|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: A Closer Look at Pat Robertson | |||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
For instance, if PR is not making any money from the ministry, the non-profit, but is pouring money into the non-profit, then I don't think it's shady. The business that ran the mine is a different organization than the ministry - the African Development Corporation, for which I presume Robertson is a significant shareholder. Operation Blessing bought and operated the planes to the benefit of ADC. Is he profiting from the ministry? You tell me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
What's wrong with that? Well, I'm not sure. Did he inform the thousands of men and women who donated to his ministries that he was going to fund business ventures with them? If he did, did he refund donations to anyone who declined to float him a business loan in this way?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Not sure where you went to take a break, but you appear to have come back in a lot better shape. Welcome back, and good job. Thank you, Holmes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
How come noone is doing anything about this? 1) He's one of the three most famous religious leaders in the country. 2) His businesses and contributions to the state of Virginia constitute millions in tax revenue and campaign funding. 3) He hosts religious programming that reaches millions of Americans who will react very, very negatively to any hint that he's being "persecuted" by the government. We've seen examples of that reaction in this very thread.
I suppose now he will feel some heat. No, he won't. His comments will be dismissed as "mistakes" or "gaffes", despite an obvious pattern of similar statements that proves that that's what he meant to say in the first place. (I don't understand how you can "mistakenly" call for the assassination of a democratically-elected leader, but perhaps it can be explained to me.) Christians will give him a pass, again, because he's one of the most powerful and influential Christians in the country, and Christians at every level benefit from his use of that power.
But is what he has done technically illegal? Acccording to the Virginia consumer affairs board, yes, what he's done is technically illegal, not to mention obviously illegal.
I agree much with my brothers sentiment but when someone tries to represent christianity and is known for his christianity says evil and does evil things, these actions and words must be known, basically. As an atheist I'm an outsider in the community of Christians. If you believe, as I do, that this man's ties to the body of Christian churches - and they are many - need to be severed, that's a process you're going to have to instigate yourself.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
He upholds the traditional Christian concept of "separation of church and state" Didn't you just read where he says
quote: He doesn't believe in the separation of church and state. That's absolutely obvious from his own statements. Trying to argue otherwise is not going to be a position congruent with the facts.
So? So, that's an accurate description of Robertson.
You condemn YECers and religious conservatives all the time. Then when you write my Wiki biography, you're free to introduce me that way. What's the problem, here?
The modernist version of separation is a violation of the "free exercise" clause because it seeks to ban any governmental participation of religious worship rather than governmental establishment in the law, and that's a distortion of the Constitution. The right of free expression of religion is granted to the people, not to the government. There's no violation of the First Amendment because that amendment grants rights to the people, not to the government.
If the modernist myth was correct, Congressional chaplains and openign Congress with prayer should be illegal. I believe that it is. I reject the Supreme Court's concept of "civil religion", something I find inherently unconstitutional. Unfortunately they're the authority in charge of interpreting the Constitution, not me. And not you. Nonetheless, I fail to see how any of this is on-topic. Robertson is the topic of this thread, not the First Amendment, and I question why you appear to be doing your level best to send us off the rails. I suspect you're having significant difficulty grappling with the arguments of the OP.
There is nothing in there though about religion not effecting non-religious laws in the government. I don't believe I've suggested that there is. But Robertson's views go father; his religion would necessitate religious laws, and he would excize persons who were not either Christians or Jews from office:
quote: Now, you may not believe that the First Amendment prevents that, but the main body of the document does assert, very clearly, that no religious test shall ever be required for office. Regardless, you've again failed to stay on-topic. The topic is the article's characterization of Robertson's views, which you appear now to accept, not the legitimacy of his views. I'm going to have to ask you again to stay on topic or refrain from posting.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I apologize for continually going off topic. I need to stop letting them bait me into pursuing off topic discussions. I usually fall for it, too. Don't sweat it, just call them on it. It's clear they're baiting us off-topic because they have no effective answer for the arguments we've presented.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Neither American history nor church-state issues are on-topic in this thread.
Your constant attempt to send us off the rails begins to look a little suspicious, Rand. Having trouble with the topic at hand?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Um, crash, you do realize that is a factual statement. The term "separation of Church and State" is not in the Constitution. I didn't contest it's factuality. I'm merely defending the assertion that this is Robertson's view, which you challenged but appear now to accept. As I said, the legitimacy of Robertson's views is not the topic of this thread.
If what you are saying is true, then Congressional chaplains should be unConstitutional, right? I believe I've already asserted that I believe that they are unconstitutional. Regardless, that is not the topic of this thread.
No, he just thinks in an ideal situation we should only vote for Christians and Jews for elected office That would be an inaccurate characterization of his views, which he goes on to clarify:
quote: I don't see anything there about voting, do you?
In America, you get to have the opinions you want. I've never said that he doesn't. This sub-topic is about the defense of an accurate characterization of his views, which you challenged and then accepted, not defending or attacking their legitimacy. Nonetheless, speech has consequences. Robertson is entitled to his views but I'm entitled to call for cable companies to stop using my money to fund speech I don't support. And, again, constitutional issues are not the topic of this thread.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Crash, you are the one that brought up separation of Church and State, not me. That would be incorrect. Church-state issues were introduced into the thread by you, when you challenged the assertion that Robertson doesn't believe in the separation of church and state, a claim which you later appeared to abandon. I remind you again that church-state issues are not the topic of this thread; the topic of the thread is Pat Robertson and his credentials as a humanitarian.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I guess if you are thoroughly beaten, you start resorting to claiming others repudiating your claims are off-topic. Your claims have been consistently off-topic, except for a half-hearted attempt to contest minor issues of the OP. To date not a single post of yours has successfully contended with my argument; hence your repeated attempts to hijack the thread.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Clearly, I said he believes in the original meaning of the term, true separation of Church and State, but not the modern definition, which no one should, because it's merely a mask for denigrating religion and religious values and ideas. Since the article does not refer to any particular definition of the church-state separation, I don't see how this is relevant to the thread, or to a claim that the wiki article is somehow biased or inaccurate. Church-state issues are not on-topic in this thread. Again I must ask you to take these arguments to the thread specifically opened on that topic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Max Blumenthal has a great article detailing how much money Pat Robertson, despite his calls for violence against democratically elected leaders and support of terrorist-sheltering dictators, stands to make through his charity Operation Blessing.
Yes, that's right. The same charity that Robertson used to bilk his followers out of millions so that he could move diamond mining equipment around and market a diet shake of his own invention is now prominently listed on FEMA's website of charitable organizations that are accepting donations.
FEMA.gov | Federal Emergency Management Agency - FEMA.gov is experiencing technical difficulties That brief aside brings us to this Robertson Watch update. What I had failed to uncover the first time around was that Robertson and the Christian Coalition he founded were successfully sued by a group of black employees for racist activities, including making the black employees enter the premises from a back entrance and segregating them during meals. The allegations were so damaging to the organization that Robertson was forced to resign. And now the Federal government is making sure that money from hard-working, generous Americans is flowing right into the pockets of this racist? I mean, let's get real. There's absolutely no guarantee that any donation to Operation Blessing is going to benefit any victim of Katrina.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
And I agree, why isn't there protests to ban this guy, why is he the best we got. Probably the whole network is corrupt. Because more people watch his show than watch MSNBC. That's right. More people watch Robertson than watch the news. That's some 800,000 people. That's why prominent conservatives appear on his show; that's why Karl Rove consults Robertson and Dobson about Bush's judicial nominees. The Left Behind series is the most popular series of books among adults in the country. In what sense is Robertson not the representative of conservativism?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024