MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
|
|
|
From the Readers
- barefooted 8 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 9 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
Creative corner
- PeraclesPlease 10 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
From the Dagbloggers
- Michael Wolraich 10 months 3 weeks ago
- Danny Cardwell 3 years 1 month ago
- Doctor Cleveland 3 years 10 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 2 weeks ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 2 weeks ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 2 weeks ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 2 weeks ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 1 month ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 1 month ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 2 months ago
Hits of the Day
Report on lynching in the US shows historical numbers, like killings by police, are underreported
By trkingmomoe on Tue, 02/10/2015 - 9:31pm |We are just now beginning to understand the terror that south committed against African Americans after the civil war. This is a good read.
For me to see the counties in Florida listed as where the most lynching took place explains how today they are willing to send the bat shit crazy house reps to Congress.
URL:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/02/10/1363557/-Report-on-lynching-in-the-US-shows-historical-numbers-like-killings-by-police-are-underreported?showAll=yes
- Add new comment
- 19134 reads
Comments
Bill Moyer writes about his father's reaction to a lynching and he compares our history to ISIS.
http://www.salon.com/2015/02/10/when_america_behaved_like_isis_jesse_washington_and_the_bible_belts_dark_history_of_public_lynchings_partner/
by trkingmomoe on Tue, 02/10/2015 - 11:18pm
I read Moyers' remembrance, today actually.
Salon will pick up things other blogs do not.
A fine article really.
Terrorism is a confusing term at times.
But I know it when I see it.
by Richard Day on Tue, 02/10/2015 - 11:33pm
Terrorism?
by Resistance on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 3:34am
A nice picture but it does not depict the reason that Union troops came into the South. Following the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Johnson tried conciliation with the South. The South responded by electing government's geared to preventing Blacks from voting and enacting the Black Codes. The Black Codes placed limitiatons on education, employment, and travel. Blacks were terrorized by Whites prior to arrival of the troops.
http://www.crf-usa.org/brown-v-board-50th-anniversary/southern-black-cod...
The Southern response to law and order was the Klu Klux Klan.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 8:19am
An Act of Congress on March 2, 1867 - Library of Congress link - said federal troops will occupy and administer the government of the rebel states until elected representatives from those states ratify the 14th Amendment. The 14th Amendment would never have passed otherwise.
Bookmark that link. It is the Act of Congress that forced the 'solid south' to recognize and protect the rights of all Americans. The whites of the south did not go willingly, even after a devastating war.
The 14th Amendment includes all the rights you, Resistance, bemoan are at risk of imminent loss, as a remedy for which you rhetorically clutch at your gun. Hypocrisy and ignorance thy name is resistance.
That 14th Amendment stated:
by NCD on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 11:05am
Resistance sides with the "plight" of those willing to keep the newly freed slaves in servitude. Southern White legislatures were actively stripping human rights of Blacks, but Resistance sees the Union troops as the terrorists.
The first thing Southern White legislatures display when President Andrew Johnson tried conciliation was to deny the rights of Blacks. Black could note vote. Black Codes made it possible for an employer to refuse to allow a Black worker to go to a better paying job. The current employer had to agree that the Black worker could leave. It was slavery by another name.
The first thing that Southern White legislators did when the troops left, was to suppress the rights of Blacks. The Klan and Jim Crow followed.
Today we see the old Confederate States suppressing Black votes after the Supreme Court gutted Section V of the Voting Rights Act. The Conservatives on SCOTUS are ready to gut the Fair Housing Act.
We have a sitting judge in Alabama telling lower court judges to disobey a Federal Court judge's ruling on Gay marriage. The past is a window to the future. Some Southern elites are truly representative of William F. Buckley' s definition of a Conservative as a person standing athwart history yelling stop.
Some pine for the "Good Old Days.". Resistance has exposed himself.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 11:25am
How close are we to having the troops and barristers of the National Guard usurp control of Alabama courts? (Once again, how many times has the Guard or Army been called out to enforce the law there? And they call themselves patriotic Americans....while they wave Confederate flags...)
Just to provide legal recognition of marriage for a few, or a few score, of the humble and oppressed who have lived together in silence and fear for years?
by NCD on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 3:52pm
Patriotic?
Conservatives have yammered about how Putin makes Obama look weak because Putin makes a decision and things happen. Conservatives call the King of Jordan a strong leader because he orders rapid air strikes against ISIS. A dictator and a King are what Republicans prefer. They have gone insane. When Putin got into economic trouble he attempted to use Gays as part of the rationale for why Russia was failing. Not surprisingly, Governor Brownbeck in Kansas is rolling back laws protecting Gays in the workplace. Conservatives love strong leaders because they want to crush the opposition.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/11/kansas-s-big-gay-rollba...
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 4:47pm
Someone asked today, how long before someone can marry their beloved dog?
by Resistance on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 5:03pm
This question has nothing to do with an owner that desires to marry their beloved dog. It's about the dog. As soon as dogs show that they are sufficiently sentient to freely make choices in a shared human/dog society. As soon as all dogs are fully emancipated and set free to roam the streets, freely enter into employment agreements, rent apartments or buy houses, shop for their own food, and so long as they are capable of understanding and obeying laws including public nudity and public defecation laws. And as soon as the dog is above the legal age of consent which is 18, can prove it understands and consents to the marriage, and when the dog can sign a marriage license.
If you can convince me that a dog fully understands marriage and is freely choosing it I'd support it. If a dog is sufficiently sentient to do all of the above I would support emancipation and their right to freely enter into marriage as they, the dog, choose. Marriage is an agreement that both parties freely choose.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 5:44pm
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 6:07pm
Yes it's too stupid and disqusting to take seriously and I too am not surprised who posted it. But it's been bandied about among the ignorant often enough that I decided to address the nosense seriously once.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 6:20pm
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 6:47pm
Fanatical to you, because of a rebellious spirit, you and others don't want to accept Gods standards and would wish everyone to observe what you believe is right or wrong in order to usurp Gods Right to rule.
All TRUE Christians know of Gods commandment.
by Resistance on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 10:14pm
Your god can go fuck himself with his psychopathic rules. Of course imaginary beings can't do anything.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 10:36pm
You quote the Old Testament which also says that a disobediant child should be killed, much different than the message of the Prodigal Son. You have bloodlust.
Here is a debate on what the New Testament says about homosexuality.
http://www.westarinstitute.org/resources/the-fourth-r/what-the-new-testa...
------All TRUE Christians know of Gods commandment.
That statement is exactly why we know your understanding of Scripture is incorrect. We saw your inability to comprehend the meaning of "render unto Caesar"
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 12:23am
I see you found another teacher, to tickle your ears with lies, other than Gods own words.
Jesus own words, prove your teacher a liar.
I know Christians and you are no Christian, if you teach homosexuality is acceptable to God.
Your lies stumble those who should repent, just as the prodigal son did and THEN he was accepted back by his father.
As usual, You are clueless and your deceptive words will cause the death of those who listen to you.
by Resistance on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 1:47am
You erred on the meaning of Scripture. You are not a Biblical authority. What we get from you is venom. You are clueless on the concept of Christian love. You have a dark heart. If we search for false prophets, we come to your picture.
We saw your inability to interpret Scripture. We saw your lack of Biblical knowledge. You cannot escape that observation. You avoid addressing your mistake.
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 7:50am
If you're going to quote Leviticus, let's not forget to include Leviticus 11:9-12:
by Verified Atheist on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 8:22am
There are also sentences of death for adulterers and disobedient children.
Resistance loves the fire and brimstone, so he dileberately overlooks passages that carry a different message. The Bible describes slave -traders and man-stealers as scum, but Resistance selects passages that support his love of slavery. He should be strengthened by his faith but is afraid of his own shadow. The world will end because .......Ebola, etc. When you actually ask Resistance to put Biblical snippets into context, he is lost.
Ask him if stoning of a child is supported, he will say yes. Ask him if Jesus said let he who is without sin cast the first stone, he will say yes. He will have no problem saying that Jesus supports stoning.
It is sad. Fortunately, people are able to recognize messages of venom. Take the Westboro Baptist Church for example. They quote snippets to support their venom. Boko Haram and ISIS will tell you that the Koran supports slavery. Other Islamic scholars will say those who release slaves are free. Westboro, ISIS, and Boko Haram attract followers with flawed moral compasses. People take snippets from religious texts remove any message of peace and love and create an abomination.
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 10:39am
I have never condoned abusive treatment of other humans, and believe the bible promotes that slaves should be treated in a humane and loving manner.
You grossly distort my comments at every opportunity. You refuse to look at the evidence of the slavery, the Bible tolerated.
With a broad brush you condemn those who were compassionate masters and the relationship they had with their servants.
You have continually, twisted (Philemon 15, 16) to serve your bias
You ignore any scriptural references the Bible writes on the matter of slavery, instead you lump all loving acts of servitude, as abominable, because of your limited knowledge and would rather distort the facts allowing you to make personal attacks.
Some Jews voluntarily, became slaves to their fellow Jews,
in order to repay debts and this arrangement also kept the people from suffering hunger/starvation.
The Jewish slaves were not treated abusively so it can never be used as justification for extremely cruel and brutal behavior.
Laws About Slaves
Colossians 4:1
1 Timothy 6:1-2
Leviticus 25:39-46 The Poor, and the buying and selling off slaves
Exodus 22:3-4 The Thief
Exodus 21:1-2 Buying a Hebrew slave,
Exodus 21:26-27 Injured slaves, freed
by Resistance on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 9:41pm
Resistance, the slavery practice in the United States was race-specific and abusive. The Slavery in the Bible that you give snippet responses to included Spaniards, Germans, etc, not one specific race. Slavery in the United States was a rape based culture. Slavery in the United States was not of the Biblical based type your snippets mention. Just as you were uniformed about render unto Caesar, you are wrong about Philemon. Paul was sending a man back to be freed. You are unable to comprehend that message.
Your response as to what the Christian should do about Black enslavement in the United States is do nothing. Your response to what Christians should do about Jim Crow is nothing. Your type of Christian stands on the sidelines doing nothing but ready to criticize Martin Luther King Jr. The Christian you prefer sits in his comfortable home filling his belly. The Christian you describe gains employment benefits from good salaries, home loans, and better schools. Then when after generations of disparities, people object, the Christian you describe criticizes those who are upset as leeches on society.
The Christian you describe gives no comfort to the enslaved even when the slavery violates your Biblical snippets. Your Christian complains about a movement that challenged Jim Crow. They reserve criticism for the enslaved, not the slave-owner. Criticize the oppressed not the oppressor. The Christian you describe is worthless.
Fortunately Resistance, aid came to free the slaves first in the form of radical abolitionism and then Union troops. Relief came to those suffering under Jim Crow in the form of Martin Luther King Jr. it is unfortunate that the Christians who sat at home warming their bodies and filling their bellies had their meals disturbed. The Christian you describe will ask why Minorities still suffer if the Civil War and Civl Rights movements were correct actions. Obviously evil does not rest. Evil, powerful people will seek to remain in power. Voting gains and housing gains will be challenged. The struggle continues.
The Christian you describe who does nothing as people are enslaved or face with oppressive segregation. Will complain about the oppressed daring to complain. But those types of Christians are worthless. Their inaction leaves the door wide open for Satan
The Baptists and Methodists who severed relations with slave supporting factions in their midst saw the evil of the non-biblical slavery in front of their faces. They realized that those who stood on the sidelines doing nothing were taking an action. Those who do nothing support enslavement and oppression
More recently we have seen so-called Christians from the United States travel to Uganda, Kenya, and Russia to warn about the evils of homosexuality. We see the homophobic physical attacks that are left in their wake. We see countries passing legislation calling for imprisonment of homosexuals. One country was ready to enforce the death penalty against homosexuals.
I have misrepresented nothing. I know true Christians and I know those whose only religion is to observe and criticize as they eat their three meals a day.
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 10:23pm
To sum up ocean-Kat's answer:
A man can marry a dog when a dog can buy the engagement ring. Also when a dog can file a joint tax return.
Until then, it is a stupid question. And of course, a deliberately insulting and mean-spirited one.
by Doctor Cleveland on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 1:48am
You don't know shite
The North allowed the carpetbaggers, to sic after the decimated South; not because they cared for the newly freed slaves; but because there was much to be gained financially to enrich the war profiteers.
How did you think the South would react, to the obvious theft by the collusion of freed slaves with carpetbaggers and scalawags who were scorned as opportunistic scum bags seeking to get rich on their misfortune.
BTW, do you think it would have been better if during 1700;s 1800's considering the continuous inter rival warfare in Africa, where one Black community attacked other Black villages; should the victims have been murdered or sold for ransom?
Who pays the ransom?
by Resistance on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 4:57pm
The period in which the carpet baggers were in the south was only right after the war. These unscrupulous charlatans were also in the north. Unfettered capitalism in the second half of the 19th century led to the progressive era and reforms. Jim Crow was a whole different bag of worms and it lasted through the progressive era and finally ended at the end of the new deal era.
If you would have read the report you would know that when the period of reconstruction ended a decade after the war. Then the southern aristocrats wanted very cheap and free labor to rebuild their economical power. That started the reign of terror against the former slaves known as Jim Crow. It went on for a hundred years. The lynching finally stopped when we started stuffing our prisons with minorities under the disguise of the war on drugs.
by trkingmomoe on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 5:29pm
The North freed the slaves, but the North, especially the Irish, resisted the migration of the freed slaves.
Jim Crow would have had no affect on Blacks; who should have fled North, knowing the resentment the South would have. In retaliation
Where was the financial aid, to relocate the freed slaves? Who couldn't see, they would be hated in the South.
Is it because the North didn't want to have to deal with the freed slaves. so they shoved the problem onto the South, in order to destroy the South's political and financial power? .
Just as today, many taxpayers don't want to help those, who'll piss in their own beds, burn down and loot their own communities and expect others to finance and rebuild for them because they claim they are the victims. BS
by Resistance on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 10:31pm
Once again you expose yourself. You have demons that you need to address. You post a cartoon that complains about the plight of the Solid South. Troops were provided for protection and you complain about the stress on the Southerners. instead of addressing the evil of the Southerners, you say the freedmen should have left. Blacks did build societies during Reconstruction. Blacks were elected. White Southerners rebelled. At every turn you absolve the evil of the Southerners and the Klan.
The South had political power because they stole the votes of Blacks by being able to count them as 3/5ths of a man. Again you sympathy is with the vote stealing Southerners. The financial power of the South was built on the theft of labor by man-stealers. Biblically man-stealing slaveowners are an abomination.
There were too many stolen Black men and women for any mass government exodus to the North. Your inability to understand the reality of the situation is astounding. How many slaves would you estimate would need to be transferred to the North? Give your guess of how many slaves were in the Confederate states.
You continue to embarass yourself. I feel as if I am talking to someone from ISIS or Boko Haram. Your moral compass does not exist. In a tragic way your lack of logic or compassion makes you an object of ridicule. Post more. Continue to embarass yourself.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 11:45pm
The cartoon was about how the South had to carry the burden, that the North didn't want to carry.
I asked earlier, who should have paid the ransom, when back in Africa (the old country), villages were raided by other Black tribes and the victors had a choice, sell the captured or cut their throats?
Abubakar Shekau
Look like one of your brothers?
Why would Boko Haram care to keep their captives alive? Is there a market for the captured?
Do you blame the South for paying a ransom for captives delivered to them, by warring factions in Africa? Or should the captives of the tribal wars, have suffered the same fate as the victims do with Boko Haram and ISIL. if a ransom is not paid?
by Resistance on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 2:47am
Again you embarrass yourself and you make it plain that you lump people together by race. You show a Boko Haram picture and ask if he is my brother. No, he is a religious fanatic who believes that slavery is justified and homosexuals are dogs. His DNA matches yours not mine. The only difference is that he has more melanin than you. Skin color is a minor difference is a minute sequence of molecules in DNA. Other than that minor sequence, his DNA is identical to yours, not mine. He is probably grabbing his gun because he has a nonfunctional male member and can't afford Viagra.Sound familiar?
I have no reason to feel guilt because some African heathen, who was not a member of my family sold Africans to another heathen of European descent. Two evil people made a deal. In searching family histories, it is much more likely that your family benefitted from the slave trade than mine.As you note, the African heathens attacked other tribes, so there were no relationship between the two groups. I suspect that your flawed family history is what makes you a defender of the non-Biblical slavery practiced in the United States of America.
Regarding homosexuality, some of the most vocal Bible-quoting homophobes are later found to be homosexual themselves.
Edit it to add:
The relationship between you and the Boko Haram guy is that he is your brother from another mother. He is you after a day on the beach in August.
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 8:47am
It's really not surprising, if you think about it. People who are trying hard to choose not to be gay convince themselves that being gay is a choice.
by Verified Atheist on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 8:23am
The slave trade was not an epiphenomenon of tribal warfare in Africa. Slavery was not a second chance we were giving to people who would have all died anyway.
The people killed in the lynchings were not the victims of crazy desperate people who were at their wit's end of what to do. They were killed by people dressed in their Sunday best who had nice picnics afterwards.
The Reconstruction and the White Resistance to it can be seen from many points of view. The entanglement of Northern and Southern money that fueled the slave market also had a profound influence on what happened after the war. But to assert that such circumstances exonerate the participants of lynching from moral responsibility for the banality of evil they nurtured in their communities is a continuation of the sin itself.
by moat on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 8:33am
One could be forgiven for thinking that anyone making such excuses must subscribe to moral relativism!
by Verified Atheist on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 8:36am
Or subscribe to an absolute right to a permanent inequality.
by moat on Fri, 02/13/2015 - 11:00am
Please stop saying this. It detracts from the arguments you make.
When someone challenges a point of view, especially one with ethical consequences, the goal should be to stop it from reproducing.
by moat on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 11:15am
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 11:36am
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 6:47pm
A report like this should be passed all over the media. We have been tip toeing around this all my long life and it is time to stop that. The country needs to face up to this. What we have done to the minorities in this country is not being "American exceptionalism" but "American terrorism." I don't see them as Buckley's conservatives but white supremacist fascist.
My parents would have been shocked to know the extent of what went on in the south during their life time. They knew people was hung but they had know idea of the public show of torture and the way some was mutilated to death. They were horrified at the nightly news showing water hoses, dogs and beatings during the 1960's civil rights movement. Most of the country was too. That put pressure on Washington to act and pass laws.
Fifty years later and we need to be talking about this. It is time to fix this and our lopsided justice system. We need to put this right beside the right wing crazies so when they start their dog whistles the country knows the roots of this behavior. We need to hold the Supreme Court Accountable when they rule in favor of the white supremacist.
by trkingmomoe on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 5:00pm
Ferguson
by Resistance on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 5:18pm
These are examples of when a community has had enough abuse, that out comes the pitch forks and torches. We are discussing the root cause of this abuse not is symptoms. It may not be right but it does get the point across that they can't take it anymore and it needs to be fixed.
by trkingmomoe on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 6:12pm
So pissing in their own beds solves their problem?
by Resistance on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 10:40pm
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 6:17pm
IMO Wattrees picture was the equivalent of "waving the bloody shirt"
My pictures showed self- inflicted wounds, but as usual you just cant grasp the difference.
More evidence of your lack of comprehension and critical thinking skills?
by Resistance on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 2:57am
The detail that was in the Kos blog was hard to read. I had to stop a few times because it was so brutal. How could people stand and watch that and not end up with post traumatic shock especially a kid? It sure explains the nasty behavior that is pointed at our president.
by trkingmomoe on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 8:07am
Given President Obama's stance that ISIS, et. al. are not Islam, were the White people who performed and observed the lynching Christians, or evil people who hid behind Christianity? Much of the opposition to lynching in the Black community had ties to the church, but the Black Christians had very little power. Should we label Islam as evil because of ISIS. Was Christianity evil? Are we merely noting that evil people will use any justification to commit evil and religion is not the true reson for the violence?
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 12:11am
..
by Resistance on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 5:18pm
Response to Resistance from above
Resistance, the slavery practice in the United States was race-specific and abusive. The Slavery in the Bible that you give snippet responses to included Spaniards, Germans, etc, not one specific race. Slavery in the United States was a rape based culture. Slavery in the United States was not of the Biblical based type your snippets mention. Just as you were uniformed about render unto Caesar, you are wrong about Philemon. Paul was sending a man back to be freed. You are unable to comprehend that message.
Your response as to what the Christian should do about Black enslavement in the United States is do nothing. Your response to what Christians should do about Jim Crow is nothing. Your type of Christian stands on the sidelines doing nothing but ready to criticize Martin Luther King Jr. The Christian you prefer sits in his comfortable home filling his belly. The Christian you describe gains employment benefits from good salaries, home loans, and better schools. Then when after generations of disparities, people object, the Christian you describe criticizes those who are upset as leeches on society.
The Christian you describe gives no comfort to the enslaved even when the slavery violates your Biblical snippets. Your Christian complains about a movement that challenged Jim Crow. They reserve criticism for the enslaved, not the slave-owner. Criticize the oppressed not the oppressor. The Christian you describe is worthless.
Fortunately Resistance, aid came to free the slaves first in the form of radical abolitionism and then Union troops. Relief came to those suffering under Jim Crow in the form of Martin Luther King Jr. it is unfortunate that the Christians who sat at home warming their bodies and filling their bellies had their meals disturbed. The Christian you describe will ask why Minorities still suffer if the Civil War and Civl Rights movements were correct actions. Obviously evil does not rest. Evil, powerful people will seek to remain in power. Voting gains and housing gains will be challenged. The struggle continues.
The Christian you describe who does nothing as people are enslaved or face with oppressive segregation. Will complain about the oppressed daring to complain. But those types of Christians are worthless. Their inaction leaves the door wide open for Satan
The Baptists and Methodists who severed relations with slave supporting factions in their midst saw the evil of the non-biblical slavery in front of their faces. They realized that those who stood on the sidelines doing nothing were taking an action. Those who do nothing support enslavement and oppression
I have misrepresented nothing. I know true Christians and I know those whose only religion is to observe and criticize as they eat their three meals a day.
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 02/12/2015 - 10:32pm
Did Jesus tell his disciples the night he was arrested; protect me from wicked men?
As I have noted before, you want Christianity in the manner you prescribe to and not what the Scriptures teach. If it doesn't meet with YOUR expectations, you insult True disciples who meekly follow in the footsteps of Christ and suffer, just as Jesus told his disciples to expect.
Yours and so many so called Christians problem is; they don't want to meekly follow, they want to lead.
False teachers, telling lies in order to draw off disciples for themselves, enslaving the weak to serve them and their causes
As your reply demonstrates, you despise/ hate teachings of Jesus about meekness and YOU would instead promote others to act against the teachings of Christ.
Instead of being as lambs displaying the qualities of being, docile, gentle, passive, subdued, submissive, forbearing, humble, long-suffering, lowly, peaceful, resigned, yielding
You want to teach a message of being bold, brave and disobedient; attributes Jesus despised and warned against
You want to gather followers to war against oppressors , just as the rest of the alienated world from God does and those who follow what you are teaching will suffer not for righteousness sake but because they rebelled against Jesus teachings of being meek.
I admire doves, you admire wolves.
Matthew 10:16.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
by Resistance on Fri, 02/13/2015 - 2:38am
This response is truly hilarious. Your snippet religion causes you to miss the forest for the trees. Jews leaving Egypt was an illegal act. Merely being a Christian was an illegal act. Breaking the bonds of the non-Biblical slavery in the United States was justified. Your "Solid South" cartoon and your tone defends the slave-owners.
If you are a dove, why do you have firearms? Could it be that you have rules for your own behavior and different rules for others?
In all likelihood, your family benefitted from the practice of slavery, segregation, and Jim Crow. If home loans and post World War II veteran's benefits were better for your family then for Blacks, you benefitted from the race based practices of the past. Your family gained an economic boost.
Given your "do nothing" version of Christianity, how are we to tell the Christian from the non-Christian? Your Christian remained silent during slavery and Jim Crow. We would expect the same from non-christians.Your do-nothing Christians slept through the Rosa Parks incident, the bombing of a Birmingham church, and the use of fire-hoses and dogs on Black children. At the end of the day, what is the value of your warped version of Christianity? It would seem that you are the only beneficiary.
Abolitionists and those who severed there ties with church-attending, slave-owning members of their Antebellum congregations knew the fallacy of your faux-Christianity.
by rmrd0000 on Fri, 02/13/2015 - 8:18am
The cartoon is in response to Richard Day, not you, for as always you'll twist and distort everything I write because of your problem.
Look again, at the top of the picture of the Solid South woman crying a heavy burden with a carpet bag on her back, I raised a question. Terrorism? Report on lynching in the US shows historical... in reply to DD who already wrote
Terrorism is seen differently, by those most affected.
I am sure the South felt unjustly treated and felt the North was an occupying force affecting Southerners.
Just as some in the Middle East feel the heavy hand of American colonialism and it's ability to punish those who do not follow the script America wants served, as terrorist.
You always have a rafter in your eyes when viewing my replies to others
Did Saddam have weapons of mass destruction and did WE terrorize the populace.
So again your distortions are always fabrications, conjured up in your own mind. allowing you to make personal attacks.
Another distortion,
Did I not provide you with scriptural references on how slaves were to be treated kindly and not abusively?
Can I help it if others don't care to listen to the words of God on such matters?
Had the South listened to Gods words, WAR; something detestable to GOD, could have been avoided. Instead you would act as God and would punish and kill the non - listeners proving you are not a footstep follower of the Christ.
Did Jesus tell his true followers pick up,the sword and pursue war against those who don't follow me? Of course not, but you'll ignore Gods words, just as the oppressive slave owners did.
As for the rest of your reply; as I have stated many times before, YOU have no right to force your conscience on anyone.
I quote scripture because I give recognition to the authority of the one, who gave us his words; you complain about snippets because you hate the word, because you don't want to accept his authority, as you elevate yourself above others, with your twisted reasoning and wanton justification for war. You're know better than the other monsters, who'll send people into battle, just because you believe your cause is just.
by Resistance on Fri, 02/13/2015 - 6:55pm
So. If a runaway slave arrived at your doorstep it would have been your Christian duty to return the slave to the slave-owner?
by rmrd0000 on Fri, 02/13/2015 - 8:31pm
As I have stated before, you don't know shite, other than how to make Personal attacks
by Resistance on Fri, 02/13/2015 - 7:35pm
You are offended, yet you post a picture of a member of Boko Haram and ask if he is one of mine? You set double standards.
by rmrd0000 on Fri, 02/13/2015 - 8:54pm
Should I have been offended?
" I feel as if I am talking to someone from ISIS or Boko Haram."
by rmrd on Wed, 02/11/2015 - 8:45pm
by Resistance on Fri, 02/13/2015 - 9:17pm
We can go around on this, you said that I wasn't a Christian. My position on Christianity and slavery was the position taken by the Christian churches in Europe and Canada. The United States was the outlier. The Northern Baptists and Methodists severed their ties with the slave-owners in their midst. I stand with them.
I admit that I see you as a curiosity supporting an abomination and a religion that has no value in people's lives. Christians who remained silent as Trains went to concentration camps are not heroes in my book and in the eyes of many other Christians. So I view you as the anomaly.
If a runaway slave, had arrived on your doorstep, would it have been your Christian duty to return him to his slave-owner?
by rmrd0000 on Fri, 02/13/2015 - 9:57pm
I have no problem stating that the Bible does not instruct me to support slavery. There is question as to whether translations converted servant into slave. I hear the words instructing me not to be a slave/servant to any man. I hear Mathew instructing us to care for our fellow man, not remain on the sidelines. I see a faith that tolerates injustice as something not supported Biblically. When questioned about aiding the oppressed and feeding the poor, caring for strangers, I will have much different answers than you.
Do not take from the Bible instruction to stone disobediant children. I do remember the story of the Prodigal Son. I don't take a message of stoning adulterers. I do make a connection with ISIS and Boko Haram with those practices. I receive a completely different message than you and I am glad that I do.
As I have noted before your snippet knowledge base made you unaware of the meaning of Scripture. You continue to be confused about context. You are locked into your particular delusion. Your snippets blind you to true meaning.
by rmrd0000 on Fri, 02/13/2015 - 11:12pm
The discussion has been helpful in verifying that what you represent is a jumble of selections from the Bible used to support evil. Christians do not stand on the sidelines as injustice exists. Christians fight injustice. There will always be injustice because evil people will continue to exert their desires. Others will stand on the sidelines watching and criticizing.
Evil people do not give up easily. In the run up to the Civil War, the Union was willing to let the evil of slavery stand as long as it did not expand. Slave-owners were not satisfied with this outcome. They wanted the evil practice to spread to new territory in addition they wanted citizens who objected to slavery to return escaped slaves to bondage. There was not going to be any way to appease the evil. Lincoln made a point of trying to insure that the Union was on God's side. The Union prevailed.
The evil then switched to Jim Crow. A Baptist preacher aided in the fight to end the practice. Like Lincoln, he was killed by evil people. The death's were the work of evil men, not God. Evil continues today because of power hungry people ready to steal votes and place heavy tax burdens on the middle-class.
Christianity is hard because when you oppose evil like slavery, Jim Crow, and abuse of taxation, powerful, greedy people with fight your efforts. The struggle goes on as one attempts to do as commanded by Mathew 25.
It is easy to identify a snippet based, do nothing religion as something that is not Christian. A religion that sides with a prosecutor that allowed perjury to be presented, tells others that it is their problem to take care of children coming to our borders, and talks of liking doves while arming themselves is easily show to be false. All the snippets in the world cannot cover that fact.
by rmrd0000 on Sat, 02/14/2015 - 1:23am
Still SLANDERING and smearing
YOU UNDERSTAND NOTHING
Three comments after my last reply and you still want to argue and slander?
In one corner of their mouths, they praise the Prince of Peace, on the other side they promote war.
by Resistance on Sat, 02/14/2015 - 4:38pm
Not slandering, misstating, or lying. Christians are known by their fruits. The religion you present has a lot of snippets by no context. You are arrogant enough to believe you know God's will. You lack context, the reason why I keep noting your inability to interpret Scripture regarding Caesar. You demonstrated a sever lack of knowledge yet you keep posting your snippets. When presented with Biblical scholarship that disagrees with your personal delusions, you reject it. You are locked in.
Since Christians are known by their fruits, we only have to look at the smelly, rotting fruit you place before us. You ridicule the poor. You support the injustice of your ever-changing earthy "Authority" in police misconduct . Ignoring Mathew's instruct to care for others including strangers. The stench of what you propose as Christian causes our eyes to tear up and gastric retching.
Further proof of the nonsense you propose is the fear you have at every earthy threat. Ebola, Ferguson, etc all make you tremble. We see your attempt to ally yourself with doves, yet we know you will be armed against any perceived personal threat.
We read of your worthless, do-nothing religion, your gun-clinging, and your demonization of the poor. We do not see any Christianity. It should again be noted that it was denominations in the United States that cheerleaded in the vile practice of slavery on our shores, causing true Christians to severe ties with the evil in their midst. Christians in Europe and Canada abandoned the practice as incompatible with Christianity. You are the outlier.
by rmrd0000 on Sat, 02/14/2015 - 5:21pm
Justice Dept is looking into a 1946 killing of 2 African Americans.
http://onlineathens.com/local-news/2015-02-17/fbi-not-commenting-reported-interview-about-1946-lynching-walton-county
This is good news if they can hold accountable the people who are still alive that was involved in this.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/16/suspects-1946-moores-ford-bridge-georgia-mass-lynching-alive
by trkingmomoe on Fri, 02/20/2015 - 4:49pm
The NAACP interview of Wayne Watson starts at 30.59 in this video.
by trkingmomoe on Fri, 02/20/2015 - 4:59pm