PDA

View Full Version : Kentucky church bans interracial marriage



Steely Dan
12-02-2011, 06:30 AM
Kentucky church bans interracial marriage
By Eric Pfeiffer |

http://l1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/KsvPpprAs5J2COTQo9WMfQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTE5MA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/thesideshow/MarriageBan.jpg
Stella Harville and Ticha Chikuni in a November 2010 photo by Harville (AP)

...A copy of the recommendation, obtained by WYMT, reads in part:

That the Gulnare Freewill Baptist Church does not condone interracial marriage. Parties of such marriages will not be received as members, nor will they be used in worship services and other church functions, with the exception being funerals. All are welcome to our public worship services. This recommendation is not intended to judge the salvation of anyone, but is intended to promote greater unity among the church body and the community we serve.

Members of the church held a vote on Thompson's proposed language, with nine voting in favor and six voting against. The other members in attendance chose not to vote....

The red coloring is done by me for emphasis.

I know this is not representative of all of Kentucky or the south as a whole, and the article points out that other churches in the area were quick to denounce this, but this is what makes people think the south is still very racist.

In 2009 we had the Louisiana Judge who refused to marry interracial couples too. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90275&highlight=interracial+couple+denied+marriage IMO, people in those areas need to make a huge public display against this kind of thing in order to break the stereotype.

I'm not sure if the church is more against his being African American or the fact that he's highly educated, because there are a lot dumb ***** in that church. JMO

On the other hand I at least respect them for being openly honest. I think, and this applies to the whole country, that a lot of racism, sexism, anti-gay sentiment and religious hatred is kept behind the eyes these days.

josie1986
12-02-2011, 06:47 AM
Have these people even read the Bible?? Based on Jesus's geographic location he is most likely to have had darker skin and not what we see depicted in most images of what people think he looked like.

This is totally shocking,is this a different church to the story posted yesterday??

Everyone is the same on the inside whether they are Caucasian,African American,Asian etc the colour of someone's skin doesn't make the person I just wish everyone would think the same.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

Steely Dan
12-02-2011, 07:21 AM
Have these people even read the Bible?? Based on Jesus's geographic location he is most likely to have had darker skin and not what we see depicted in most images of what people think he looked like.

This is totally shocking,is this a different church to the story posted yesterday??

Everyone is the same on the inside whether they are Caucasian,African American,Asian etc the colour of someone's skin doesn't make the person I just wish everyone would think the same.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

Can you link the story posted yesterday. Nothing came up when I searched, TIA.

LolaMoon08
12-02-2011, 09:18 AM
I remember a story from a few years ago from Georgia. The school was intergrated, but they still had segregated proms. White prom and Black prom. I have no idea where Asian or Hispanic students fit in? If I am remembering correctly, a few White and a lot of Black students didn't want to have a segregated prom but they were met with a lot of defiance from the public and some students wanting to keep the proms segregated. It was a big deal and although there ended up being an intergrated prom, the White students still had a prom just for them.

I remember being really sad because my High School years were filled with so many close friends from all races.

It's really sad to hear that these things still go on. We have come so far, but we're obviously just not there yet.

My Aunt married a Black man back in the early 70's. They are still married today. My uncle and cousins are black and it can get very personal for me because I love them so much and they do not deserve to be treated like this. We are all humans.

believe09
12-02-2011, 09:46 AM
Honestly-in this day and age. I am sorry, but this story made me laugh only because I suspect that someone affiliated with the church is looking for their 15 minutes, kind of like the guy who announced he would burn the Koran.

believe09
12-02-2011, 09:48 AM
Can you link the story posted yesterday. Nothing came up when I searched, TIA.


http://abcnews.go.com/US/kentucky-church-bans-interracial-couples/story?id=15065204

There are a couple of different MSM sources, but here is ABC.

Steely Dan
12-02-2011, 09:51 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/24/magazine/24prom-t.html?pagewanted=all

A Prom Divided

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/05/24/magazine/600x330_laub_blackprom_2009_0313.jpg
Students from Montgomery County High School in Mount Vernon, Ga., before the prom.
Photographs by GILLIAN LAUB; Text by SARA CORBETT
Published: May 21, 2009

...“Most of the students do want to have a prom together,” says Terra Fountain, a white 18-year-old who graduated from Montgomery County High School last year and is now living with her black boyfriend. “But it’s the white parents who say no. … They’re like, if you’re going with the black people, I’m not going to pay for it.”...

Those parents are diseased. 'Nuff said. :banghead:

Steely Dan
12-02-2011, 09:52 AM
http://abcnews.go.com/US/kentucky-church-bans-interracial-couples/story?id=15065204

There are a couple of different MSM sources, but here is ABC.

Could you link the thread too? TIA

josie1986
12-02-2011, 09:57 AM
Can you link the story posted yesterday. Nothing came up when I searched, TIA.

i searched my posts too and it seems to have disappeared,strange. but it was the story that believe posted.

im just shocked people can still be so small minded in the day and age

angelmom
12-02-2011, 10:26 AM
i searched my posts too and it seems to have disappeared,strange. but it was the story that believe posted.

im just shocked people can still be so small minded in the day and age

I believe the thread was removed.

Evan's Mom
12-02-2011, 10:32 AM
As a southerner, it's downright embarrassing.

Jacie Estes
12-02-2011, 11:12 AM
I wonder how this 'church' feels about American Indians, East Indians, Hispanics, Latinos and any other non-Caucasian group?

BIGOTRY=IGNORANCE

****

"but is intended to promote greater unity among the church body and the community we serve." I'm glad I am not part of that 'community'.

not_my_kids
12-02-2011, 12:21 PM
I'm going to try to say this in such a way that I don't get flamed to death.
I DO NOT support the fact that the church has gone this far with their obvious bigotry. (I do congratulate the members that voted to oppose this, because I'm sure they were under great pressure to vote for it.)

That said, I do sometimes think that this is the best we can hope for, that people be up front and honest about the fact that they are bigotted. I don't believe for one moment that discrimination and racism will ever go away. So, in a way, maybe this is better than a church allowing an interracial couple to attempt to gain membership and be told that they are not welcome after attending the church for years, or being granted membership, but still not really being welcome. It's terrible to say to someone that they aren't welcome there because of their skin tone, but at least it's honest, and so much in the way of blatant racism or hatred or bigotry are hidden, and I feel that causes more damage.

Persoanlly, I would rather know, right up front, whether someone is going to hate me for something as stupid as how much melanin is in my skin so that I can just avoid them completely. That way, I don't have to deal with thinly veiled hatred, I'll already know that person is not quite stable as a human being, and I don't have to take part in my own discrimination by ever walking through the door.

And yes, I know about discrimination. I'm white, but my city isn't. SO, I've been there. I've seen it in ways that people tried to cover up, and I've seen it right out in the open. I prefer it in the open. The only people the church is hurting are themselves, by turning people against them and their belief system and costing themselves friendships and associations with some very positive people that can see beyond the color boundary.

HMSHood
12-02-2011, 01:09 PM
I'm going to try to say this in such a way that I don't get flamed to death.
I DO NOT support the fact that the church has gone this far with their obvious bigotry. (I do congratulate the members that voted to oppose this, because I'm sure they were under great pressure to vote for it.)

That said, I do sometimes think that this is the best we can hope for, that people be up front and honest about the fact that they are bigotted. I don't believe for one moment that discrimination and racism will ever go away. So, in a way, maybe this is better than a church allowing an interracial couple to attempt to gain membership and be told that they are not welcome after attending the church for years, or being granted membership, but still not really being welcome. It's terrible to say to someone that they aren't welcome there because of their skin tone, but at least it's honest, and so much in the way of blatant racism or hatred or bigotry are hidden, and I feel that causes more damage.

Persoanlly, I would rather know, right up front, whether someone is going to hate me for something as stupid as how much melanin is in my skin so that I can just avoid them completely. That way, I don't have to deal with thinly veiled hatred, I'll already know that person is not quite stable as a human being, and I don't have to take part in my own discrimination by ever walking through the door.

And yes, I know about discrimination. I'm white, but my city isn't. SO, I've been there. I've seen it in ways that people tried to cover up, and I've seen it right out in the open. I prefer it in the open. The only people the church is hurting are themselves, by turning people against them and their belief system and costing themselves friendships and associations with some very positive people that can see beyond the color boundary.

You know, I rather deal with someone who is open about their bigotry and hatred than someone who lies about it and claims they are against bigotry. I have seen those kind of people who say they are not bigoted and fight against it, but they are. They are the most dangerous kind of people. We all discriminate and are prejudiced to a certain degree. For some it just consumes them. Case in point, Fred Phelps or Osama bin Laden.

Chewy
12-02-2011, 01:13 PM
You know, I rather deal with someone who is open about their bigotry and hatred than someone who lies about it and claims they are against bigotry. I have seen those kind of people who say they are not bigoted and fight against it, but they are. They are the most dangerous kind of people. We all discriminate and are prejudiced to a certain degree. For some it just consumes them. Case in point, Fred Phelps or Osama bin Laden.

I've seen this too. There's always some "logical reason" for their prejudice that they try to use to cover up their bigotry.

Kimberlyd125
12-02-2011, 02:14 PM
I'm in the south and I can't think of 1 church in my area that would do this.

krimekat
12-02-2011, 02:23 PM
While I believe this to be the highest form of ignorance, we should not stoop to their level & call "people" names or deem an entire group of people as bigots. Generalizing seems to get us in trouble.

I was taken aback at the initial title of the thread which had the link to this story but totally understand the sentiment.

I have a hard time with people who profess to be Christian & do not follow the teachings of Christ . . .

Chewy
12-02-2011, 02:29 PM
Is calling a bigot a bigot name calling? How so. I've never seen the word used as an insult but only as a description. If I say these church people are racist is that name calling as well?

There are many bigots in the world and Christians who don't follow the teachings of Christ but instead go around and try to tell others how they should live their lives, just like these church goers. Not all of course.

I would suspect that most churches are segregated anyway because neighborhoods are segregated etc etc. The article I posted yesterday had a comment that 11-12 on Sunday morning is the most segregated hour in the US.

I'm sure more people don't say how they really feel since they know it's going to have bad consequences.

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/11/03/louisiana.interracial.marriage/

Kimberlyd125
12-02-2011, 02:37 PM
www.dictionary.com

bigot
- noun
1.
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

This covers most people with strong opinions about ANYTHING. Those who are intolerant of differing opinions it seems.
So I guess that's a lot of people.

I think the word is grossly misused, misunderstood, and over used.

Chewy
12-02-2011, 02:42 PM
I don't think having a strong opinion is the same thing as being a bigot. Sorry a person who is really into Justin Beiber is NOT a bigot.


efinition of BIGOT

: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance


These church goes are definitely bigots. Intolerance of bigotry is not "having a different opinion" it's standing up to something vile. What has been overused a lot in the world is the way people will try to claim their rights are violated because they have to interact with someone they are prejudiced against. Then they try to claim people are being bigoted towards them. But intolerance of bigotry is not bigotry. It's decency.

Kimberlyd125
12-02-2011, 02:47 PM
There are many bigots.

What this church did is not right. The members who voted in favor of this are bigots.

But the term bigot is used so often, the meaning gets lost in the insult of it.

For example, I have strong beliefs regarding faith. Others who are opposed to my faith are bigoted towards it.

Chewy
12-02-2011, 02:51 PM
There are many bigots.

What this church did is not right. The members who voted in favor of this are bigots.

But the term bigot is used so often, the meaning gets lost in the insult of it.

For example, I have strong beliefs regarding faith. Others who are opposed to my faith are bigoted towards it.


I'm sorry you feel that way. This thread isn't about your beliefs etc.

The church goers in this op are bigots and racist. But I wonder if they even think they are though.

In the above link there's a great quote
Humphrey said in October that she wanted Bardwell to resign. "He doesn't believe he's being racist, but it is racist," she said.

The guy who refused to do the interracial marriage thinks he's not racist because he's willing to marry blacks to blacks. He's worried about the "children" he says.

I mean some people are totally deluded.


I'm curious what can legally be done about it.

Kimberlyd125
12-02-2011, 02:53 PM
I'm sorry you feel that way. This thread isn't about your beliefs etc. The church goers in this op are bigots and racist. But I wonder if they even think they are though.

In the above link there's a great quote

The guy who refused to do the interracial marriage thinks he's not racist because he's willing to marry blacks to blacks. He's worried about the "children" he says.

I mean the some people are totally deluded.


I'm curious what can legally be done about it.

BBM, but I can give an example if I feel the need. Thanks! :smile:

BTW, it's not about Justin Bieber either.

krimekat
12-02-2011, 03:06 PM
http://abcnews.go.com/US/kentucky-church-bans-interracial-couples/story?id=15065204

There are a couple of different MSM sources, but here is ABC.

from the article:

of 42 members, very few stayed for the meeting after church and even fewer voted . . . most congregants wanted no part in the vote. Ultimately, nine people voted for the motion and six voted against it and interracial couples were banned.

Other churches in the community have condemned the decision. The matter will be up for discussion again at the Sandy Valley Conference for Freewill Baptist Churches.

Only 36% of the congregation voted at all
Of those 60% in favor -- 21% of the entire congregation voted for the motion
The majority 79% abstained or voted against the motion

Not representative of an entire congregation & it appears the church's governing entity is looking into the motion.

Kimberlyd125
12-02-2011, 03:47 PM
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/12/pastor-believes-church-will-drop-ban-on-interracial-couples/1

Pastor expects church will drop ban on interracial couples


Here is a statement, issued Thursday, by the executive office of the National Association of Free Will Baptists:

Recently, the action of a Free Will Baptist church in the state of Kentucky raised questions regarding the position of the National Association of Free Will Baptists on interracial couples. This statement is intended to bring clarity to the subject.

The National Association of Free Will Baptists does not have an official policy regarding interracial couples because it has not been an issue in the denomination. The Free Will Baptist Treatise neither condemns nor disallows marriage between a man and woman of different races.

Free Will Baptists have historically championed the rights and dignity of all people, regardless of race. The denomination's leadership in the abolition movement is evidence of that fact. Free Will Baptists currently spend millions of dollars each year to take the good news of Jesus Christ to people of every race.

Many interracial couples are members of Free Will Baptist churches. They are loved, accepted, and respected by their congregations. It is unfair and inaccurate to characterize the denomination as racist.

It is our understanding that steps are being taken by the church in question to reverse its decision. We encourage the church to follow through with this action. Leaders from the local conference and state association in Kentucky are working with the church to resolve this matter.

Kimberlyd125
12-02-2011, 03:49 PM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45523898

Revote Likely At Church On Interracial Couples


Stacy Stepp, pastor of Gulnare Free Will Baptist Church, told the Appalachian News-Express in Pikeville he believes state and national Free Will Baptist associations will stand with him and other members of the church who oppose the ban.

Stepp also said he is seeking another vote on the issue, perhaps as early as Sunday, according to the Lexington Herald-Leader.

Chewy
12-02-2011, 03:53 PM
A revote? :floorlaugh:

Why isn't it just being thrown out the window. You know if I went to a church that even put this on the table for a vote, I'd LEAVE. The same way if I was a member of a religion that hid pedophiles I'd LEAVE. I bet they think this is a nice gesture or something.

Kimberlyd125
12-02-2011, 03:55 PM
All actions regarding church bylaws are voted on as far as I know.

They are trying to correct the problem. The pastor that held the original vote is no longer at the church.

They are trying to say "Hey, we didn't want that!"

The will revote. It will be corrected.

krimekat
12-02-2011, 04:33 PM
All actions regarding church bylaws are voted on as far as I know.

They are trying to correct the problem. The pastor that held the original vote is no longer at the church.

They are trying to say "Hey, we didn't want that!"

The will revote. It will be corrected.

Thank you - another fact in the article I wanted to mention. That Pastor is no longer the Pastor of the church.

Melvin Thompson has since been replaced with a new pastor who said that everyone was welcome at the church & the Harville family said the issue was dropped.

At a recent meeting Thompson, who is still a member of the congregation, brought up the issue again and asked that it be discussed at a business meeting among the church's men.

So to me it sounds like a small minded "Melvin" & a few of his cronies causing trouble -- they're going to get the smack down Free Will Baptist-style!

It's a shame that a few bad apples can spoil the entire batch. Such is the World . . .

Chewy
12-02-2011, 04:36 PM
That's a good thing then. Great post Krimekat! :)

Kimberlyd125
12-02-2011, 04:45 PM
Thank you - another fact in the article I wanted to mention. That Pastor is no longer the Pastor of the church.

Melvin Thompson has since been replaced with a new pastor who said that everyone was welcome at the church & the Harville family said the issue was dropped.

At a recent meeting Thompson, who is still a member of the congregation, brought up the issue again and asked that it be discussed at a business meeting among the church's men.

So to me it sounds like a small minded "Melvin" & a few of his cronies causing trouble -- they're going to get the smack down Free Will Baptist-style!

It's a shame that a few bad apples can spoil the entire batch. Such is the World . . .

Yep. That was my point. The pastor is no longer the pastor and the majority of the church did not want this ban.

IMO it's being corrected.

Constance
12-02-2011, 05:26 PM
I'm curious what can legally be done about it.

IMO, this is a case of religious freedom, covered by the Constitution.

Commenting on it is one thing; legal action seems a bit too close to religious persecution for this American.

:twocents:

Chewy
12-02-2011, 05:33 PM
That's what I thought. It's disgusting that people use religion this way. But public backlash ought to bring them around. I find it strange how few people commented on this in the news compared to a silly twitter spat in Kansas. Makes you wonder.

Steely Dan
12-02-2011, 05:39 PM
While I believe this to be the highest form of ignorance, we should not stoop to their level & call "people" names or deem an entire group of people as bigots. Generalizing seems to get us in trouble.

I was taken aback at the initial title of the thread which had the link to this story but totally understand the sentiment.

I have a hard time with people who profess to be Christian & do not follow the teachings of Christ . . .

BBM

The title of the thread is the title of the article.


www.dictionary.com

bigot
- noun
1.
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

This covers most people with strong opinions about ANYTHING. Those who are intolerant of differing opinions it seems.
So I guess that's a lot of people.

I think the word is grossly misused, misunderstood, and over used.

I think racist applies here better. JMO


from the article:

of 42 members, very few stayed for the meeting after church and even fewer voted . . . most congregants wanted no part in the vote. Ultimately, nine people voted for the motion and six voted against it and interracial couples were banned.

Other churches in the community have condemned the decision. The matter will be up for discussion again at the Sandy Valley Conference for Freewill Baptist Churches.

Only 36% of the congregation voted at all
Of those 60% in favor -- 21% of the entire congregation voted for the motion
The majority 79% abstained or voted against the motion

Not representative of an entire congregation & it appears the church's governing entity is looking into the motion.

What's more disgusting is that people walked out. They allowed the vote to take place. If these people felt very strongly about the issue they would have stayed and voted. 15 people felt strongly enough to vote on it. By walking away the others supported it in absentia. JMO


http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/12/pastor-believes-church-will-drop-ban-on-interracial-couples/1

Pastor expects church will drop ban on interracial couples


Here is a statement, issued Thursday, by the executive office of the National Association of Free Will Baptists:

Recently, the action of a Free Will Baptist church in the state of Kentucky raised questions regarding the position of the National Association of Free Will Baptists on interracial couples. This statement is intended to bring clarity to the subject.

The National Association of Free Will Baptists does not have an official policy regarding interracial couples because it has not been an issue in the denomination. The Free Will Baptist Treatise neither condemns nor disallows marriage between a man and woman of different races.

Free Will Baptists have historically championed the rights and dignity of all people, regardless of race. The denomination's leadership in the abolition movement is evidence of that fact. Free Will Baptists currently spend millions of dollars each year to take the good news of Jesus Christ to people of every race.

Many interracial couples are members of Free Will Baptist churches. They are loved, accepted, and respected by their congregations. It is unfair and inaccurate to characterize the denomination as racist.

It is our understanding that steps are being taken by the church in question to reverse its decision. We encourage the church to follow through with this action. Leaders from the local conference and state association in Kentucky are working with the church to resolve this matter.

Personally, I'd prefer they keep it. If national attention hadn't been shed upon them they would have kept it going, I believe. Now the congregation just has to keep it behind the eyes like so many in the country do about a great many things. JMO

IMO, an insincere apology is worse than no apology at all. Let's find out what people really believe in this world.


Yep. That was my point. The pastor is no longer the pastor and the majority of the church did not want this ban.

IMO it's being corrected.

IMO, you can't say the majority of the church didn't want it. Most of them walked away. If they truly didn't want it they would have stayed and let their voices be heard. Instead they left. They didn't have the guts to stand up for what they believed, if they truly didn't want the rule to pass. Only six people were willing to stay and make the right choice.

If a group of people get together to lynch a person and people against it walk away they are as culpable as the lynchers, IMO. Get in between the lynchers and the potential victim and fight for them. Walking away seems to be an: "eh it's ok with me whatever they decide." type of attitude. JMO

Steely Dan
12-02-2011, 05:41 PM
IMO, this is a case of religious freedom, covered by the Constitution.

Commenting on it is one thing; legal action seems a bit too close to religious persecution for this American.

:twocents:

Where would you draw the line? I think the argument could be made that this is a political statement and therefore they should lose their tax exempt status.

Kimberlyd125
12-02-2011, 05:42 PM
SD!!!! You with those dang multi-quotes!!!

:smile: I try to follow along. It's hard on Tapatalk though.

You are right! Those people should not have walked away. They should have stood up for what the believe.
My personal opinion on that is that many people hold their pastor in such high regard, they didn't want to go against him even if they felt they should.

I wish they would have stood up and been counted.

Kimberlyd125
12-02-2011, 05:45 PM
We also don't know if those who left and refused to vote ever went back to the church.

Perhaps they were disgusted by the fact it even came up for vote and decided they didn't want to be a part of that type of church.

Who knows.

Steely Dan
12-02-2011, 05:56 PM
SD!!!! You with those dang multi-quotes!!!

:smile: I try to follow along. It's hard on Tapatalk though.

You are right! Those people should not have walked away. They should have stood up for what the believe.
My personal opinion on that is that many people hold their pastor in such high regard, they didn't want to go against him even if they felt they should.

I wish they would have stood up and been counted.

They should have stayed and voted and then left the church. However, I think it was just a matter of wanting to get home in time for the football games or whatever they wanted to do and didn't think this was important enough to stay and address. JMO

Kimberlyd125
12-02-2011, 06:00 PM
Well we most likely will never know what their reasons were for leaving.

I find it hard to believe the majority of the church wanted the ban.

Skin color has nothing to do with religion.

Chewy
12-02-2011, 06:02 PM
BBM

The title of the thread is the title of the article.



I think racist applies here better. JMO



What's more disgusting is that people walked out. They allowed the vote to take place. If these people felt very strongly about the issue they would have stayed and voted. 15 people felt strongly enough to vote on it. By walking away the others supported it in absentia. JMO



Personally, I'd prefer they keep it. If national attention hadn't been shed upon them they would have kept it going, I believe. Now the congregation just has to keep it behind the eyes like so many in the country do about a great many things. JMO

IMO, an insincere apology is worse than no apology at all. Let's find out what people really believe in this world.



IMO, you can't say the majority of the church didn't want it. Most of them walked away. If they truly didn't want it they would have stayed and let their voices be heard. Instead they left. They didn't have the guts to stand up for what they believed, if they truly didn't want the rule to pass. Only six people were willing to stay and make the right choice.

If a group of people get together to lynch a person and people against it walk away they are as culpable as the lynchers, IMO. Get in between the lynchers and the potential victim and fight for them. Walking away seems to be an: "eh it's ok with me whatever they decide." type of attitude. JMO

Excellent point. This is exactly how I see it. And trying to make excuses for them is doing the same thing you describe above.

Steely Dan
12-02-2011, 06:10 PM
Well we most likely will never know what their reasons were for leaving.

I find it hard to believe the majority of the church wanted the ban.

Skin color has nothing to do with religion.

What we do know is that it wasn't a big enough issue for the majority to stay behind and vote on it. To quote "Freewill" by Rush; "If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice."

I also disagree with skin color having nothing to do with religion. It doesn't until a religion uses it to discriminate. True Christians aren't racist. IMO, Jesus wouldn't return and be a racist. He loved everyone and that was his message. We should all be a big brotherhood of one.

I have yet to meet someone who claims to be a Christian and actually is. The rules that Jesus laid down are very difficult to follow and everybody I know doesn't follow some of them. Saint Mother Theresa of Calcutta, Ghandi and MLK Jr. are the closest I've heard about. As for mentioning Ghandi, he wasn't a professed Christian but he lived a true Christian lifestyle, from what I know. JMO

Constance
12-02-2011, 06:13 PM
Where would you draw the line? I think the argument could be made that this is a political statement and therefore they should lose their tax exempt status.


I'm not sure where I would draw the line - but I am thankful I don't have to!

I don't know enough about the tax-exempt agreement churches make with the government to form an opinion on whether or not this violates that.

Constance
12-02-2011, 06:25 PM
I have yet to meet someone who claims to be a Christian and actually is. The rules that Jesus laid down are very difficult to follow and everybody I know doesn't follow some of them. Saint Mother Theresa of Calcutta, Ghandi and MLK Jr. are the closest I've heard about. As for mentioning Ghandi, he wasn't a professed Christian but he lived a true Christian lifestyle, from what I know. JMO


I have to respectfully address the bolded part of your post that I quoted. I think that the very definition of the term "Christian" can (and obviously does) vary. I can't help but feel repulsed when individuals attempt to force their understanding of a holy text or revered prophet onto other people. It strikes me as an attempt to control the actions of others - something that doesn't sit easy with me. I'm just too gosh-darn freedom loving, I suppose!

BTW, I have to know (sorry for going off-topic) - is the Steely part of your username because of a steel guitar? I always think of that when I see your posts!

stilettos
12-02-2011, 06:33 PM
I'm not sure where I would draw the line - but I am thankful I don't have to!

I don't know enough about the tax-exempt agreement churches make with the government to form an opinion on whether or not this violates that.

Political statements from the pulpit are enough to get your tax expempt status yanked. I can say that I have sat in a few pews where political statements were made during election years.

stilettos
12-02-2011, 06:36 PM
That's what I thought. It's disgusting that people use religion this way. But public backlash ought to bring them around. I find it strange how few people commented on this in the news compared to a silly twitter spat in Kansas. Makes you wonder.

Chewy...I am not sure that public backlash nor anything else would remove their narrow-minded racial views from limited minds.

Kimberlyd125
12-02-2011, 07:04 PM
Well we only know FOR SURE 9 members are racist.

IMO you can't judge the whole congregation for the actions of 9.

Steely Dan
12-02-2011, 07:24 PM
Well we only know FOR SURE 9 members are racist.

IMO you can't judge the whole congregation for the actions of 9.

IMO, the people who walked out are like the people who looked the other way while Sandusky and Fine molested children. They are as culpable as those 9. JMO

stilettos
12-02-2011, 07:25 PM
Well we only know FOR SURE 9 members are racist.

IMO you can't judge the whole congregation for the actions of 9.

I would judge the congregation for not ousting those with views antithetical to the cause of Christ. I would judge them (imo) cowards for not standing for the rights of any man, woman or child...no matter the pigment of their skin...nor their spouses. I think it is a sin to stand and do nothing while injustice rules.

Kimberlyd125
12-02-2011, 07:30 PM
I would judge the congregation for not ousting those with views antithetical to the cause of Christ. I would judge them (imo) cowards for not standing for the rights of any man, woman or child...no matter the pigment of their skin...nor their spouses. I think it is a sin to stand and do nothing while injustice rules.

As I said before, almost all changes to bylaws have to be voted on. They can't just insist others leave when the main one doing the wrong is the pastor.

They are trying to correct it.

Yes they should have stood up from the beginning by voting. I'm not arguing that.

But the pastor is no longer the pastor. They are putting the matter to a vote.

Chewy
12-02-2011, 07:39 PM
IMO, the people who walked out are like the people who looked the other way while Sandusky and Fine molested children. They are as culpable as those 9. JMO


I think so as well. In fact they were the bigger cowards. The only ones who I think are not guilty are the ones who voted against it. But in the end if they didn't report it then they are just as guilty.

T4Tide
12-02-2011, 07:44 PM
When I was 20, an interracial couple had been visiting our Southern Baptist church for months before deciding to join. Everyone was welcoming, and they felt like they "fit in" there..... until the morning they decided to join. When someone joins a church, all members who are present "vote" on it. I'm not sure why.... but before this event, it had always been a positive "all those in favor of said person joining our church, say 'Amen!'" That particular morning, the couple went down, and when the vote was called, a couple of people voted against them. It was dramatic.... tumultuous.... downright heartbreaking. After the naysayers spoke, people started speaking up in favor of the couple. I remember getting up and leaving, as I was too emotional to even speak, especially after I watched tears fall down the face of the wife during the whole fiasco.

In the time after I left, I had many thoughts to deal with. Who WERE these people? This was MY church... the church I felt loved and nurtured in, and the only home I knew. I heard vicious words come out of mouths I had once revered. It hurt EVERYONE to the core. To make a long story short, the pastor apologized and many people privately contacted the couple telling them they were more than welcome, but the pain of those few was just too much for them to come back. I didn't leave the church. I got married there, and eventually moved away, but I still consider it my childhood church. The church is not a building with laws and rules. The church is made of the people... the members. It is supposed to be the Body of Christ. In retrospect, it was not my church that was evil, but the hearts of those few troublemakers who, in sadness, were ignorant and reluctant to change.... they had been taught a belief system that to them was right, but to the rest of us was wrong. The media, if they had been invited, would have had a field day, and the whole "church" would have been thrown to the wolves. However, there were many true Christians there that day, and while they may not have knocked the idiots over the head with clubs in a display of public detest, they reacted much more calmly and compassionately... for those being hurt, AND for those doing the hurting. We ALL need love, acceptance, and forgiveness. I must remember the same when thinking of this church and this situation. I simply cannot judge the hearts of all those involved, but I pray for peace and understanding for them all. I do now attend a Free Will Baptist Church, and there are people of all kinds are welcome, as by the teachings of Jesus Christ.

That said, while it is not MY wish or mentality AT ALL, I think that if churches, groups, clubs or any of the sort want to gather together and welcome only certain types of members, that is MORE THAN within their rights to do so. Would I want to be a member? Ummm, no. If a club decided they didn't want anybody like me... blonde, green-eyed, I'm-Not-From-Louisana-But-I'm-Still-Hot-Sauce kinda girls... well, they can do so. I wouldn't want to be a part of such group to begin with, but I still believe it is their not-so-nice right to do so. There's plenty of churches and groups for everyone to belong to. ;)

stilettos
12-02-2011, 07:45 PM
As I said before, almost all changes to bylaws have to be voted on. They can't just insist others leave when the main one doing the wrong is the pastor.

They are trying to correct it.

Yes they should have stood up from the beginning by voting. I'm not arguing that.

But the pastor is no longer the pastor. They are putting the matter to a vote.

I know Kimberly...all changes to bylaws in denominations must be put to a vote...but I think a huge public outcry should have arisen right there in the middle of that church and the members should have ousted this guy before it hit the news.

Kimberlyd125
12-02-2011, 09:45 PM
I know Kimberly...all changes to bylaws in denominations must be put to a vote...but I think a huge public outcry should have arisen right there in the middle of that church and the members should have ousted this guy before it hit the news.

He is no longer the pastor.

The current pastor does not agree with the ban.

Was the pastor ousted? I don't know. Could have been.

Kimster
12-02-2011, 11:30 PM
There was a thread on this news story yesterday. It got pulled. Why? Because it turned into a religious debate rather than a racial concern.

Keep your posts directed on racial issues and leave the different religious aspects alone.

If you find something in the Bible to support banning interracial marriages, sent me a private message and I'll review it.

Fairy1
12-03-2011, 01:29 AM
There was a thread on this news story yesterday. It got pulled. Why? Because it turned into a religious debate rather than a racial concern.

Keep your posts directed on racial issues and leave the different religious aspects alone.

If you find something in the Bible to support banning interracial marriages, sent me a private message and I'll review it.

Perhaps we should not focus on the Bible, but how far we are supposed to have come since?

FGS, the whole thing is so.....icky. Clearly, we have not made the strides we like to believe we've made.

I'm grateful for the "uproar" that has come about as a result of this ridiculous ban.

Kimberlyd125
12-03-2011, 09:18 AM
I think we have come really far.

But there will always be some people stuck in their ways.

I'm glad this is an exception to the norm.

Fairy1
12-03-2011, 11:27 PM
I think we have come really far.

But there will always be some people stuck in their ways.

I'm glad this is an exception to the norm.

I guess I just have to wonder why so many people are still "stuck in their ways." How many more generations must pass through this world before we just recognize people as people; no matter the color?

When my first husband and I were looking for a church to be married in, we found a beautiful Presbyterian church and made the decision to join. I was raised in this religion and it's quite un-controversial, in comparison to others.

So......we went to Sunday services and afterward, hung out in the lobby with the other congregants. All I heard people talking about was who was wearing what, who was driving what, who had this and who had that. It made me sick! I should point out that everyone there - including us - were as white as the driven snow. It made me so sad to see how shallow these people were.

We never went back there and I have raised my own children to choose their own way.

Kimberlyd125
12-03-2011, 11:52 PM
Sure those churches exist.
But they are not all that way.

You have to find one you are comfortable with. There are judgmental people in almost every group. Not just churches.

Some people are just that way.

Color should not matter to a congregation at all IMO.

Chewy
12-04-2011, 07:05 PM
I guess I just have to wonder why so many people are still "stuck in their ways." How many more generations must pass through this world before we just recognize people as people; no matter the color?

When my first husband and I were looking for a church to be married in, we found a beautiful Presbyterian church and made the decision to join. I was raised in this religion and it's quite un-controversial, in comparison to others.

So......we went to Sunday services and afterward, hung out in the lobby with the other congregants. All I heard people talking about was who was wearing what, who was driving what, who had this and who had that. It made me sick! I should point out that everyone there - including us - were as white as the driven snow. It made me so sad to see how shallow these people were.

We never went back there and I have raised my own children to choose their own way.


It's not just prejudice against race, it's sexuality, personal life choices etc. People find ways to judge others. Unfortunately organized religions create safety zones for people to harbor and share these kinds of feelings because people don't do what you did and leave. Kudos to you.

HMSHood
12-05-2011, 12:51 AM
It's not just prejudice against race, it's sexuality, personal life choices etc. People find ways to judge others. Unfortunately organized religions create safety zones for people to harbor and share these kinds of feelings because people don't do what you did and leave. Kudos to you.

I hope no one takes offense at what I say. The sad fact is organized religion is people treat them as another social organization.

Kimberlyd125
12-05-2011, 10:41 AM
http://www.wkyt.com/home/headlines/Church_votes_to_lift_ban_134997733.html

Church votes to lift ban on interracial couples

Church members at Gulnare Freewill Baptist Church in Pike County voted again, but this time the outcome was different.


They unanimously voted to allow all people of all races to attend their church.

"I tried every way possible that I could to resolve this matter before it got to where it did," said Pastor Stacy Stepp.



Church members plan to move forward in unifying their church.

The Harville family says Stella was pleased to hear the outcome of the final vote.

Church members hope the couple will return to their church.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kimberlyd125
12-05-2011, 10:50 AM
http://kgoam810.com/rssItem.asp?feedid=118&itemid=29764333

Kentucky Pastor Nullifies Church Ban on Interracial Couples

GULNARE, Ky.) -- The pastor at a small Kentucky church says he has nullified a vote by parishioners that banned interracial couples from the church.

"As far as I'm concerned and the church is concerned, this case will be closed as of tomorrow," Gulnare Free Will Baptist Church pastor Stacy Stepp said on Saturday, according to the Lexington Herald-Leader. "We will...get back on the right track and continue to win souls for the Lord."

Kimberlyd125
12-05-2011, 10:52 AM
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/20111205_Ky__church_OKs_mixed_couples.html

Ky. church OKs mixed couples


Stepp told the Associated Press yesterday that the church body can't pass new bylaws if they run contrary to local, state or national laws.

Stepp said about 30 people who attended church services yesterday voted on a new resolution that welcomes "believers into our fellowship regardless of race, creed or color."

Kimberlyd125
12-05-2011, 10:54 AM
http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/faith/pastor-at-kentucky-church-to-void-ban-on-interracial-couples-ncx-12052011

Pastor at Kentucky Church to Void Ban on Interracial Couples


"There wasn't enough support in that tiny church for what they did," said Sandy Valley Conference representative Jim Patton. "This is not any longer a part of their church. It is null and void."

The conference's statement said it would continue to work with Gulnare Freewill Baptist Church "to rebuild what has been damaged by this tragic error."

The churches that make up the conference "strongly denounce prejudice, racism and all ungodly forms of conduct, whether within the church or without," the statement added.

Chewy
12-05-2011, 11:07 AM
Let's see if they really mean it or just got caught. To be racist in this day and age creates major backlash. But other groups are discriminated against no problem. When they openly embrace homosexuals and transgender people then I'll believe them. But this seems like just too much backlash, the fact that the vote even came up this way is ridiculous. As has been pointed out in this thread, these churches have very organized ways of voting for things. The idea that this idea was brought up for voting at all is beyond the pale. I'm sure this is just damage control. Once it settles down they will go back to their comfort zone of bigotry. I do have to commend those who voted against it but if they stay in the church after this I'll lose respect for them.

believe09
12-05-2011, 11:09 AM
There you have it. Over and out.

believe09
12-05-2011, 11:15 AM
from the article:

of 42 members, very few stayed for the meeting after church and even fewer voted . . . most congregants wanted no part in the vote. Ultimately, nine people voted for the motion and six voted against it and interracial couples were banned.

Other churches in the community have condemned the decision. The matter will be up for discussion again at the Sandy Valley Conference for Freewill Baptist Churches.

Only 36% of the congregation voted at all
Of those 60% in favor -- 21% of the entire congregation voted for the motion
The majority 79% abstained or voted against the motion

Not representative of an entire congregation & it appears the church's governing entity is looking into the motion.

I highlighted the words in blue-I think this is a good social lesson...avoiding or abstaining the vote doesnt necessarily solve the problem. At least 9 people in that Congregation were determined enough to fight for their POV. Imagine if the 79% had showed up an voted...what a statement that would have been.

Chewy
12-05-2011, 11:24 AM
That's how I see it as well. It's not as if we live in a place where you are afraid to speak up for justice.


“The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference. The opposite of art is not ugliness, it's indifference. The opposite of faith is not heresy, it's indifference. And the opposite of life is not death, it's indifference.”

Elie Wiesel.


This is why I do always speak up about such things. Because many times we look back in history and wonder how such horrible things could happen, and it was simply because people didn't say anything.


First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me -- and there was no one left to speak for me.


Martin Niemboller.

daisy7
12-05-2011, 11:58 AM
There was a thread on this news story yesterday. It got pulled. Why? Because it turned into a religious debate rather than a racial concern.

Keep your posts directed on racial issues and leave the different religious aspects alone.

If you find something in the Bible to support banning interracial marriages, sent me a private message and I'll review it.

:bump: