Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 34
| visibility 1

if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a


Aug 28, 2016, 1:11 PM

"Christian"?

Personally, I think that's up to a higher authority to decide.

However it's quite evident that the person isn't acting in a manner that evinces the morality proposed by Christ. He/she may claim to be a Christian, but he/she isn't acting like one.

And to suggest that that person "represents" Christianity or the Bible is to unduly besmirch those institutions. The person can "represent" neither without acting in a proscribed manner. Many good Muslims tell us this same thing when speaking about those radical-types who commit atrocities in the "name of Allah". It's the same thing.

And so it is the same for an "American" wrapping himself in the flag.

If someone stands up and says the Pledge of Allegiance or sings the Star-Spangled banner does that make them an "American"? Well not if they then turn around and act in a racist or sexist fashion towards another human being. So says the Constitution.

And that's what Colin KaperHole and all these post-Vietnam lib-morons misunderstand completely.

The flag doesn't represent the people in this Country, it represents a Constitution. And it isn't the "Nation" that has acted racist to African-Americans. It was people. Misguided and often mean-spirited people. And these people were not in their hearts or actions "American". They didn't espouse the morals contracted in the Constitution for this Nation.

Redux: The Flag doesn't represent these people; rather, it boldly represents the Constitution and the values of the Nation-state behind it.

You can call out a President or Congressman all you want - they're just people; fallible, egotistical, gullible, greedy, self-absorbed.

But to disrespect the Constitution, or the Flag that represents the Constitution, is wrong. Eminently wrong. Ipso facto.

That is, you cannot disrespect that which provides you all of your rights and not cast dispersion upon yourself at the same time. That's just the way it is.

KaperHole got a National TV audience, and that's what he wanted. But he was wrong in what he did, plain and simple.

We've been telling you this since you started burning flags in the 60's - you sure are thick...

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a


Aug 28, 2016, 1:14 PM

It's almost football season , who cares ?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a


Aug 28, 2016, 1:20 PM

You are clueless about American History. Slavery was legal in America. Congress passed that three-fifths a human being BS. The US Supreme Court had their hand in the Dred Scott case and Plessy v.Ferguson. Jim Crow. The Tuskegee Experiment and those are just some instances of State-Sanctioned Racism.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

to say that Slavery was "legal" is inappropriate....


Aug 28, 2016, 1:31 PM

it may have been backed by a Law or Laws,

but it was never backed by the Constitution itself.

Thus the Laws themselves were baseless, other than for the power of those who voted them in.

The fact that it took a Civil War to void those Laws off the books

is not a comment on the "legality" of those Laws,

but is rather a comment on the Political Power that rests outside the confines of a written piece of paper.

don't confuse "what people do in the name of the Constitution"

with the "legality" provided by that Constitution.

two different things entirely.

quite frankly, our Constitution should be seen as the as the greatest document ever inspired by man (i.e. not the Koran or the Bible for some).

that piece of paper can't stop people from acting badly though, unless others stand up to protect it....

hence a Civil War.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: to say that Slavery was "legal" is inappropriate....


Aug 28, 2016, 2:28 PM

> it may have been backed by a Law or Laws,
>
> but it was never backed by the Constitution itself.
>
> Thus the Laws themselves were baseless, other than
> for the power of those who voted them in.
>
> don't confuse "what people do in the name of the
> Constitution"
>
> with the "legality" provided by that Constitution.
>

You seem to be ignoring the facts. To see the profound flaw in your argument, you must look to the "Fugitive Slave Clause in the Constitution itself:

Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3,: "No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due."

According to the Constitution, a slave who escaped from bondage into a non-slave state must be returned to the slave state and his/her original owner.

Hence, the Constitution did in fact "back" slavery.

Facts are hard sometimes. :)

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: to say that Slavery was "legal" is inappropriate....


Aug 28, 2016, 4:21 PM [ in reply to to say that Slavery was "legal" is inappropriate.... ]

The United States did not invent slavery! It was around looking my before the 1600's and every race has been enslaved and every race has enslaved.
The USA took less than 100 years from it's founding to outlaw a practice that had been around forever.
Collin Kapernick nor anybody alive in America has been enslaved by nor have they been oppressed!
All people in the USA should count their blessings!
The Bible was inspired by God , not man!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: to say that Slavery was "legal" is inappropriate....


Aug 28, 2016, 10:10 PM

> The United States did not invent slavery! It was
> around looking my before the 1600's and every race
> has been enslaved and every race has enslaved.
> The USA took less than 100 years from it's founding
> to outlaw a practice that had been around forever.
> Collin Kapernick nor anybody alive in America has
> been enslaved by nor have they been oppressed!

Because we didn't invent it is irrelevant. England outlawed slavery in 1833 and didn't have to fight a war over it.

To say no one living has ever been oppressed is simply ignoring history and you certainly don't understand migrant worker's lives.

I would love for you to be right, but unfortunately you're not.

Oppression and slavery absolutely do still exist. Read this, it's from Mackenzie Alexander's hometown.

http://archive.naplesnews.com/news/local/brothers-receive-12-year-prison-terms-in-immokalee-human-slavery-case-ep-400544123-344259152.html

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: to say that Slavery was "legal" is inappropriate....


Aug 29, 2016, 12:09 AM

That is a very sad awful story that does not reflect the vast majority of the USA.
Also were any of these people here legally? Sometimes enforcing laws actually helps protect people!
Today I went to church, there were whites and Mexicans and Asians and Blacks all there all getting along and worshipping together.
I also went out for lunch and there again were many different races present. We all paid the same amount for the buffet and no one was denied service and whites even held the door for blacks and Visa Versa and we all got along just great!
Next was a movie where I had the same experience (except for some of the Hollowood crap in the previews)
By the way Ben Hur was excellent! ( there was true oppression)
I stand by my assertion that the oppression you speak of and that Collin K the Muslim Jihadist speaks of does not exist.
If you want to have better relations between cops and blacks then clean up the neighborhoods get rid of the drugs and the gangs and start showing respect for others and yourself!
That goes for all races!
There are problems but we should open our eyes and actually see who is causing them.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Trying to figure out if are responding to the original


Aug 28, 2016, 1:33 PM [ in reply to Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a ]

post or just making a statement. While I do agree their was institutionized racism in America's past, don't you think amends have been made to right the wrong?

I'll hang up listen.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

That was for Feel. Bitter much, buddy?***


Aug 28, 2016, 1:35 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a


Aug 28, 2016, 1:38 PM [ in reply to Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a ]

And we went from that to living in an era where we have a black president.

No, that is not a sign that all of society's ills are solved. Trump and the Alt-Right are proof positive of that. The schism that exists between the police and the black communities they're supposed to be protecting is still more proof there's still more progress to be made. There's a thousand lingering stereotypes that are etched in attitudes, the language, the unconscious manner we relate to and see the world.

But stuff is getting better, for all the idiots that try to continuously pour gasoline on old fires. And it seems there's no shortage of those this election cycle.

But the wonderful thing about the human being - regardless of the paint job they happen to be wearing - is self-awareness. We can reprogram ourselves. We can learn from our mistakes. We can re-shape the future.

Invective doesn't help. On either side. And hurling failings of white people from 75+ (or more) years ago back in our faces is invective as ridiculous as anything Trump and the Alt-Right blowhards have ever said.

Speak to the now, or you literally make my eyes glaze. Invective is for dumb angry people who want to nurse old wounds and behave like idiots.

Engagement is...very different. It starts with the idea of: what does a better future for everybody looks like. What seems fair to you? What seems fair to me? What does this better solution look like, and how do we get there?

Then again, your handle is "FEEL". Not a good sign.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Well said Quozzel. Especially the invective person. Race


Aug 28, 2016, 1:49 PM

baiting is solely reliant on these type people. Sadly to report, these type folks dominate our ever polarizing society. the further we stray from right and wrong and keep expanding the gray area, the less rational people will become.

I agree. Feel less, think more should be a mantra we all should follow.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

what?! you're like banning my right to rename buildings?!!


Aug 28, 2016, 1:56 PM [ in reply to Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a ]

dude, how will I then evoke true "social radicalism"?

how will I then through out the baby with the bathwater by following a mindless "Counter Culture"?

you steal all my thunder.

you blunt all my knives.

you make me live for the positive...

wtph is wrong with you?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a


Aug 28, 2016, 4:14 PM [ in reply to Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a ]

> You are clueless about American History. Slavery was
> legal in America. Congress passed that three-fifths a
> human being BS. The US Supreme Court had their hand
> in the Dred Scott case and Plessy v.Ferguson. Jim
> Crow. The Tuskegee Experiment and those are just some
> instances of State-Sanctioned Racism.

You failed to mention the 14th Amendment, Brown v The Board of Education, & the Voting Rights Act (thank you MLK). Also part of American history, all of which supercede your aforementioned examples of state sanctioned racism and would suggest to me that racism only exists in the hearts and minds of...racists

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

The constitution is not without imperfections either


Aug 28, 2016, 1:40 PM

Hence the ability to write amendments. Probably the greatest political move our forefathers made when drafting the rules for our country. There are many examples of the US citizens having rights infringed upon by the constitution. But now women can vote. Black people can vote. Black people can be free. Imagine, there was a time when this beloved constitution that is the pillar of freedom didn't allow black people the same rights as white people.

Freedom of speech is awesome because it lets anybody voice their opinion. Think about how powerful that is, even when it is against the country and it's constitution itself.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

so have KaperHole start an Amendment Party...


Aug 28, 2016, 1:57 PM

outside that process however

what he did was wrong.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I hope you felt that way about the unconstitutional patriot act***


Aug 28, 2016, 1:52 PM



badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

:)


Aug 28, 2016, 2:00 PM

always a lib around to stir the pot when you need one.

I suggest you read Q's post.

like a 1000 times.

then go out and do something positive rather than the status quo.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a


Aug 28, 2016, 2:00 PM

What I do know is that most of us had relatives who spit on and burned the flag of the United States in 1861-1865. Were they wrong? And if they weren't wrong, were they any more right than people who dissent against the flag now for their own reasons? Complex questions usually don't have easy answers.

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a


Aug 28, 2016, 10:46 PM

> What I do know is that most of us had relatives who
> spit on and burned the flag of the United States in
> 1861-1865. Were they wrong? And if they weren't
> wrong, were they any more right than people who
> dissent against the flag now for their own reasons?
> Complex questions usually don't have easy answers.

Post of the day. TU

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a


Aug 28, 2016, 2:02 PM

Jesus said in Matthew 7, "You will know them by their fruit."

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Gotta love these self help Protestant sects


Aug 28, 2016, 2:05 PM

Whatever you want the bible to mean.. That's what it means!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a


Aug 28, 2016, 2:06 PM

In answer to your first question, no they are not "Christians" in that they do not embrace the teachings of Christ with anything other than rhetoric.

On the flag, yours is a very well reasoned and lucid argument. However, it is unique in determining that the Flag only represents the Constitution. This is the first, as far as I can tell, that anyone has ever heard this. The stars represent the 50 states and the bars represent the 13 original colonies that seceded from England. The flag represents a lot of things, but primary among them is the people of the United States. It may also represent the freedoms provided by the Constitution as well, or the freedoms it provides. But I think it in error and historically inaccurate to say the flag only represents the Constitution.

You have to understand what the Constitution is. It is the framework for the relationship of the government with the people. It is at it's heart an elucidation of what power the government has over the people and it's limitations thereof. The "values of the nation-state behind it" are first and foremost limitations on government actions vs the inalienable rights of it's citizens.

Further, when you say: "But to disrespect the Constitution, or the Flag that represents the Constitution, is wrong. Eminently wrong. Ipso facto." is a grand and gross overstatement. The Constitution itself guarantees our citizens the right to disagree with and/or disrespect the Constitution if a citizen wants to. That is one of the Freedom's guaranteed by the it.

You must also remember that the Constitution has been changed 17 times since the first 10 amendments (Bill of Rights) were ratified in 1791.

Ultimately, the idea that protest against the government is in and of it'self a protest against the Constitution is contrary to the Constitution itself.

Freedom isn't always pretty. :)

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Nice rebuttal Felix2


Aug 28, 2016, 3:50 PM

Well said.



2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


freedom isn't always pretty.. neither are BS arguments...


Aug 28, 2016, 5:07 PM [ in reply to Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a ]

The Constitution is the basis of a Nation, of which there are now 50 states included under that Constitution and making up that Nation. So what? In fact the point is very much that the Flag has changed, while the underlying values and virtues of the Constitution have not - even as additional States were added under it.

I think you mistake geography for a Nation. Two different things.

And as far as the Flag representing many things, then yes, individuals can and will make up they own metaphors. But at it's base - the original purpose of the Flag itself - in all cases and not just here in the United States - the Flag was incorporated in order to symbolize the Nation brought to life ONLY by the Constitution. The Constitution is rightly, the end all, be all.

It's funny - you get on this very Board and you argue that the Confederate Battle Flag is a symbol of racism. Why is that? Well because it symbolized a people's willingness to fight and kill for racism. Without that very idea - if we're going to let everyone make up their own definition of what a Flag is all about - then there is no argument for taking down the Battle Flag. If I choose what it's about then I can say "it stands for peach cobbler, so leave it up". Doesn't work very well does it?

And then again you confuse yourself: protest against the Government is NOT protest against the Constitution. As many have pointed out here, the US Government has many times been incorporated in ways that we believe is not Constitutional. Often later Supreme Courts have gone back and struck down laws that have been not he books for many years. And the Emancipation Proclamation itself is probably the most well-known declaration that previous Governments had ratified and flaunted un-Constitutional Laws. Separating Government from the Constitution in one's mind is absolutely required, not just a suggestion.

One point: I don't mind at all your definition of what the Constitution is - maybe one of the better things you've ever put on this board. Too bad you don't do it more often.

Unfortunately, then you go and disrespect yourself. Oh when will you liberals give up your ego and emotion, your pride and yes, your prejudice? You're right when you say there is in fact nothing at all wrong with "disagreeing" with the Constitution. There is however in fact everything wrong with "disrespecting" the Constitution.

An Amendment is NOT "disrespect" for the Constitution - as you point out yourself, it is the natural conclusion of a process whereby the Document can be modified through appropriate discourse, argument, and possibly, voting. But to participate in that discourse is to show respect for not only the Amendment process, but also the Document which sets out the process itself - i.e. the Constitution.

What really frightens me here is your insistence that you be allowed to "disrespect" our Constitution, and thus the morals we're supposed to be living by. It's like you've got so much ego that you can't separate "disagree" (which you can do) from "disrespect" (a no-no).

And this is exactly WHY I can't stand modern-Liberalism: it is fraught with people, like yourself, who simply don't want to be told "no" and are willing to argue anything, make any rationalization, to make sure no one does tell you "no". It's really selfishness and self-deceit, not liberalism, but it's what passes these days.

Take it from a friend: you're not so well wired that you aren't just putting out arguments that Liberal media haven't been promoting to the gullible for 100 years now. They're not news, they're not inspired, and they're not fresh. They are tired and old, and we've got a sick society to show for it. You should stand up and take credit -

oops - I mean you should sit with KaperHole and take credit...

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: freedom isn't always pretty.. neither are BS arguments...


Aug 28, 2016, 10:36 PM

I'm sorry you take this all so seriously. It was never my intention to offend you. There is no need to be insulting. Your insistence on the flag representing the Constitution is simply wrong and contrary to history. It's not about liberals or conservatives, you just don't like being corrected.

Here is a picture of the first American Flag adopted by resolution of the 2nd Continental Congress on June 14, 1777. The resolution stated: "Resolved, That the flag of the thirteen United States be thirteen stripes, alternate red and white; that the union be thirteen stars, white in a blue field, representing a new constellation."

This was the first official American Flag. It was adopted 10 years before the Constitution existed.

The Constitution draft wasn't finished until 1787 and wasn't ratified by the states until September 13, 1787.

The American Flag could not represent a Constitution that hadn't been written yet. And after it was written, the Flag wasn't converted then, by heart or mind to represent the Constitution.

Stop being so personal. Your argument is simply in error. No harm done.



Message was edited by: Felix2®


badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


it's election year - it better be personal...


Aug 29, 2016, 1:04 AM

I still don't understand what you're missing here.

The original flag was created to represent a Union of thirteen states. Yes, exactly. This was all that existed at the time of a Nation, except, oh yes, the Declaration of Independence, which was the forerunner of the Constitution in terms of espousing the values defining the Nation.

So then what do you not get? Flags represent Nations and the values that create them. Constitutions, Declarations, Treaties, Alliances, et al. They're simply formal declarations of the values that Flags represent and define separate Nations.

If Nations aren't defined by separate values then why do separate Nations exist - maybe to highlight historical ethnic and racial differences? Wow, you've dug a big hole there, sir.

Flags simply do not represent whatever you as an individual want them to represent - as I pointed out, you can't get rid of the Confederate Battle Flag if you're going with such a "diverse" opinion. If you do provide individual interpretations of Flags, the Battle Flag won't represent "slavery" to many who instead still revere it as a symbol of sacrifice. You just can;t have it both ways, bub.

The problem is Felix is that you want a "result" but you can't provide the consistent argument to support that "result". That is a typical "political" faux pas, and yes, it happens on both sides of the aisle.

I'm simply using the opportunity to highlight the naivete of traditionally historical Liberal arguments about "freedom of choice". Those arguments often carry well in the Liberal media when there's no one to challenge their lack of consistency, but that's often about all they can do.

It's too bad our public schools teach so little critical thinking that a largesse of current voters apparently can't really sustain these types of trains of consistent thought - present company included it appears.

Why else do you think we're left with two crooks like Clinton and Trump as our "candidates"? People simply can no longer think on their own - or care so little about each other and our Country so as not to fight even the most egregious political corruption. Probably both, actually.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

fantastic***


Aug 28, 2016, 2:59 PM



military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

GOP Christians...


Aug 28, 2016, 3:38 PM

To take it to a further extreme, cam someone please explain how there are even any Christian Republicans at all?

On which side of the universal health care issue do you imagine you might find Jesus the free healer?

Jesus also said that to follow him, you needed to give all your money to the poor and Republicans spit up at the notion of giving anything to the poor- even children. Come the Judgment Day you all imagine, you’d have to think millions of Republican camels are going to be lined up trying like hell to pass through the eye of that needle the book none of you reads or heeds mentions.

As for the racism issue, Jesus might have been a lot of things but European White is not one of them.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

so democratic Christians are walking the walk with abortion and rewarding sloth?


Aug 28, 2016, 4:23 PM

The truth is we are all hypocrites and that's why we need a Savior. Politics is the art of pitting sheep against one another while the wolves secretly work together to gain wealth and power. Think about the issues that flare up every election cycle. Can they really be solved? The person who wants the rich to pay more in taxes is the same as a rich person who hoardes cash. The essence of both stances is greed. two sides of the same coin. Meanwhile, poverty and hunger will not be cured by politicians. There's a reason someone is willing to spend tens of millions of dollars to win a job that pays $175,000 per year.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Jesus couldn't heal today too many regulations & high


Aug 28, 2016, 4:25 PM [ in reply to GOP Christians... ]

malpractice insurance :)

badge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: GOP Christians...


Aug 28, 2016, 6:29 PM [ in reply to GOP Christians... ]

Jesus was not worried about your health care. If he wanted to heal someone he did in order to bring Glory to his Father in Heaven.
Jesus was and is concerned about your soul! Your eternal soul!
But as far a governments and political party's and you and me.
"All have sinned and come short of the Glory of God".

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a


Aug 28, 2016, 4:50 PM

Well said epifunny! This is our country and our ????!! I never thought I would see the day that a professional athlete would disrespect our ???? that brave men and women of all diffirent races have fought and died for. Its plum out disrespectful and a crying shame that a pro athlete and role model to millions of kids, would pull some kind of selfish stunt like this. Pathetic is the first thought I come up with, when I here or think of Kolin Kaepernick!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

How about that DW? Awesome, right?***


Aug 28, 2016, 6:51 PM



2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: if a Christian evidences racism towards minorities is he a


Aug 29, 2016, 7:43 AM

wrong board

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

March 4th 2016- "Lee won't be here 4 years from today" - Viztiz


Replies: 34
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic