Where would the left be if MLK had "kept his faith to himself"?

[SoCalDem]

posed by an evangelical christian on Lou Dobbs.. The HUBRIS is astounding..

The real question is where would the REPUBLICAN right be without the radical rightwing zealots??


Although MLK was a man of faith, he did not demonize "the other side". His mission was equality for ALL people. If he had not been REV. MLK, you might not have even KNOWN he was a minister. His whole movement was NOT about any specific religion or belief system... It was about human dignity and fairness...

The mission of the "religious right" is the destruction and demonization of ALL who do not believe as THEY do.


There's a HUGE difference..

[RPM]

1. well stated.

thanks!

[RetroLounge]

2. I don't remember MLK telling me I would go to hell

if I didn't become a Xtian.

Major difference...

RL

[stray cat]

3. The difference is in their faith.

MLK put his faith into action and it is a faith I share.

I do not recognize the "faith" of the extreme "religious right". It has little to do with Christianity and alot to do with selfishness, self-righteousness and self-gratification. It has nothing to do with Jesus Christ.

[FreedomAngel82]

30. Another point is

MLK didn't deny people civil rights because of sexual orientation! On this one Christian board I go to I started a RIP MLK thread and someone posted how a same-sexual site had something up about him and this person was PISSED. Ugh. I so went off on them.

[wildeyed]

4. It was about dignity, fairness and non-violence.

He was against the Vietnam war, too.

[SoCalDem]

6. People who were very young or unborn back then do not understand

how ALL issues of the time merged, because at their core, they were really the SAME issue.

Equality...

Whites-only voted for legislators and laws that excluded and damaged black people

Poor young men were sent off to die because they were poor and had no political capital to spend..or a rich Daddy to "save" them

women were treated as "possessions" and got no respect in the workplace...lousy pay, bad treatment from untouchable bosses

even Roe v Wade had "equality" issues at its core.. Rich women have always had the means and methods to "fix their little problem", but poor women were doomed to dirty motel rooms, newspapers on the floor, and a med student with a coat hanger...if they were lucky :(

All the issues that morphed together were of ONE theme.. Equality

[Sandpiper]

5. MLK actually believed all that nonsense that Jesus said

About caring for the poor, powerless, and downtrodden, and not resisting violence with more violence.

[Fleshdancer]

8. and he never wasted his time demonizing cartoon characters

he even used words like "tolerance" and "diversity". Wild concept.

[sw04ca]

7. On the other hand...

A lot of ideas about equality and fairness come from Christianity, although we generally don't see them in the cultural war. But before the war started, you heard more of it. Hell, the entire idea of human rights, despite being really fleshed out in the Age of Absolutism, was born out of the ancient embryo of man being uniquely created in the image of the Christian god. It wasn't such a natural step as one might think, especially since our parent civilizations had no such concept as equality or social justice.

[SoCalDem]

10. hmmmm... the Spanish Inquisition comes to mind..

not much fairness and christian love there..

and the Puritans were not very "kind"...

Sorry, but when people are not accepted at face value, and must somehow "prove" their worthiness to exist, I don't buy it :)

[sw04ca]

13. It doesn't alter my point...

...that the concept of human rights was massively influenced by Christian thought. Of course, no philosophy of peace and love and human rights can succeed when applied to an entire society, but it doesn't change the fact that Christian philosophy was vital in the creation of the modern gospel of human rights.

[realisticphish]

16. that makes no sense

stalin was an athiest, and he wasn't exactly a nice guy. that doesn't mean athiests don't have good ideas.


:hippie: The Incorrigible Democrat

[xultar]

9. I think you mistated what he was saying he appeard to be on OUR SIDE...

He was anti war and @ the end was cut of when he was saying that you shouldn't throw sticks when you have a log in your own eye in relation to 9/11.


Furthermore he was saying that the Democrats have a huge advantage where religion is concerned. He was talking about helping the poor etc.

Where MLK was concerned he was saying hey...MLK a democrat used his religion as a foundation from which to speak out on issues of civil rights etc. HE was saying that we seem to have forgatten that and we should go back to it. I agree.

[SoCalDem]

11. Whose "side" he was on, was not what bugged me..

His inference was that had MLK NOT been a public figure, the democrats would already be "extinct". The message I got, was that he was "our" religious base, and without aligning with him, we would HAVE no values..:(

he did in it a "left-handed" way but the inference was there.

[xultar]

12. I totallly didn't see al that. It was like you were watching a different

show. :shrug: Perhaps I missed something.

So, I defer to your expert analysis.

[SoCalDem]

14. No expert here.. media is like that..

We can all see different slants to the same story.. I see your point as well :hi:

[saltpoint]

15. Faulkner said it is the privilege of writers to provide --

-- uplift and exaltation to the people. Dr. King borrowed from the minisry of Jesus of Galilee to achieve the same goals. The "I Have a Dream" speech is a history-maker in part because it dips deep into historical oratory and taps the blood vein right into the human heart.

The Far Right's attempt to co-op Dr. King is identity theft of the worst kind -- a spiritual rape and manipulation.

A good reporter -- and Lou Dobbs is not one -- would have called that evangelical christian to task for the inane comparison.

[dsc]

17. Anyone who listened to MLK would have known he was a Christian

His speeches are replete with religious imagary.

[BiggJawn]

18. What parts of his religion did he try to make into Law?

I mean the BAD stuff, the stoning and abommination stuff, not that boring "love one another" stuff.

Iwas a very young boy then, but I have NO recall of dr. King running around spewing crap from the Book of Leviticus like the RW Neo-Cons do.

[Hissyspit]

19. And He Was Not President of the U.S.

so it's a false analogy

[sonicx]

21. He means King didn't personally advocate it...

in other words, he's not like Jerry Falwell.

[BiggJawn]

23. Exactly. n/t

[FreedomAngel82]

31. Jerry Falwell only

wishes he was an MLK jr.

[BiggJawn]

24. William Hudnut.

Former Mayor of Indianapolis, is an ordained minister.
But he had no "Office of Faith-Based Doo-Hickeys".

In fact, he was so low-key about his religion that i can't even recall what sect he belongs to.

Of course, there's some facets of his personal life that ain't exactly "Christ-like", either...;-)

[IrateCitizen]

37. What about former US Rep Bob Edgar (D-PA)?

He's an ordained minister (Methodist, I believe), and the head of the National Council of Churches, a mainstream Protestant organization.

IIRC, he was not given to trying to advance laws with a "Biblical" basis during his time in the House.

There's also a new Democratic Rep from MO, I believe from Kansas City, who is an ordained minister. I heard an interview with him in which he lambasted what the RR is trying to do to the country.

[Spider Jerusalem]

20. MLK's faith told him that we're all equal in the eyes of god...

the fundamentalists, on the other hand, think they're special, anointed, and everyone else is going to hell. Therein lies the difference. A faith of unity, love, and universal brotherhood vs. one of divisiveness, intolerance, and hate.

[DARE to HOPE]

22. They are Dominionists, heretics, and as for Falwell,

aren't he and Robertson both paid assets of the CIA?

They are trying to 1) divide us and 2) destroy the very meaning of the word "Christian."

MLK shared his faith in a way which was formative for many of us (including Hillary) who remain activist Christians today.

[bread_and_roses]

25. MLK was not an elected official

a critical difference that these Theocrats, with their disregard for the separation of Church/State don't think important.

I don't care if elected officials are open about their "faith" as long as they keep it out of their policy. Nor do I think it appropriate for citizins to be subjected to religion when they participate in a civic function. I recently attended the swearing-in of our local Dem legislators, but got up and walked out when they started with a prayer - a specifically Christian prayer at that.

[SoCalDem]

26. I don't even want to know what religion they ARE..

Until Kennedy, it was not even an issue, and with him it was only because he was the 1st Catholic.

Before Kennedy, people did not even know what faith the presidents were.. It was not "polite" to discuss religion. People just assumed that everyone had thier own private religious beliefs.

It's almost a requirement now...candidates seem to feel that they have to "out-God" their opponents and it's disgusting.

Decency is so much more than toting a Bible around and mangling some verses..:(

[bread_and_roses]

38. You are right...religiosity has become a sort of "litmus"

and all this "out-god"-ing as you put it has no place in politics. It is contrary to the spirit, if not the letter, of the Constitution. It is hard for me to understand how so many seem to be taken in by what is plainly a ploy and a sham in so many instances. By "open" I simply meant "no need to hide" not an invitation to bring religion into every public pronouncement.

[ultraist]

28. EXACTLY! MLK Jr was a PRIVATE CITIZEN

And he did not advocate disregarding the Constitution to legislate personal religious beliefs.

He drew parallels between Christianity and equality. There is nothing wrong with that. Freedom of religion.

What he did NOT do, was advocate that we legislate RELIGIOUS DOGMA that defied our Constitution.

Private citizens have a right to freedom of religion. That freedom does not allow legislators to impose their beliefs on all of us if they are in opposition with our Constitution.

If churches want to support their peace movements by quoting the Bible, so be it. Faith based peace orgs are PRIVATE and are not pushing to legislate any religious beliefs that conflict with our Constitution.

Once again, they are distorting the truth!

It's pretty simple, if it conflicts with our Constitution, just because it's "Christian" doesn't mean it should be allowed.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

27. Rigthwing playbook rule #5332:

When criticized, defend yourself by quoting or referring to someone whom you hated when he was alive.

[ultraist]

29. "You're either on Kerry's side or the side of the MM conspiracy theorists"

WHO SAID THAT AT THE CERTIFICATION OF THE ELECTORAL VOTES? That's right, a RWer!

How many times did we hear, 'Kerry did not contest, why are all of you nutty tin foil hat, godzilla movie, Michael Moore radical fringe freaks complaining?'

Playbook rule #5332! GOOD ONE! :D

[FreedomAngel82]

32. It's so sad

how they demonize when they're a live (like with Jesse Jackson for example) and when they died they use their name to invoke them and look holy. :puke:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

33. The worst recent example was when Peggy Noonan wrote

about how Paul Wellstone would not have liked his own memorial service.

Right, as if the entire Republican establishment wasn't high-fiving each other over that particular plane crash. :grr:

[IrateCitizen]

34. Very misleading, SoCalDem...

I'm not debating the hypocrisy of the religious right here -- their clownish antics are well-documented here. But this part of your statement is beyond incredible:
If he had not been REV. MLK, you might not have even KNOWN he was a minister.

I think you'd better go back and read some of his speeches. The are FILLED with religious language -- calls for us to live up to our calling as "sons of the living God", for example. Everything he spoke about -- fairness, equality, goodwill, brotherhood, etc. -- was couched in religious language.

What you fail to realize is that it was the fact that his rather radical ideas (for the time) being couched in religious language is what made him so effective. He was able to advocate massive change while at the same time remaining true to many old traditions and institutions.

But now, many of us on the left would rather smash these traditions to bits in our smug satisfaction -- or, in this case, revise the history to pretend that they were never touched on by the left.

[SoCalDem]

35. I should have gone further.. What I "meant" was that he was

a preacher by trade, but he did not PREACH that his way was the ONLY way, and that you were EVIL if you did not see it his way..

The guy on TV was linking MLK to the left as our "only" link to religion and values, and inferred that if MLK had not been "left of center", the dems would have NO values.. That's how I took his comments.

MLK speeches were certainly biblical, but I never saw them as cultish criticism of non believers..

[IrateCitizen]

36. OK, I can agree much more with that...

Personally, I think that we've become so consumed with the idea of NOT offending people with no religious faith on the left, that we've lost the touchstone that has traditionally grounded most progressive causes throughout American history. The end result has been that the religious right has presented themselves as the only true voice of religious values in this country, while the religious left has been left floundering.