100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Doin' The 'Useful Idiot' Tango ... | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Willful ignorance of fact does not a case make ... amen physician, heal thyself 
Mimicry is not an argument ... |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
willing2
on
Thu 05/20/10 07:18 AM
|
|
The sermon was about Governments changing and God remaining the same,,it was comparing a government of biblical times to governments of modern times, the quote was actually "GD America AS LONG as she tries to act like she is God and she is supreme' So, Actually, the Lords name was used in a sermon where it was relevant,, .the context of which in no way dishonored Him or His character, which is hardly in vain.......but everyone's entitled to their perceptions the media took snippets of two sermons out of thousands the Reverend gave,,out of context, and sensationalized them,,but that is the nature of media,,,,,,,The Reverend is not without responsibility or beyond accountability for what he says in the pulpit and I dont agree with all points made, but my opinion was that it was shown WAY out of context and used as some indirect assassination on OBamas character(as if two specific sermons out of thousands HAD to be two which OBama attended or agreed with) as to the OP, I think OBama did the only thing he could do given the Pastors choice to fuel controversy after the beautiful red white and blue speech and interview OBama gave originally. It was the Pastor (who didnt think of how he was affecting OBama's public perception) who pretty much put himself in the position he is in. In the Bible I was smacked with, I think I remember, it's against the commandment to use the Lords mane in vain. So, you go 'head and defend the pair of and justify all ya' wants. 
Throw 'em both under th' bus!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The evidence simply destroys your argument. Wright is NOT a 'baptist' - he's a racist. He doesn't preach 'religion' - he preaches hatred. 'The ONE', using the political principles employed by every 'progressive', determined that the 'useful idiot' in this particular instance had served its purpose, it needed to be done away with. Wright outlived his shelf life and had to go. 'The ONE' merely did what Marxism dictates he had to do. I corrected my statement about Wright and Baptism although he was RAISED as a baptist. He was pastor of a christian church. so what 'evidence' and what argument are you referring to? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Willful ignorance of fact does not a case make ... amen physician, heal thyself
Mimicry is not an argument ... no, but hypocricy and double standards are good reasons to be suspect of an argument,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The sermon was about Governments changing and God remaining the same,,it was comparing a government of biblical times to governments of modern times, the quote was actually "GD America AS LONG as she tries to act like she is God and she is supreme' So, Actually, the Lords name was used in a sermon where it was relevant,, .the context of which in no way dishonored Him or His character, which is hardly in vain.......but everyone's entitled to their perceptions the media took snippets of two sermons out of thousands the Reverend gave,,out of context, and sensationalized them,,but that is the nature of media,,,,,,,The Reverend is not without responsibility or beyond accountability for what he says in the pulpit and I dont agree with all points made, but my opinion was that it was shown WAY out of context and used as some indirect assassination on OBamas character(as if two specific sermons out of thousands HAD to be two which OBama attended or agreed with) as to the OP, I think OBama did the only thing he could do given the Pastors choice to fuel controversy after the beautiful red white and blue speech and interview OBama gave originally. It was the Pastor (who didnt think of how he was affecting OBama's public perception) who pretty much put himself in the position he is in. In the Bible I was smacked with, I think I remember, it's against the commandment to use the Lords mane in vain. So, you go 'head and defend the pair of and justify all ya' wants.
Throw 'em both under th' bus!
We are not to use the Lords name in vain but PASTORS use the Lords name in church to teach about the lessons the Lord taught,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The sermon was about Governments changing and God remaining the same,,it was comparing a government of biblical times to governments of modern times, the quote was actually "GD America AS LONG as she tries to act like she is God and she is supreme' So, Actually, the Lords name was used in a sermon where it was relevant,, .the context of which in no way dishonored Him or His character, which is hardly in vain.......but everyone's entitled to their perceptions the media took snippets of two sermons out of thousands the Reverend gave,,out of context, and sensationalized them,,but that is the nature of media,,,,,,,The Reverend is not without responsibility or beyond accountability for what he says in the pulpit and I dont agree with all points made, but my opinion was that it was shown WAY out of context and used as some indirect assassination on OBamas character(as if two specific sermons out of thousands HAD to be two which OBama attended or agreed with) as to the OP, I think OBama did the only thing he could do given the Pastors choice to fuel controversy after the beautiful red white and blue speech and interview OBama gave originally. It was the Pastor (who didnt think of how he was affecting OBama's public perception) who pretty much put himself in the position he is in. In the Bible I was smacked with, I think I remember, it's against the commandment to use the Lords mane in vain. So, you go 'head and defend the pair of and justify all ya' wants.
Throw 'em both under th' bus!
We are not to use the Lords name in vain but PASTORS use the Lords name in church to teach about the lessons the Lord taught,,,, Sooooooo, WE will burn in hell saying GD Wright, but him and all the other pastors you refer to, get a free pass? I don't think so. 
Show me, in the bible where it says, They are exempted, please. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Thu 05/20/10 07:43 AM
|
|
The sermon was about Governments changing and God remaining the same,,it was comparing a government of biblical times to governments of modern times, the quote was actually "GD America AS LONG as she tries to act like she is God and she is supreme' So, Actually, the Lords name was used in a sermon where it was relevant,, .the context of which in no way dishonored Him or His character, which is hardly in vain.......but everyone's entitled to their perceptions the media took snippets of two sermons out of thousands the Reverend gave,,out of context, and sensationalized them,,but that is the nature of media,,,,,,,The Reverend is not without responsibility or beyond accountability for what he says in the pulpit and I dont agree with all points made, but my opinion was that it was shown WAY out of context and used as some indirect assassination on OBamas character(as if two specific sermons out of thousands HAD to be two which OBama attended or agreed with) as to the OP, I think OBama did the only thing he could do given the Pastors choice to fuel controversy after the beautiful red white and blue speech and interview OBama gave originally. It was the Pastor (who didnt think of how he was affecting OBama's public perception) who pretty much put himself in the position he is in. In the Bible I was smacked with, I think I remember, it's against the commandment to use the Lords mane in vain. So, you go 'head and defend the pair of and justify all ya' wants.
Throw 'em both under th' bus!
We are not to use the Lords name in vain but PASTORS use the Lords name in church to teach about the lessons the Lord taught,,,, Sooooooo, WE will burn in hell saying GD Wright, but him and all the other pastors you refer to, get a free pass? I don't think so.
Show me, in the bible where it says, They are exempted, please.
I dont need to. One only needs to be intellectually honest about what the sentence "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain" the declaration was never made to not use the Lords name,,period a distinction is made about WHEN to use it,,,when it is not in vain a pastors use of the Lords name to teach about the Lord is hardly in vain,,, in a sermon about governments, to compare biblical government with current government is relevant and not vain when speaking about current government, to compare the common assertion of a country being 'blessed' (as in God Bless America) to the biblical assertion of countries being obliterated(or damned) for sin is also relevant,, and not vain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The sermon was about Governments changing and God remaining the same,,it was comparing a government of biblical times to governments of modern times, the quote was actually "GD America AS LONG as she tries to act like she is God and she is supreme' So, Actually, the Lords name was used in a sermon where it was relevant,, .the context of which in no way dishonored Him or His character, which is hardly in vain.......but everyone's entitled to their perceptions the media took snippets of two sermons out of thousands the Reverend gave,,out of context, and sensationalized them,,but that is the nature of media,,,,,,,The Reverend is not without responsibility or beyond accountability for what he says in the pulpit and I dont agree with all points made, but my opinion was that it was shown WAY out of context and used as some indirect assassination on OBamas character(as if two specific sermons out of thousands HAD to be two which OBama attended or agreed with) as to the OP, I think OBama did the only thing he could do given the Pastors choice to fuel controversy after the beautiful red white and blue speech and interview OBama gave originally. It was the Pastor (who didnt think of how he was affecting OBama's public perception) who pretty much put himself in the position he is in. In the Bible I was smacked with, I think I remember, it's against the commandment to use the Lords mane in vain. So, you go 'head and defend the pair of and justify all ya' wants.
Throw 'em both under th' bus!
We are not to use the Lords name in vain but PASTORS use the Lords name in church to teach about the lessons the Lord taught,,,, Sooooooo, WE will burn in hell saying GD Wright, but him and all the other pastors you refer to, get a free pass? I don't think so.
Show me, in the bible where it says, They are exempted, please.
I dont need to. One only needs to be intellectually honest about what the sentence "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain" the declaration was never made to not use the Lords name,,period a distinction is made about WHEN to use it,,,when it is not in vain a pastors use of the Lords name to teach about the Lord is hardly in vain,,, in a sermon about governments, to compare biblical government with current government is relevant and not vain when speaking about current government, to compare the common assertion of a country being 'blessed' (as in God Bless America) to the biblical assertion of countries being obliterated(or damned) for sin is also relevant,, and not vain You can't show me, cuz it ain't in there. I already knew dat.
I don't know where you go to church at.   
In all the churches I've ever been to, not once has a preacher ever used his name in vain. The name God, (the Lord) is used all da' time. The term damned is used a lot, also. Until Wright came up with GD, I have never heard a preacher GD anything, not even satan. I have heard preachers state, God has damned his angle satan. I never heard them say, GD that satan! I think God can get away with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The sermon was about Governments changing and God remaining the same,,it was comparing a government of biblical times to governments of modern times, the quote was actually "GD America AS LONG as she tries to act like she is God and she is supreme' So, Actually, the Lords name was used in a sermon where it was relevant,, .the context of which in no way dishonored Him or His character, which is hardly in vain.......but everyone's entitled to their perceptions the media took snippets of two sermons out of thousands the Reverend gave,,out of context, and sensationalized them,,but that is the nature of media,,,,,,,The Reverend is not without responsibility or beyond accountability for what he says in the pulpit and I dont agree with all points made, but my opinion was that it was shown WAY out of context and used as some indirect assassination on OBamas character(as if two specific sermons out of thousands HAD to be two which OBama attended or agreed with) as to the OP, I think OBama did the only thing he could do given the Pastors choice to fuel controversy after the beautiful red white and blue speech and interview OBama gave originally. It was the Pastor (who didnt think of how he was affecting OBama's public perception) who pretty much put himself in the position he is in. In the Bible I was smacked with, I think I remember, it's against the commandment to use the Lords mane in vain. So, you go 'head and defend the pair of and justify all ya' wants.
Throw 'em both under th' bus!
We are not to use the Lords name in vain but PASTORS use the Lords name in church to teach about the lessons the Lord taught,,,, Sooooooo, WE will burn in hell saying GD Wright, but him and all the other pastors you refer to, get a free pass? I don't think so.
Show me, in the bible where it says, They are exempted, please.
I dont need to. One only needs to be intellectually honest about what the sentence "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain" the declaration was never made to not use the Lords name,,period a distinction is made about WHEN to use it,,,when it is not in vain a pastors use of the Lords name to teach about the Lord is hardly in vain,,, in a sermon about governments, to compare biblical government with current government is relevant and not vain when speaking about current government, to compare the common assertion of a country being 'blessed' (as in God Bless America) to the biblical assertion of countries being obliterated(or damned) for sin is also relevant,, and not vain You can't show me, cuz it ain't in there. I already knew dat.
I don't know where you go to church at.
In all the churches I've ever been to, not once has a preacher ever used his name in vain. The name God, (the Lord) is used all da' time. The term damned is used a lot, also. Until Wright came up with GD, I have never heard a preacher GD anything, not even satan. I have heard preachers state, God has damned his angle satan. I never heard them say, GD that satan! I think God can get away with that.
well, there is much to be said about context. The sermon was about government. Our government often asserts that GOD BLESS America, and the pastor was preaching about the contrast GD America in the context used, it was relevant and not vain,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obama used wright to gain creditability. with whom,,? the VAST majority of those who voted OBama never heard of Wright before the controversy surrounding his sermons. with whom? he was a mixed guy that grew up with whitey, went to Harvard, didn't know anything about inner city life, moved to Chicago and wanted to become a politician. going to wrights church helped him locally and wasn't he a state senator before he ran for US Senate? it's just like the basketball photo ops.. I doubt the inner city folks would have been too impressed with his golf game.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obama used wright to gain creditability. with whom,,? the VAST majority of those who voted OBama never heard of Wright before the controversy surrounding his sermons. with whom? he was a mixed guy that grew up with whitey, went to Harvard, didn't know anything about inner city life, moved to Chicago and wanted to become a politician. going to wrights church helped him locally and wasn't he a state senator before he ran for US Senate? it's just like the basketball photo ops.. I doubt the inner city folks would have been too impressed with his golf game.. and? I still dont get your point... He moved to chicago at the age of 24/25? and the pastor showed him around and became his pastor,,,,,,,how do we leap from that to him USING the pastor for creditability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
God damning something isn't really using the lords name in vain though is it?
It is a request of god to take action. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obama used wright to gain creditability. with whom,,? the VAST majority of those who voted OBama never heard of Wright before the controversy surrounding his sermons. with whom? he was a mixed guy that grew up with whitey, went to Harvard, didn't know anything about inner city life, moved to Chicago and wanted to become a politician. going to wrights church helped him locally and wasn't he a state senator before he ran for US Senate? it's just like the basketball photo ops.. I doubt the inner city folks would have been too impressed with his golf game.. and? I still dont get your point... He moved to chicago at the age of 24/25? and the pastor showed him around and became his pastor,,,,,,,how do we leap from that to him USING the pastor for creditability When you run for state office its not a state wide election. You are voted in by the people that live in the district you want to represent. He wasn't going to represent the white guys playing golf, he was trying to represent people that he had nothing in common with besides his fathers race. Wright was his conduit to the people who votes he needed to be elected to the state senate. He used Wright and when the time came to impress the white guys that play golf he tossed wright away.. Pretty obvious |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obama used wright to gain creditability. with whom,,? the VAST majority of those who voted OBama never heard of Wright before the controversy surrounding his sermons. with whom? he was a mixed guy that grew up with whitey, went to Harvard, didn't know anything about inner city life, moved to Chicago and wanted to become a politician. going to wrights church helped him locally and wasn't he a state senator before he ran for US Senate? it's just like the basketball photo ops.. I doubt the inner city folks would have been too impressed with his golf game.. and? I still dont get your point... He moved to chicago at the age of 24/25? and the pastor showed him around and became his pastor,,,,,,,how do we leap from that to him USING the pastor for creditability When you run for state office its not a state wide election. You are voted in by the people that live in the district you want to represent. He wasn't going to represent the white guys playing golf, he was trying to represent people that he had nothing in common with besides his fathers race. Wright was his conduit to the people who votes he needed to be elected to the state senate. He used Wright and when the time came to impress the white guys that play golf he tossed wright away.. Pretty obvious I disagree to a point. I believe that Obama did not realize how the pastors words would be construed and had to make a choice when the twisted version of the information hit the news. The sermon was twisted in the form used on the news. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obama used wright to gain creditability. with whom,,? the VAST majority of those who voted OBama never heard of Wright before the controversy surrounding his sermons. with whom? he was a mixed guy that grew up with whitey, went to Harvard, didn't know anything about inner city life, moved to Chicago and wanted to become a politician. going to wrights church helped him locally and wasn't he a state senator before he ran for US Senate? it's just like the basketball photo ops.. I doubt the inner city folks would have been too impressed with his golf game.. and? I still dont get your point... He moved to chicago at the age of 24/25? and the pastor showed him around and became his pastor,,,,,,,how do we leap from that to him USING the pastor for creditability When you run for state office its not a state wide election. You are voted in by the people that live in the district you want to represent. He wasn't going to represent the white guys playing golf, he was trying to represent people that he had nothing in common with besides his fathers race. Wright was his conduit to the people who votes he needed to be elected to the state senate. He used Wright and when the time came to impress the white guys that play golf he tossed wright away.. Pretty obvious I disagree to a point. I believe that Obama did not realize how the pastors words would be construed and had to make a choice when the twisted version of the information hit the news. The sermon was twisted in the form used on the news. I'm not talking about what happened during his run for President. When he moved to Chicago and wanted to run for state office he had no problem being associated with Wright. Wright is respected in his community and I believe Obama knew associating with Wright was going to help him win the state senate seat. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
is this like Rumsfeld denying any association with saddam hussein yet there are hundreds of pictures of the two posing in photographs shaking hands???
No news story here |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
is this like Rumsfeld denying any association with saddam hussein yet there are hundreds of pictures of the two posing in photographs shaking hands??? No news story here Did you have a point of ANY kind ... ? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obama used wright to gain creditability. with whom,,? the VAST majority of those who voted OBama never heard of Wright before the controversy surrounding his sermons. with whom? he was a mixed guy that grew up with whitey, went to Harvard, didn't know anything about inner city life, moved to Chicago and wanted to become a politician. going to wrights church helped him locally and wasn't he a state senator before he ran for US Senate? it's just like the basketball photo ops.. I doubt the inner city folks would have been too impressed with his golf game.. and? I still dont get your point... He moved to chicago at the age of 24/25? and the pastor showed him around and became his pastor,,,,,,,how do we leap from that to him USING the pastor for creditability When you run for state office its not a state wide election. You are voted in by the people that live in the district you want to represent. He wasn't going to represent the white guys playing golf, he was trying to represent people that he had nothing in common with besides his fathers race. Wright was his conduit to the people who votes he needed to be elected to the state senate. He used Wright and when the time came to impress the white guys that play golf he tossed wright away.. Pretty obvious all that seems obvious is that he has made many acquaintances in his lifetime from many backgrounds,,,doesnt follow that he USED any or them |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obama used wright to gain creditability. with whom,,? the VAST majority of those who voted OBama never heard of Wright before the controversy surrounding his sermons. with whom? he was a mixed guy that grew up with whitey, went to Harvard, didn't know anything about inner city life, moved to Chicago and wanted to become a politician. going to wrights church helped him locally and wasn't he a state senator before he ran for US Senate? it's just like the basketball photo ops.. I doubt the inner city folks would have been too impressed with his golf game.. and? I still dont get your point... He moved to chicago at the age of 24/25? and the pastor showed him around and became his pastor,,,,,,,how do we leap from that to him USING the pastor for creditability When you run for state office its not a state wide election. You are voted in by the people that live in the district you want to represent. He wasn't going to represent the white guys playing golf, he was trying to represent people that he had nothing in common with besides his fathers race. Wright was his conduit to the people who votes he needed to be elected to the state senate. He used Wright and when the time came to impress the white guys that play golf he tossed wright away.. Pretty obvious I disagree to a point. I believe that Obama did not realize how the pastors words would be construed and had to make a choice when the twisted version of the information hit the news. The sermon was twisted in the form used on the news. I'm not talking about what happened during his run for President. When he moved to Chicago and wanted to run for state office he had no problem being associated with Wright. Wright is respected in his community and I believe Obama knew associating with Wright was going to help him win the state senate seat. what? He continued to be associated with Wright long after he left Chicago,,,,their ties didnt break until the controversy around those old sermons and Wright continuing to speak on them,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obama used wright to gain creditability. with whom,,? the VAST majority of those who voted OBama never heard of Wright before the controversy surrounding his sermons. with whom? he was a mixed guy that grew up with whitey, went to Harvard, didn't know anything about inner city life, moved to Chicago and wanted to become a politician. going to wrights church helped him locally and wasn't he a state senator before he ran for US Senate? it's just like the basketball photo ops.. I doubt the inner city folks would have been too impressed with his golf game.. and? I still dont get your point... He moved to chicago at the age of 24/25? and the pastor showed him around and became his pastor,,,,,,,how do we leap from that to him USING the pastor for creditability When you run for state office its not a state wide election. You are voted in by the people that live in the district you want to represent. He wasn't going to represent the white guys playing golf, he was trying to represent people that he had nothing in common with besides his fathers race. Wright was his conduit to the people who votes he needed to be elected to the state senate. He used Wright and when the time came to impress the white guys that play golf he tossed wright away.. Pretty obvious all that seems obvious is that he has made many acquaintances in his lifetime from many backgrounds,,,doesnt follow that he USED any or them Agreed. |
|
|
|
|
