So - Black Lives Matter and your Religion/Denomination?

[badnewsbarrett]

I have a very simple message for each and every white Catholic who may decide to comment on the BLM movement.

Nobody. No one. And I do mean No-Bo-Dy. Is asking you. To tell black people, presumably mostly black Protestants, the exact issues that they should care about the most and focus on the most.

There is no rational reason on God’s green earth that would explain why anyone would ask you to decide which issues should be most important to black Protestants, or to black Americans in general. Why in the world would anyone ask you for such a thing? It’s not going to happen.

This is what you are being asked to do. State, to the best of your ability, the things that BLM stands for and is doing. Assess what is happening and then maybe talk about what looks realistic and may get done, talk about what’s probably not going to happen. Talk about what they want and if it should happen. And talk about which parts of it can be fully supported from a Catholic standpoint. Are any of the actual, stated goals of BLM contrary to Catholic teaching? That would be an interesting thing to explore…although ABC has absolutely nothing to do with the BLM movement, so I really don’t know why some of you insist on making that the focus. BLM isn’t passing out condoms or making any statements about them at all, nor are they doing any favors for Planned Parenthood or the availability of abortion clinics. No statements whatsoever, they’re only talking about a handful of things that they’re actually working on. So, are any of those things contrary to Catholicism? That’s a question worth asking.

This is a movement. These are people who are trying to get a handful of things done where one or two specific issues are concerned, and that is it. It’s not a whole political party, and you’re not being asked to register as a member. There are not multiple planks in a party platform or a series of policies, it is just a movement that is trying to accomplish a certain thing, so talk about that thing. If there were a series of planks and a list of policies, no one would ever ask you to decide what they all should be. No one. Ever.

Finally…black on black crime is important, but as I’ve said once before on this thread, it is also a black on black conversation. That conversation happens every day, all the time, it just doesn’t usually involve you. It’s something that is dealt with between black people. It doesn’t happen in front of you, and it doesn’t involve you directly, but that doesn’t mean the conversation isn’t happening. It very much is, and one of the main things that keeps coming up is the pain and grief that comes from losing a family member, or someone very close to you. People will also talk about the trauma of kids seeing dead bodies at a very young age, just how many dead bodies they saw in the streets when they were growing up or perhaps concern over what their kids are seeing as they grow up. This conversation is happening between regular black people all the time, it happens in every black church every Sunday, it completely dominates what’s focused on at HBCU’s, and you can catch some of this conversation on black radio if you’re inclined to listen to it. You ever heard the phrase “Put the guns down”? Where I’m at, I keep hearing “Put the guns down, Chicago.” That’s something you hear on certain radio stations, maybe just a little more often than the station ID.

The point is, black people are all caught up on the importance of this issue. As a white Catholic, you probably are not, but you don’t really need to be. Do that on your own time, if you want. Right now though, this thread is about the Black Lives Matter movement, not about how much you don’t realize black people talk to other black people about the violence in their communities.

Let’s focus up and try not to get distracted.

 

[HungerNThirst4R]

I have a very simple message for each and every white Catholic who may decide to comment on the BLM movement.

Nobody. No one. And I do mean No-Bo-Dy. Is asking you. To tell black people, presumably mostly black Protestants, the exact issues that they should care about the most and focus on the most.

There is no rational reason on God’s green earth that would explain why anyone would ask you to decide which issues should be most important to black Protestants, or to black Americans in general. Why in the world would anyone ask you for such a thing? It’s not going to happen.

This is what you are being asked to do. State, to the best of your ability, the things that BLM stands for and is doing. Assess what is happening and then maybe talk about what looks realistic and may get done, talk about what’s probably not going to happen. Talk about what they want and if it should happen. And talk about which parts of it can be fully supported from a Catholic standpoint. Are any of the actual, stated goals of BLM contrary to Catholic teaching? That would be an interesting thing to explore…although ABC has absolutely nothing to do with the BLM movement, so I really don’t know why some of you insist on making that the focus. BLM isn’t passing out condoms or making any statements about them at all, nor are they doing any favors for Planned Parenthood or the availability of abortion clinics. No statements whatsoever, they’re only talking about a handful of things that they’re actually working on. So, are any of those things contrary to Catholicism? That’s a question worth asking.

This is a movement. These are people who are trying to get a handful of things done where one or two specific issues are concerned, and that is it. It’s not a whole political party, and you’re not being asked to register as a member. There are not multiple planks in a party platform or a series of policies, it is just a movement that is trying to accomplish a certain thing, so talk about that thing. If there were a series of planks and a list of policies, no one would ever ask you to decide what they all should be. No one. Ever.

Finally…black on black crime is important, but as I’ve said once before on this thread, it is also a black on black conversation. That conversation happens every day, all the time, it just doesn’t usually involve you. It’s something that is dealt with between black people. It doesn’t happen in front of you, and it doesn’t involve you directly, but that doesn’t mean the conversation isn’t happening. It very much is, and one of the main things that keeps coming up is the pain and grief that comes from losing a family member, or someone very close to you. People will also talk about the trauma of kids seeing dead bodies at a very young age, just how many dead bodies they saw in the streets when they were growing up or perhaps concern over what their kids are seeing as they grow up. This conversation is happening between regular black people all the time, it happens in every black church every Sunday, it completely dominates what’s focused on at HBCU’s, and you can catch some of this conversation on black radio if you’re inclined to listen to it. You ever heard the phrase “Put the guns down”? Where I’m at, I keep hearing “Put the guns down, Chicago.” That’s something you hear on certain radio stations, maybe just a little more often than the station ID.

The point is, black people are all caught up on the importance of this issue. As a white Catholic, you probably are not, but you don’t really need to be. Do that on your own time, if you want. Right now though, this thread is about the Black Lives Matter movement, not about how much you don’t realize black people talk to other black people about the violence in their communities.

Let’s focus up and try not to get distracted.

This thread is not about the Black community in general, it is about the BLM movement and how posters regardless of their faith or rather in connection to it, view the movement. Maybe this is unknown to you but there are many black Catholics in the USA. There are also many black people in general who are against the BLM movement because of what it focuses on and what it turns a blind eye to, including other notable civil rights activists. Even former Black Panthers. Furthermore, while the original premise that Blacks Lives Matter and need to be fully respected and protected by the justice system, and lives taken by police officers are a grave injustice, the movement’s other political agendas may definitely clash with certain religions, just as its aligning or birth from the “Social Justice Warrior” movement which advocates “reproduction rights” (ie abortion) and gender ideology. As well as censoring free speech.

 

[TheAtheist]

the movement’s other political agendas may definitely clash with certain religions, just as its aligning or birth from the “Social Justice Warrior” movement which advocates “reproduction rights” (ie abortion) and gender ideology. As well as censoring free speech.

Allow me to deliver a bit of news on that front.

So apparently a while back, the founder of BLM Canada, Yusra Khogali, made a rather controversial statement apparently done so in a fit of anger:



Now i’m sure you can trip over the thousand and one debates associated with the context of the above quote, but i was drawn to the beginning of the statement she made.

So… I decided to dig a little deeper. Was there some sort of connection between BLM and Islam in the context of African American struggles for social justice?

Most of the Muslims i know in real life are actually from Pakistan/India so I decided to tap them, not because they had any particular connection to the movement, but rather because they knew who to ask about the “wider-world” issues that intersect with Islam.

The response I got was pretty much the sentiment echoed - how can any form of Islam lend support to a movement that condones “black queer and transfolk and all black lives along the gender spectrum, reproductive rights/abortion, etc. etc. etc.”

Bear in mind, i’m speaking to people who follow a rather conservative i guess you can call it, interpretation of Islam. Same people who were miffed about Daaiyee Abdullah, America’s first openly gay imam.

america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/america-tonight-blog/2013/12/20/meet-america-s-firstopenlygayimam.html

…who in point of fact, also happens to be African American.

And this is kind of the question bubbling in the back of my own mind.

While you can have African Americans belonging to this or that denomination/faith…it seems like there is a chunk of them that essentially are playing by their own rules.

slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2008/06/are_black_muslims_sunni_or_shiite.html

And their religious faith, whether it be a form of Christianity/Islam/Whatever feeds directly into the issues raised by badnewsbarrett.

From my “perch” if you will, I tend to find this all rather intriguing - simply because I actually don’t think many of you in the Mainstream version(s) of Christianity/Islam etc. know how to actually handle/address the concerns raised by this particular unique mix of Social Justice and Religious faith.

A Side Note: Even the fire-breathing New Atheists have…difficulties… when interacting with this segment of the population. Remember, these people are prone to hating all religion and disliking statements that can’t be verified.

So they take a facts-figures-numbers approach similar to what’s been stated on this thread - ie: “Black on Black violence” or “Black Population overall percentage is disproportionate to the amount of violence caused by said proportion” etc. etc.

…But in the end, at least in public settings, these people who as i’m sure you Christians know well enough -Love- to Debate… they falter or disengage quickly.

So i asked them: Why?

The answer was surprising:

I can be Anti-Christian. Some Christian can be Anti-Atheist. We can fight all day and night about their imaginary sky fairy - but at the end of the day, i can go home and he can go home and our lives can continue on.

If i get branded a racist, or the Christian gets branded a racist - we are both $#@%.

I think you’ll find sir, that a lot of the New Atheist crowd have gotten tired with arguing with Christians. They are a $#*#@ joke, but not some existential threat.

Most of our ire is drawn toward two groups. Islam because they are trying to blow us up. But more importantly, its that other “religion” that we didn’t notice till now.

Cause the God of Political Correctness and his/her/it’s Social Justice Missionaries are a lot more powerful in our society than some Hippy Jewish Carpenter or Science for that matter.

Violate that “religion’s” precepts, and it could literally ruin your career and life.

Again…it seems we live in very interesting times…

 

[badnewsbarrett]

This thread is not about the Black community in general, it is about the BLM movement and how posters regardless of their faith or rather in connection to it, view the movement. Maybe this is unknown to you but there are many black Catholics in the USA.

To the first part- that is my understanding, yes, and I attempted to say something very similar to that. To the second part- the number of black Catholics in the USA is not unknown to me. 3% of American Catholics are black, compared to 12% of the whole population, and only 1% of those who are raised in a black Protestant church are now Catholic. This could be construed as “many black Catholics” if you’re counting beans and declaring that the total number is much greater than zero, but when you place the total numbers in context, compare them to anything, or look at the likely future trends of Catholic demographics, I think you wind up telling a story about Catholic demographics in America in which there aren’t very many black people and that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.

Now, in my area, I am aware of one particular black Catholic church in Chicago. Its priest is especially well known, that would be Father Michael Pfleger. Here he is talking about gun violence, Chuck’s Gun Shop, and the NRA. youtube.com/watch?v=5ZLAcaWHRaU

You may notice that the most outspoken and socially active Catholic priest in Chicago, who is the head of Saint Sabina Church (and absolutely refuses to leave there), is a German American. Yeah, he’s the white guy. If you’ve ever seen the movie Chi-raq, he is the inspiration for a particular character in that film.

There are also many black people in general who are against the BLM movement because of what it focuses on and what it turns a blind eye to, including other notable civil rights activists. Even former Black Panthers.

I’m okay with talking about what BLM has stated that it’s focusing on. Criticism of what they’re actually doing is fine. And if BLM has openly stated that they don’t care about something, or they’ve shown disrespect or contempt in an overt manner, that is worthy of comment as well. What I’m not okay with is the argument from silence, as if it’s appropriate for white Catholics to create a laundry list of things that BLM ought to do and then accuse them of negligence when they do what everyone knows they’re going to do, and ignore the silly lists that should have never been made.

The argument from silence is a weak argument in general, and in this example it’s especially weak. Just because BLM “appears to be silent” on certain matters- at least as far as white Catholics are aware, which is not necessarily all that far- it doesn’t follow that they are negligent. And it’s wrong to assume that BLM is obligated to talk about this or that, or any particular thing, simply because it is an important issue in the abstract.

Furthermore, while the original premise that Blacks Lives Matter and need to be fully respected and protected by the justice system, and lives taken by police officers are a grave injustice, the movement’s other political agendas may definitely clash with certain religions, just as its aligning or birth from the “Social Justice Warrior” movement which advocates “reproduction rights” (ie abortion) and gender ideology. As well as censoring free speech.

The original premise absolutely does need to be addressed and supported, and I wish that more Catholics on this particular thread would make that a higher priority- or a priority at all- before getting into whatever kind of criticism they want to bring, which can be perfectly legitimate criticism but sometimes really is not.

What is a good source that you’ve been able to come up with regarding these “other political agendas”? Is there a particular place where that is spelled out?

By the way, here’s another link to Father Michael Pfleger, specifically pertaining to BLM.
chicago.cbslocal.com/2015/08/09/pfleger-on-ferguson-one-year-later-black-lives-still-matter/

“BLM is not just some tagline, it’s not just some, you know, cute thing to say. It comes out of a cry from the street as saying, you know, when are we going to address this, black lives do matter and we’ve got to stop this murdering, whether it’s in the neighborhood and whether it’s cops or vigilantes.”

And in answer to that question, some Catholics on this forum would like to tell him…here’s when, Father Michael Pfleger. Just as soon as you properly address the issue of abortion, make that the thing you lead with, and then bring this along afterward. That’s when we’ll get behind you and start to take this seriously, okay Father? Silly Catholic priest, he should have argued to make abortion illegal and Then got into the issue of violence in black neighborhoods.

My reaction to this is basically smh.

 

[arthra]

Bad news wrote :

i’ll toss this question out to all of you folks on the Non-Catholic Religions board.

Has your religious denomination in an official capacity somehow found itself engaged with the Black Lives Matter movement?

Has it been supportive? Critical? Or has it essentially tried to stay as far away as possible and not get entangled in the identity politics of the movement?

…

I don’t think there’s any connection between Baha’is and “Black Lives Matter” as such but we have been in favor historically of the Civil Rights Movement. Baha’is are generally law abiding and are for peaceful demonstrations… also we’re non-partisan politically.

 

[TheAtheist]

3% of American Catholics are black, compared to 12% of the whole population, and only 1% of those who are raised in a black Protestant church are now Catholic. This could be construed as “many black Catholics” if you’re counting beans and declaring that the total number is much greater than zero, but when you place the total numbers in context, compare them to anything, or look at the likely future trends of Catholic demographics, I think you wind up telling a story about Catholic demographics in America in which there aren’t very many black people and that will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.

May I ask where you got your statistics from?

Because if those numbers are indeed correct… well… i’m more inclined to believe my conjecture that Catholicism (and probably Orthodoxy and many of the older mainline non-evangelical Protestant churches) essentially have an outreach issue to the African American/Black community.

And in answer to that question, some Catholics on this forum would like to tell him…here’s when, Father Michael Pfleger. Just as soon as you properly address the issue of abortion, make that the thing you lead with, and then bring this along afterward. That’s when we’ll get behind you and start to take this seriously, okay Father? Silly Catholic priest, he should have argued to make abortion illegal and Then got into the issue of violence in black neighborhoods.

Ah now you see this is real find. Thank you very much for your information regarding Father Pfleger.

As for the thread respondents… well… bear in mind something Badnews.

I’ve learned over time that Catholicism, although deemed monolithic from the outside, is kind of more like a giant tent from within.

I wouldn’t be surprised if a member of Opus Dei would have similar criticisms as expressed on this thread, while a member of the Society of Jesus/Jesuit would probably raise many of the points you have been making.

 

[JonNC]

Here are some noteworthy quotes from the BLM website:

** Black Villages**
We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, and especially “our” children to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable.

Transgender Affirming
We are committed to embracing and making space for trans brothers and sisters to participate and lead. We are committed to being self-reflexive and doing the work required to dismantle cis-gender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence.

What Does #BlackLivesMatter Mean?

When we say Black Lives Matter, we are broadening the conversation around state violence to include all of the ways in which Black people are intentionally left powerless at the hands of the state. We are talking about the ways in which Black lives are deprived of our basic human rights and dignity.

How Black poverty and genocide is state violence.

How 2.8 million Black people are locked in cages in this country is state violence.

Now, it is a big website, but I didn’t see anything about black-on-black violence. I also did not see anything about insisting children do well in school, and behave in school, in order to escape poverty and live a better life, like many blacks have already done.

blacklivesmatter.com/

Jon

 

[HungerNThirst4R]

What is a good source that you’ve been able to come up with regarding these “other political agendas”? Is there a particular place where that is spelled out?

.

Everywhere, literally. On almost every university campus across the country these “SJWs” are censoring speech of those who have opposing opinions. You can watch videos of students at Yale(worst one), Rutgers, DePaul university and many others the false “social justice” agenda is being imposed by students and their far leaning liberal professors. At teacher lost her job at the University of Missouri for trying to prevent a student journalist from filming a protest by utilizing the protesters as her “muscle”. Google or youtube these things, the videos are everywhere.

As for the lgbt agenda, many of the founders and high ranking members identify as queer, gay or trans. Lgbt rights has been part of the movement from the start. The three founding members also identify as feminist, which in its modern form champions “reproductive rights”.

I’ll be honest, at first I was like “wow anyone is against the BLM movement must be a racist”. But then I saw more and more proBlack people speak out against them so I did my research.

Also, maybe I live in an eastcoast, tristate, NYC metropolitan area bubble, but I personally know many Black Catholics, both lay and religious. In the archdiocese of Newark we have some all-African American Catholic Churches, not because they are “segregated” but because there are all black neighborhoods. But in terms of Black Catholics in general, many of them don’t identify as “African-American” which is where your possibly skewed statistic came from? There are numerous Haitian, Nigerian, Jamaican, Trinidadian, Catholics out here. My parish is predominately Colombian and Haitian.

 

[badnewsbarrett]

May I ask where you got your statistics from?

Because if those numbers are indeed correct… well… i’m more inclined to believe my conjecture that Catholicism (and probably Orthodoxy and many of the older mainline non-evangelical Protestant churches) essentially have an outreach issue to the African American/Black community.

I got the numbers from Pew Forum, and I’m glad you asked me to cite them since there was one figure that I misquoted by one. First source:

pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/09/14/a-closer-look-at-catholic-america/

In the first couple of graphs, American Catholics are 59% white, 3% for Black and Asian, 34% Hispanic and 2% Other. I did recall the information from this source correctly; 12% of the general US population is black and I remembered both of these things correctly.

My second source is where I made a mistake and was off on one thing by one percent. Here’s the source.

pewforum.org/2015/05/12/chapter-2-religious-switching-and-intermarriage/

About halfway down, there is a graph titled “Hindus, Muslims, and Jews have the highest retention rates.” In the left column 12 different religious groupings are listed, the next column over in bold shows you how many that are raised in it stick around and the other columns tell you six other places they might have gone to.

I originally said that 1% of those raised in a black Protestant church are now Catholic, but in fact that number is 2%. My bad. I should have remembered that, since the Catholic Church is picking up 2% of those raised in a lot of different categories.

So basically, black Protestant churches- which are very close to being 100% black- lose 2% of those raised in these churches to Catholicism. And the Catholic Church in the United States- which is only 3% black- loses 1% of those raised in the Catholic Church to black Protestant churches.

These are very small numbers going in both directions, especially when you look at the entirety of the rest of the chart. There’s really not a whole lot going on between black Protestant churches and the Catholic Church, although these numbers taken together initially seem to suggest that if you’re part of the small minority of black people raised as Catholics, it seems pretty likely that you’ll wind up joining a black Protestant church.

It should be noted that among all Christian groups- even including marginal groups like Mormons and JWs- black Protestants have the highest retention, so relatively speaking, everyone kind of has an outreach problem with them, not just Catholics. On the other hand though, the Catholic Church in America has a bit of an outreach problem with a few other religious groups as well. I’m especially looking at the trajectory of those raised unaffiliated.

Ah now you see this is real find. Thank you very much for your information regarding Father Pfleger.

Thank you very much, I appreciate that. I should mention that Father Pfleger has generated a bit of controversy, not really anything truly scandalous but there has been a questionable decision or two, he’s willing to work closely with Farrakhan on some things, he went to bat for Jeremiah Wright and said he’s a great man who’s been treated unfairly, there’s also been a couple of issues pertaining to free speech, he has impeded a couple of things that were indeed objectionable but nonetheless lawful and not illegal…

And more importantly, there was that time in 2011 when his bishop recommended that he end his time at his parish and take over at some position at a school, I forget which one. He adamantly refused to leave, he even said he would leave the Catholic Church entirely if he was forced to leave his parish. His bishop said something like “If you really feel that way, then you left already.” (Paraphrasing). He wasn’t excommunicated, but he was disciplined, suspended and not authorized to do his regular things with the sacraments. But then after a little while the suspension was lifted, and he is still there. It seems like he won that round, and thirty years in at this one particular parish, he still doesn’t want to go anywhere, no matter what it is that Catholic priests usually do. And no matter what his bishop says he should do, which is just a bit defiant, and not really the normal relationship that a Catholic priest is expected to have with authority.

With all that being said…he is the best known name in Chicago when it comes to Catholic priests who are also social justice warriors. He’s not exactly typical, and there are some things about him that give opportunities for criticism, but he certainly is noteworthy for this type of thing. He’s likable to me, and seems like he’s likable to Chicago’s black community overall. I see him as a very good man who’s done a couple of questionable things and maybe made a couple of bad decisions along the way. Overall though, very likable. I haven’t seen many people be critical of him, or suggest that he’s polarizing. But it’s possible I haven’t looked hard enough.

As for the thread respondents… well… bear in mind something Badnews.

I’ve learned over time that Catholicism, although deemed monolithic from the outside, is kind of more like a giant tent from within.

I wouldn’t be surprised if a member of Opus Dei would have similar criticisms as expressed on this thread, while a member of the Society of Jesus/Jesuit would probably raise many of the points you have been making.

Thank you for sharing that, I appreciate it. I have a reasonably good handle on the Jesuit identity and where that’s coming from, but I’ll have to refresh myself on Opus Dei. Thanks for bringing that to my attention, it’s been awhile since I’ve taken a look at that.

 

[Lion_IRC]

Who are the BLM folk angry at?
I would support them but I just don’t know who it is that says black, white, brown, pink, yellow, caramel, beige lives are not all equally sacred in the eyes of The Creator.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Due to a rather bit of an oversight by an overly enthusiastic undergrad, I found myself on campus early early this morning waiting on the results of a 72 hr blood/cell culture experiment started on a Friday…

(Note to any of you budding scientists out there who happen to be on CAF = Do yourself and your primary investigator a favor and don’t start experiments on a Friday!).

Having decided to have lunch outside in the open air, I sat down only to stare out across the quad to see kids chanting:

“You can’t stop the Revolution, Black Power is the Solution.”

The crowd of course, was the local manifestation of the Black Lives Matter movement on campus with associated student organizations.

My innate curiousity go the better of me as I moved a little closer trying to figure out if some faces in the crowd I spied may have been grad students i’ve seen in other institutions.

But in that forming crowd, which seems to have been some sort of organizational meeting for an event later in the week, I did see members of an evangelical all-african american (or is it black? I’m never quite sure what the proper thing to say is as a foreigner) church and possibly a representative of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan’s little group.

That got the gear in my mind turning so to speak. So i’ll toss this question out to all of you folks on the Non-Catholic Religions board.

Has your religious denomination in an official capacity somehow found itself engaged with the Black Lives Matter movement?

Has it been supportive? Critical? Or has it essentially tried to stay as far away as possible and not get entangled in the identity politics of the movement?

I remember the first round. I’d like to believe that BLM is not rooted in the hate and racism of “back then”. But with the names Louis Farakan and Black Panthers thrown into the hat… I have an instant zero respect for the group.

Of course I am interested in justice. I don’t see it coming from a movement that includes Farakan or the Black Panthers.

Here, where I live, any BLM activity is 900 miles away. Never hear anything about it anywhere, except in coverage of national news.

 

[badnewsbarrett]

Here are some noteworthy quotes from the BLM website:

Now, it is a big website, but I didn’t see anything about black-on-black violence. I also did not see anything about insisting children do well in school, and behave in school, in order to escape poverty and live a better life, like many blacks have already done.

blacklivesmatter.com/

Jon

You raise some very good points from the website, I had known that BLM was more of a place for black female activists than for black men but I hadn’t known that it was explicitly going out of its way to work so closely and visibly with the LGBT community, especially homosexual and transgender people of color. This is all perfectly legal of course, as it should be, and there is some sort of conversation to be had about what those people are going through- even for someone with the most orthodox of beliefs about lifestyles and gender identity, we do need to take time every once in awhile to say that all forms of abuse, along with extrajudicial violence, should not be happening to these people. We could also stand to acknowledge that in this part of the world, at least, Christian teachings on the wrongness associated with these people is quite a motivator, especially if the same people saying “It’s wrong” are somehow refusing to say “The violence and abuse you may be thinking about carrying out…is also wrong, and also an ongoing problem.”

With that being said, I can see how this type of emphasis would limit the direct involvement that a faithful Catholic might want to have. I would be interested to hear, in the words of actual Catholics, exactly what this means to them. Particularly if, let’s say for example, the general ideas pertaining to justice and reform are mostly things you agree with- but there also happens to be gay and trans people who are fairly involved with delivering the message. Where does that leave you exactly, what does it mean for you, and what do you do?

 

[badnewsbarrett]

Everywhere, literally. On almost every university campus across the country these “SJWs” are censoring speech of those who have opposing opinions. You can watch videos of students at Yale(worst one), Rutgers, DePaul university and many others the false “social justice” agenda is being imposed by students and their far leaning liberal professors. At teacher lost her job at the University of Missouri for trying to prevent a student journalist from filming a protest by utilizing the protesters as her “muscle”. Google or youtube these things, the videos are everywhere.

As for the lgbt agenda, many of the founders and high ranking members identify as queer, gay or trans. Lgbt rights has been part of the movement from the start. The three founding members also identify as feminist, which in its modern form champions “reproductive rights”.

In all honesty, I think I have different search habits and video watching habits than you do. I am dimly aware of BLM protesters and, what do you call them, SJWs doing some absurd things, sometimes in anger or frustration, but I don’t know much of the specifics. It’s kind of intentional on my part, though. The way I see it, there’s two basic types of video searchers when it comes to this. There’s the type of person who wants to criticize this thing as much as they can, so they look at all the videos they can that support the idea that these people deserve lots of criticism. I don’t want to be that kind of person though, so I don’t go searching in that way. I just now discovered the Halloween thing from Yale, which had previously passed me by entirely, and I don’t know the first thing about any of the other campuses. Instead, I’m trying to figure out where this might go and what might happen in the near future that will actually be helpful and beneficial to everyone on the whole, so I’m staying up on what might go into that.

I’ll be honest, at first I was like “wow anyone is against the BLM movement must be a racist”. But then I saw more and more proBlack people speak out against them so I did my research.

Also, maybe I live in an eastcoast, tristate, NYC metropolitan area bubble, but I personally know many Black Catholics, both lay and religious. In the archdiocese of Newark we have some all-African American Catholic Churches, not because they are “segregated” but because there are all black neighborhoods. But in terms of Black Catholics in general, many of them don’t identify as “African-American” which is where your possibly skewed statistic came from? There are numerous Haitian, Nigerian, Jamaican, Trinidadian, Catholics out here. My parish is predominately Colombian and Haitian.

That’s a good point about black people who aren’t necessarily self-identifying as black, it’s pretty common especially with certain types of islanders that they think of themselves as native, and not as black. They know who black people are, but they don’t think of themselves that way. Unless they move here, then maybe they do. Dominicans, for example, think of themselves as native islanders. Haitians, as far as they are concerned, are black, Jamaicans probably are, so are all the black people in the US, but they’re not. They’re native.

So that type of person- the type we might look at and lump in with other people, but they don’t- is in the “Other” category, which is 2% of American Catholics, as of numbers from 2015. Keep in mind though, there are an awful lot of Asian people who retain a more specific sense of racial identity, from India to China, Vietnam and Japan, and of course the whole MidEast, which is technically part of the Asian continent. I would venture to guess that Asian immigrants are more likely, over the course of more generations, to reject the Asian ethnic grouping in favor of something more specific. But for the sake of simplicity, let’s say the “Other” category most likely gives you the potential for one extra percentage point for a broader black grouping, and one extra percentage point for a broader Asian grouping.

I think that racial switching is more common than we give it credit for, and it can happen almost immediately for many immigrants. Going back to the example of an islander in the Caribbean- let’s say you grow up on the island, and up to a certain point, you are an islander and other people are black. Then you move to the US, and everyone treats you as a black person, you basically have no choice but to assimilate, to some extent, into the African-American community. (The same sort of thing can happen with Asian or Hispanic people as well). You don’t even keep yourself locked in and leave it to your children- you, personally, actually spend part of your life with one racial identity and then you spend the rest of your life with a different one. This is actually very, very common for non-white immigrants to the United States, mostly because there is so little in the way of globally applied ideas of racial categories.

At any rate, the main point I’m making is that the “other” category is only another 2%, and I think you could make a stronger argument for most of it being different types of Asian people than you could for black people. (Asians also claim 3% of the Catholic population in the US).

I would venture to suggest that a fair bit of the 3% of Catholics that identify as black are just exactly the same people that you were describing- but they have already switched their racial identity to “black,” and that is how they respond on surveys when asked what they are. Not all of them have done this, of course, so I’d say that in totality, you have some people in both categories at any given time. And in both categories, it’s pretty small numbers that we’re looking at.

 

[badnewsbarrett]

Who are the BLM folk angry at?
I would support them but I just don’t know who it is that says black, white, brown, pink, yellow, caramel, beige lives are not all equally sacred in the eyes of The Creator.

They’re mostly angry at racist cops, and at a broken criminal justice system. Also the NRA, come to think of it, but mostly it’s cops (who don’t kill that many unarmed people in anger but- this is crucial- never get indicted when they do). And that dovetails nicely into the broken criminal justice system.

The war on drugs deserves a mention as well. Again, this involves cops and the criminal justice system.

Now, as to why they focus up on black lives, there is a very good reason for that. I don’t know about the area you’re from, but the Chicago police, where I’m from, have been saying something that’s been coming up for the longest time. They acknowledge the particular set of problems between black people and the Chicago police, involving a lack of trust and cooperation, refusal to call the police when it’s otherwise a really good time to do so, refusal to give any information about anything because black people don’t trust the police to keep them safe…and then the department says, in its most official capacity possible, that it will be taking steps to working on building a better relationship with Chicago’s black community. There’s been a lot of little steps, but not much measurable progress.

Now, do you notice as I have that police departments never say they want improved relationships with white pink and yellow people? You know they’re all equal in the eyes of our Creator, right? Have you noticed that police departments never talk about working to build a greater sense of trust with caramel and beige people. That’s because Chicago’s police department- and I would venture to guess every police department in every major American city- already has at least a decent relationship with its white pink and yellow people. They trust the police, as do the caramel and beige people (unless the caramel people are being classified as black, in which case they definitely don’t trust the police either).

The truth is, there is only one racial group of people that’s always had this bad of a relationship with American police departments everywhere. There is only one racial group that distrusts the police this consistently and at this level. You guessed it, it’s black people. Sometimes- and this is one of those times- it’s well worth your while to talk about what’s going on with just one racial group and then try to do something positive that will make a bit of a difference going forward. And when the problems associated with a particular situation are this clearly delineated on the basis of race, you’ll quickly notice that race-specific solutions are what we truly need, whereas this urge to make things as racially generic as possible winds up having quite a bit less potential to be truly helpful.

 

[JonNC]

=badnewsbarrett;13933003]You raise some very good points from the website, I had known that BLM was more of a place for black female activists than for black men but I hadn’t known that it was explicitly going out of its way to work so closely and visibly with the LGBT community, especially homosexual and transgender people of color.

Parenthetically, think about the exclusionary nature of the language, “people of color”.

What this indicates is that BLM is nothing more than another progressive client group, one of many.

This is all perfectly legal of course, as it should be,…

Of course it should be legal, and I wouldn’t sever suggest otherwise.

and there is some sort of conversation to be had about what those people are going through- even for someone with the most orthodox of beliefs about lifestyles and gender identity, we do need to take time every once in awhile to say that all forms of abuse, along with extrajudicial violence, should not be happening to these people.

Again, of course not. Orthodox Christian teaching is always to “love the sinner, hate the sin”. What you won’t find orthodox Christians doing is saying its okay.

We could also stand to acknowledge that in this part of the world, at least, Christian teachings on the wrongness associated with these people is quite a motivator, especially if the same people saying “It’s wrong” are somehow refusing to say “The violence and abuse you may be thinking about carrying out…is also wrong, and also an ongoing problem.”

In this part of the world, the treatment of these people is light years better than in most of the rest of the world. Do we have room for improvement, absolutely, but as an orthodox Christian, that room for improvement will not include an acceptance of the lifestyle. As someone living at ground zero (North Carolina) of the transgender issue, we can see that the transgender movement and its supporters take no concern of the needs and rights of others. So, while violence is never the answer, I’m not particularly sympathetic to the calls of the activitists.

With that being said, I can see how this type of emphasis would limit the direct involvement that a faithful Catholic might want to have. I would be interested to hear, in the words of actual Catholics, exactly what this means to them. Particularly if, let’s say for example, the general ideas pertaining to justice and reform are mostly things you agree with- but there also happens to be gay and trans people who are fairly involved with delivering the message. Where does that leave you exactly, what does it mean for you, and what do you do?

I’ll let Catholics respond here.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

=badnewsbarrett;13933134]They’re mostly angry at racist cops, and at a broken criminal justice system. Also the NRA, come to think of it, but mostly it’s cops (who don’t kill that many unarmed people in anger but- this is crucial- never get indicted when they do). And that dovetails nicely into the broken criminal justice system.

The movement is said to have begun in response to the Trayvon Martin death. George Zimmerman was not a cop, and was found not guilty.
To say they are angry at “racist cops” assumes that cops are racist. I would suspect no more so than the general public, including members of BLM. In Baltimore, the racist there might be prosecutor Marilyn Mosby. Or, she just hates cops. Or she’s just a lousy presecutor.

As for the NRA, it is one of a very few organizations that has stood up for law-abiding people regardless of race or ethnicity. The MacDonald v Chicago decision confirmed that the civil and human right to keep and bear arms protected by the second amendment is also protected under the 14th amendment. Otis MacDonald is an African American who wanted to keep a firearm to be able to do what the Chicago government is clearly incapable of doing - protect himself and his property from the street thugs.

The war on drugs deserves a mention as well. Again, this involves cops and the criminal justice system.

It also involves legislatures and executives around the country. Police take their marching orders from them.

Now, as to why they focus up on black lives, there is a very good reason for that. I don’t know about the area you’re from, but the Chicago police, where I’m from, have been saying something that’s been coming up for the longest time. They acknowledge the particular set of problems between black people and the Chicago police, involving a lack of trust and cooperation, refusal to call the police when it’s otherwise a really good time to do so, refusal to give any information about anything because black people don’t trust the police to keep them safe…and then the department says, in its most official capacity possible, that it will be taking steps to working on building a better relationship with Chicago’s black community. There’s been a lot of little steps, but not much measurable progress.

Now, do you notice as I have that police departments never say they want improved relationships with white pink and yellow people? You know they’re all equal in the eyes of our Creator, right? Have you noticed that police departments never talk about working to build a greater sense of trust with caramel and beige people. That’s because Chicago’s police department- and I would venture to guess every police department in every major American city- already has at least a decent relationship with its white pink and yellow people. They trust the police, as do the caramel and beige people (unless the caramel people are being classified as black, in which case they definitely don’t trust the police either).

The truth is, there is only one racial group of people that’s always had this bad of a relationship with American police departments everywhere. There is only one racial group that distrusts the police this consistently and at this level. You guessed it, it’s black people. Sometimes- and this is one of those times- it’s well worth your while to talk about what’s going on with just one racial group and then try to do something positive that will make a bit of a difference going forward. And when the problems associated with a particular situation are this clearly delineated on the basis of race, you’ll quickly notice that race-specific solutions are what we truly need, whereas this urge to make things as racially generic as possible winds up having quite a bit less potential to be truly helpful.

One may need to look at the political party/movement that’s been in charge in Chicago for a very long time.

Jon

 

[Son_of_Niall]

How many on this thread are white?
My hand is raised as well.

 

[JonNC]

How many on this thread are white?
My hand is raised as well.

I am, and why does that matter?

Jon

 

[TheAtheist]

To say they are angry at “racist cops” assumes that cops are racist. I would suspect no more so than the general public, including members of BLM. In Baltimore, the racist there might be prosecutor Marilyn Mosby. Or, she just hates cops. Or she’s just a lousy presecutor.

On the topic of Cops and the African American/Black Community…

A number of Chinese colleagues made me aware of this little issue:

nypost.com/2016/02/20/10000-protesters-rallying-in-support-of-ex-cop-peter-liang/

This refers to the 2014 accidental shooting of Akai Gurley by Chinese rookie officer Peter Liang.

BLM came down on the side of Akai Gurley, the Chinese community rallied to Peter Liang casting this also as a case of a tragedy but also pointing out the potential of this becoming a case of scapegoating of the rookie cop.

So this bit went on and on and on… with both Chinese community and political leaders rallying for Peter Liang and BLM and associated supporters trying to get a conviction.

What I, as a naturalized citizen of the US and Indian male (so i don’t have a horse in this race so to speak), found absolutely interesting was the ineffectiveness of the charge of racism in this case.

Make no mistake, that charge was used against Peter Liang by Akai Gurley’s supporters, BLM or otherwise. The Chinese community absorbed it…and fired back with the same charge. Cue Twitter wars.

In fact, when the verdict was rendered ( I believe Liang was given a guilty verdict but was given community serivce as a punishment and kicked off the police force for good), you can actually find people making this little chain of logic:

1.) Danny Chun, the judge of the case, rendered the verdict
2.) Danny Chun is Chinese
3.) Ergo, Peter Liang got off easy.
4.) This is Racism.

Both sides are attempting to appeal - Liang’s side to get rid of the manslaughter charge. Gurley’s side for a stronger conviction against Liang.

And i can’t help but wonder… is this where we’re heading at this point?

okayplayer.com/news/akai-gurley-peter-liang-sentenced-to-probation-twitter-reacts.html#slide1

before someone accuses me of some sort of favoritism, i’d show you all something simliar for the Liang side… except I can’t read Chinese. Suffice it to say, you can find many in the Chinese community expressing the opposite sentiments of those in the link above…

 

[JonNC]

On the topic of Cops and the African American/Black Community…

A number of Chinese colleagues made me aware of this little issue:

nypost.com/2016/02/20/10000-protesters-rallying-in-support-of-ex-cop-peter-liang/

This refers to the 2014 accidental shooting of Akai Gurley by Chinese rookie officer Peter Liang.

BLM came down on the side of Akai Gurley, the Chinese community rallied to Peter Liang casting this also as a case of a tragedy but also pointing out the potential of this becoming a case of scapegoating of the rookie cop.

So this bit went on and on and on… with both Chinese community and political leaders rallying for Peter Liang and BLM and associated supporters trying to get a conviction.

What I, as a naturalized citizen of the US and Indian male (so i don’t have a horse in this race so to speak), found absolutely interesting was the ineffectiveness of the charge of racism in this case.

Make no mistake, that charge was used against Peter Liang by Akai Gurley’s supporters, BLM or otherwise. The Chinese community absorbed it…and fired back with the same charge. Cue Twitter wars.

In fact, when the verdict was rendered ( I believe Liang was given a guilty verdict but was given community serivce as a punishment and kicked off the police force for good), you can actually find people making this little chain of logic:

1.) Danny Chun, the judge of the case, rendered the verdict
2.) Danny Chun is Chinese
3.) Ergo, Peter Liang got off easy.
4.) This is Racism.

Both sides are attempting to appeal - Liang’s side to get rid of the manslaughter charge. Gurley’s side for a stronger conviction against Liang.

And i can’t help but wonder… is this where we’re heading at this point?

okayplayer.com/news/akai-gurley-peter-liang-sentenced-to-probation-twitter-reacts.html#slide1

before someone accuses me of some sort of favoritism, i’d show you all something simliar for the Liang side… except I can’t read Chinese. Suffice it to say, you can find many in the Chinese community expressing the opposite sentiments of those in the link above…

This is, indeed, the direction we are heading in, sadly.

Jon