It was another banner night in the Politically Virtuous City. Local progressives/Democrats once again descended on the city council chambers. Some spoke respectfully and reasonably in opposition to the landfill. But some continued the pattern of abusive, confrontational, disrespectful, insulting behavior and language directed toward conservative council members.
Goldie Wells played a video that used children and adolescents as props in opposition to the landfill.
Michael Roberto, a member of the "human relations commission", spoke in an absolutely detestable fashion toward council members.
Father Randall Keeney of St. Barnabas Episcopal Church brought a message from his bishop-- that the council was engaging in "economic and environmental racism". Keeney is a certifiable member of the religious left. The Episcopal Church, that joke-of-a-denomination, is the same sect that brought us gay bishops and also Bishop Spong.
Once again, those clergy and churches most likely to put their energies behind political activity are least likely to be saving souls. Evangelism is almost an afterthought.
Local Episcopalians who want to get away from this kind of mess, and remain in the Anglican tradition, should consider St. John's Anglican Church in Greensboro.
The mainstream media and the local left do not like it whenever members of the dreaded religious right attempt to weigh in on political issues. Indeed, they treat it as a cataclysmic violation at times. But amazingly, they don't seem to care if the religious left do it-- and even if they do it in an objectionable way, as Keeney did.
The four council conservatives once again resisted the impulse to lash back at their critics. Bill Knight spoke well in defense of his position.
Trudy Wade had been the target of some who spoke last night because her cousin was a principal in one of the lesser proposals. She later made a motion to adopt a different proposal.
These same critics never uttered a peep when T. Dianne Bellamy-Small supported former GPD Chief Bellamy, who was reported to have been her cousin.
I recall the heady days of the GPD fiasco. Local conservatives and Republicans never treated council members at city council meetings back then so miserably, even though these politicians had mismanaged the problem severely.
But we have seen contemptible behavior among local liberals as a regular occurrence directed toward city council members during recent months. Yes, this is the Politically Virtuous City.
Joe, if a preponderence of the people whose behavior you speak of above, named or unnamed, were black, then you are a racist by definition, irrespective of the accuracy of those statements.
If their behavior might be characterized differently by people with different standards of behavior than yours, then you are also a liar.
Finally, if you fail to correct the wrongness of your opinion about their behavior, after it has been pointed out to you by someone with the correct opinion, then you are a coward as well.
See how it works?
Posted by: cheripickr | August 17, 2011 at 08:36 PM
If someone professes their belief in Jesus Christ as savior, is it fair to call their denomination a joke? I am not a believer of any particular church, so I am asking as someone who thought all who acted and prayed as Christians were usually accepting of one another's faith differences, if not their politics. But maybe I am wrong.
Posted by: Jim Langer | August 17, 2011 at 08:40 PM
Ah, now I understand. Thanks for clarifying the situation, cheri. You can't play according to the ground rules if you don't know what they are.:)
Posted by: Joe Guarino | August 17, 2011 at 08:42 PM
But if you'd agree to prefer, with me, that people try to keep faith arguments out of their public arguments about fiscal and political issues, I am right there with you, whether it is on the left or right of the spectrum.
Posted by: Jim Langer | August 17, 2011 at 08:42 PM
Other definitions from the World according to Roch:
1) straw man: any argument that Roch cannot refute, thus not lending itself to the perpetuation of his soothing self-superior intellect and morality.
2) laziness: a state of slothfulness or nonproductiveness characterized by not having one's own blog (I'm not making this up)
Posted by: cheripickr | August 17, 2011 at 08:45 PM
"You can't play according to the ground rules if you don't know what they are.:)"
And the ground rules are subject to change without prior notice.
Posted by: bubba | August 17, 2011 at 09:19 PM
Jim, I think it is fine for clergy and churches to weigh in on issues, but they generally cannot assist political candidates because they would then run afoul of IRS rules. It is breaking the law.
My beef is with the double standard. It is regarded as fine for the religious left, exemplified locally by Father Keeney and Nelson Johnson, to get involved; but the moment the religious right becomes vocal, it is treated as impermissible by the separationist crowd, the mainstream media, the liberals.
American Christianity is polyglot. While there is broad toleration of differences among denominations, there can also be some passionate disagreement as to beliefs and practices. Some denominations tend to be more "ecumenical" than others, and therefore are more readily affirming of the faith practices of other groups, at least on the surface; and tend more to cooperate with other groups in joint endeavors. Some denominations tend to be less ecumenical.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | August 17, 2011 at 09:24 PM
Jim, you are a good man.
Posted by: cheripickr | August 17, 2011 at 09:25 PM
The Episcopal Church, that joke-of-a-denomination - Fonzie (er. Joe) has jumped the Shark! Drink a beer, take some meds, chop some wood, move out to the woods, chew some gum, run across the country.
Posted by: my sources say | August 17, 2011 at 09:58 PM
Readers should follow the link I provided to Bishop Spong, a man with some North Carolina roots who was elevated to a high position within the Episcopal Church. His belief system most aptly could be described as apostasy. And Spong's beliefs were widely known-- a matter of public record.
That kind of thing matters to some people.
Ordaining and elevating gays to the role of bishop also is, at best, controversial.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | August 17, 2011 at 10:02 PM
Perhaps I watched a different meeting.
I saw some passionate and downright upset folks expressing their opinions.
Posted by: Craftyboro | August 18, 2011 at 07:49 AM
"Perhaps I watched a different meeting."
Perhaps you saw only what you wanted to see.
Posted by: bubba | August 18, 2011 at 08:10 AM
I watched the meeting and I saw quite a few really hostile and obnoxious folks who simply refuse to accept the facts.
Posted by: sensei | August 18, 2011 at 09:22 AM
I saw a kid at Walmart the other day having what I would call a Hissy Fit because he did not get his way... Reminds me of some of the landfill opponents. They are used to getting their way and it is not working this time. Once again the majority of the tax payers of Greensboro want this or the streets would be full of protesters. The tax payers need some relief and this is one way to do that.
Posted by: KeepYourHandOutOfMyPocket | August 19, 2011 at 10:37 AM
Joe, I can appreciate anyone holding to convictions that have given them solace and meaning. Being "ecumenical", as you say, is not always the preferred path. I am not sure calling an entire body of believers in the same Christ as oneself "a joke" is indicative only of showing the strength of one's religious convictions, as it is a dismissal with utter disrespect for those believers en masse. Spong's apostasy (as you see it) should not be a joke, but a clarion call to refute seriously, if it offends one's belief. I also knew at least one sincere, believing gay man who was an Episcopal and it made a huge difference in his life to be affirmed by a community of fellow Christians. He loved the "High" services, particularly.
CP-no, I probably am not that, entirely. I try to be a good father, a fair teacher and a perceptive/grounded artist and performer. And I clean up around the house.
Posted by: Jim Langer | August 20, 2011 at 11:08 PM
Jim, please be assured that my comments were not "a dismissal with utter disrespect for those believers en masse". Instead, it was a reference to their leadership. The denomination is on a downward spiral because of its leadership.
I believe many Episcopal congregants "inherited" their denominational affiliation from their parents; and some likely have been quite uncomfortable with the manner in which the denomination has deteriorated.
When I made reference to Spong's apostasy (heresy?), it was to highlight the denomination's leadership decision to elevate him to the high post he held.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | August 20, 2011 at 11:20 PM