Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm tired of people mad mouthing Rev. Wright and the people at Trinity UCC for things they have not done. This had already occured twice in this thread alone.
"If Reverent Wright hadn't been taped spouting a bunch of, "Kill Whitey!!" rhetoric"
I responded with what I feel to be one of the strongest proof points that the congregation is not about hating white people, other than the total absence of ""Kill Whitey!!" rhetoric", which is their voluntary membership within a predominately white denomination. Another would be that white congregations, from many denominations, all over the greater Chicago area continually send their youth groups to Trinity UCC for services. They would not do this if they believed that the minister in the pulpit would be attacking their youth or that the people in the pews would be hostile towards them.
I already said it was never an issue for me. But since you insist that Reverend Wright was not racist against white-America in is rhetoric, here you go:
Now to be clear, I agree with Rev Wright that blacks and others have been treated badly. But the man clearly is extremely mean-spirited, angry and flat-out hateful in his rhetoric. His sermons have frequently been calculated to stir up anger and hatred for white America, which Wright clearly sees as the enslaver and exploiter of blacks. He does not come right out and say, "Kill whitey!!" but that is the direction his sermons are going. He does not come right out and say that white Christians are worshiping a false god, but that is clearly what he is implying. This is not the kind of thing that mends bridges and heals the wounds of the past. This rhetoric just preserves the bitterness and anger from generation to generation to generation, ensuring that it never ends.
Mormonism has something in common with blacks in American history. They were illegally driven from New York, Ohio, Missouri and Illinois in succession. So they left the USA altogether, only to find that their destination had just become part of the USA when they got there because the Mexican-American War happened while they were enroute. And with the Mormons a thousand miles or more removed from the rest of the nation, the federal government still saw fit to send the army to attack them in what is now Utah. They're duly elected governor was removed and a federally imposed governor was forced on them by threat of violence. In the 1800's Mormon leaders were assaulted, assassinated and murdered. Their houses were burned, their women were raped and their children killed or more often starved to death during these sudden displacements -- which always just happened to take place in the middle of the winter. And nobody ever stood trial for any of these crimes. For decades, Mormons had their right to vote stripped from them purely because they were Mormon. Mormonism has a lot of reasons to hate the USA, yet they preach the exact opposite and don't hate America at all. They're actually some of the most patriotic people you will ever meet. Personally, I think theirs is a better approach to the crimes of the past.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big George
#1. Yes, I'm full of crap. But in a couple minutes I'm going to go take a huge Burdell. Problem solved.
No, you'll still be full of crap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big George
#2. An example of "healthy living": Mormons don't drink alcohol. An example of personal responsibility: Mormons teach strict financial management.
Given the prevalenc of wine in the Bible at occasions like the wedding at Cana and the Last Supper I find a Christian religion's banning of alcohol non-sensical. Is it really about God or control of the 'flock'?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big George
Shall I go on?
With what, gonna regale us with stories of why we shouldn't drink coffee and why pre-marital sex is a no-no?
No, I'm not, but I am a member of another UCC congregation. I often watch Trinity's services which are streamed over the internet either before or after my local services.
#2. An example of "healthy living": Mormons don't drink alcohol. An example of personal responsibility: Mormons teach strict financial management.
Shall I go on?
HA HA HA
Where I used to live, there was a mormon family who owned a little local country store that had a post office in it. That is where I had my p.o. box and where I would go to pick up some item I might have needed unexpectedly (their prices were understandably marked up quite high - typical for out of the way stores).
Anyway.....I worked in a local feed store and this family had horses and goats and often came into the feed store and mom was ALWAYS bouncing checks!
So, I realize this is just one person out of many mormons; your statement about "strict financial management" just struck me as funny.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010
Hey as long as you're fair about it and hold religiousness against any presidential candidate, then I don't see a problem with it. Since Obama happens to be Christian as well, it goes without saying that his denomination of choice believes their truth is better than everyone else's
WHERE have I said I hold religiousness against any candidate? I'd only hold it against them if they try to impose their beliefs on others through legislation, they can all worship oak trees on the back lawn for all I care, just don't tell me I should.
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010
So if you're being completely fair in your contempt for such notions in religions, you would refuse to vote for both Obama and Romney, right?
Why? Has either one put their religion over the Constitution in law making?
Well, the Mormon practice of baptizing dead people who had no connection to their church when they were alive (such as Holocaust victims, including Anne Frank) is certainly a turn off for me.
You find that offensive? I find the notion that anyone failing to accept Christ will spend the rest of eternity burning in hell to be vastly more offensive. No matter how bad you were in this life, you are only capable of committing a finite amount of sin. And the majority of humankind that ever lived is going to suffer for an infinite amount of time for their finite amount of sins. That doctrinal stance held by most traditional Christian religions has never made any sense to me. I think it transforms a perfectly just God into a terrifyingly unjust God and I will always reject that notion.
It just so happens that Mormonism also rejects that notion. Proxy baptism for those that are deceased is an integral part of that belief because they believe that baptism is an absolute requirement for salvation. But because the Jews specifically asked them not to perform proxy baptisms for Holocaust victims, they have a policy that doing baptisms for Holocaust victims is taboo and not allowed. If some Mormon does a proxy baptism for Anne Frank tomorrow, they are doing so in direct defiance of what their leaders have told them. That doesn't mean it won't happen, just that they've been told quite clearly not to.
In the Catholic and traditional Protestant viewpoint, Anne Frank gets to burn in hell for all eternity for her failure to accept Christ while she was alive. Now I'm not going to weigh in on the necessity of her getting a Mormon proxy baptism, but I find the Catholic and traditional Protestant teaching that Anne burns in hell forever to be vastly more offensive. To be honest, the only reason the traditional "burn for eternity" doctrine is less controversial than the Mormon proxy baptisms is that it is familiar to people. I think it's pretty obvious which of the two is actually malicious and mean spirited and it ain't Mormonism.
You find that offensive? I find the notion that anyone failing to accept Christ will spend the rest of eternity burning in hell to be vastly more offensive. No matter how bad you were in this life, you are only capable of committing a finite amount of sin. And the majority of humankind that ever lived is going to suffer for an infinite amount of time for their finite amount of sins. That doctrinal stance held by most traditional Christian religions has never made any sense to me. I think it transforms a perfectly just God into a terrifyingly unjust God and I will always reject that notion.
It just so happens that Mormonism also rejects that notion. Proxy baptism for those that are deceased is an integral part of that belief because they believe that baptism is an absolute requirement for salvation. But because the Jews specifically asked them not to perform proxy baptisms for Holocaust victims, they have a policy that doing baptisms for Holocaust victims is taboo and not allowed. If some Mormon does a proxy baptism for Anne Frank tomorrow, they are doing so in direct defiance of what their leaders have told them. That doesn't mean it won't happen, just that they've been told quite clearly not to.
In the Catholic and traditional Protestant viewpoint, Anne Frank gets to burn in hell for all eternity for her failure to accept Christ while she was alive. Now I'm not going to weigh in on the necessity of her getting a Mormon proxy baptism, but I find the Catholic and traditional Protestant teaching that Anne burns in hell forever to be vastly more offensive. To be honest, the only reason the traditional "burn for eternity" doctrine is less controversial than the Mormon proxy baptisms is that it is familiar to people. I think it's pretty obvious which of the two is actually malicious and mean spirited and it ain't Mormonism.
I, for one, find this statement extremely offensive:
Quote:
I find the notion that anyone failing to accept Christ will spend the rest of eternity burning in hell to be vastly more offensive.
I guess I'll be spending the rest of eternity burning in hell then.
I'll tell you - if I ever find out that my brother, who passed away last year and who was a proud atheist, is ever baptized, I will be livid. It is not what he wanted in life, and I know for a fact that he would not have wanted it in death.
Why do the mormons think it's ok to defy an individual's beliefs (or NON beliefs)?
Not all of us share your beliefs, and while I think you are entitled to them, I don't want them shoved down MY throat.
WHERE have I said I hold religiousness against any candidate? I'd only hold it against them if they try to impose their beliefs on others through legislation, they can all worship oak trees on the back lawn for all I care, just don't tell me I should.
Why? Has either one put their religion over the Constitution in law making?
My apologies, I thought it was you that said this, but it wasn't:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255
Again though the issue is NOT what religion Romney is (or any other Republican, or hell anyone else), the issue is when those personal religious beliefs are used to dictate policy. That is the problem, and its something Romney favors doing.
I am unaware of either man pushing their religion into their policy-making, etc.
My apologies, I thought it was you that said this, but it wasn't:
I am unaware of either man pushing their religion into their policy-making, etc.
Wanting to write discrimination into the Constitution of the United States because something goes aganst your personal religious beliefs is what exactly??
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010
My apologies, I thought it was you that said this, but it wasn't
No problem, I have no problem with anyone's religion. Personally, I believe there are forces in the universe that no mere mortal truly understands, that includes those who claim they do. But that's just me.
Perhaps it's being raised in the Catholic Church that's permanently turned me away from all organized religion. Remembering the dogma I was taught and reading the history of other religions, my personal belief is I see far too many things that have nothing to do with God and everything to do with control.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
