught. makes me very sad for anyone to say that is how they perceive it.

its really sad that the Christian church as a whole, has a very vocal minority. going back to (as you mentioned) jerry falwell, and pat robertson. it feeds from the fact that those on all sides are so lazy about seeking out and discerning what a faith or belief system really teaches. pat robertson makes bold statements almost weekly that cannot (and are not) supported by christian theology. unfortunately he is the loudest, and he's on tv.

christianity suffers greatly today in america (its reputation) because it is easy to be a christian. many are surrounded by those who believe the same or similarly (or say they do) and never take the time to really understand what they believe and why. they don't have to its easy to be intellectual lazy when you don't have to answer what and why you believe it. (i wonder how many professing christians there would be if the church was persecuted as it is in other parts of the world?) that is why someone like pat robertson can go on tv and be so popular. so many don't know that he doesn't have a clue what he is talking about the majority of the time.

the best christian minds, are usually nowhere near tv. they don't have anything to sell, and don't want to be associated with those that do want the spotlight. i am sorry that, as you say, modern evangelism looks like narcissism. i am even more sorry, that i know exactly why you say it, and can see pretty easily how you would reach that conclusion.

please don't judge all christianity on the faces of the megachruch or televangelism. better yet don't judge christianity on the people who claim to follow it (me included). every single one will let you down, and be a mess to some degree- and if they are sincere in their belief, that is why they are christians to begin with.

 

[dazzledbylight]

“….help us work for that day when black will not be asked to give back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man, and when white will embrace what is right.”

~from Joseph Lowery’s benediction"

This offends me and should offend people of all races.

(maybe i'll get to address the rest of your comments later next week, tho i might try a bit)


I am white and I do not find this offensive at all.......

(& since no one has posted this particular info, i will )

.....WHY???.....

because i know the background of these actual remarks...........

it is a play on words of another saying........

which I happen to know tho, it IS more commonly know in the black community..... i don't know whether it originated in the early -mid 60's or earlier.........goes like this>>>>>>>>

" If you're Black
step back,
If you're Brown,
stick around
If you're White,
you're alright "

and that how it was... and still at times is in various ways


So Rev Lowery was celebrating that some change has happened into the hearts of certain white people who in the past never would NEVER have been willing to vote for any black person for president.


And if you go on about Barack being half-white et al


the rule was this..if you had 1/8 ( ? one great-grandparent)(really one drop of ) "black blood" in you--you were/are considered Black in the USA.......


Even today IH...........


......a white man with and HS diploma AND a Criminal Record is STILL MORE LIKELY to be hired than a black man with a college degree..... in areas of the USA.........
\
and test couples showwing up at Real estate brokers with IDENTCIAL RECORDS- salleries/job/assets etc ...

The Black Couple STILL is often still rejected............


There IS NO excuse fore that kind of behavior anymore!
i rest my case

we still have a ways to go............

 

[nathan1977]

at first, i found it offensive because i thought it was rude and disrespectful to others, and thinking about it a bit more, i find it offensive that he'd choose such an occasion to make such an occasion about himself.

Personal testimonies are personal testimonies, and this is what the average Christian has -- a personal testimony of a personal relationship with a personal God Who changed his or her life. A lot of us have the same thing. That's not narcissism. Lots of people's lives have been changed by plenty of different things, from U2 to Allah to a blender. The man was asked to pray a prayer, and he prayed in the name of the only God he knows. It would be hypocrisy to pray differently.

Let's just admit that Warren's under a cloud from the get go as far as you are concerned and leave it at that. There were plenty of other elements to celebrate (including Robinson's prayer). Don't like it? Change the channel. (As has been quoted so often here in FYM to those of us who find something disagreeable on our TV screens.) Welcome to multiculturalism in America.

 

[phillyfan26]

If he wasn't on record as having compared athiests to Stalin and Mao, maybe I'd be more accepting of his legitimacy.

 

[Kieran McConville]

At least he wasn't comparing atheists to Carl Weathers.

 

[maycocksean]

I don't have an issue with Warren's referencing Jesus or the Lord's Prayer in his prayer. He's a Christian pastor, I think most people understand that. And I will venture to suggest that if he were Muslim imam and he prayed in the name of Allah we might be more inclined to give him a break.

What I think I may have a problem with is that it sounds to me like he was grandstanding. I'm going to try to find the prayer on Youtube so I can see for myself. If that is indeed the case then I do have a problem with him trying to make some sort of statement for political/personal gain with his constituency and using the inaugural prayer as his platform for it.

 

[maycocksean]

watched the rick warren prayer and eh. . .I don't know. The end of the prayer did seem a little bit as if he was trying to make a point. . .or rather to earn points with his constituency. . .Still it wasn't as obvious as I expected.

To be honest I thought both his and Lowry's prayers came off more like sermons and I didn't care for that.

 

[corianderstem]

To be honest I thought both his and Lowry's prayers came off more like sermons and I didn't care for that.

I agree. It started to feel like a church service, and I kept waiting for them to start passing out communion.

 

[AttnKleinkind]

If he wasn't on record as having compared athiests to Stalin and Mao, maybe I'd be more accepting of his legitimacy.

This is a sidenote to the thread, but: I'd just like to draw attention to the fact that you are saying that you don't like it when people characterize a whole belief system with its extremists, yet how often is it recognized on this board that not all Christians are Crusaders, Southern Republicans, or followers of James Dobson?

 

[Irvine511]

please don't judge all christianity on the faces of the megachruch or televangelism. better yet don't judge christianity on the people who claim to follow it (me included). every single one will let you down, and be a mess to some degree- and if they are sincere in their belief, that is why they are christians to begin with.

i have a more nuanced view than you might think, but as a gay man, it's hard not to feel as if i've been singled out by Christians at large to be the repository of all that they believe has gone wrong with society. while it's true that many churches are gay friendly, i don't consider simple "tolerance" to be any sort of consolation, nor do i consider the "hate the sin" mentality as anything other than a spoonful of sugar to make the hate go down. for me, anything less than the full acceptance of a gay relationship and homosexuality as the equal of a straight relationship and heterosexuality, including marriage and adoption rights, is homophobia. and while there are certain some christians who believe in equality -- and not that dreaded word "tolerance" -- i have seen nothing to make me think that they are anything other than, at best, a minority.

Warren has compared homosexuality to pedophilia. i have no reason to cut him any slack whatsoever. he can't claim ignorance. supporting AIDS charities is not a get-out-of-gay-hate free card.

 

[Irvine511]

Personal testimonies are personal testimonies, and this is what the average Christian has -- a personal testimony of a personal relationship with a personal God Who changed his or her life. A lot of us have the same thing. That's not narcissism. Lots of people's lives have been changed by plenty of different things, from U2 to Allah to a blender. The man was asked to pray a prayer, and he prayed in the name of the only God he knows. It would be hypocrisy to pray differently.

yep, it's narcissism. on a stage like that, when you are in front of 300 million people, it's time for it to be about the occasion, not about the individual. i think BluerWhite hit it on the head -- saying Jesus is one thing, reciting the entire Lord's Prayer is something else altogether.

i'm not surprised that you saw his naming of Jesus -- in four languages, no less -- and recitation of the Lord's Prayer as evidence of authenticity. you even frame it as if he had no other choice. that it was brave. and, hence, we have the narcissism.

Let's just admit that Warren's under a cloud from the get go as far as you are concerned and leave it at that. There were plenty of other elements to celebrate (including Robinson's prayer). Don't like it? Change the channel. (As has been quoted so often here in FYM to those of us who find something disagreeable on our TV screens.) Welcome to multiculturalism in America.

so you're comparing the inauguration -- which i was at, in person -- to a prime time TV line up? this is too cute by half, nathan. it's a super-serious ceremony, and it's too bad Obama chose the wrong man for the job.

 

[Irvine511]

If he wasn't on record as having compared athiests to Stalin and Mao, maybe I'd be more accepting of his legitimacy.

or homos to pedophiles and alcoholics.

 

[maycocksean]

I agree. It started to feel like a church service, and I kept waiting for them to start passing out communion.

It wasn't so much that they were excessively religious, more the sense I got that they were less "talking to God" and more "talking to the audience." I just think public prayers should be simple, short, and should avoid the quality of "speech with eyes closed." I've been guilty of such prayers myself, but that doesn't make it okay as far as I'm concerned.

Had Warren just closed with "In Jesus name amen" I wouldn't see much cause for complaint. He's a Christian minister so I think such a closing would be acceptable. But the "in the name of the one who changed MY life" and then the Lord's Prayer felt like, "I'm making a statement here." Prayers aren't the place for scoring points.

 

[Zoomerang96]

For pity's sake, can anyone remember Billy Graham's inaugural prayer from 1993, when he specifically prayed about how we as a nation had turned our backs on God and we needed to repent and turn back to Him? I would think that would be a much more offensive prayer.

And for those viewers counting at home, Billy Graham referenced Jesus in 2001, too.

NOOOOOooooo.

billy graham, perhaps the world's most renowned preacher REFERENCED jesus?!

i used to come on this message board to have a laugh at the uptight conservatives, the pro-bush crowd, those who thought the iraq war was justified, etc.

but my how times have changed. the "centrist" views that seem to permeate this message board are equally ridiculous.

no wonder everyone in america is offended all the time if you've got both sides of the argument coming across as complete and utterly daft.

this all reminds me of 1984 when the public have their 2 minutes of hate to be angry about whatever it is their government wanted them to.

 

[Zoomerang96]

i have a more nuanced view than you might think, but as a gay man, it's hard not to feel as if i've been singled out by Christians at large to be the repository of all that they believe has gone wrong with society. while it's true that many churches are gay friendly, i don't consider simple "tolerance" to be any sort of consolation, nor do i consider the "hate the sin" mentality as anything other than a spoonful of sugar to make the hate go down. for me, anything less than the full acceptance of a gay relationship and homosexuality as the equal of a straight relationship and heterosexuality, including marriage and adoption rights, is homophobia. and while there are certain some christians who believe in equality -- and not that dreaded word "tolerance" -- i have seen nothing to make me think that they are anything other than, at best, a minority.

you know something, i'm pretty tired of this too.

yeah.

historically the population at large has been against most of the things that you want to promote (complete equality and benefits that man/woman couples enjoy), and it's only been relatively recently since gay rights started to come to pass and that public opinion has begun to shift.

you can't expect to change the world overnight. and moreover, you will never...ever change people's minds by calling them homophobes. that just won't work. i know many, many fine people who happen to not agree with what you'd like to see happen. that's their right, however ignorant, bigoted and ultimately wrong you feel it is.

i know, without question that homosexuals have quite literally been persecuted for their lifestyle. as wrong as that is, you must learn that everyone who disagrees with you is not necessarily an uneducated, heartless bastard.

this "us v them" mentality is as polarising of an approach one could possibly adopt.

think how far you've come in the last 100 years, in the last fifty years... in the last 20 years! social progress doesn't happen with a flick of a switch, you should know that.

 

[Irvine511]

i know, without question that homosexuals have quite literally been persecuted for their lifestyle. as wrong as that is, you must learn that everyone who disagrees with you is not necessarily an uneducated, heartless bastard.

firstly, please don't use the word "lifestyle." my lifestyle is urban, maybe, and in my lifestyle i take lots of public transportation, go out to restaurants, prioritize my savings so that i'm able to take a good vacation once a year, and i value books, movies, and music. being gay is not a "lifestyle." i do not have a gay "lifestyle." i don't even know what one is.

on this issue, in any western nation, no one has any excuse anymore. we all know Ellen. we all know Rosie. we all know Anderson Cooper. and the moment anyone actually knows, among their family and friends, a gay person, their opinion on this subject changes. all that people have left to hold on to that allows them to maintain their homophobia is religion, or just straight up bigotry that's akin to racism.

so i think "uneducated" and "heartless" are entirely appropriate.

 

[Irvine511]

NOOOOOooooo.

billy graham, perhaps the world's most renowned preacher REFERENCED jesus?!

did billy graham say jesus in four different languages and then recite the Lord's Prayer?

there are distinctions being made in here. saying Jesus is one thing, and even for me, that pushes the line. but saying the Lord's Prayer certainly crosses that line and goes from a broad service under which people of all faiths can find a home, and into something that's exclusive.

 

[Zoomerang96]

firstly, please don't use the word "lifestyle." my lifestyle is urban, maybe, and in my lifestyle i take lots of public transportation, go out to restaurants, prioritize my savings so that i'm able to take a good vacation once a year, and i value books, movies, and music. being gay is not a "lifestyle." i do not have a gay "lifestyle." i don't even know what one is.

on this issue, in any western nation, no one has any excuse anymore. we all know Ellen. we all know Rosie. we all know Anderson Cooper. and the moment anyone actually knows, among their family and friends, a gay person, their opinion on this subject changes. all that people have left to hold on to that allows them to maintain their homophobia is religion, or just straight up bigotry that's akin to racism.

so i think "uneducated" and "heartless" are entirely appropriate.

alright

for a start if you want to pick on my terminology, fine. that wasn't meant to cause offence.

as for "the issue", your response has water under it. there is no question that you're a brilliant individual, but in my view when you dismiss others in the way that you have, you're betraying noone more so than yourself.

being "right" isn't good enough. you should know that. but perhaps that's not even the point... i mean, i have no idea what you're like in real life, and perhaps you're a lot like me who use this board as a place to vent.

but in order to change minds, this polarising approach you take will get you nowhere. if in fact, it is religion that's instilled their homophobia do you really think that by bashing what many hold dear to them, you're going to get them to change their mind?

do outspoken anti-gay people who openly ridicule your sexual orientation have ANY effect on changing the way you feel inside? does it have ANY effect on you into even thinking about changing your sexual preference?

of course not.

so why do you think by attacking religion itself, something that mainstream america is known for, do you think you're going to convert hearts and minds to your point of view?

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

firstly, please don't use the word "lifestyle." my lifestyle is urban, maybe, and in my lifestyle i take lots of public transportation, go out to restaurants, prioritize my savings so that i'm able to take a good vacation once a year, and i value books, movies, and music. being gay is not a "lifestyle." i do not have a gay "lifestyle." i don't even know what one is.

on this issue, in any western nation, no one has any excuse anymore. we all know Ellen. we all know Rosie. we all know Anderson Cooper. and the moment anyone actually knows, among their family and friends, a gay person, their opinion on this subject changes. all that people have left to hold on to that allows them to maintain their homophobia is religion, or just straight up bigotry that's akin to racism.

so i think "uneducated" and "heartless" are entirely appropriate.

Anderson Cooper's gay? Not that there's anything wrong with that...

 

[Zoomerang96]

did billy graham say jesus in four different languages and then recite the Lord's Prayer?

there are distinctions being made in here. saying Jesus is one thing, and even for me, that pushes the line. but saying the Lord's Prayer certainly crosses that line and goes from a broad service under which people of all faiths can find a home, and into something that's exclusive.

if you invite a pastor to make a speech, and you think he's going to do something that's politically correct and inviting to all faiths, you're forgetting that you just invited a preacher to speak in the first place.

 

[Irvine511]

alright

for a start if you want to pick on my terminology, fine. that wasn't meant to cause offence.

as for "the issue", your response has water under it. there is no question that you're a brilliant individual, but in my view when you dismiss others in the way that you have, you're betraying noone more so than yourself.

being "right" isn't good enough. you should know that. but perhaps that's not even the point... i mean, i have no idea what you're like in real life, and perhaps you're a lot like me who use this board as a place to vent.

but in order to change minds, this polarising approach you take will get you nowhere. if in fact, it is religion that's instilled their homophobia do you really think that by bashing what many hold dear to them, you're going to get them to change their mind?

do outspoken anti-gay people who openly ridicule your sexual orientation have ANY effect on changing the way you feel inside? does it have ANY effect on you into even thinking about changing your sexual preference?

of course not.

so why do you think by attacking religion itself, something that mainstream america is known for, do you think you're going to convert hearts and minds to your point of view?

you're right, like you, i use FYM to vent.

and on an individual level, i'm much more tactful and not nearly as strident, and in fact, the only time i ever actually encounter anything remotely resembling prejudice in my day-to-day life is here on FYM.

there is something to be said, however, for arguing with bigots. it's not for the sake of the bigot. it's that when you engage bigotry and challenge it, you can discredit that bigotry to those who are in the middle, those who might not (in this case) know a gay person, and those who really haven't thought about it very much.

that's for all issues, not this specific one.

real life is different than in FYM. i do agree. it's a public forum, whereas a private conversation is much different.

 

[Irvine511]

if you invite a pastor to make a speech, and you think he's going to do something that's politically correct and inviting to all faiths, you're forgetting that you just invited a preacher to speak in the first place.

up until last Tuesday, no pastor had spoken the Lord's Prayer at the inauguration.

 

[phillyfan26]

At least he wasn't comparing atheists to Carl Weathers.

Let me tell you a little story about acting: I was doing this Showtime movie, Hot Ice with Anne Archer ... never once touched my per diem. I'd go to Craft Service, get some raw veggies, bacon, Cup-A-Soup. Baby, I got a stew goin'!

 

[phillyfan26]

This is a sidenote to the thread, but: I'd just like to draw attention to the fact that you are saying that you don't like it when people characterize a whole belief system with its extremists, yet how often is it recognized on this board that not all Christians are Crusaders, Southern Republicans, or followers of James Dobson?

That's not the point. Mao and Stalin were not "extreme" atheists. They were extreme in their political beliefs, not in their religious beliefs. And the reasons they did what they did were not because they were atheist.

Whereas, many actions taken by Christians are based on their spiritual beliefs, and, more specifically, the church organizations that they are a part of.

 

[UberBeaver]

you americans are far too easily offended by just about everything.

It's like a fucking sport here, man. Everyone waits for someone to say something that they can pounce on and then everyone else around them breathes deep and looks shocked. It's pretty pathetic the way "we" treat everyone like an enemy. And basically pointless. I don't know how it started. You'd think that the bright side would be that fear would cause most people to STFU and we'd at least have some peace and quiet, but nope. Somehow it just makes people talk more...though about nothing.

 

[Zoomerang96]

you're right, like you, i use FYM to vent.

and on an individual level, i'm much more tactful and not nearly as strident, and in fact, the only time i ever actually encounter anything remotely resembling prejudice in my day-to-day life is here on FYM.

there is something to be said, however, for arguing with bigots. it's not for the sake of the bigot. it's that when you engage bigotry and challenge it, you can discredit that bigotry to those who are in the middle, those who might not (in this case) know a gay person, and those who really haven't thought about it very much.

that's for all issues, not this specific one.

real life is different than in FYM. i do agree. it's a public forum, whereas a private conversation is much different.

okay, cool.

all is right in the world now.

cheers

 

[Kieran McConville]

Let me tell you a little story about acting: I was doing this Showtime movie, Hot Ice with Anne Archer ... never once touched my per diem. I'd go to Craft Service, get some raw veggies, bacon, Cup-A-Soup. Baby, I got a stew goin'!

haha, and did you know that you can get a free refill on your coke at Burger King?

It's a wonderful restaurant!

 

[jphelmet]

That's not the point. Mao and Stalin were not "extreme" atheists. They were extreme in their political beliefs, not in their religious beliefs. And the reasons they did what they did were not because they were atheist.

is there such thing as extreme atheism, or conservative atheism? what grounds does any atheist make a moral objection to what stalin or mao did?

cs lewis "my argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. but how had i gotten this idea of 'just' and 'unjust'? "

 

[BVS]

is there such thing as extreme atheism,

Yes, I believe so...

or conservative atheism?

There are conservative atheist, but I don't know how one would define conservative atheism...

what grounds does any atheist make a moral objection to what stalin or mao did?

I find this kind of questioning to be extremely narrow minded. Human empathy alone could be grounds for setting morals, treat fellow humans the way I would want to be treated...

 

[A_Wanderer]

is there such thing as extreme atheism, or conservative atheism? what grounds does any atheist make a moral objection to what stalin or mao did?

cs lewis "my argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. but how had i gotten this idea of 'just' and 'unjust'? "

What grounds do you say that something is morally right?

How can you justify anything at all?

What makes the bible right?

If God is the definition of good then how can the term have any moral meaning?

What makes God good?

Adopting a tit-for-tat stance of social interaction, which is essentially the Golden Rule, defines a lot of moral intuition. God is not an explanation of moral behaviour, and the claims should be challenged.