Some Americans Blind to Cause for Alarm

I just ran into a blog post entitled, "Why fuss over Obama's church-going?" That question isn't too hard to answer. The concern isn't primarily about religion, but rather the simple fact that Obama is a member of a group with such clearly radical ideas. Trinity United Church of Christ, which Obama has been a member of since 1991, is far from a typical Christian church. The pastor, Reverend Wright, openly adheres to and preaches Black liberation theology, which is not ordinary for even black churches. Black liberation theology purports that blacks are victims of the rich whites, and need to be liberated, and contains many Marxist principles. It is considered by many to create racism and separatism even where there was none originally.

Reverend Wright appeared in an interview with Hannity(2:00), who brought up a statement on the church's website that the members are "pledging allegiance to all black leadership who have embraced the black values system." The Reverend continually interrupted Hannity by asking if he knew Black liberation theology, and how many of Cone's books he had read. Wright implied that the "Theology" and "Cone's books" were of such importance that Hannity could not talk to him about the statement on the church's website until he knew it and had read them. Wright was speaking of Jamie Cone, a major advocate of the Theology. Here are excerpts from two of Cone's books, illustrating both his admiration for Marxism and the radical nature of his beliefs.

"Marxism as a tool of social analysis can disclose the gap between appearance and reality, and thereby help Christians to see how things really are." For My People

"Black theology refuses to accept a god who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If god is not for us, and against white people, then he is a murderer and we had better kill him." Black Theology and Black Power

Two other issues to cause concern are the church's honoring of black extremist Louis Farrakhan, and the extent of Wright's radical ideas, illustrated by his belief about AIDS. First, Trinity United Church of Christ's annual Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award was given to Louis Farrakhan, a man the church's publication wrote "truly epitomized greatness." (Washington Post) Farrakhan is considered anti-semitic by many, and has said,“Do you know some of these satanic Jews have taken over BET?... Everything that we built, they have. The mind of Satan now is running the record industry, movie industry and television. And they make us look like we’re the murders; we look like we’re the gangsters, but we’re punk stuff.” (ADL) Second, Reverend Wright believes that the AIDS virus was created by the US government as a means of genocide against blacks. He has spoken up(0:41) on the issue in his church.

To say that Obama has recently separated himself from Wright does not dismiss the issue of the connection and Wright's influence on Obama. Obama has called Wright his "mentor," he is involved in the church, and a sermon by Wright inspired the title of one of his books, The Audacity of Hope. Revered Wright said to a New York Times reporter, “If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me. I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen.” Obama distancing himself from this person to improve his chances politically should not convince anyone that his feelings have changed. As a matter of fact, Wright prayed with Obama and his family prior to the presidential announcement.

It should concern every US citizen that the man to take over the presidency has chosen to be a member of a church with such radical ideas and teachings for such a long period of time. I believe it is lucky for Obama that his involvement in the church was not greater, or he would not have been able to brush off the connection as easily. That this clear alliance with a radical group did not cause more alarm forces me to seriously question the discernment of voters.

not so sure about this...

Instant messaging is something that is very normal to me, but there is something about it that bothers me. What I question most is the way in which emotional intimacy and seemingly harmless bonds can be created so easily, even so casually(which, of course, is an oxymoron.) If two people are dating, they may have a problem with their partner having this sort of emotional intimacy in person with another person of the opposite sex. But as long as it is online, it can be passed off as something casual. I have begun to question the wisdom and appropriateness of such "online" friendships. I mean, I am in love with my boyfriend and he is in love with me, but our relationship began in the same way these friendships do: from conversation, which created emotional intimacy, to a close friendship, which led to the love and relationship we have today.

off to a bit of a slow start. need to do housework and homework today, then going to church, then going to rehearsal. hopefully i'll do some writing at rehearsal.