TRUE Christian Ex-negro Ministry!

by Kent 27 Replies latest jw friends

LDH

Rochelle,
I agree with you, I find it outrageous that you can't participate fully in our paranoid society if you are a lesbian/homosexual.
And yes, I do have a VERY good understanding of the issue. Someone VERY closely related to me by marriage was the first black attorney the largest insurance company in the states hired.
He worked for them for 30 years, all the time moving up the corporate ladder and ended up being one of the most respected attorneys of his time. The whole time, he hid the fact that he was gay.
And when he died of AIDS, no one knew the reason. He paid all his medical expenses out of pocket because he didn't want his diagnosis public. Almost one half a million dollars.
I guess for him, dealing with being black in corporate America was enough of a burden, he chose to not reveal that he was homosexual.
So while the pain may be comparative, I was only pointing out that one CAN be hidden for certain purposes, but not the other.
And I don't disrespect or dislike Kent, he's trying to start dialogue.
Love
Lisa
AGuest

Hi, dear 'Sun... and may you have peace!
I got Kent's 'satire' as well... But not all will, and while all things are lawful, not all things are advantageous. Does that mean we should stop speaking simply because folks won't... or don't... understand? Now, think... who's speaking here - LOL! But in truth, Kent most probably should have a put a disclaimer... out of love. Why? Because not doing so makes him a hypocrite. How so? Because he is attempting to 'reveal' 'true' 'christianity'... and it's hatred and hypocrisy... but by not taking into account the feelings of ALL others, he kinda did the same thing.
Did I take offense? No, for I know Kent meant none. But I truthfully think he should have thought carefully about the item and, as I said, put a disclaimer for those he KNEW would take it the wrong way (yes, you DID know, Kent, and that's why it's hypocrisy).
As for Lisa's comments and yours about blacks and homosexuality, I think Lisa MEANT that if you WANTED to hide your orientation (not necessarily would or needed to, but WANTED to), you could. However, unless one is extremely pale, one cannot 'hide' being black.
Does that make discrimination of either groups right? Absolutely not. Does that make acceptance of one more than the other 'righteous'? Nope. I know some VERY loving homosexual people, some who helped me greatly before I was 'assimilated' by the borg. Hearts of gold. And I know some blacks who I wouldn't be caught in a dark alley with. And some whites, latinos, asians, etc., too.
It just seems to me that the PROBLEM is people using race as a means to 'inflame' others. On both sides. Black people saying, "Hey, let's bring the race thing out". Why? To truly discuss a peaceful resolution and give points of view that will 'enlighten'? Or to inflame and start a 'controversial' discussion. White people who post things such as Kent did, to say, "Hey, this is what OTHER people think... and it's stupid," or to say, "Hey, take a look at THIS", for purposes of throwing out 'chum' and watching the resultant 'entertainment'?
I don't understand this, truly. I mean, call me 'naive' and living in a fantasy world (some do), but I don't understand the underlying maliciousness in people and their attempts to mask it with 'What did I do wrong? I only opened up a discussion for debate." In truth, some will see it that way, but others will see it differently... for what it truly is... a provocation.
Provocation is not, of course, always a bad thing, but it depends on the INTENT, yes? If one is provoking to open a discussion that leads to enlightenment, acceptance and understanding, then, of course, that is a good thing. But if one is provoking so as to 'start something' that will lead to animosity and division... what is the 'good' in that? Truthfully, I don't 'get it'.
Kent should have stated his INTENT when posting such a provocative statement. He signed it "George Bush", but it isn't until one gets down to the end that one knows Kent is satirizing someone else. Not all will get that far, though, and Kent knows it. His intent, then, was not 'honorable', and he and others, then, can't really get upset if it's taken the wrong way.
"If in doubt, ask for clarification; If subject to being doubted, clarify."
I bid you the utmost of peace, and I remain,
Your servant, and a slave of Christ,
SJ
Kent

Kent should have stated his INTENT when posting such a provocative statement. He signed it "George Bush", but it isn't until one gets down to the end that one knows Kent is satirizing someone else. Not all will get that far, though, and Kent knows it. His intent, then, was not 'honorable', and he and others, then, can't really get upset if it's taken the wrong way.

First, I believe people should READ a post before being offended. And - if you READ this post, you would know that this was satire - unless you're a religious fundie, stupid, or extremely American. (No offence - but it's the stuff about the national sport).
I didn't "sign" anything. This is written by someone else, and I forgot to paste in the URL. What SHOULD worry you is that this IS Christianity at its best!
You can prove anything from the Bible, and people do it all the time. When some moron starts talking about TRUE Christianity - and tells others I'm an asshole never seen before in history, I don't get angry by this - but I find it to be a golden oportunity to post what's REAL Christianity!
I agree this post could bee seen as "disgusting" - but REAL Christian values ARE disgusting. The Christian God is disgusting, and the Bible itself is a bad joke. That's MY opinion. Nobody have to agree, and nobody needs to sympathise with my opinions either.
You think you know me, and you say:
Not all will get that far, though, and Kent knows it. His intent, then, was not 'honorable'
Naturally I know that everyone won't read everything. So what? If someone takes offence of some statements without reading the full statement, that person is an idiot. This has nothing to do with me being 'honorable' or not.
I know honesty is dead dangerous. As a famous comedian - even an American say - If we started being honest in America, the whole country would be fucked up in hours!
Yakki Da
Kent
"The only difference between God and Adolf Hitler is that God is more proficient at genocide."
Daily News On The Watchtower and the Jehovah's Witnesses:
http://watchtower.observer.org
AGuest

Dearest Kent... may you have peace!
First, let me say that I did know your post was satire... I read it in its entirety. My point is that you can't really 'decry' the hypocrisy of 'christianity' if you do the same hypocritical thing you accuse them of. And, dear one, you did.
Your point is that although they SAY they do, 'christianity' has no love. But your intention to provoke in a negative way, shows that you don't either in this particular matter. I can read your postings, and many others can, too, and get your point. But we both know that not all can do that, nor will they, because the way it was set up was an enticement to provocation. C'mon, Kent... YOU'RE A SMART MAN. You know what you did and what you intended it to do. It doesn't take an exceptional IQ to 'see' that.
As for you 'signing' it 'George Bush', I retract that. I know that you did not 'sign' it, but merely copied and posted it, but what I meant is that some would wonder just where YOUR feelings truly fit in this and yes, they would have to read all the way to the bottom to determine it. And, Kent, you knew... just at the WTBTS knows... that many folks don't LIKE to read and so would not get all the way to the bottom without becoming inflamed. And since your intent WAS to inflame (you're not that 'obscure', though I know you would like to be), such an intent was not 'honorable'.
I am not disagreeing with you on your position of 'christianity', as you perceive it, for I understand the foundation for that perception... 'false' christianity. People who SAY they are 'christians' simply because they claim to be disciples of Christ and 'live by the Bible'. That, however, is not true 'christianity'. A true christian does not live by the Bible, but by the spirit. Most who claim to BE christians do not possess such spirit; that is why my Lord says of them, "Get away from me... I never KNEW you". For it is by that spirit that such ones ARE 'known'.
The 'christian' god that YOU refer to, as many have PAINTED him, is truly undesirable. But how would YOU feel if everyone based their determination of YOU... and their perceived KNOWLEDGE of you... on what is 'written'. Before you answer, think about the perception of you that I got, just based on this post... and your response to it. To wit:
"You THINK you know me."
I 'think I know you' (actually, I don't; I just responded to what you posted and how...) based on what? If what you say is true, then on what I read, yes? And yet, what you posted in its entirety is NOT 'you', yes? But some will think it is. And yet, you base YOUR knowledge and perception of my Lord... on what YOU read, yes? And what others have told you certain things 'written' MEAN, yes? Thus, you said:
"Naturally I know that everyone won't read everything.
Hmmmmmm...
"So what? If someone takes offence of some statements without reading the full statement, that person is an idiot.
Hmmmmmm...
"This has nothing to do with me being 'honorable' or not.
And yet, you have in essence accused my Father of being 'disgusting'. Tell me, have YOU read everything about HIM? Have you not 'taken offence' without reading 'the full statement' as well? No, for even if you read the Bible from cover to cover, it doesn not CONTAIN the 'full statement' of my Father and my Lord. And such 'full statement' has not been made available to you... partly because all of it could not be contained in mere books, partly because of the 'false stylus' of the scribes, partly because some men took it upon theirselves to decide what was appropriate to be included and what was not... and partly because you have not 'asked' for it.
My point is that we all have to take care with regard to 'leaven', Kent. We can go around decrying the hypocrisy of others, but in truth, to not examine ourselves FIRST... is folly. We must FIRST... extract the 'rafter' from our OWN eye; THEN, we can 'see' how to extract the 'straw' from our brothers.
I wish you NOTHING but peace... and I am truly sorry if I 'inflamed' you by my response. That was not my intent at all, in all sincerity.
I remain...
Your servant and a slave of Christ,
SJ
Sunchild

Hi, Shelby!
As for Lisa's comments and yours about blacks and homosexuality, I think Lisa MEANT that if you WANTED to hide your orientation (not necessarily would or needed to, but WANTED to), you could. However, unless one is extremely pale, one cannot 'hide' being black.

And my point was that I don't understand how that's relevant. The entire point of the satire Kent posted was to illustrate how silly it was to discriminate against people. If it's wrong to discriminate against Black people -- who cannot change their color -- why is it any more "acceptable" to discriminate against gay people, who also cannot change who they are? That was the point, I think. Nothing more; nothing less. JanH articulated this better than I probably could.
Moreover, I think it's actually more stressful to have an "invisible" trait that people might hate you for. Keeping such a very big secret can be quite a drain, with all the fear of being discovered and having to pretend you're something you're not. I guess that's why, since I live in a liberal climate, I don't make any effort to hide who I am... except, unfortunately, in front of my own parents.
It just seems to me that the PROBLEM is people using race as a means to 'inflame' others. On both sides.

I dunno, I just didn't take this as being "inflamatory" myself. It was simply a means of proving a point. I know that Kent isn't a racist person, and I knew what the meaning of the post was. I also knew that the stereotypes given in the post were just another way of bringing that point home. Stereotyping homosexuals -- especially by people who make a conscious effort to avoid them and don't even try to understand them -- is just as silly as stereotyping Blacks. Again, as someone who fits into both categories, I think it's a fair tactic.
Kent should have stated his INTENT when posting such a provocative statement.

This, I agree with. A disclaimer of some sort might've been a good idea, though it might've dulled the impact a bit.
*Rochelle.
---------
"Most men complacently accept 'knowledge' as 'truth'. They are sheep, ruled by fear."
-- Sydney Losstarot, "Vagrant Story."
bigboi

Hey Rochelle:
You said:
I dunno, I just didn't take this as being "inflamatory" myself
I think you are wrong. If Kent meant this as a joke he would never have included my name in the post, point blank. When he did that,he made it a personal matter. He even put my name alongside two individuals that are rather "unleavened", an oreo and a sellout. I don't appreciate that shit one bit. It's a friggen naz....oh..uh.. I mean, travesty of justice. The reference to trash hurt esepecially. I mean, how can Kent be so hypocritical? Has anyone seen that pic of Kent on his website? Come on if that ain't bright(rhymes with?)trash, I dunno what is! Come on! He looks like a broke ass Chuck Norris doing a Don Johnson impersonation from his Miami Vice days. Anyway I like Kent. His site helped me out a lot wwhen I first started surfing the web. Thank God I didn't know who this asshole really was or I might've never took the time to look.
Stay up peoples.
ONEloveluvluvislove,love
Bigboi
"it ain't what ya do. it's how you do it" quote from the song "True Honeybunz" by Bahamadia
COMF

Please send your contribution of $1,000 or more to Simon Invoking God’s Old Testament Standards c/o jehovahs-witness.com

Whoops, part of the humor was lost in the editing here. "Simon" replaced something that started with a B. Wonder what it was? Bible-lovers? Believers? Bullshitters?
COMF
Bendrr

Kent, I laughed my ass off.
Bigboi, my friend, it was humor. He did what many BLACK comedians do all the time and poked fun at a racial stereotype.
His post didn't cause a black/hispanic/jewish/indian/gay person to miss out on a job/home/loan/relationship or anything else.
He made a joke. You yourself praised his website. He wouldn't have put that time and effort into a website if he didn't care about ALL people, not just white folks.
Y'all just calm down a little bit, don't start any kind of "thought police" here.
your friend,
mike.
Expect nothing and you will never be disappointed,
Sunchild

I think you are wrong. If Kent meant this as a joke he would never have included my name in the post, point blank. When he did that,he made it a personal matter.

Hm. In that case, you could be right: it was meant to be inflamatory, at least for the people he singled out. But it's also possible that he was only joking.
I'm sorry, I didn't really pay attention to the names. I just remembered reading this article somewhere else, either Landover Baptist or The Onion, so I didn't read Kent's version very carefully. It seemed like most of the reaction here was to the paralleling of racial discrimination with discrimination based on sexual orientation, and that's what I responded to.
*Rochelle.
---------
"Most men complacently accept 'knowledge' as 'truth'. They are sheep, ruled by fear."
-- Sydney Losstarot, "Vagrant Story."
bigboi

Rochelle and Bendrr:
You guys took my post out of context. I was attempting to be funny, too. that explains the lame ass joke at the end of the post. Maybe I shudda made a declaration of intent, huh? Or I shudda used a couple of smilies, huh? I thought I did though by saying I liked the guy and givin props to his website. It was all jokes y'all. Maybe a bit dry but jokes none the less. Shit, afterwhile mofos gonna be referring to me as BigboiX around this mofo.
ONE....whose never been taken this seriously in his life
bigboi
"it ain't what ya do. it's how you do it" quote from the song "True Honeybunz" by Bahamadia

TRUE Christian Ex-negro Ministry!

Share this