The Ku Klux Klan and Christianity

[YukonJack]

"Then why do blacks vote for Democrats in such huge numbers over Republicans?"

First, because they are racists. You know, black is beautiful, implying everything else is crap.
Second, because nobody ever taught them history.
Third, because even if somebody did, it is far easier to be complainer.
Fourth, because in a politically correct world complaining and welfare gets you far more than working.
Fifth, because they are "lead" by poverty pimps like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jakcson and the Congressional Black Caucus.
Sixth, because these racist clowns tell them to speak ebonics in order to be true black and not a whitey-wanna-be.
Seventh, because these same racist clowns removed the word "RESPONSIBILITY" from all dictionaries.
Eighth, because according to these same racist clowns, it is a great honour for single black women to produce children without fathers.
Ninth, because these same racist clowns keep on telling the gullible ones that Lincoln was a Democrat.
Tenth, because the same pied piper poverty pimps know fully well that Dr. Martin Luther King would roll over in his grave and puke looking at them.
Eleventh, because the same hypocrites convinced the gullible that any black who dares to be Republican/conservative is an Uncle Tom.

Lots more, but what's the use.

 

[Downhome_Woman]

I was recently looking at the KKK's website and came across their membership requirements. The second requirement for membership application is to "profess faith in Jesus Christ as personal savior".

I don't understand how a group like the KKK does this. Their faith, something which seems is suppose to be held above everything else, seemingly conflicts with the rules and "dogma" of their organization.

I know I didn't really go anywhere with this, but could someone please expand on this?

They do 'this' the same way any group does - they choose to cherry pick what is relevant to their outlook on life and ignore the rest. This, I might add, applies to both left and right of the religious spectrum, as far as I can see.Both sides are egregiously the same, unfortunately.

 

[Downhome_Woman]

"Then why do blacks vote for Democrats in such huge numbers over Republicans?"

First, because they are racists. You know, black is beautiful, implying everything else is crap.
Second, because nobody ever taught them history.
Third, because even if somebody did, it is far easier to be complainer.
Fourth, because in a politically correct world complaining and welfare gets you far more than working.
Fifth, because they are "lead" by poverty pimps like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jakcson and the Congressional Black Caucus.
Sixth, because these racist clowns tell them to speak ebonics in order to be true black and not a whitey-wanna-be.
Seventh, because these same racist clowns removed the word "RESPONSIBILITY" from all dictionaries.
Eighth, because according to these same racist clowns, it is a great honour for single black women to produce children without fathers.
Ninth, because these same racist clowns keep on telling the gullible ones that Lincoln was a Democrat.
Tenth, because the same pied piper poverty pimps know fully well that Dr. Martin Luther King would roll over in his grave and puke looking at them.
Eleventh, because the same hypocrites convinced the gullible that any black who dares to be Republican/conservative is an Uncle Tom.

Lots more, but what's the use.

Great heavenly days! Both you and SJP do run towards the hyperbole!BOTH sides use race to their advantage - and quite frankly, both misrepresent the wonderful diversity in the States.
But you, YJ - still carry that wee chip on your shoulder that was put there when you were attacked by those first nations kids, when you first got here. Too bad you and the ones who attacked you, couldn't actually meet up and exchange thoughts as to what each of you saw when it happened.Think about it.
You were a newcomer to this country and you were attacked and robbed. They live with the fact that they are the first people here, and their land and culture were essentially thrown away - unless of course, it was a cultural benefit to the image of the country. How different, really, are you both?

 

[theconqueror]

I used to get Ku Klux Klan brochures in the mail as a youth and I thought it was a great organization to donate to that preserved the white race without discrimination to others as good christians, untill the internet came into technology that I soon learned that it is nothing but the opposite of what they are advertising with a twisted truth about who they are associated with crime and hate that I want no part of anymore...

Then you wonder why they burn down a Cross when they claim they are good faithed christians insisting that they "light" up the cross like you would a christmas tree...

btw: Now that I think about it, it seems quite hilarious that we even have KKK's around the world such as Canada, U.S., Russia and England... As if the White Race is at the brink of extinction. :lol:

 

[gopher]

Thank you Yukon Jack for post # 61.

On another thread, there was talk that only liberals play the race card and charge every one else with extremism. Now that you have made this post (and it is not the first time thus has been done), nobody can say that only the left makes such charges.

 

[Machjo]

I don’t think that is quite right, Machjo. They do read the Bible, but they read it selectively. And Bible says plenty of nasty things about many groups, such as homosexuals, witches, nonbelievers etc.

Thus Leviticus prescribes death penalty to homosexuals. Exodus exhorts Christians to kill witches (thou shalt not suffer a witch to live). Genesis tells a man that he is superior, he is the boss, that a woman is his inferior (Adam shall rule over Eve). Bible also tells KKK that blacks are inferior to whites (Curse of Ham).

Just as Mohammed Atta and 9/11 terrorists justified their action by selective reading of Koran; KKK can justify their actions by selective reading of the Bible.

I'll grant that the Jewish, Christian and Muslim Faiths have certain social teachings that are outdated. They're spiritual teachings remain valid though and none of them promote racism.

 

[theconqueror]

Also, for any Ku Klux Klan members who are looking to Germany for an example of what the White Race represents, they should do some more investigations as alot of the soldiers of the german empire were black whom served in Hitlers Reich. :lol:

Picture: Emil Doerstling

 

[gopher]

^ I believe Doerstling worked in art from the 1870s to 1900 and did not live long enough to see Hitler rise to power. From what little I know of his work, that officer above was not of a genuine Prussian officer but is a painting of a story largely based on the Russian Pushkin.

 

[gerryh]

Also, for any Ku Klux Klan members who are looking to Germany for an example of what the White Race represents, they should do some more investigations as alot of the soldiers of the german empire were black whom served in Hitlers Reich. :lol:

Picture: Emil Doerstling

This looks to me like a German officer from the first world war at the latest. Not Hitlers third reich.

 

[theconqueror]

^ I believe Doerstling worked in art from the 1870s to 1900 and did not live long enough to see Hitler rise to power. From what little I know of his work, that officer above was not of a genuine Prussian officer but is a painting of a story largely based on the Russian Pushkin.

Nope. Just look up Doerstling and German Kaiser II (Emperor), also goes on with including Doerstling's two sons Horst and Herbert as serving with Hitler's Wehrmacht.

 

[lone wolf]

The uniform is pre WW1

 

[theconqueror]

The uniform is pre WW1

You got the idea anyway... Let's not worry about technicality of when Photographs were invented.

The point is Germany is the wrong example of the white race with their indiscrimination. Better luck with Poland or Russia...

 

[ironsides]

full ku klux klan scene from o brother where art thou( kkk )
YouTube - full ku klux klan scene from o brother where art thou( kkk )

 

[SirJosephPorter]

"Then why do blacks vote for Democrats in such huge numbers over Republicans?"

First, because they are racists. You know, black is beautiful, implying everything else is crap.
Second, because nobody ever taught them history.
Third, because even if somebody did, it is far easier to be complainer.
Fourth, because in a politically correct world complaining and welfare gets you far more than working.
Fifth, because they are "lead" by poverty pimps like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jakcson and the Congressional Black Caucus.
Sixth, because these racist clowns tell them to speak ebonics in order to be true black and not a whitey-wanna-be.
Seventh, because these same racist clowns removed the word "RESPONSIBILITY" from all dictionaries.
Eighth, because according to these same racist clowns, it is a great honour for single black women to produce children without fathers.
Ninth, because these same racist clowns keep on telling the gullible ones that Lincoln was a Democrat.
Tenth, because the same pied piper poverty pimps know fully well that Dr. Martin Luther King would roll over in his grave and puke looking at them.
Eleventh, because the same hypocrites convinced the gullible that any black who dares to be Republican/conservative is an Uncle Tom.

Lots more, but what's the use.

So what you are saying in all this ranting and raving is that blacks don’t know what is good for them, you do. With such condescending, hate filled attitude, is it any wonder that blacks flock to Democratic Party and shun Republican Party like Black Plague?

And for your information, Lincoln would very likely be a Democrat today. He would be horrified to see one of his Party members, a Republican honouring the Confederate cause (and implicitly honouring slavery), the cause which Lincoln dedicated his life fighting.

And yes, MLK also probably would be a Democrat today.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

They do 'this' the same way any group does - they choose to cherry pick what is relevant to their outlook on life and ignore the rest. This, I might add, applies to both left and right of the religious spectrum, as far as I can see.Both sides are egregiously the same, unfortunately.

Quite so. That is why religion is meaningless, as far as I am concerned. Anybody with any kind of views can find some validation for their views in any particular religion.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I used to get Ku Klux Klan brochures in the mail as a youth and I thought it was a great organization to donate to that preserved the white race without discrimination to others as good christians, untill the internet came into technology that I soon learned that it is nothing but the opposite of what they are advertising with a twisted truth about who they are associated with crime and hate that I want no part of anymore...

Reminds me of a joke I saw on TV when I used to live in Britain. They have an organization (or used to, I don’t know if it still exists) called National Front, which was the counterpart of KKK. So the question was, can the slogan ‘Vote for National Front’ be made to appear funny? They did, on TV.

In Britain, in most places they don’t have mail boxes, they have a slot in the front door through which mail may be dropped.

So they showed this footage of people slipping flyers, brochures, through the slot. There was ‘Vote Conservative’, ‘Vote Labour’, a couple more flyers.

Then came a missile, in the form of a bullet shaped box. It shattered the door and landed inside the house. In it was the brochure ‘Vote for National Front’.

 

[DaSleeper]

even atheism or liberalism:lol:

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I'll grant that the Jewish, Christian and Muslim Faiths have certain social teachings that are outdated. They're spiritual teachings remain valid though and none of them promote racism.

Quite. There are good parts and bad parts with any religious book. Some people (like Mother Teresa) take to heart only the good parts, they ignore the bad parts. Then some others, like Pat Robertson (or the Paw Creek Ministries that ironsides quoted in another thread) take to heart only bad parts (death to homosexuals, death to infidels etc.) and ignore the good parts.

 

[ironsides]

And for your information, Lincoln would very likely be a Democrat today. He would be horrified to see one of his Party members, a Republican honouring the Confederate cause (and implicitly honouring slavery), the cause which Lincoln dedicated his life fighting.

And yes, MLK also probably would be a Democrat today.

Here is a little history about the Civil War and Abraham Lincoln, he may have not liked slavery, but in no way would he have gone out of his way to have ended it if it were not for the war. No he did not dedicate his life to fighting slavery. The Emancipation Proclamation was made only because it served the war effort at the time by giving all slaves hope of freedom and probably more important gave southern slave holders something else to worry about.
The Civil War lasted from 1861 to 1865 and led to over 618,000 casualties. Its causes can be traced back to tensions that formed early in the nation's history. Following are the top five causes that led to the "War Between the States."

1. Economic and social differences between the North and the South.
With Eli Whitney’s invention of the cotton gin in 1793, cotton became very profitable. This machine was able to reduce the time it took to separate seeds from the cotton. However, at the same time the increase in the number of plantations willing to move from other crops to cotton meant the greater need for a large amount of cheap labor, i.e. slaves. Thus, the southern economy became a one crop economy, depending on cotton and therefore on slavery. On the other hand, the northern economy was based more on industry than agriculture. In fact, the northern industries were purchasing the raw cotton and turning it into finished goods. This disparity between the two set up a major difference in economic attitudes. The South was based on the plantation system while the North was focused on city life. This change in the North meant that society evolved as people of different cultures and classes had to work together. On the other hand, the South continued to hold onto an antiquated social order.
2. States versus federal rights.
Since the time of the Revolution, two camps emerged: those arguing for greater states rights and those arguing that the federal government needed to have more control. The first organized government in the US after the American Revolution was under the Articles of Confederation. The thirteen states formed a loose confederation with a very weak federal government. However, when problems arose, the weakness of this form of government caused the leaders of the time to come together at the Constitutional Convention and create, in secret, the US Constitution. Strong proponents of states rights like Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry were not present at this meeting. Many felt that the new constitution ignored the rights of states to continue to act independently. They felt that the states should still have the right to decide if they were willing to accept certain federal acts. This resulted in the idea of nullification, whereby the states would have the right to rule federal acts unconstitutional. The federal government denied states this right. However, proponents such as John C. Calhoun fought vehemently for nullification. When nullification would not work and states felt that they were no longer respected, they moved towards secession.
3. The fight between Slave and Non-Slave State Proponents.
As America began to expand, first with the lands gained from the Louisiana Purchase and later with the Mexican War, the question of whether new states admitted to the union would be slave or free. The Missouri Compromise passed in 1820 made a rule that prohibited slavery in states from the former Louisiana Purchase the latitude 36 degrees 30 minutes north except in Missouri. During the Mexican War, conflict started about what would happen with the new territories that the US expected to gain upon victory. David Wilmot proposed the Wilmot Proviso in 1846 which would ban slavery in the new lands. However, this was shot down to much debate. The Compromise of 1850 was created by Henry Clay and others to deal with the balance between slave and free states, northern and southern interests. One of the provisions was the fugitive slave act that was discussed in number one above. Another issue that further increased tensions was the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. It created two new territories that would allow the states to use popular sovereignty to determine whether they would be free or slave. The real issue occurred in Kansas where proslavery Missourians began to pour into the state to help force it to be slave. They were called “Border Ruffians.” Problems came to a head in violence at Lawrence Kansas. The fighting that occurred caused it to be called “Bleeding Kansas.” The fight even erupted on the floor of the senate when antislavery proponent Charles Sumner was beat over the head by South Carolina’s Senator Preston Brooks.
4. Growth of the Abolition Movement.
Increasingly, the northerners became more polarized against slavery. Sympathies began to grow for abolitionists and against slavery and slaveholders. This occurred especially after some major events including: the publishing of Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin, the Dred Scott Case, John Brown’s Raid, and the passage of the fugitive slave act that held individuals responsible for harboring fugitive slaves even if they were located in non-slave states.
5. The election of Abraham Lincoln. Even though things were already coming to a head, when Lincoln was elected in 1860, South Carolina issued its “Declaration of the Causes of Secession.” They believed that Lincoln was anti-slavery and in favor of Northern interests. Before Lincoln was even president, seven states had seceded from the Union: South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas.
All this bunk about what Lincoln and MLK would have been today is just that bunk. The Democratic party of today is nothing like the Democrats or Republicans during the Civil War. Today the Democratic party are a bunch of wimps, sissies deplorable representations of humans and will go the way of the Dodo, and the Republicans are like lost souls with no direction, but like the Phoenix will rise again.

 

[AnnaG]

Possibly. But the truth doesn't, it is as fresh the 51st time as it is the first time.

So you'll let us know when you finally find some truth?