PDA

View Full Version : Al Sharpton at it again



Matthew
Jan 11th 2008, 10:14 PM
Reverend Al Sharpton is back and he's come out swinging. The newest word that should get you fired regardless of context is "lynch."

Everytime this guy surfaces in the news I lose more and more respect for him. Actually, I have zero respect for him. Just in case anyway hasn't heard, Kelly Tilghman is a reporter for the Golf Channel. She and Nick Faldo were discussing how other players could compete with Tiger and Faldo said something like "Maybe they should just gang up on him for awhile" and Kelly laughed and said "Lynch him in the back alley."

Here is a link where you can see the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XlcVAe4NJs

I encourage you to watch it because the statement seems much worse in print than it does in the video. It also includes an interview with the Reverend so you can see his position on this, if you're so inclined.


I think most are fed up with Al's antics. I'd like thoughts on this though, especially if you think that she should be fired.

I<3Jesus
Jan 11th 2008, 10:17 PM
I know this is horrible, but if I were black I would put a lot of distance between myself and this man. His antics are disgraceful. If MLK Jr. was alive I am sure he would rebuke him.

Matthew
Jan 11th 2008, 10:37 PM
I know this is horrible, but if I were black I would put a lot of distance between myself and this man. His antics are disgraceful. If MLK Jr. was alive I am sure he would rebuke him.

I agree.

While watching him in the interview I laughed because he said something to the effect of "If I got on this show and said I wanted to put some Jewish American in a gas chamber I don't care under what context I said it, the entire Jewish community has a right to say I should put off this show or my radio show." Since context isn't important how about we boil that quote down to "I wanted to put some Jewish American in a gas chamber" and completely ignore the fact that he suggested no such thing. To do so would be ridiculous and unfair of course, but Al said context doesn't matter.

always
Jan 11th 2008, 11:22 PM
You know if you are not black, you can not really speak for how we should feel.

She may have not mean't it with a heart of hatred, but there are some things that are simply not appropriate to say.

the word "lynching" to me, a black women, brings visions of unwarranted mistreatment of my people, plain and simple, (maybe because of the generation I was born in) but it still angers me to have to deal with those who are flippant about such a horrid period of time in our Christian Nation

fired? I feel no, she needs to apologize, and she has, Tiger (of a different generation,) says he understands, problem solved

but for those who feel different, let me put it like this, I understand the flame of the fire.

bornagain
Jan 12th 2008, 12:12 AM
Miss Kelly used a poor choice of words I totally agree and she should be reprimanded along with her fellow host since he did agree with her. (Watch the video on you tube). Kelly and Tiger are friends. Were her intentions to be racial? No way. If this was consistent behaviour then by all means she should be terminated. Again a very poor choice of words to a member of the black community. But c'mon Rev.Al I want to know where is the forgiveness we teach? she has apoligized for what she said and I truly believe her and I think Rev.Sharpton does too. He just wont let it go until her livelihood is taken from her and she is unemployed, then what? does that make it better? Should everyone that has an honest slip of the tongue be terminated no matter what the issue? That is just not right. WWJD?

AlainaJ
Jan 12th 2008, 12:20 AM
Was Tiger Woods upset?....I read somehwhere they spoke afterwards.

Just curious, if he wanted her disciplined?

always
Jan 12th 2008, 12:26 AM
Was Tiger Woods upset?....I read somehwhere they spoke afterwards.

Just curious, if he wanted her disciplined?

wether he wanted her disciplined or not is not the issue, the venue that she works in requires her to speak in a professional manner.

He stated they were friends and maybe they have a rapport of such., but on her job she should be professional.

AlainaJ
Jan 12th 2008, 12:28 AM
wether he wanted her disciplined or not is not the issue, the venue that she works in requires her to speak in a professional manner.

He stated they were friends and maybe they have a rapport of such., but on her job she should be professional.

Hey,

I am curious as I missed the news story.....it would be important...or atleast interesting to know.

diffangle
Jan 12th 2008, 01:03 AM
Extremely poor choice of words on her part... no doubt. She definately owes an apology(which has been done). Do I think she should be fired? No, for a couple of reasons, for starter's the first victims of lynching in this country were white's(abolitionists) pre Civil war, after the war about 1/3 of the victims were white Republican's... so lynching isn't a term solely reserved for blacks.

Second... the first amendment. Did George Bush(someone whose last two Sec.'s of State were black) sick his lawyer's on Kayne West when he declared to America that George hate's black people? Without actual proof of that, it's pretty defaming/slandereous to someone's character... has his music been banned? Has he even apologized?

I don't know... I believe it's a mistake she'll never make again. :dunno:

Matthew
Jan 12th 2008, 01:10 AM
Hey,

I am curious as I missed the news story.....it would be important...or atleast interesting to know.

According to Tiger Woods they are friends and he understands there was no ill intent in her words.



wether he wanted her disciplined or not is not the issue, the venue that she works in requires her to speak in a professional manner.

He stated they were friends and maybe they have a rapport of such., but on her job she should be professional.

I think whether Tiger was offended is a good part of the issue. If Tiger, who is part African-American, is not offended by a statement directed at him (a statement that was intended to be a compliment to him) then why should other African-Americans be offended? It was most certainly a poor choice of words, but I think most of us have inadvertently said something in a way that is offensive when the intent was not to be offensive at all.

diffangle
Jan 12th 2008, 01:17 AM
but I think most of us have inadvertently said something in a way that is offensive when the intent was not to be offensive at all.
Guilty :blush: :blush: :blush:

bornagain
Jan 12th 2008, 03:58 AM
Again here is a link where you can see the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XlcVAe4NJs
Thanks for the link Matthew.

Revinius
Jan 12th 2008, 05:02 AM
I am not an American but in Australia we have our own share of passive racial hostility. I am sick of the over focus on race in pretty much anything, she didnt get up and call Woods names, she was jovially voicing how some of the players are keen to beat a master golfer. A Pastor has no place on the political forum, especially not in something that has no real Biblical ties. If he is to say anything he should just say, "all men were created by God and if there are racial comments made then that shows a person not living under the Grace of God."

Lefty
Jan 12th 2008, 05:23 AM
Casual, careless words like that, even when the subject isn't offended, just help to fuel racial hatred in the community at large. They've got to go and I don't know a better way do it except to stop them in the media, so I'm with Sharpton on this. I don't know about firing, but if that's what it takes...

jeffreys
Jan 12th 2008, 06:05 AM
You know if you are not black, you can not really speak for how we should feel.

She may have not mean't it with a heart of hatred, but there are some things that are simply not appropriate to say.

the word "lynching" to me, a black women, brings visions of unwarranted mistreatment of my people, plain and simple, (maybe because of the generation I was born in) but it still angers me to have to deal with those who are flippant about such a horrid period of time in our Christian Nation

fired? I feel no, she needs to apologize, and she has, Tiger (of a different generation,) says he understands, problem solved

but for those who feel different, let me put it like this, I understand the flame of the fire.

I'm curious... Do you feel that Al Sharpton does people of your race more damage than good?

I hope that question doesn't sound racist, because I don't want it to be. In fact, as a pasty white guy, I'm very much the minority in my neighborhood - and it suits me perfectly fine. And yes, no matter how innocently it was said, I believe the word "lynching" has horrible connotations for black people.

But I wonder what you, as a black lady, think about Al Sharpton. Because, truth is, I know lots of really, really cool black people - and they're embarrassed by Sharpton, Jackson, and perpetual rabblerousers such at them.

always
Jan 12th 2008, 08:58 PM
I think whether Tiger was offended is a good part of the issue. If Tiger, who is part African-American, is not offended by a statement directed at him (a statement that was intended to be a compliment to him) then why should other African-Americans be offended? It was most certainly a poor choice of words, but I think most of us have inadvertently said something in a way that is offensive when the intent was not to be offensive at all.

I think this excellent post addresses this statement


Casual, careless words like that, even when the subject isn't offended, just help to fuel racial hatred in the community at large. They've got to go and I don't know a better way do it except to stop them in the media, so I'm with Sharpton on this. I don't know about firing, but if that's what it takes...

always
Jan 12th 2008, 09:09 PM
I'm curious... Do you feel that Al Sharpton does people of your race more damage than good?

I hope that question doesn't sound racist, because I don't want it to be. In fact, as a pasty white guy, I'm very much the minority in my neighborhood - and it suits me perfectly fine. And yes, no matter how innocently it was said, I believe the word "lynching" has horrible connotations for black people.

But I wonder what you, as a black lady, think about Al Sharpton. Because, truth is, I know lots of really, really cool black people - and they're embarrassed by Sharpton, Jackson, and perpetual rabblerousers such at them.

Hello Jeffrey

I am embarassed by no one, white, blue, green, black, brown whatever, stating that something bothers them.

One of my favorite quotes happens to be by Rev. Sharpton

" You cannot bring the truth in a wheelbarrel of Lies"

I myself have been called a rabblerouser, trouble maker, the whole gambit, but a long time ago in my dying from this world process, I was delivered from people, individuals in our history like Sharpton, Jackson, MLK, Edgars, Malcolm and more I'm sure went through that process.

Do I agree with everything either of them say and do? of course not, but I am not that naive to think that racism and prejudice is something that doesn't exist anymore in reference to anybody.

I feel my culture needed MLK, Jackson, Malcolm, and Sharpton has his place as well. There were many that were embarassed by MLK, "he's starting trouble" by Rosa "why didn't she just get up" and Malcolm scarred some to death, they are called cowards not cool people. And I have no respect for THEM.

Matthew
Jan 12th 2008, 10:33 PM
I think this excellent post addresses this statement

Originally Posted by Lefty
Casual, careless words like that, even when the subject isn't offended, just help to fuel racial hatred in the community at large. They've got to go and I don't know a better way do it except to stop them in the media, so I'm with Sharpton on this. I don't know about firing, but if that's what it takes...

That raises an interesting question: Why does her statement, which appears to be a slip of the tongue, fuel racial hatred? If she did not intend to be hateful and simply made a mistake, then why not simply ask for an apology and ask that she choose her words more carefully? I just don't see the point in being outraged over something that appears to be accidental.

AlainaJ
Jan 12th 2008, 11:10 PM
Ok- I was reading this today...and I just have to ask........

Why can black people call white people names and make fun of them in comedy routines and movies and it is ok?


Maybe our society is just angry, mean and unchristian? Why do blacks have to make jokes about whites and whites say stuff about blacks. To me it seems both groups fuel the fires that keep this going.

I have heard black comedians call white people by slang names or make jokes about them in a movie........and it is wrong on both sides. I think it is human nature to form groups and gang up and be against another group. It could be Irish and Catholic...or whatever....it is just wrong.

I just wanted to post........:)

always
Jan 12th 2008, 11:24 PM
That raises an interesting question: Why does her statement, which appears to be a slip of the tongue, fuel racial hatred? If she did not intend to be hateful and simply made a mistake, then why not simply ask for an apology and ask that she choose her words more carefully? I just don't see the point in being outraged over something that appears to be accidental.

my mother always taught me that a "slip of the tongue" was also a view of the heart.:hmm:

Again I couldn't say that the young lady had a heart of hatred when her tongue slipped, and this may be a rapport that she has with Tiger. But since she was on her job, it was not professional.

"Things are not always as they appear"

always
Jan 12th 2008, 11:32 PM
Ok- I was reading this today...and I just have to ask........

Why can black people call white people names and make fun of them in comedy routines and movies and it is ok?


Maybe our society is just angry, mean and unchristian? Why do blacks have to make jokes about whites and whites say stuff about blacks. To me it seems both groups fuel the fires that keep this going.

I have heard black comedians call white people by slang names or make jokes about them in a movie........and it is wrong on both sides. I think it is human nature to form groups and gang up and be against another group. It could be Irish and Catholic...or whatever....it is just wrong.

I just wanted to post........:)

Who said it was alright?, I have heard comedians black/white do racial jokes, in a tasteful manner.

Making us laugh at ourselves and our differences, now I agree with you if it's done just to be mean and cruel it is always wrong.

I was sent this joke in a email, I rearended a car, it was a very stressful day and as I looked forward I saw the door of the car I had hit open and out steps a dwarf to my surprise, he walked up to my car and proclaimed that HE WAS NOT HAPPY,

to which I responded "WELL WHICH ONE ARE YOU?" and THAT'S WHEN THE FIGHT STARTED.

I laughed and laughed, then I thought about how the joke would affect someone who was a dwarf.

yes, I agree with you it's wrong

AlainaJ
Jan 12th 2008, 11:39 PM
I was sent this joke in a email, I rearended a car, it was a very stressful day and as I looked forward I saw the door of the car I had hit open and out steps a dwarf to my surprise, he walked up to my car and proclaimed that HE WAS NOT HAPPY,

to which I responded "WELL WHICH ONE ARE YOU?" and THAT'S WHEN THE FIGHT STARTED.

I laughed and laughed, then I thought about how the joke would affect someone who was a dwarf.

yes, I agree with you it's wrong[/quote]

That is excellent and a very good point....we don't really think about what we say ...sadly most Americans don't really care if they hurt people.......

My children have made very real statements to people, as innocent as can be...and yet embarassed or hurt someone's feelings....

jeffreys
Jan 12th 2008, 11:49 PM
Do I agree with everything either of them say and do? of course not, but I am not that naive to think that racism and prejudice is something that doesn't exist anymore in reference to anybody.

I feel my culture needed MLK, Jackson, Malcolm, and Sharpton has his place as well. There were many that were embarassed by MLK, "he's starting trouble" by Rosa "why didn't she just get up" and Malcolm scarred some to death, they are called cowards not cool people. And I have no respect for THEM.

First of all, we both know that racism and prejudice are alive and well in the world today. That's an unfortunate fact of living in a fallen, broken world.

Of course, it's a fallacy to believe that only white people are racists (something I know you do not believe). It's a problem we all have to be careful about.


And I agree with you about your culture needing MLK, etc. Our entire American culture needed them. Of that there is no question.

But what really makes me scratch my head & ponder, is the question of whether Al Sharpton & Jesse Jackson are more concerned with the plight of blacks in America, or with making sure their own names are in the newspapers & their faces on TV. And if the latter is the case, I wonder if they're doing more damage than good, when it comes to race relations.

Sometimes stupid is just stupid, not racist. And to read racism into every off-handed, or ill-thought out comment, is racist in itself.

I'm continuing to scratch my head... :)

Lefty
Jan 13th 2008, 12:25 AM
That raises an interesting question: Why does her statement, which appears to be a slip of the tongue, fuel racial hatred? If she did not intend to be hateful and simply made a mistake, then why not simply ask for an apology and ask that she choose her words more carefully? I just don't see the point in being outraged over something that appears to be accidental.

Her intentions and Tiger's reaction are beside the point.

I think the problem is simply that the word was spoken, and every time one of these words is spoken in public without being criticized, there's an implication that it's "ok", "no big deal", and so helps to reinforce existing racist thoughts and encourage new ones. In my view it's like weeds in the garden. You look at one and say "no big deal", but if someone doesn't come and pull them out they spread and hurt the plants. Words spoken in public grow fast.

I don't know a whole lot about Sharpton, but at least this one thing imo, is a Christian thing to do. He's a weed puller.

Willie Lynch was a british slave owner who came over here to teach unusually cruel methods to discipline (torture) American slaves, and one was hanging. Thus the term. So, "Lynch" is racist-specific and applies only to blacks. The fact that people of all races have been 'hung' is irrelevant. Only blacks have been 'lynched'. She picked the wrong word.

Lefty
Jan 13th 2008, 12:39 AM
Always, I can't help but scratch my head when I look at your avatar. When I ran track I always ran counterclockwise:hmm:

Maybe that's why they made me a high jumper:D

always
Jan 13th 2008, 12:41 AM
Always, I can't help but scratch my head when I look at your avatar. When I ran track I always ran counterclockwise:hmm:

Maybe that's why they made me a high jumper:D

We are just running a different race than the world is:saint:

Matthew
Jan 13th 2008, 12:43 AM
Her intentions and Tiger's reaction are beside the point.

I think the problem is simply that the word was spoken, and every time one of these words is spoken in public without being criticized, there's an implication that it's "ok", "no big deal", and so helps to reinforce existing racist thoughts and encourage new ones. In my view it's like weeds in the garden. You look at one and say "no big deal", but if someone doesn't come and pull them out they spread and hurt the plants. Words spoken in public grow fast.

I don't know a whole lot about Sharpton, but at least this one thing imo, is a Christian thing to do. He's a weed puller.

Willie Lynch was a british slave owner who came over here to teach unusually cruel methods to discipline (torture) American slaves, and one was hanging. Thus the term. So, "Lynch" is racist-specific and applies only to blacks. The fact that people of all races have been 'hung' is irrelevant. Only blacks have been 'lynched'. She picked the wrong word.

I'm about to head out for the night, so this will be my last response today probably.

I disagree that intentions can be ignored. That's like treating manslaughter and murder the same. How big of a deal do you think this would've been if Sharpton had not gotten wind of it? Do you think "lynch" would take the nation by storm as a cool phrase because a golf announcer said it? If anything people will say it now because of the fit that Sharpton is throwing, just like with "nappy-headed hoes."


The word lynch by itself is not racist. I don't doubt that it has racist connotations in many contexts, but plenty of people other than blacks have been lynched.

Y'all have a good night! :)

I<3Jesus
Jan 13th 2008, 12:50 AM
I feel my culture needed MLK, Jackson, Malcolm, and Sharpton has his place as well. There were many that were embarassed by MLK, "he's starting trouble" by Rosa "why didn't she just get up" and Malcolm scarred some to death, they are called cowards not cool people. And I have no respect for THEM.

I am not sure that that makes sense, but I would not lump Sharpton in with great people like MLK or Rosa Parks.

always
Jan 13th 2008, 12:50 AM
I'm about to head out for the night, so this will be my last response today probably.

I disagree that intentions can be ignored. That's like treating manslaughter and murder the same. How big of a deal do you think this would've been if Sharpton had not gotten wind of it? Do you think "lynch" would take the nation by storm as a cool phrase because a golf announcer said it? If anything people will say it now because of the fit that Sharpton is throwing, just like with "nappy-headed hoes."

Oh, I think they will think twice before going there with the nappy-headed hoes and Sharpton was absolutely correct to come down on Imus, and I did not buy that propaganda that he said it because of rap. He said it because it was in his heart, and he had been saying all along. HE should have been fired, and I'm glad Sharpton made the fuss he did.

I didn't hear about this situation until I read it here, but listening to the tape of it, I'm sure if I would have heard it first hand, I would have been just as shocked.



The word lynch by itself is not racist. I don't doubt that it has racist connotations in many contexts, but plenty of people other than blacks have been lynched.

Y'all have a good night! :)


Lefty has already explained the history of the word Lynch in a previous post and why it is most definitely a racist comment directed only to blacks.

diffangle
Jan 13th 2008, 01:15 AM
Willie Lynch was a british slave owner who came over here to teach unusually cruel methods to discipline (torture) American slaves, and one was hanging. Thus the term. So, "Lynch" is racist-specific and applies only to blacks. The fact that people of all races have been 'hung' is irrelevant. Only blacks have been 'lynched'. She picked the wrong word.From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching)




Lynching, an enumerated felony (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony) in some states in the U.S.A. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.A.), is defined by some codes of law as "Any act of violence inflicted by a mob upon the body of another person which results in the death of the person," with a 'mob (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mob)' being defined as "the assemblage of two or more persons, without color or authority of law, for the premeditated purpose and with the premeditated intent of committing an act of violence upon the person of another."



In the South, members of the abolitionist movement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolitionist_movement) or other people opposing slavery were usually targets of lynch mob violence before the Civil War.




White Republicans were often victims of lynching as well in the post-war period.


Tuskeegee Institute records of lynchings between the years 1880 and 1951 show 3437 African-American victims, as well as 1293 white victims, nearly all of whom were registered Republicans.

diffangle
Jan 13th 2008, 01:24 AM
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching)





The term 'lynching' is believed to have originated during the American Revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolution) when Charles Lynch, a Virginia justice of the peace, ordered extralegal punishment for Tory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loyalist_%28American_Revolution%29) acts.

jeffreys
Jan 13th 2008, 01:44 AM
The term 'lynching' is believed to have originated during the American Revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolution) when Charles Lynch, a Virginia justice of the peace, ordered extralegal punishment for Tory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loyalist_%28American_Revolution%29) acts.

You're right.

Of course, we all know that words tend to evolve over time.

Take the word "gay" for example. There is a town in South Dakota named Gayville. Do you suppose when it was founded, it meant what people think of that name today? Of course not.


I guess what I'm saying is twofold. First, most blacks will have a knee-jerk reaction to the word "lynching" - and for some good reasons. Second, I think Al Sharpton is an opportunist who is trying to stir up trouble - as he always does.

Big T
Jan 13th 2008, 02:21 AM
Lynch is not a racist term. People of all races have been "lynched". And if it was racists towards blacks, then Tiger should not be offended since he is "asian".

bornagain
Jan 13th 2008, 03:35 AM
Your pretty observent there Lefty, I ran track also and I never looked twice at that picture.ha.

jeffreys
Jan 13th 2008, 03:42 AM
Your pretty observent there Lefty, I ran track also and I never looked twice at that picture.ha.

I ran track too, but thought that maybe things had changed in the past 30 years! :o

Lefty
Jan 13th 2008, 04:54 AM
I see I was misled about the origin of "lynch", that it's been disputed (kneels and kowtows), so I'll have to back off on saying it's 'black specific'. I know whites were 'lynched' too, but it really means 'white mobs hanging blacks' for all intents and purposes. It is a racist term. Yeah, we hear it in cowboy movies sometimes when a white horse thief or someone is lynched, but who cares? Slinging the word around pains blacks, not whites.

Lefty
Jan 13th 2008, 05:16 AM
I'm not sure about Sharpton and what his angle is though. Who do guys like him and Jackson get paychecks from?, are they extortionists masquerading as advocates? Like I said, I'm for censoring racial slurs, but I'm uneasy about who's talking because these guys advertise the title "reverend" and I don't hear them preaching. I always liked MLK though.

th1bill
Jan 13th 2008, 06:03 AM
Reverend Al Sharpton is back and he's come out swinging. The newest word that should get you fired regardless of context is "lynch."

Everytime this guy surfaces in the news I lose more and more respect for him. Actually, I have zero respect for him. Just in case anyway hasn't heard, Kelly Tilghman is a reporter for the Golf Channel. She and Nick Faldo were discussing how other players could compete with Tiger and Faldo said something like "Maybe they should just gang up on him for awhile" and Kelly laughed and said "Lynch him in the back alley."

Here is a link where you can see the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XlcVAe4NJs

I encourage you to watch it because the statement seems much worse in print than it does in the video. It also includes an interview with the Reverend so you can see his position on this, if you're so inclined.


I think most are fed up with Al's antics. I'd like thoughts on this though, especially if you think that she should be fired.
.. You know, there are a great number of preachers I disapprove of after hearing them or seeing things they have done but I dislike going after them. The word of God assures us that we are to meditate on good and Holy things. In the same Bible we are instructed to avoid gosip and these strings always turn into a gosip sling. And if we are busy tearing the Al Sharptons of the world to pieces, are we about the mission God set for our attention? Are we then busy saving the lost?

Matthew
Jan 13th 2008, 07:09 PM
my mother always taught me that a "slip of the tongue" was also a view of the heart.:hmm:

Again I couldn't say that the young lady had a heart of hatred when her tongue slipped, and this may be a rapport that she has with Tiger. But since she was on her job, it was not professional.

"Things are not always as they appear"

I think it's harsh to treat someone as if they're a racist if the basis is that a "slip of the tongue" is also a view of the heart. Things may not always be as they appear but if you're going to try to take away someone's job then there should be more justification than that.


Oh, I think they will think twice before going there with the nappy-headed hoes and Sharpton was absolutely correct to come down on Imus, and I did not buy that propaganda that he said it because of rap. He said it because it was in his heart, and he had been saying all along. HE should have been fired, and I'm glad Sharpton made the fuss he did.

I didn't hear about this situation until I read it here, but listening to the tape of it, I'm sure if I would have heard it first hand, I would have been just as shocked.

Imus has said a lot of dumb stuff. There was definitely a much greater basis to fire him, although I didn't think he should've been fired either. I'm of the ilk that believe that generally restrictions on speech are much more dangerous than speech, even if that speech is offensive. That can definitely be a double-edged sword sometimes.


.. You know, there are a great number of preachers I disapprove of after hearing them or seeing things they have done but I dislike going after them. The word of God assures us that we are to meditate on good and Holy things. In the same Bible we are instructed to avoid gosip and these strings always turn into a gosip sling. And if we are busy tearing the Al Sharptons of the world to pieces, are we about the mission God set for our attention? Are we then busy saving the lost?
Al's actions certainly do annoy me. I think he's a hinderance to our country and I don't understand why someone doesn't stand up to him. The idea that someone who has said so many stupid things throughout his life has the gall to try to get someone fired for a slip of the tongue boggles the mind.

That said I don't consider this gossip. It's a current news story. I started this in the controversial forum because I know that tensions can run high when it comes to issues of race. I think everyone here has conducted themselves in a Christian manner. There are certainly differences of opinion but no one here is gossiping.

ProjectPeter
Jan 13th 2008, 07:22 PM
You know if you are not black, you can not really speak for how we should feel.

She may have not mean't it with a heart of hatred, but there are some things that are simply not appropriate to say.

the word "lynching" to me, a black women, brings visions of unwarranted mistreatment of my people, plain and simple, (maybe because of the generation I was born in) but it still angers me to have to deal with those who are flippant about such a horrid period of time in our Christian Nation

fired? I feel no, she needs to apologize, and she has, Tiger (of a different generation,) says he understands, problem solved

but for those who feel different, let me put it like this, I understand the flame of the fire.
Actually Tiger Woods said that they were very dear friends and there was never an issue with it because he knows she meant nothing ill with it at all. Imagine that... actually taking context into consideration and realizing that the lady meant nothing nasty about the comment.

ProjectPeter
Jan 13th 2008, 07:42 PM
And if anyone of you is interested... reading this thread inspired me to add an article in my blog... current events category. :lol:

mcgyver
Jan 13th 2008, 07:48 PM
Just like a pile of manure....the more ya stir it, the worse it's gonna stink....

Lets see here...The offending party (who didn't mean to offend) has apologized...The offended party (who wasn't really offended) has accepted it (tendered forgiveness)....

Maybe someone (:rolleyes:) ought to look at the part In the Bible about repentance, forgiveness, restoration...See what Jesus has to say :P

My :2cents:

ProjectPeter
Jan 13th 2008, 08:02 PM
Just like a pile of manure....the more ya stir it, the worse it's gonna stink....

Lets see here...The offending party (who didn't mean to offend) has apologized...The offended party (who wasn't really offended) has accepted it (tendered forgiveness)....

Maybe someone (:rolleyes:) ought to look at the part In the Bible about repentance, forgiveness, restoration...See what Jesus has to say :P

My :2cents:
Goodness no!!! There is no value in doing that! ;)

diffangle
Jan 13th 2008, 08:14 PM
Imus has said a lot of dumb stuff. There was definitely a much greater basis to fire him, although I didn't think he should've been fired either. I'm of the ilk that believe that generally restrictions on speech are much more dangerous than speech, even if that speech is offensive. That can definitely be a double-edged sword sometimes.

Exactly one of my concerns!



[quote=mcgyver;1499503]Just like a pile of manure....the more ya stir it, the worse it's gonna stink....

:eek: Ewww... :lol:



Lets see here...The offending party (who didn't mean to offend) has apologized...The offended party (who wasn't really offended) has accepted it (tendered forgiveness)....

Maybe someone (:rolleyes:) ought to look at the part In the Bible about repentance, forgiveness, restoration...See what Jesus has to say :P

My :2cents:

¶Then came Peter to him, and said, Master, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.
-Mat. 18:21-22

always
Jan 13th 2008, 10:01 PM
So the general consensus is that "the slip of the tongue" was inappropriate.

She apologized, He accepted. as I said problem solved. (by the way if the word "lynching" is a term that history states was a horrid deed to ALL people, then it should be offensive to ALL people and not excused.

I pray that the young lady learned a lesson, as we all have to now and then, that there are some things you just don't say, especially on national TV.:rolleyes:

the scripture states in James3:8 ... the tongue can no man tame; [it is] an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.

therefore stick to a script or keep your mouth close

In reference to Sharpton, I have no problem with him, he will be either wrong or right and if I keep my mind on Jesus, I'll always know, but simply because he has the guts to speak up and point a finger at foolishness is not a reason for me to say he is wrong.

ProjectPeter
Jan 13th 2008, 10:29 PM
So the general consensus is that "the slip of the tongue" was inappropriate.And that is the saddest part of it all. The idea that it was "inappropriate" when used with no malice at all intended... but just because she used the word "lynch" when talking about a black man... that's pretty pitiful.




She apologized, He accepted. as I said problem solved. (by the way if the word "lynching" is a term that history states was a horrid deed to ALL people, then it should be offensive to ALL people and not excused.

I pray that the young lady learned a lesson, as we all have to now and then, that there are some things you just don't say, especially on national TV.:rolleyes:

the scripture states in James3:8 ... the tongue can no man tame; [it is] an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.

therefore stick to a script or keep your mouth close

In reference to Sharpton, I have no problem with him, he will be either wrong or right and if I keep my mind on Jesus, I'll always know, but simply because he has the guts to speak up and point a finger at foolishness is not a reason for me to say he is wrong.
Oh I am sure she learned a lesson. She learned that she has to talk carefully about black folk. There are two standards and languages that one can and cannot use. You have to chose your words based on the color of ones skin. I figure Martin Luther King never intended nonsense like that. ;)

always
Jan 14th 2008, 04:39 AM
I figure Martin Luther King never intended nonsense like that. ;)

You figured wrong my friend, for MLK, was not for one culture, but his dream was that we would have respect for one another.

If one person was offended by any remark I made, as a CHRISTIAN, I would have to take that offense in consideration and purpose in my heart not to offend again.

It does not pay to be flippant toward others feelings, the bible states treat others as you would like to be treated. This is not a analytical rhyme or reason issue.

If ones say they are hurt by it, for whatever reason they are, and as CHRISTIANS why would we want to hurt any one?

ProjectPeter
Jan 14th 2008, 01:07 PM
Right... SILENCE CHRISTIAN PEOPLE BECAUSE HELL OFFENDS SOMEONE!!! If you are going to take it to the silly extreme then go all the way because otherwise it makes one a hypocrite.

It didn't even remotely offend the person they were talking about. It didn't even offend Al Sharpton either. It likely didn't even offend the small handful of black folk that demographically watch the "golf channel." That lady was sacrificed for a cause... that cause was for Al to get his face on television to push his cause and keep hope alive. If racism ever didn't become an issue... folks like him and Jesse would be without a flow of money in a couple of months. Rest assured... when racism becomes a multi-million dollar industry (and it sure enough has) then they'll fight hard to keep it alive. It pays them to do so.

always
Jan 14th 2008, 02:34 PM
Read James 3: 1-8

and settled down:lol:

diffangle
Jan 14th 2008, 02:41 PM
Read James 3: 1-8

and settled down:lol:
Which one of us gets to cast the first stone? :P

ProjectPeter
Jan 14th 2008, 02:47 PM
Who causes the fire in this case? The woman that didn't offend Tiger Woods... or Al Sharpton and the like that have offended many? Come on Always... I assume you heard the tape by now and the context of the thing. The point is... it is pathetic that you even think this ladies words "caused a fire" and if it caused one in you... then why? It shouldn't have because anyone listening could know easily that this lady didn't intend it to go back in the 40's and 50's implying racist actions by a bunch of boneheads that used to lynch black folk. To take that offense is just silly. It was just a comment about the futility of beating Tiger Woods ... the old guys and new ones coming up. There was no racist intent at all in that and anyone listening should have known that.

I am amazed too. All the mess going on in the world and much of it in the black community and here is Al going on and on about something as silly as this. His time, and everyone else's time could be used much more wisely by making a fuss about many other more important issues than this nonsense. It really is a shame. And while I am rather certain that there are many folk, black and white, that actually would agree with me here but are too afraid of the PC police to actually voice it.

But honestly... folks need to get a life. It is like they hang out on television just looking for something to whine about... no matter the innocence of it.

diffangle
Jan 14th 2008, 03:19 PM
http://www.hscca.org/articles/alsharpton.html

Al "anti-Semitic" Sharpton
by Tim Bueler

The Reverend Al Sharpton's run for the Democrat presidential nomination is shocking. While Sharpton has built his career as a self-proclaimed savoir -- a so-called "civil rights" leader - we find his recent history proves otherwise. Could it be true that he only comes to the aid of minorities not to help them, but for the purpose of personal political gain? What does Sharpton's history say about him?

According to CNN.com, July 13,1998, in the article "Winner in Brawley suit says victory is bittersweet," Tawana Brawley, a 15-year-old black female, was found in a garbage bag with dog feces smeared on her body and racial epithets scrawled on her, after disappearing from her home on November 1987. With the help of Al Sharpton, she claimed a gang of white law enforcement officers had abducted and raped her. One of these accused men was former prosecutor Steven Pagones. Eventually, a grand jury pronounced her story a hoax, exonerating Pagones. The jury found Sharpton liable for $65,000 of the total damages for making seven defamatory statements about Pagones, many of which included Al Sharpton calling Pagones a "rapist." Sharpton never apologized for his remarks against Pagones. The case was obviously racially inflamed with the help of Al Sharpton, who demonstrated his unrepentant hatred toward whites.

According to a Jewish Forward article "The Crown Heights Riot & It's Aftermath," January 1993, by Philip Gourevitch, a car driven by Yosef Lifsh, a Hasidic Jew, went out of control in Crown Heights. A black seven-year-old, Gavin Cato, was killed, and his seven-year-old cousin, Angela Cato, was badly injured.

When the driver stepped out of his car to help the child he had hit, angry black bystanders beat and robbed him before police could reach the scene. As the ambulance arrived to help the Cato children under the car, medics decided that Lifsh should be placed in the first ambulance. Seeing this, the black crowds began to gather, crying "racism," and chanting "Jews, Jews, Jews."

Later that day, the angry black mob came upon Yankel Rosenbaum, a twenty nine year old Orthodox Jew, shouting, "get the Jew" and "kill the Jew." Rosenbaum was stabbed and beaten. Later that day Rosenbaum died after receiving medical treatment at Kings County Hospital.
True to form, Al Sharpton rushed to Crown Heights. He called for the arrest of Lifsh, and even pressured Brooklyn district attorney Charles Hynes into convening a Grand Jury, which found no cause for an indictment. Al Sharpton then spoke at Gavino Cato's funeral, saying,

"The world will tell us he was killed by accident. Yes, it was a social accident. It's an accident to allow an apartheid ambulance service in the middle of Crown Heights. It is an accident to think that we will keep crying and never stand up and call for justice. What type of city do we have that would lie on our children and allow politics to rise above the blood of innocent babies? Have we lost all our moral fiber? Talk about how Oppenheimer in South Africa sends diamonds straight to Tel Aviv and deals with the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights."

A horrific three-day, four night attack on Jews in Crown Heights neighborhood followed. Angry black mobs attacked Jewish homes, and held up signs that read, "Hitler didn't do his job." Many Jews throughout the community lived in fear - fear that was perpetuated by Al Sharpton's finger pointing gestures against Jews, which he referred to as "diamond merchants." Why isn't the "elite" media exposing Al "anti-semitic" Sharpton for stereotyping Jews? Is it because he is a minority? Is it because he is bleeding heart liberal-Democrat? Why don't they persecute him like they would a conservative? The radical left, through their control of the media, is not printing both sides of the story. We live in liberal times, where liberals like Sharpton can say all the racist, anti-semitic comments they want, and the media will "accidentally" miss it; but if a conservative dare say anything that could even be construed as hateful, that will be front page headlines. Are Al Sharpton's comments about Jews just an accident? When he's walking with people carrying signs with extreme anti-semitic comments, is that just by chance? Sharpton has built his political career by attacking Jews and whites. In other words, he is the very racist that he claims others to be!

According to the Jewish Post of New York, article titled "Burn the Jew Store Down," by Hy Drusin, The Jewish Post of New York, January 1996) The Reverend Al Sharpton organized a group of protestors in 1995, that began two months of protest outside Fredi's Fashion Mart, a Harlem business owned by Fred Harari , a Jewish man. At the time, Sharpton was the head of the National Action Network. The protest centered on the eviction of Sikhulu Shange, owner of the Record Shack, who was subletting from Mr.Harari. In months leading up the Harlem Massacre, Al Sharpton used black radio stations (WWRL and WLIB) to attack non-black Harlem storeowners:

"Now, many of us are involved in various levels of struggle. One of the things that our Buy Black Campaign, and Brother Morris Powell and I are engaged in, is there is a systemic and methodical strategy to eliminate our people from doing business off 125th Street. It started with the vendors, now they're going to the actual merchants. One of our brothers who has for years been a backbone in our community, who has not only been an entrepreneur, but has also been a activist and involved in the struggle is now being threatened with not having his lease renewed."

"Brother Sikhulu -- stand up, brother -- on 125th Street. I want to make it clear to the radio audience -- and do you hear -- that we will not stand by and allow them to move this brother, so that some white interloper can expand his business on 125th Street. And we're asking the Buy Black Committee to go down there, and I'm gonna go down there, and do what is necessary to let them know that we are not turnin? 125th Street back over to outsiders as it was done in the early part of this century." - Radio Station WWRL - Sharpton Rally - 9/9/95

Sharpton organized crowds of protestors, screaming about "bloodsucking Jews" and "Jew bastards" and threatening to "burn the building down." Finally, Roland James Smith, Jr., got Sharpton's message. On Friday, December 8, at 10:12 a.m., Smith walked into Freddy's Fashion Mart, pulled out a gun, ordered all the black customers to leave, spilled paint thinner on several bins of clothing and set them on fire, resulting in the deaths of eight people, including himself. Isn't it wonderful, how Al the racist Sharpton, can throw around words like "white interloper" and "bloodsucking Jews" in public, and the "elite" media conveniently misses it again! But I don't miss it. I see Sharpton for the kind of guy he really is: a low life liberal and racist who hates Jews.

The Democrat party doesn't care what Al Sharpton says or does. They have so few blacks in high positions that they are willing to justify anything in the name of diversity. Just imagine: if Sharpton was thrown out of the party, he would probably call them "racist" and say they are discriminating against him, or that they are holding the black man down.

But let me get something straight, if a conservative opens his mouth to speak the factual truth, he is called "racist," "fascist," or "homophobe," but if guys like Al Sharpton say things that would be objectionable coming from anyone else, they are called "activists."

always
Jan 14th 2008, 03:20 PM
:hmm:PP,

I guess the statement "YOU just don't understand" has to be used here.

You really don't have a clue do you?

I pray for a day that a generation of our people will not relate these words to a cruel time, (like Tiger,) because of his mixed heritage and affleuance, he hasn't endured what my generation, my mother's generation, have endured.

I showed this tape to my husband and a young black man that could be my son, their reactions were "would she had said that about one of her white friends?"

Words have power, Our heavenly Father SPOKE with words creation, it's the Word of God we live by.

Again this is easy! if it hurts and ones tell you it hurts, don't say it!

always
Jan 14th 2008, 03:22 PM
[quote=diffangle;1500249]http://www.hscca.org/articles/alsharpton.html


Okay I get it, this issue of this thead is to put down Sharpton? not what the young lady said.

People have their opinions of people, and everybody has an opinion.....

ProjectPeter
Jan 14th 2008, 03:30 PM
:hmm:PP,

I guess the statement "YOU just don't understand" has to be used here.

You really don't have a clue do you?

I pray for a day that a generation of our people will not relate these words to a cruel time, (like Tiger,) because of his mixed heritage and affleuance, he hasn't endured what my generation, my mother's generation, have endured.You can pray until the cows come home... until you put legs to that prayer... in other words... don't let yourself be offended by such... then it ain't going to amount to nothing. This "you don't understand" mindset don't work either. That's a cop out used by most anyone depending on their own circumstance. Folks toss it around to continue excusing their own behavior. I don't have to be the recipient of a hanging or a beating to know... it's really, really bad.


I showed this tape to my husband and a young black man that could be my son, their reactions were "would she had said that about one of her white friends?"She probably would have in the context she was talking about. And the question is wrong... if she did say it about one of her "white friends" would you guys have even cared? I dare say no... there'd of been no stink at all if she'd been talking about Phil Mickleson or another white golfer.


Words have power, Our heavenly Father SPOKE with words creation, it's the Word of God we live by.

Again this is easy! if it hurts and ones tell you it hurts, don't say it!I am not talking to the world. The world is as the world does. I am talking about Christian folk. Christian folk don't need getting all bunched up over some nonsense like this because of something that happened many years ago. Press on to more important things. If it still hurts after all of these years... then hurt or not... it is just plain silly.

always
Jan 14th 2008, 03:34 PM
then hurt or not... it is just plain silly.


I have nothing further to say after that.

ProjectPeter
Jan 14th 2008, 03:35 PM
That would be a first!!! :lol:

diffangle
Jan 14th 2008, 03:46 PM
http://www.hscca.org/articles/alsharpton.html


Okay I get it, this issue of this thead is to put down Sharpton? not what the young lady said.

People have their opinions of people, and everybody has an opinion.....
Is what's good for the goose not good for the gander? The issue of this thread is to show that all(Sharpton included) of us are guilty of saying things that have offended someone at one point or another... but the Christian thing to do(for the offender) is ask for forgiveness and for the offended to forgive. Asking for her head on a platter is not forgiveness.

ProjectPeter
Jan 14th 2008, 03:59 PM
And just so folks know... Racism is ignorant. In any form it is simply stupid. Worse... it is a damnable sin because there isn't one person who is racist (no matter the whom you hate) who isn't full of HATRED.

That being said... goofy statements made in jest with no ill intent... don't make it a racist comment. If this lady had any racist intent... then by all means I'd be screaming too. She didn't. So all the screaming is just as goofy as the comment.

And yes I am dead serious in regard to CHristian folk getting bunched up over this. They really do need to put this mess behind them and quit living in past history. It keeps you down both physically and spiritually. Let it go. That isn't saying to forget that it happened... it is history and we learn from it. But let the fussing go. The fact that the man has "Reverend" used every time you see his name... Sharpton really doesn't forgive much for someone that has been a "Christian" for as long as he has professed it. That's just a very simple fact that too many folks are ignoring.

th1bill
Jan 14th 2008, 09:05 PM
I think it's harsh to treat someone as if they're a racist if the basis is that a "slip of the tongue" is also a view of the heart. Things may not always be as they appear but if you're going to try to take away someone's job then there should be more justification than that.



Imus has said a lot of dumb stuff. There was definitely a much greater basis to fire him, although I didn't think he should've been fired either. I'm of the ilk that believe that generally restrictions on speech are much more dangerous than speech, even if that speech is offensive. That can definitely be a double-edged sword sometimes.


Al's actions certainly do annoy me. I think he's a hinderance to our country and I don't understand why someone doesn't stand up to him. The idea that someone who has said so many stupid things throughout his life has the gall to try to get someone fired for a slip of the tongue boggles the mind.

That said I don't consider this gossip. It's a current news story. I started this in the controversial forum because I know that tensions can run high when it comes to issues of race. I think everyone here has conducted themselves in a Christian manner. There are certainly differences of opinion but no one here is gossiping.
You, then leave me needing to ask, have you followed the Biblically mandated format for rebuking Mr. Sharpton by confronting him, one on one? And if he failed to see your point did you then go with two or three brothers and address the issue? Gossip is such an easy sin to fall into, I know because I have oft, found myself guilty.

SethElijah
Jan 14th 2008, 10:03 PM
When I was young we were the minority white people in my neighborhood. I had no clue really what racism was, I just wasnt raised that way. I heard words here and there and would ask my parents, so they explained how the world "used" to be. I still see racism here and there, just like I still see sexism, just like I see all sorts of wrongs. I do not raise my children to be racist or sexist. My son was learning about Jackie Robinson in school and asked me why he couldn't play in the major league f he was good. My husband took them to the negro league museum, my son had no clue why they had to have their own league. I had to explain.

My son has no clue that "lynch" is a racist term, it is just a term to him. Of course, he also thinks "cracker" is just something you eat with soup. I wonder what other terms will be branded unusable because it offends one person, or group of persons. I have a few that I dont really care for, but I dont get offended to the point of wanting someone fired. My youngest son, who is 4, called someone a honkety honkey person because they kept blowing their car horn for no reason. So, if I were to be politically correct, I would explain to him that this word has negative connotations to whites, and possibly to some african-americans, and we really shouldnt use this word? Should I also go through the dictionary and make a list of words my children should never use in case they offend someone? No. I will explain to my children how the world once was, and how it is now, and how they should behave. A slip of the tongue does not always show what is in the heart. You could never know what is in ones heart. My children have said words, they had no idea could be offensive, and the offense was no-where near their heart. They just do not know all the ins and outs of American history and how some words have been twisted by some to fit their political correctness. They also do not understand how someone could be racist, just seems silly to them.

One thing I wonder is this, couldn't she have used this term never even thinking of the color of someones skin, never even thinking someone would take offense?

Matthew
Jan 14th 2008, 10:04 PM
You, then leave me needing to ask, have you followed the Biblically mandated format for rebuking Mr. Sharpton by confronting him, one on one? And if he failed to see your point did you then go with two or three brothers and address the issue? Gossip is such an easy sin to fall into, I know because I have oft, found myself guilty.

Again, I'm not gossiping. It isn't a rumor that he's called for her to be fired. He is a public figure who has taken a position and I am debating the correctness of that position. I don't think it is feasible for me to rebuke every public figure that I disagree with.

th1bill
Jan 15th 2008, 12:11 AM
Again, I'm not gossiping. It isn't a rumor that he's called for her to be fired. He is a public figure who has taken a position and I am debating the correctness of that position. I don't think it is feasible for me to rebuke every public figure that I disagree with.
But is feasible today, more so than ever before with the advancement in communication. I routinely converse with my Senators, the President, the local news media and my minister. I also converse with missionaries in the field and if I felt the need to address Mr. Sharpton I would also email him. And since you do with some degree of regularity post here you can even invite Al to address you in this forum in the presence of other Christians. Your answer is a cop out that is not worthy of a Christian. If I, a man, locked inside his house and only released at the whim of others because of my disease can get to these folks, so can you. To not give Al the opportunity to defend himself is indeed gossip. It is being done behind his back. And since there is at least one defender of Al, I'll bet that of you received a refusal to communicate, I'll bet you'd gain an instant ally in your quest. Always and I do not always agree but I have found myself looking forward to being seated at that table in Heaven with her. She's a spirited conversationalist but she has a very large heart for the matters of our LORD. I find her low on show and large on go.

Matthew
Jan 15th 2008, 12:45 AM
But is feasible today, more so than ever before with the advancement in communication. I routinely converse with my Senators, the President, the local news media and my minister. I also converse with missionaries in the field and if I felt the need to address Mr. Sharpton I would also email him. And since you do with some degree of regularity post here you can even invite Al to address you in this forum in the presence of other Christians. Your answer is a cop out that is not worthy of a Christian. If I, a man, locked inside his house and only released at the whim of others because of my disease can get to these folks, so can you. To not give Al the opportunity to defend himself is indeed gossip. It is being done behind his back. And since there is at least one defender of Al, I'll bet that of you received a refusal to communicate, I'll bet you'd gain an instant ally in your quest. Always and I do not always agree but I have found myself looking forward to being seated at that table in Heaven with her. She's a spirited conversationalist but she has a very large heart for the matters of our LORD. I find her low on show and large on go.

Defend himself? I posted a link where he is on TV defending himself. We have an entire Elections 2008 forum where people discuss the candidates without emailing them each time a comment is made. The idea that we cannot discuss the public actions of those who willingly put themselves into the public spotlight without first contacting that person is a bit silly, IMO.

As for Always, I already consider her an ally. There is no need for us to agree with each other on every issue, especially as one as insignificant as this.

I'm sorry you feel like I've done something wrong by creating this thread. If this response isn't satisfactory, then feel free notify the mods and I'll abide by whatever decision they have for this thread.

th1bill
Jan 15th 2008, 03:32 AM
Defend himself? I posted a link where he is on TV defending himself. We have an entire Elections 2008 forum where people discuss the candidates without emailing them each time a comment is made. The idea that we cannot discuss the public actions of those who willingly put themselves into the public spotlight without first contacting that person is a bit silly, IMO.

As for Always, I already consider her an ally. There is no need for us to agree with each other on every issue, especially as one as insignificant as this.

I'm sorry you feel like I've done something wrong by creating this thread. If this response isn't satisfactory, then feel free notify the mods and I'll abide by whatever decision they have for this thread.
.. I'm sorry you have gone off so rapidly. Your remarks have me head hunting when exactly the opposite is true. The world watches our every move and listens to our every word. If we look just like them then it is logical to conclude that we, Christians, are no better than them and it is therefore reasonable to conclude that we do not have the answer and they must look elsewhere.
.. Your defense of, "I'm no worse than those people in the other forum," is a very thin piece of ice to be skating on. You are certainly not the first to ignore God and go your own way. Isn't there a scripture about that? I'll not be posting here again for there is no glory being brought to God here and that is the business I seek to attend.
.. God bless and I pray you will bow your pride to our Father.

threebigrocks
Jan 15th 2008, 03:45 AM
Let's keep on topic and out of the personal attack realm here. Contro is what it is, but we need to remember who each of us are here first and remember to season ourselves well before being controversial.

ProjectPeter
Jan 15th 2008, 01:41 PM
1. It is not gossip.

2. I did email Al Sharpton.

3. My email... will never cross the eyes of Al Sharpton just as emails to congressmen, senators and the president never cross his eyes save a very small few that they can get some mileage out of in some way. So while a person thinks that might cover the biblical mandate of telling the person... I suppose it does in a legalistic sense. Straight skinny though... good luck getting an audience with him in person. You'll even need much more luck in getting it with a couple of other folks. :lol:

4. Al Sharpton is just a vehicle in this discussion. The point is the point. Why are Christian's still so uptight about actions that happened many years back? Where do we draw the line? I remember back when the ACLU sued trying to make handcuffing illegal because when black folk were handcuffed it was derogatory because of the days when they were shackled etc. With the discussion context... this is about as odd.

5. These guys were calling for this lady to be fired. They want to ruin the woman for an innocent comment and then justify it because of what... it hurt their feelings because back over fifty years ago... black folk used to get lynched? Well shoot... go back a little further and many folk got lynched and color didn't matter. It was the way of killing folk. So let's just strike that word from the vocabulary and never use it again!

6. Notice how select these complaints are. There are a lot of black folk, especially comedians, that say a lot of really nasty stuff about white folk.... where's Al and Jesse? Answer... who knows. Bringing that stuff out doesn't keep their hope alive. ;)

Folks really do need to let stuff go. Like I said... remember it because we never want to repeat that stuff. It is history and a bad time in our history and thank God for a man like Martin Luther King that had the courage of his convictions to stand against it along with others like Rosa Parks who just plain grew tired of the nonsense. But this sort of stuff... it really does totally cheapen the fight those people made. This wasn't racism in ANY form. At worst... it was a stupid comment because Lord knows... use the word lynch when talking about a black person is going to get you crucified. But all of this hissing and scratching.... it is a shame.

From the world... okay that happens. From Christians? Wow... it just ain't good.

mcgyver
Jan 15th 2008, 01:53 PM
:agree: Common Sense....What a Concept!


Isn't it interesting that in the midst of all this....

That it is Al Sharpton who is trying to incite.......A lynch mob....:rolleyes:

always
Jan 15th 2008, 03:37 PM
http://www.liu.edu/cwis/cwp/library/african/2000/lynch_5.jpg


This is what some are defending, I'm sorry if you feel like this being spoken of lightly should not offend me, you are in another world. It's offensive!

ProjectPeter
Jan 15th 2008, 03:50 PM
And that picture was taken when? 50's or there abouts? You are making the point beautifully. What have you forgiven? What part of this past are you forgetting about? Why hang onto something that don't happen any longer? Why and yet say you forgive? Why and yet say you are actually pressing on to what lies ahead?

If you would like... I can go get a picture of a white man hanging from a noose to show you... it happened to a lot of folks regardless of color for a variety of reasons. Some justified.... many not. Why do you think a man hanging from a noose only happened to black folk? Do you realize that in number... many white folk were hung from trees because some rich white guy got mad because the poor white folk squatted on their land? This is not something only unique to black folk in bad parts of history. That is just a simple fact. Should we all bug out because someone uses the word lynching? What next? We going after the football guys who talked about the "beating" that San Diego put on the Colts? I mean shoot... most of those guys are black and they said "BEAT!" Oh my.... blacks were beat too. So let's just go all out and make it where folks can't talk at all about black folk and use analogies of any kind. Then you guys can say you've achieved equality... with special favor! Sort of defeats the equality thing... but hey... let's go all the way here if we're going to go part way. At least there is consistency.

Right now... simple fact. It was an innocent statement with no ill intended. Even the person being talked about FULLY recognizes that and thinks the fact that she was suspended was WAY over the line. But hey... who cares about facts. She hurt the feelings of folks still hanging onto to stuff that happened many years ago. Heaven forbid they actually have to do like most folks do... grow up and get over it.

I think of the many times, and I bet you've said it too in counsel to folk. A person dies and years later they are still grieving the loss. We tell them... okay we know it hurt. But time to move on now. There's a time to stop grieving over the past. Time to move on. 50 plus years... it is WAY beyond that time.

mcgyver
Jan 15th 2008, 03:55 PM
Not defending it in the least...

But let me ask you this...without Sharpton making a major incident out of this, would the black community be so incensed?

What is it going to take?

Ruining her reputation?

Taking her lively-hood away?

Perhaps a public flogging?

How about a public beheading in the town square?

What kind of "satisfaction" is deemed acceptible?

I have stood up publicly against the Klan, Neo-Nazis, and White Hate groups, standing on the Word of the Living God, and if there were something here that deserved condemnation I'd be at the front of the line!

What we have here IMO is someone who is taking an issue that had already been resolved and using it for self-serving purposes. For someone who fancies himself a Christian, who uses the title of "Reverend", I see a sad lack of forgiveness and obedience to the Word of God...

That offends Me.....

diffangle
Jan 15th 2008, 04:18 PM
http://theatre_chick.tripod.com/franklynching.jpg

Should I be offended that the lynching's of white people go unrecognized?

always
Jan 15th 2008, 04:20 PM
In my post I've stated that her apology was enough, that Sharpton's reminder of the horrid nature of this could have been a revealer to her that this talk is not appropritate.

and PP I don't care if the person lynched was white blue or green, that is even more reason for the words offensiveness

do you guys realize that there are those I don't care what color that survived these times? forgiveness is there but until we eradicate this through our conversations it will be forever in their faces.

let me tell you something, I live in a town that had a terrible race riot over 70yrs ago, but the hurt of that incident is still very evident today,

there is a literal curse on the community, because of those who state, just forget it, get over it, to the victims it's unremorse saying we don't care.

I wasn't born when that happen either, but it's my history told to me from those who where there, and to hear their hurt causes me hurt, Why do they say "get over it" because they haven't forgiven themselves.

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkx8w3YxH1y0BTGZXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE4djBrNnJ yBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMgRjb2xvA3NrMQR2dGlkA0RGRDVfNzYEb ANXUzE-/SIG=12akmrcqe/EXP=1200500400/**http%3a//www.tsha.utexas.edu/mytexas/stories/SS/262.html

jeffreys
Jan 15th 2008, 04:27 PM
Always, I love you dearly. You know I do!

But I also believe that Al Sharpton is one of the biggest racists in America today, and that his behavior is not only not helping race relations, but is causing major damage. I believe his behavior in this incident is far more reprehensible than that of the reporter.

That's my 2 cents' worth. Now I'll shut up. :)

diffangle
Jan 15th 2008, 04:27 PM
http://www.liu.edu/cwis/cwp/library/african/2000/lynch_5.jpg


This is what some are defending,
No one is defending the action of lynching. Lynching was/is a very bad thing... but it's not reserved for one race, it's happened to whites, blacks, Native Americans, Mexicans, etc. As PP pointed out about other words, like "beat"... should we stop using that word to explain when a team "beats" another team just b/c a majority of the players are black and in the past black people have been beaten? The word lynch or beat are not words reserved for a single race of people... all races have been beat or lynched at one point in time.

always
Jan 15th 2008, 04:32 PM
Again in case you missed it.

Could it be that the reason many say "get it over" is because of unremorse, or self-unforgiveness, is that a possibility?

diffangle
Jan 15th 2008, 04:33 PM
In my post I've stated that her apology was enough, that Sharpton's reminder of the horrid nature of this could have been a revealer to her that this talk is not appropritate.

and PP I don't care if the person lynched was white blue or green, that is even more reason for the words offensiveness

do you guys realize that there are those I don't care what color that survived these times? forgiveness is there but until we eradicate this through our conversations it will be forever in their faces.

let me tell you something, I live in a town that had a terrible race riot over 70yrs ago, but the hurt of that incident is still very evident today,

there is a literal curse on the community, because of those who state, just forget it, get over it, to the victims it's unremorse saying we don't care.

I wasn't born when that happen either, but it's my history told to me from those who where there, and to hear their hurt causes me hurt, Why do they say "get over it" because they haven't forgiven themselves.

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkx8w3YxH1y0BTGZXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE4djBrNnJ yBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMgRjb2xvA3NrMQR2dGlkA0RGRDVfNzYEb ANXUzE-/SIG=12akmrcqe/EXP=1200500400/**http%3a//www.tsha.utexas.edu/mytexas/stories/SS/262.html
Should I as an individual who has never killed anyone feel guilty for a crime/s that I didn't commit? Do I think those crimes are horrible? Absolutely... but my question is... Should I as an individual who has never killed anyone feel guilty for crimes I didn't commit?

always
Jan 15th 2008, 04:37 PM
not guilt but empathy would be nice, death can be inflicted in many ways, words for one can kill as well

mcgyver
Jan 15th 2008, 04:43 PM
In my post I've stated that her apology was enough, that Sharpton's reminder of the horrid nature of this could have been a revealer to her that this talk is not appropritate.

and PP I don't care if the person lynched was white blue or green, that is even more reason for the words offensiveness

do you guys realize that there are those I don't care what color that survived these times? forgiveness is there but until we eradicate this through our conversations it will be forever in their faces.

let me tell you something, I live in a town that had a terrible race riot over 70yrs ago, but the hurt of that incident is still very evident today,

there is a literal curse on the community, because of those who state, just forget it, get over it, to the victims it's unremorse saying we don't care.

I wasn't born when that happen either, but it's my history told to me from those who where there, and to hear their hurt causes me hurt, Why do they say "get over it" because they haven't forgiven themselves.

Believe it or not, I both understand and can empathize with you.

But this is where the "rubber hits the road" as it were....Forgiveness (Lit. "to cancel the debt") is an ACT OF WILL on our part...

The Word of God says in Col 3:13 (speaking to Christians) "if anyone has a complaint against another; even as Christ forgave you, so you also must do."

So then, the question for Christians is: Will we be part of the healing and the solution by being obedient to God?

For if we will not, who will?

This is a big part of my problem with "Rev" Sharpton...

What do you (and I'm honestly asking your opinion as a black woman) suppose would have been the result if he had said:

"She blew it, she meant no offense by it, she's apologized for causing offense and assured me that in the future she will be more careful of her usage of words in the public forum...let's now be Christian in our forgiveness"?

Do you think that this kind of attitude would serve the cause of healing racial division more beneficially?

always
Jan 15th 2008, 04:54 PM
"She blew it, she meant no offense by it, she's apologized for causing offense and assured me that in the future she will be more careful of her usage of words in the public forum...let's now be Christian in our forgiveness"?[/B]

Do you think that this kind of attitude would serve the cause of healing racial division more beneficially?


Praise the Lord! that would have been a perfect approach to the problem, on this we agree

diffangle
Jan 15th 2008, 04:58 PM
Could it be that the reason many say "get it over" is because of unremorse, or self-unforgiveness, is that a possibility?


not guilt but empathy would be nice, death can be inflicted in many ways, words for one can kill as well
Words like "unremorse" and "self-unforgiveness" indicates to me that you might think I'm guilty of something and in need of forgiveness and remorse. :confused How much empathy do you want? All of us here have said that the actual act of lynching is a horrible thing and is very wrong. But again the word and the action of lynching is not a word reserved solely for black people... so again I ask the question... should I be offended that white's that have been lynched go unrecognized?

ProjectPeter
Jan 15th 2008, 04:59 PM
Again in case you missed it.

Could it be that the reason many say "get it over" is because of unremorse, or self-unforgiveness, is that a possibility?And you figure that lady made that comment with malice toward black folk in her heart?

Why do you think there is no remorse? Folks have made it clear that what happened was horrid and about as anti-Christ as any act can be. But what... do you want me to say I am sorry for something that Joe Bob and Bubba did 50 years ago? What does it matter that I am sorry? It shouldn't have happened and it was horrid. I'm old enough to remember the signs that read "niggers use bathroom in back." Or the signs in Georgia over the water fountains that read... "NO NIGGERS". I was but a little boy and will never forget the feelings even young... something is really wrong with this. That is because my dad was a civil rights white preacher who did crazy stuff like went across the tracks every Sunday and picked kids up and brought them to the church. He started an athletic program in Tennessee which went across those tracks to (by this time the N word was frowned up a bit more so it was reworded) "colored town" and picked kids up and involved them in that program which in four years was so large that the city stopped the city leagues and sent all the kids to the church. So while there were some horrible things happening... not everyone participated in that nonsense. I have absolutely nothing to be sorry for because I frankly don't speak for the white race. I speak for the Christian... and as a Christian... folks need to let it go.

Are the terms still alive? You bet. More black folk use those terms now than white folk. There are those that love it too because hey... it keeps HOPE ALIVE! Are there folks mistreated because of the color of their skin? Sure there are. Folks of all color including white folk. ARe there folks mistreated because of their religion? No doubt about it. It is going to happen because the world is sinful and rotten. If Christian folk are going to continue to wallow in that sinfulness... then they enslave themselves.

Again....

but one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and reaching forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.

Forget that stuff. Press on. :) In doing that... we are free and in doing that... we can unite and forget the goofy wrangling over goofy words.

always
Jan 15th 2008, 05:38 PM
That is because my dad was a civil rights white preacher who did crazy stuff like went across the tracks every Sunday and picked kids up and brought them to the church. He started an athletic program in Tennessee which went across those tracks to (by this time the N word was frowned up a bit more so it was reworded) "colored town" and picked kids up and involved them in that program which in four years was so large that the city stopped the city leagues and sent all the kids to the church.


You don't realize what your father was doing do you? you're dad was not crazy, he with his ACTIONS was saying " this is wrong ,Im sorry" don't ever refer to him again as crazy!


should I be offended that white's that have been lynched go unrecognized?

sweetheart yes you should, the fight for equality as PP post shows was not fought just by blacks, we would have never won it alone, but because of God, christian whites, we were able to come through.

I want to thank you guys, I do have a speech to do for MLK's birthday and for black history week as well, and I've gotten some great insights from you all to address with the young people in our community. Thanks so much

diffangle
Jan 15th 2008, 05:48 PM
[quote=always;1501665]
sweetheart yes you should, the fight for equality as PP post shows was not fought just by blacks, we would have never won it alone, but because of God, christian whites, we were able to come through.

Okay so now that we agree that it's not a word solely used for black people then why should black people claim it as their own and punish every person that ever says the word?



I want to thank you guys, I do have a speech to do for MLK's birthday and for black history week as well, and I've gotten some great insights from you all to address with the young people in our community. Thanks so much

Thankyou for the dialogue. I wish you well on your speech. :)

always
Jan 15th 2008, 05:54 PM
[quote]

Okay so now that we agree that it's not a word solely used for black people then why should black people claim it as their own and punish every person that ever says the word?




Just because (going out on a limb here) Sharpton is black and the only one that raised cain PUBLICALLY about it does not mean that black people have claim a word. You should have wrote in about the whites being lynched and how it was offensive to you.

And I'm going to say this if she had said "gassed" "electrocuted" you know my feelings on the death penalty, I would have still wanted her reprimended.

What is wrong with someone beating Tiger at golf because they have the ability to.

mcgyver
Jan 15th 2008, 05:55 PM
Praise the Lord! that would have been a perfect approach to the problem, on this we agree

This, dearest sister, is the thrust of my problem with Al Sharpton...he should know better!

The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King...IMO a great man of God who saw an injustice and ultimately gave his life for his convictions, preached a different message than Sharpton.

William Wilberforce, a committed Christian who devoted his entire life to the eradication of the evil of slavery in the British Empire...who was vilified for his efforts by his contemporaries, preached a different message than Sharpton.

Sharpton, who uses the title of "Reverend", who claims to be a Christian, and who has a tremendous impact in the black community IMO has taken the mantle of "righteous avenger"...a "messiah complex" if you will.

He could be working to to bring racial tension to an end...but instead he seems to want it to continue.

You want to know the most terrible thing that I see?

(Disclaimer: the following is my personal opinion only)

The only difference between the methods of Al Sharpton and David Duke is the color of their skin.

ProjectPeter
Jan 15th 2008, 06:00 PM
You don't realize what your father was doing do you? you're dad was not crazy, he with his ACTIONS was saying " this is wrong ,Im sorry" don't ever refer to him again as crazy!Here lies a major problem you have. You don't read what was said but instead you just JUMP at what you think you are reading. I didn't say my dad was crazy. Context of what I am saying is that back when my dad did this stuff the stuff he did was INSANE because he was a white man that busted his butt trying to end it. Of course he realized it was wrong. Goodness gracious...read what is actually being said. It'll help keep you from getting all puckered up!

ProjectPeter
Jan 15th 2008, 06:04 PM
Um... in the context of what the lady was saying... most folks pretty much know that beating Tiger Woods on any regular basis... they would have to take him out and lynch him... because death is about the only way it is going to happen. Tiger is really that good. SHe wasn't being derogatory at all. Even Tiger understood the context of what she said and wasn't in the least offended.

always
Jan 15th 2008, 06:05 PM
Here lies a major problem you have. You don't read what was said but instead you just JUMP at what you think you are reading. I didn't say my dad was crazy. Context of what I am saying is that back when my dad did this stuff the stuff he did was INSANE because he was a white man that busted his butt trying to end it. Of course he realized it was wrong. Goodness gracious...read what is actually being said. It'll help keep you from getting all puckered up!

WHOSE PUCKERED UP! :kiss:

ProjectPeter
Jan 15th 2008, 06:06 PM
This, dearest sister, is the thrust of my problem with Al Sharpton...he should know better!

The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King...IMO a great man of God who saw an injustice and ultimately gave his life for his convictions, preached a different message than Sharpton.

William Wilberforce, a committed Christian who devoted his entire life to the eradication of the evil of slavery in the British Empire...who was vilified for his efforts by his contemporaries, preached a different message than Sharpton.

Sharpton, who uses the title of "Reverend", who claims to be a Christian, and who has a tremendous impact in the black community IMO has taken the mantle of "righteous avenger"...a "messiah complex" if you will.

He could be working to to bring racial tension to an end...but instead he seems to want it to continue.

You want to know the most terrible thing that I see?

(Disclaimer: the following is my personal opinion only)

The only difference between the methods of Al Sharpton and David Duke is the color of their skin.
Right... If Al was just Joe Schmucky the follower of the world... I'd just shake my head in bewilderment and go on. The fact that he claims Christ... that changes everything.

ProjectPeter
Jan 15th 2008, 06:07 PM
WHOSE PUCKERED UP! :kiss:
Go back and read what I said Always. Then see if you see me calling my dad crazy... or did you just react and let the actual context blow right by you? If you did the latter... go back and read the other post realizing that you likely are totally missing context in those as well. That might help you see what we are saying here.

diffangle
Jan 15th 2008, 06:12 PM
[quote=always;1501693]
Just because (going out on a limb here) Sharpton is black and the only one that raised cain PUBLICALLY about it does not mean that black people have claim a word. You should have wrote in about the whites being lynched and how it was offensive to you.

But that's the thing... I'm not for getting rid of our first Amendment rights... I like our Constitution just fine. Plus, she wasn't saying that he should be lynched. Also, you did start out saying that the term applies only to blacks...

"Lefty has already explained the history of the word Lynch in a previous post and why it is most definitely a racist comment directed only to blacks."



And I'm going to say this if she had said "gassed" "electrocuted" you know my feelings on the death penalty, I would have still wanted her reprimended.

Where does it end? Are you against when the word "beat" is used in sports? What do you think about the First Amendment? Here's a good post from Mcgyver on another thread(http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=112189)


It was while reading another thread that I started contemplating the term "politically correct" PC....

The first time I ever heard that term was long long ago, in a galaxy far far away, in a building on Smoke Bomb Hill at Ft Bragg where we were studying the methods used by communist insurgents...

To be PC was both the litmus test of, and the greatest accusation against a citizen's commitment to the ideology of a given country....If one was not PC, they would be sent to a "re-education camp" in order to be properly "educated" and become PC. If he couldn't be "re-educated"...well there are gulags, and other methods of dealing with that individual.

The first time I heard the term used in the US (during the Clinton Presidency), it raised the hackles on the back of my neck (and still does to this day)...

Seems that the list of what is "offensive" or "politically incorrect" grows daily. Now don't get me wrong, I am not defending overtly hateful remarks.

I am concerned however when a remark becomes "offensive" due to the subjective interpretation of either a well connected individual or organization.

How much longer, I wonder, until "offensive" or "Hateful" speech incorporates the very Word of God...How much longer until it is no longer PC to preach Romans 1...

I think of Paul's words..that if he still sought to please men then he would no longer be a servant of God.

I think that one of these days we as Christians will wake up one morning and wonder "What Happened to our freedom of speech"?

Because it will no longer be PC...and we will have helped cause it.

SethElijah
Jan 15th 2008, 06:33 PM
And I'm going to say this if she had said "gassed" "electrocuted" you know my feelings on the death penalty, I would have still wanted her reprimended.


OK, so, seriously, I do not want me or my family to ever be in danger of losing a job or having a reprimand on their record because they would never think in a thousand years that a WORD would be so offensive, such as gassed, electrocuted, in any context. Where can I find such a list of words that may, to ANY section of the populace, be so offensive that it would require a reprimand? Seriously. I mean there are obvious words which I do not utter anyway, but some have been mentioned in this thread, the main one starting with N. But gassed, electrocuted? What about beat, hosed, whipped, where does it end? Do we, then, need to have the dictionary amended to remove these words, or should we come up with a new teaching tool that covers words that will be acceptable to all members of society so that no one is offended by a simple mistake to the point that someone's livelyhood is at stake?

diffangle
Jan 15th 2008, 06:41 PM
1984

15 characters

always
Jan 15th 2008, 06:57 PM
Go back and read what I said Always. Then see if you see me calling my dad crazy... or did you just react and let the actual context blow right by you? If you did the latter... go back and read the other post realizing that you likely are totally missing context in those as well. That might help you see what we are saying here.

PP, I read your post twice, I know what you mean't but I was making a point, WORDS have to be used carefully. It peed you for me to suggest you were referring to your dad as crazy opposed to doing crazy acts for the times which is actually what you stated as you pointed out.



Lefty has already explained the history of the word Lynch in a previous post and why it is most definitely a racist comment directed only to blacks."

You are going over the same thing, Lefty gave that history explanation, you gave a more in depth one, and no one counter it?
That is why I stated if that is the case who wants to ever hear about anyone "lynching" or being "lynched"?

and another thing this is national media we are talking about, if a predjudice black group was on spouting racial propaganda, that would be something I wouldn't want to hear, and vice versa. Although either group has the right to do so.

I would have the option to change the channel, no one had that option with this incident.

It was an unprofesssional blooper! that none of you guys in your workplace would committ.

diffangle
Jan 15th 2008, 07:18 PM
You are going over the same thing, Lefty gave that history explanation,
It was a wrong history that you confirmed with a definitive statement that the word lynch "is most definitely a racist comment directed only to blacks." You and Al have claimed a word that doesn't solely apply to blacks. By claiming that word as "only" being directed to blacks is ignoring all the white people who have been lynched... should I be offended at yours and Al's unrecognition?


you gave a more in depth one, and no one counter it?

I gave a different and correct one that got no recognition by you. ;)


That is why I stated if that is the case who wants to ever hear about anyone "lynching" or being "lynched"?


Those of us that are Christian, can forgive, and who value our Constitutional rights can actually see something like what she said(in harmless jest) without jumping off the deep end and asking for her head on a platter.



and another thing this is national media we are talking about, if a predjudice black group was on spouting racial propaganda, that would be something I wouldn't want to hear, and vice versa. Although either group has the right to do so.


Yes, and the first public person that should look in the mirror for being guilty of inciting hatred towards other races that have resulted in the deaths of many and character defamation is Al Sharpton. ;)

ProjectPeter
Jan 15th 2008, 07:21 PM
PP, I read your post twice, I know what you mean't but I was making a point, WORDS have to be used carefully. It peed you for me to suggest you were referring to your dad as crazy opposed to doing crazy acts for the times which is actually what you stated as you pointed out. There you go! Keep that hope alive. :rolleyes:

Clavicula_Nox
Jan 15th 2008, 10:37 PM
Language is a beautiful and wonderful thing, why are we restricting it because of personal convictions? Language isn't for you, nor is it for me, it's for everyone, and the language is fine, our usage of it and degradation of it is not.

Seeker of truth
Jan 16th 2008, 12:11 AM
Always, I love you dearly. You know I do!

But I also believe that Al Sharpton is one of the biggest racists in America today, and that his behavior is not only not helping race relations, but is causing major damage. I believe his behavior in this incident is far more reprehensive than that of the report.

That's my 2 cents' worth. Now I'll shut up. :)

And of course I'm out of rep! I agree 100%

danield
Jan 16th 2008, 03:46 AM
I too think Mr Sharpton needs to drop the Rev in front of his name. I too think he is a racist. I also feel sorry for those kids at Duke. By the way, I love to watch good black and white preachers deliver well thought through service. I really wish Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King would have lived. I know his dream would not allow this reverse discrimination go on today by someone titled with Rev without it going unchecked. Don't get me wrong I know discrimination will happen no matter what. And we can look at the Jewish people of WW 2 to see discrimination at its height. I just hate to see someone use the title of Reverend to upstart a platform of confrontation instead of peace.

diffangle
Jan 16th 2008, 02:51 PM
reverse discrimination

Not to be picky... but there's no such thing as "reverse" discrimination.... discrimination is discrimination. ;) :kiss:

danield
Jan 16th 2008, 04:20 PM
Not to be picky... but there's no such thing as "reverse" discrimination.... discrimination is discrimination. ;) :kiss:

Yes Reverse Discrimination does exist. Let’s look at those kids from Duke. Al Sharpton mobilized a consorted effort to put pressure on the district attorney to prosecute them, and Mike Nifong took advantage of this. He viscously prosecuted those kids to get the black vote so he could get reelected even though he knew many facts that they may indeed be innocent. Mr Sharpton knew what he was doing. He is a smart man, and he knew how to wield the power that he holds, and he destroyed those kids reputation forever, and has never to my knowledge apologized personally to them for his actions.

Matthew 5:23 comes to mind concerning these actions. So if you are presenting a sacrifice at the altar in the Temple and you suddenly remember that someone has something against you, 24 leave your sacrifice there at the altar. Go and be reconciled to that person. Then come and offer your sacrifice to God.

This is a major issue those kids will have to live with for the rest of their lifes and a big part of it was brought on by Mr Sharpton, and he is not even sorry for his actions. I have watched him with interest being interviewed on the nightly news and he defends his right to do what he did. My interest is not because discrimination took place against white people but because a big part of it was carried out by a man who is suppose to hold the lords law above all. I can not imagine my minister going out and putting pressure on the DA in order to destroy someone life because of race. Reverse discrimination is a term used when a white person is being discriminated against because of being white. It has been recognized in a few court cases, and it is alive and well. What I do not understand is why it is being done by people calling themselves Reverend.

diffangle
Jan 16th 2008, 05:23 PM
Yes Reverse Discrimination does exist.

Discrimination is discrimination no matter if it's black against white, white against black, Hispanic against black, black against Hispanic, Native American against white, vice versa, etc, etc. Discrimination isn't reserved for whites only, therefore there is no such thing as "reverse"... it's just plain ol' discrimination no matter which way it runs. :(

AlainaJ
Jan 16th 2008, 05:34 PM
Discrimination is discrimination no matter if it's black against white, white against black, Hispanic against black, black against Hispanic, Native American against white, vice versa, etc, etc. Discrimination isn't reserved for whites only, therefore there is no such thing as "reverse"... it's just plain ol' discrimination no matter which way it runs. :(
What you said is perfect.....discrimination if just that.

But, I think the issue here is bringing all this into to the news and press confrences and such......does it solve anything or just fuel more discrimination?

Black people discriminate against whites.....it may not be as obvious, but it is there.

Perhaps if these cases aren't so blown up in the media...people would just live thier lives.

My kids would never know about many racial issues, if they didn't read it the news or hear it on TV. For instance ...you have an incident. The more the news blows it up...the more discrimination and hatred is flarred up in all groups.:(

Alaina

diffangle
Jan 16th 2008, 06:13 PM
What you said is perfect.....discrimination if just that.

But, I think the issue here is bringing all this into to the news and press confrences and such......does it solve anything or just fuel more discrimination?

Black people discriminate against whites.....it may not be as obvious, but it is there.

Perhaps if these cases aren't so blown up in the media...people would just live thier lives.

My kids would never know about many racial issues, if they didn't read it the news or hear it on TV. For instance ...you have an incident. The more the news blows it up...the more discrimination and hatred is flarred up in all groups.:(

Alaina
True... hopefully discussions like this will help to bring about more understanding on the issue. Woe is the day when we won't be allowed to have these discussions.

danield
Jan 16th 2008, 06:19 PM
First of all let me say that Yes Discrimination is discrimination and that it is wrong no matter which way it flows. I am completely against it. However our court system has recognized that reverse discrimination does exist in America. Discrimination has always been the “majority” or “the controlling population” rejecting a smaller less populated people. Reverse Discrimination is the minority population putting undue influence on majority population. It does not mean that reverse discrimination is not discrimination at all because it is. But reverse discrimination is a term that is used today to reflect this unique situation. By the way, I am not championing this cause. I learned a long time ago that life is not fair no matter what color you are born. But what I am upset about is that a man is using Reverend to back a cause of hatred.

Fenris
Jan 16th 2008, 06:20 PM
Those of us living in NY have been laughing at Al's antics for years. :lol:

diffangle
Jan 16th 2008, 06:26 PM
But what I am upset about is that a man is using Reverend to back a cause of hatred.
So true! :sad:

15 characters

diffangle
Jan 16th 2008, 06:34 PM
Those of us living in NY have been laughing at Al's antics for years. :lol:
I don't think this is funny...

http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1500249&postcount=52



According to the Jewish Post of New York, article titled "Burn the Jew Store Down," by Hy Drusin, The Jewish Post of New York, January 1996) The Reverend Al Sharpton organized a group of protestors in 1995, that began two months of protest outside Fredi's Fashion Mart, a Harlem business owned by Fred Harari , a Jewish man. At the time, Sharpton was the head of the National Action Network. The protest centered on the eviction of Sikhulu Shange, owner of the Record Shack, who was subletting from Mr.Harari. In months leading up the Harlem Massacre, Al Sharpton used black radio stations (WWRL and WLIB) to attack non-black Harlem storeowners:

"Now, many of us are involved in various levels of struggle. One of the things that our Buy Black Campaign, and Brother Morris Powell and I are engaged in, is there is a systemic and methodical strategy to eliminate our people from doing business off 125th Street. It started with the vendors, now they're going to the actual merchants. One of our brothers who has for years been a backbone in our community, who has not only been an entrepreneur, but has also been a activist and involved in the struggle is now being threatened with not having his lease renewed."

"Brother Sikhulu -- stand up, brother -- on 125th Street. I want to make it clear to the radio audience -- and do you hear -- that we will not stand by and allow them to move this brother, so that some white interloper can expand his business on 125th Street. And we're asking the Buy Black Committee to go down there, and I'm gonna go down there, and do what is necessary to let them know that we are not turnin? 125th Street back over to outsiders as it was done in the early part of this century." - Radio Station WWRL - Sharpton Rally - 9/9/95

Sharpton organized crowds of protestors, screaming about "bloodsucking Jews" and "Jew bastards" and threatening to "burn the building down." Finally, Roland James Smith, Jr., got Sharpton's message. On Friday, December 8, at 10:12 a.m., Smith walked into Freddy's Fashion Mart, pulled out a gun, ordered all the black customers to leave, spilled paint thinner on several bins of clothing and set them on fire, resulting in the deaths of eight people, including himself. Isn't it wonderful, how Al the racist Sharpton, can throw around words like "white interloper" and "bloodsucking Jews" in public, and the "elite" media conveniently misses it again! But I don't miss it. I see Sharpton for the kind of guy he really is: a low life liberal and racist who hates Jews.


One of these days Mr. Sharpton might get a taste of his own medicine. :thumbsdn:

Fenris
Jan 16th 2008, 06:36 PM
I don't think this is funny...

One of these days Mr. Sharpton might get a taste of his own medicine. :thumbsdn:

Yeah, I had forgotten about that...:hmm:

I guess you could see he's 50% buffoon and 50% race-baiter.

danield
Jan 16th 2008, 06:51 PM
One of these days Mr. Sharpton might get a taste of his own medicine.

I personally do not want Mr. Sharpton to get a taste of his own medicine, but I would rather him succumb to Christ and his will. I wish he would use his energy and influence to teach the truth and the love of the lord instead of inciting racial problems. If he does not want to bow to Christ’s will, then he needs to loose his title of reverend so that he does not mislead others down the path of hatred.

diffangle
Jan 16th 2008, 07:04 PM
I personally do not want Mr. Sharpton to get a taste of his own medicine, but I would rather him succumb to Christ and his will. I wish he would use his energy and influence to teach the truth and the love of the lord instead of inciting racial problems. If he does not want to bow to Christ’s will, then he needs to loose his title of reverend so that he does not mislead others down the path of hatred.

Gal 6:7 (http://cf.blb.org/search/getBible.cfm?b=Gal&c=6&v=7&version=KJV#7)Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

always
Jan 16th 2008, 07:25 PM
Gal 6:7 (http://cf.blb.org/search/getBible.cfm?b=Gal&c=6&v=7&version=KJV#7)Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

and that is every man diffangle, do not fall into a trap praying for anothers destruction.

I think the majority of us here will be surprised who is at that wonderful feast :saint:

Fenris
Jan 16th 2008, 09:15 PM
I think the majority of us here will be surprised who is at that wonderful feast :saint:Good. If Al's there I'll ask him about Fredi's, since no one else seems to.:idea:

Oh, wait. I guess I won't be there, being a heathen and all. Can someone else ask him, please?

always
Jan 16th 2008, 10:06 PM
Good. If Al's there I'll ask him about Fredi's, since no one else seems to.:idea:

Oh, wait. I guess I won't be there, being a heathen and all. Can someone else ask him, please?

I will if you don't make it in, but I'm praying and you know prayer changes things, or you two could have a hot discussion about it below

diffangle
Jan 16th 2008, 11:10 PM
and that is every man diffangle, do not fall into a trap praying for anothers destruction.

I think the majority of us here will be surprised who is at that wonderful feast :saint:
Never said I was "praying" or even hoping for his destruction... I jusy said he "might get" a taste of his own medicine one day as the Scriptures say. ;)

Fenris
Jan 17th 2008, 01:15 PM
I will if you don't make it in, but I'm praying and you know prayer changes things
That's good, I can use all the help I can get!


or you two could have a hot discussion about it belowI'm picturing the discussion: "So, reverend Al, OW! Quit poking me with that pitchfork! Excuse me, Mr Satan, can't you see I'm trying to have a discussion here?!" :lol: