Little Greta comes clean

[Tassman]

Why on earth would anyone today be offended by lynching! And why on earth would a white person find lynching offensive?

I do encourage DivineOb to examine himself, use introspection (always a good thing), but I do hope he does not move away from his position. I find it entirely consistent with a Christian ethos. Not bad for an atheist without recourse to divine grace.

[seer]

What happened to your "common courtesy dictates that we exercise polite discretion?" Like not broad brushing most Christians with something they had no part in or supported? You are such a hypocrite...

[simplicio]

What happened to your "common courtesy dictates that we exercise polite discretion?" You are such a hypocrite...

Many Christians argued that slavery, and later segregation, was the Divine design for us.

Here is an example from an elite evangelical, one with significant influence:
https://www.drslewis.org/camille/201...jones-sr-1960/

I suppose Tassman does deserve to be horsewhipped for incorrect terminology; divine grace was used inappropriately. I'll suggest he say three Hail Marys and sin no more.

Edit to add: I missed it on first read. He made the absurd claim that the civil rights initiative put a stop to those things. They only put a stop to the overt laws. The civil rights movement did not stop to rest on its laurels 50 years ago. Make that ten hail marys

[seer]

Many Christians argued that slavery, and later segregation, was the Divine design for us.

Here is an example from an elite evangelical, one with significant influence:
https://www.drslewis.org/camille/201...jones-sr-1960/

Bob Jones? Really?

[rogue06]

Bob Jones? Really?

He was pretty influential in the late 20s and for a while afterwards but was increasingly considered fringe by the time he wrote that.

[Charles]

From: The racial demons that help explain evangelical support for Trump

[seer]

From: The racial demons that help explain evangelical support for Trump

No, no it doesn't.

[Charles]

No, no it doesn't.

It seems it does...

But focusing on the disconnect between Trump's personal actions and the moral aspects of their faith misses the issue that keeps their support firm: racism. Modern evangelicals' support for this president cannot be separated from the history of evangelicals' participation in and support for racist structures in America.

Evangelical denominations formed from these splits in the South were usually comprised of people who had made money from slavery or supported it. After the Civil War many were more likely to have supported the Ku Klux Klan and approved of (or participated in) lynching. The burning cross of the KKK, for instance, was a symbol of white Christian supremacy, designed both to put fear into the hearts of African Americans and to highlight the supposed Christian righteousness of the terrorist act.

During the civil rights movement, many white evangelicals either outright opposed Martin Luther King Jr. or, like Billy Graham, believed that racial harmony would only come about when the nation turned to God.

Decades later, the Rev. Jerry Falwell, the evangelical leader, opposed sanctions on South Africa's apartheid regime and insulted Bishop Desmond Tutu, a Nobel Prize Peace winner, as a "phony."

And when Barack Obama was elected president, they regrouped, bought guns and became Tea Partiers who promoted fiscal responsibility and indulged in birtherism, promoted by no less than the son of Billy Graham, Franklin.

So it's not surprising that white evangelicals supported the Muslim ban, are the least likely to accept refugees into the country (according to the Pew Foundation) and, though a slim majority oppose it, are the denomination most likely to support Trump's child separation policy. White evangelicals certainly are not concerned with white supremacy, because they are often white supremacists.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...no-ncna1046826

[rogue06]

From: The racial demons that help explain evangelical support for Trump

Actually it was 1994 and you are taking two completely different and utterly separate things and proclaiming an iron clad link.

[Charles]

Actually it was 1994 and you are taking two completely different and utterly separate things and proclaiming an iron clad link.

What was in 1994? According to this page, the book was released in 1996: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/...3-active-faith

[seer]

It seems it does...


https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...no-ncna1046826

Charles this is pure bias pablum. First, most Evangelicals don't even know this history. Second, race was not a significant driver.

Here is a 2016 poll: The main drivers 70% and above, Are the Economy, terrorism/immigration, the courts, gun rights, health care etc...And all of these are race neutral.

4_2-1 (1).png

[rogue06]

What was in 1994? According to this page, the book was released in 1996: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/...3-active-faith

From African Americans in Conservative Movements: The Inescapability of Race by Louis G. Prisock:

00000000000000ab000-00aaad.jpg

[rogue06]

Charles this is pure bias pablum. First, most Evangelicals don't even know this history. Second, race was not a significant driver.

Here is a 2016 poll: The main drivers 70% and above, Are the Economy, terrorism/immigration, the courts, gun rights, health care etc...And all of these are race neutral.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41784[/ATTACH]

[Charles]

From African Americans in Conservative Movements: The Inescapability of Race by Louis G. Prisock:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41785[/ATTACH]

Great, thanks.

[Charles]

Please don't confuse him with facts and evidence for he knows The Trooth™

Since you describe what I have provided with such irony one might get an idea about who is only interested in one side of the story. I have not even had the time to look at it or reply before you have already made personal attacks.