So it is apparently time to have a little bit of fun with The Huffington Post.
I got a call a week or so ago from a HuffPo reporter, who interviewed me about the founding of Logos School, along with the founding of the Association of Classical Christian Schools. The interview was going along merrily, including the fact that Greg Gianforte, who a few years ago served with me on the ACCS board, is now a candidate for governor of the great state of Montana.
Let me interrupt this account to encourage all residents of Montana who read this account to reason thusly with themselves: “Anybody who gets this kind of royal treatment from The Huffington Post is someone that I should really want in the governor’s chair. I and all my friends shall plan to vote accordingly.”
Anyway, back to the interview. As it proceeded, the reporter brought up Southern Slavery As It Was, and I saw the hatchet job forming before my eyes, along with the shape of the actual hatchet. I told the reporter that it looked like a hit piece on somebody because of a passing acquaintance with me. No, no, not at all the reporter said. So the article came out yesterday, which you can read for yourself here. It turned out exactly how it looked like it might turn out.
But entirely left out of the piece was the fact that an entity with far stronger ties to me than Greg Gianforte is . . . The Huffington Post. I have written for them before, as you may easily ascertain by clicking on this phrase here.
Not only have I written for The Huffington Post, but to this date they have never once apologized for it. To this day, they refuse to back away from their association with me. Not only so, but as this most recent piece indicates, I have retrograde beliefs about the role relationships of men and women, and what did The Huffington Post have me write on? You’ve got it—they had me write my take on the demented view of life between the sexes as represented in all that Fifty Shades business.
Now I did have a swell time visiting occasionally with Greg in the context of a few board meetings. And if lived in Montana, I would certainly cast my vote for him. But compare this to every pitch I can have my agent write to every editor from now to the end of my writing career. “Wilson has written for Christianity Today, World, Chronicles, Books & Culture, and The Huffington Post.”
Now on to the argument, such as it was, that was contained in their headline. “Gubernatorial Candidate Has Ties to Pastor Who Wrote Black Families Were ‘Stronger’ Under Slavery.”
So let us not content ourselves with asking whether I said this, or even if I would be willing to say it again. Let us ask a revolutionary and possibly illegal question. Is it true? And if it is true, why is it so hard to establish? Remember that we are dealing with a generation whose historical ignorance is oceanic.
The state of the black family today in the United States is tragic, and you can’t blame slavery for it. Thomas Sowell makes this point. “In the late nineteenth century, when blacks were just one generation out of slavery, there was nothing like today’s level of unwed births or failure to participate in the labor force” (Black Rednecks and White Liberals, p. 161).
“Official Census data show that blacks had slightly higher marriage rates than whites for every census from 1890 to 1940, but far lower marriage rates than whites by 1960” (Ibid. p. 161).
Note, according to the headline, I was talking about the black FAMILY. What slavery couldn’t do, what decades of Jim Crow couldn’t do, the Great Society—brim full of unmitigated whiteness as it was—accomplished in just one generation. And what was that? Demolish the black family.
Why would I say that the black family was better off under slavery? Because it is true. White people today are blissfully unaware, with a serenity unparalleled, of what they have done to the black family, and therefore to black individuals. Look at the facts. Stop staring at your contrived Huxtable Family Narrative (HFN), viewed through the gauzy film of white self-congratulation.
In the last generation 13 million black children have been dismembered, at rates much higher than the rates of white dismemberment. Many of their bodies were sold for parts. Of those who are allowed to live, who are granted entrance into this tolerant society of ours, about 58% will grow up without their biological father. This is an illegitimacy rate that is somewhere north of grotesque. There are about 2.2 million male prisoners in the United States, and 37% of them are black. The unemployment rate among blacks is double that of whites. The American inner city looks like it has been the victim of a concerted bombing campaign, which is actually true, come to think of it. And all the damage has been done by daisy-cutter whiteness.
Liberalism is little more than whiteness supreme, whiteness on stilts, whiteness-in-a-bottle. Brimming over with good intentions and pure thoughts, they have done to the black family what a blinkered racist could only dream of getting done. Some thug of an ante bellum plantation owner in pursuit of cotton wealth may have had some nights where he had to deal with his conscience. But white liberals can leave a place a smoking crater, and walk away with their conscience pouring congratulations out of a jug into their well-meaning hearts.
And there are Christians who actually listen to these people. They are concerned that I am minimizing the outrages that happened during slavery time. I deny it. Find me an outrage, and I will condemn it. I have nothing but contempt for every appalling practice that you might set before me.
Yes, they say, reasoning closely. But you allow that some masters might have been good and gentle. You are trying to distinguish between slave owners, as though that were possible. Yes, that is right, just like in the Bible. Let me give you a number of translations of one passage from the apostle Peter. Peter, if you don’t know, “had ties” with the Lord Jesus. I have ties with Peter, having preached through his writings, and Greg Gianforte has ties with me.
“Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.” (1 Peter 2:18, KJV 1900)
“Servants, be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust.” (1 Peter 2:18, ESV)
“Servants, be submissive to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the harsh.” (1 Peter 2:18, NKJV)
House slaves (oiketes), be subject to your masters (despotes), not only to the good ones (agathos), or to the gentle ones (epieikes), but also to the bent ones (skolios).
If words have meaning, the apostle Peter is telling Christian slaves how to behave when their masters are harsh, and how to behave when their masters are good and gentle. If people want to argue with me, they need to find a topic that doesn’t have a host of verses addressing the subject explicitly, and with those verses nailed down on all four corners.
The pagan system of slavery in the first century was beyond harsh. The Christian faith really did subvert the institution of slavery in wonderfully effective ways. For those who are concerned about the subject—as they ought to be—and who wonder how all of this can be consistent with the good news of God’s grace and love, there really is an answer. There is a biblical answer for those who raise concerns about the brutality that is the backdrop to many of these passages. But it is an answer that will be forever hidden from every exegetical buttercup. This is because you cannot fight your way through to biblical answers through a steadfast refusal to face up to what the text actually says.
I was grateful that HuffPo linked to Black & Tan. For those who want biblical answers to a real problem, to be distinguished from pc-answers to the outrage-of-the-month, I would urge them to begin there.
Well, it should be a sight to behold as the neo Nazis and the bleeding heart progressives (who love to comment here) face off in the comments section over this post, each of them ignoring a good portion of what you actually said and making wild claims about what you actually mean. Too bad “disqus” makes it utterly impossible to actually follow the thread, with comments springing up above and below the way they do. It might have been good entertainment.
I took a little time to look at various marriage statistics, and just about every one shows a serious blip in 1950. WWII? I’m unsure what else factored in. If black marriage rates had dropped before 1960, that precedes the Great Society. While I agree that Johnson et al have contributed to the decline since, they can’t be blamed for starting it.
Industrialization, consumerism…
Marriage stats would be expected to take a serious dip after a global war because a large portion of the male population died in that war. A continuation in the decline of marriage after sufficient time to rebuild the population would then be due to other social factors. So, yes, we can indeed blame the Great Society for a decline in marriage.
“Huff post has ties to pastor who wrote “black families were stronger under slavery”
Wilson…….! It was very uncharitable of you, not to teach that Huffpo reporter to use the search bar on their own web site, a thing you were charitable enough to teach Rachel Miller regarding your own web site.
The facts sort of bleach the point of their “guilt by association” story huh?
I guess the Huffposts position on “ties” with you is a few shades grayer than they thought at first!????
I’m sorry. I know I didn’t do it, but still, I hate hatchet jobs, especially sloppy ones. They’re unfair, unjust.
I also really appreciated that article on twilight and 50 shades. That was well said.
Modern journalists and the media in general are proof positive that a vacuity so profound as to be willing to be subjugated indefinitely in return for a government check has no correlation at all to the color of one’s skin.
I have to ask… it’s the Huffing Post, a wretched hive of Social Justice Warriors, in the middle of an intellectual desert.
You must have known from the invitation that it would be a hatchet job. Why agree to the interview?
Arwen, touch and go. They were going to do the article anyway, and I thought I could get a few things in that needed to get in, which is what happened.
Because our host knew it would be fun to play a Huffpo “Junior Dan Rather” like a kazoo?!?
; – )
Except to most people he comes off in the article like a culturally marginalized, racist preacher with a regressive fantasy about american slavery. Hardly a masterful manipulation of the progressive media. This reads that he likes to be thought of as the theological ‘bad boy’ to his contained audience and this plays into the narrative. Trumpian tactics. He is however right to suggest that you christians ought to stop cherry picking and look at ‘what the text actually says.’ If you dogmatically follow a bronze-age text that advocates slavery and believe it to be the un-erring word of a god… Read more »
“Except to most people he comes off in the article like a culturally marginalized, racist preacher with a regressive fantasy about american slavery…”
Most people? What do “most people” know anyway? Isn’t a better question to be asking, is there any truth to what he says?
Apparently with regard to the question of slavery, ‘most-people’ know more than Douglas Wilson. (I enjoyed his ‘because abortion’ move up there as well.)
There are certain questions that I don’t really need to waste time asking. Trying to find the good in slavery in order to rationalize my faith-text as well my own master/slave relationship to a deity is a great example of one.
“There are certain questions that I don’t really need to waste time asking. Trying to find the good in slavery in order to rationalize my faith-text as well my own master/slave relationship to a deity is a great example of one.” What if Wilson were instead motivated by a desire to create a better world for black folks by examining some of the root causes of the problems we face today? What if his observations about slavery actually hit on an important part of the equation, on how the destruction of the family has now contributed to so many modern… Read more »
Setting aside for a second that I do not believe the premise of your counter question as written, I also do not believe that is Wilson’s desire. I think that one of his main needs is to square the circle of his faith as ‘revealed’ by the sacred document co-written by hundreds of people (if not more.) How can he truly condemn slavery when his/your book advocates for it on a few different levels? He is forced to slip his way around it. He is quite adept at that game. I think the other is that he is a gadfly… Read more »
“He is forced to slip his way around it. He is quite adept at that game.” Not at all. I think he has actually hit it dead on. I don’t feel any need to “slip around” those passages myself. Once one grasps the kindness of our Lord, the depth of love He has for us, understanding these things in context becomes much easier. “I think the other is that he is a gadfly and likes the attention.” LOL! He’s a writer, a blogger. Trust me, we’re all gadflys. A gadfly is a fly that bites and annoys domesticated livestock. When… Read more »
Jesus called himself a shepherd and I don’t think he ever told anyone to stop being a sheep.
He could, as many Christians do, view slavery as something that was justified in Scripture under certain, but not all, conditions–paying off a debt, being a prisoner of war, and so on–without concluding that slavery in the American South was morally good. The conditions were entirely different and arose from man-stealing which Scripture condemns The fact that Doug’s views are rare among even literalist Christians shows that there is a way to condemn race-based chattel slavery without jettisoning Biblical authority. I have never heard a Catholic priest speak of race-based slavery as other than a great evil. I find the… Read more »
don’t think Doug is suggesting that blacks have an inherent defect that requires enslavement in order for them to maintain healthy families. But it is hard not to draw that conclusion from a casual reading.
Indeed.
I think Wilson would disavow that conclusion. But I think it is the only logical conclusion one can draw from the proposition that blacks were better off under slavery. This is why I would much rather he drop this one and move on to his second piece of evidence: that free blacks who were self-supporting maintained stronger families than blacks who have been made fatherless by welfare. A. When Jill lived under parental supervision, she was obedient, diligent, and virtuous. B. When Jill lived on her own, she drank like a fish, slept until noon, and hung out with the… Read more »
Still, that Jill came through more the wiser, with a sense of humor as well.
Jill likely has more Parental supervison than one might think at first.
A-dad does! ; – )
Hey randi, glad you stopped by! Did you notice, that in my very recent comment to jilly, I always keep a fantasy rock band name “on deck”?
As I mentioned to her, my current front runner for a band name is:
“Special snowflake syndrome”
It’s kind of a cultural commentary on select blog comments! ????????????❤️
Oh. And speaking of “cherry picking”, where in the Bible is your “text that advocates slavery”? Which Biblical texts speak against slavery?
‘Oh. And speaking of “cherry picking”, where in the Bible is your “text that advocates slavery”? Which Biblical texts speak against slavery?’
I am also very interested in your answers to these questions from A-dad.
Thanks Rick! While I do get a kick out of randi, and do remember to pray for him sometimes, the forecast for his response on this one may be crickets.
????????????????
The NT doesn’t condemn slavery and offers no more than an admonishment to slaves to be obedient and their masters not to be unfair. Whatever individual or individuals who actually wrote the epistles, at no time suggested there was anything wrong with slavery.
Check Ephesians 6:5-8, Colossians 4:1 for starters. We can look at others in the next bible class?
1 Corinthians 7:21 and 23
Where you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you , although if you can gain your freedom, do so.
23 you were bought at a price, do not become slaves of human beings.
Randi, the Word does not “advocate ” slavey, as you had said it did. Please melt that special snowflake of an argument .????????????☀️
These are also interesting passages: Yes, don’t let slavery trouble you either way, because you have an eternity (of slavery to an omnipotent benevolent? dictator) awaiting you. Remain in your calling. Human slavery means nothing to the glorious slavery in christ that awaits. This is of course my point.
Randi, your initial point was that The Word “advocates” slavery, but it does not.
But to our minor disagreement, I’ll let the bard of the Sixties, Bob Dylan take over from here:
“You got to serve somebody ”
????
I agree that slavery is not condemned in the NT (or OT as far as I know). I suppose one could argue that this is advocating slavery (advocate: publicly recommend or support), but it seems to be a weak argument. It is certainly not recommending slavery, and it can only be considered support if one insists that failure to condemn is equivalent to support. If the latter is true, then I suppose it would be necessary for every person to publicly list every behavior they condemn, otherwise they would be considered to be advocates of them. That doesn’t seem practical,… Read more »
First of all I would consider ministration on how to treat your slaves to be an advocation. Second, perhaps your god’s inspired book should aspire to higher standards than ‘failure to condemn’. I would consider ‘failure to condemn’ in the instance of owning and subjugation another human being to be equivalent to support. Especially if I were god writing the guide to man and eternity. Or perhaps I would work in mysterious ways? Who knows? That would certainly be convenient wouldn’t it. My point was that Wilson’s attempt to run apologetics on American slavery is based on the simple fact… Read more »
Other than removing one opportunity to cry “Hypocrites”, I’m not certain what the benefit would be if the Bible did condemn slavery. After all, non-Christians (and many so-called Christians) seem to judge the Bible from an outside perspective. The Bible denounces multiple behaviors that are now, at least in the USA, considered to be acceptable. In other words, the Biblical standard seems to be largely irrelevant to determining what is acceptable in society. “My point was that Wilson’s attempt to run apologetics on American slavery is based on the simple fact that the master/slave relationship is what your god requires… Read more »
I think the the benefit of the bible outright condemning slavery (and rape, child rape and a host of other things we know to be awful and morally bankrupt) would be to show the superior omniscient moral knowledge that it’s divine origins claim. Morality that isn’t suspiciously similar to what we might expect to stem form the situational ethics of a bunch of bronze-age wanderers in the middle east. And there is of course there is god’s embarrassing incidents with the amalekites and midianites and others whom he directs the chosen to kill, rape, or enslave. Some moral arbiter. So… Read more »
For now, at least, I will ignore most of that, because I strongly desire to understand your perspective on Mosaic Law (the old covenant) and Christianity (the new covenant). Let’s look at the specific example of eating pork. Do you understand why the Christian view (at least for the majority) is that the Mosaic Law has been replaced by Christianity, so the old law is obsolete and it is now okay for Christians to eat pork? Or do you, as I understand your comment, consider this to be a case where Christians today eat pork in good conscience solely because… Read more »
Or, instead of making incorrect declarations about what the text says, one could actually just read the text! (instead of ignoring it) Like the pork non-issue you mention! ; – ) (Being a true “moral arbiter” is a lot harder than it looks!) Acts 11 4 Starting from the beginning, Peter told them the whole story: 5 “I was in the city of Joppa praying, and in a trance I saw a vision. I saw something like a large sheet being let down from heaven by its four corners, and it came down to where I was. 6 I looked… Read more »
It looks like you’re back again. I would really like to hear your answers to my questions in this comment.
I am an ex-christian of many years. As an apostate I understand the belief that jesus’ scapegoating on the cross renders the OT non-binding. And yet, it (the OT) is routinely cherry-picked to support and apologize for immoral positions. Like slavery, death to homosexuals, like god’s rampaging OT genocide. That is my point. So one can zoom out and claim ‘context’ or try to patiently explain why the OT law is semi-irrelevant post-jesus to christians, but the fact remains that many believers (Douglas and most here) lean on the OT to support their points.
Hey Randi, Hope you are well! FYI, The Word below explains the OT / NT thing pretty well on it’s own. Galatians 3 23 Before the coming of this faith,[j] we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. 24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian. 26 So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who… Read more »
My confusion arose from your statement: “And they ignore the injunction not to eat pork… but weirdly not gay sex.” You agree that the OT law regarding eating pork is no longer binding, so you understand that position. I presume you recognize that the NT makes it clear that gay sex is sin and so understand the position that it is considered sin. It is your use of “but” that makes no sense to me, unless I suppose that you are referring to the concept of killing convicted homosexuals as has been discussed here. If that is correct, it was… Read more »
Fair enough my bad. I should have been more clear about murdering another human as punishment for making love versus gay sex being okay. Regardless as a place to make your stand however, it leaves much to be desired. To be clear I am not trying to ‘use the bible’ correctly anymore than I am trying to use the Collected Batman Anthology correctly. To argue ethics from the CBA would be ridiculous yet there is as much actual evidence for The Dark Knight. So yes, I know I cannot directly change anyone’s mind here, especially shackled to the rules of… Read more »
I understand you deny the validity of the Bible as a source of morals. But supposing the NT perspective on a topic is in agreement with your moral understanding, and you see a Christian arguing for an OT perspective that is not in agreement with the NT perspective, I think it more likely that said Christian will understand and accept a Biblical argument than they will any other argument. Would you not prefer that the Christian have the right perspective, even if it is based on the Bible rather than your ideal? If so, why not argue from that perspective?… Read more »
Fond as I am of Randman, you have a point–unless there is some magical cut-off at which Biblical teachings stop being the product of bronze-age knuckle draggers and become enlightened. I haven’t heard Randman condemn the Sermon on the Mount. I haven’t heard him go after “Little children, love one another.” And stepping back into the OT, I haven’t heard him dismiss “But let judgment run down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream” as the product of a hate-filled bigot acting on assignment from a malevolent deity. And, going a long way back, I think Randman would have… Read more »
I wish all humans to take the ‘right’ moral perspective. I am saying that effective morality is not based on the bible. That it is often in spite of the bible. It sounds like one objection is that I focus on the easy target of the OT to make my point and that I ignore the NT and the gospels? One of the more morally reprehensible concepts in the bible is that of hell itself and christians willingness to infect the minds of children with that horror. I have written about it here more than once. So rest easy and… Read more »
I notice you did not respond to my claim of intellectual dishonesty regarding your description of the Bible. Although I question your claims that the NT text has been changed “a lot”, it is an interesting thought about changes in the text of the NT and the validity of its inspiration. Do you also argue your ideas in regard to other religions? I think there are billions of people whose morality is significantly different to that of the moralists of the western world today. “I wish all humans to take the ‘right’ moral perspective. I am saying that effective morality… Read more »
Sorry, what exactly are you claiming is dishonest about my position? I just added my thoughts on the NT so you would not think I was leaving it out. Yes, I think all religions are equally man-made. We are currently down to a couple of gods running the main shows, but there are many thousands on the god-pile of history. All supported by the same evidence of their existence, which is to say none. As it is often said, it would take one verifiable piece of evidence to destroy atheism for ever. Buddhism in practice makes the most sense to… Read more »
You regularly describe the Bible as a bronze-age text reflecting the beliefs of a society of nomadic tribesmen. The Bronze Age is considered to have ended by 1000 BC in Israel which is about the time of King David, with the vast majority of the Israelites living in cities and permanent structures nearby. I think the majority of the Old Testament Bible was written since that time. Only the earliest portions of the OT would have been Bronze Age. That is an example of intellectual dishonesty. The rest of the Bible is dated after the Bronze Age. While the OT… Read more »
I was referring to the OT there as I pointed out. Bronze age is correct and is to make a point. That you continue for the sake of argument to insist that christians don’t also lean on the OT as backup for their claims about the nature of reality doesn’t make it so. I understand the ‘negation’ of the OT and have made it clear that I find it (the NT) possibly worse.
I would be interested to hear what you qualify as evidence. I was raised a christian as well. We have that in common.
“Bronze age is correct and is to make a point.” Your insistence on this description, which is misleading at the very least, leads me to consider your point to be dubious. “… lean on the OT as backup for their claims about the nature of reality ….” I don’t understand what you mean, but I believe all of the Bible is true, so I suppose I probably “lean on the OT”, too. “I would be interested to hear what you qualify as evidence.” I believe that there is philosophical, archaeological, historical, and scientific evidence that the Bible and Christianity are… Read more »
After I declined to make a wedding cake for a lesbian couple and the internet went bizerk, I, too, was asked by HuffPo to do an online “discussion” on the subject with a HuffPo rep and the lesbian photog that turned me in. I told them- no flipping way. There is no way I would trust that even in a live discussion (which I was given no time to prepare for) I (or my words) wouldn’t be filleted into mush. I gave an emphatic “no” to them and many others and I believe it is the only reason I and… Read more »
So I read the comments (yes I know the warnings). What is it about reading comprehension? Saying that Black families were stronger under slavery than now does not mean that slavery was good for Blacks or that Blacks need to be slaves if they know what is good for them. It is merely a statement of fact that may be true or false. If it is true then it suggests that current policies or current beliefs (or both) are more destructive for the family than slavery was. The abandonment of Christianity by individuals and the destructive power of welfarism has… Read more »
We have abandoned logic as well as reading comprehension. Whether or not a statement is factually accurate does not depend on the motive of the speaker. Opinion often does. But it is possible for a reprehensible person (and I don’t mean Doug) to have, on occasion, accurate facts and valuable opinions. Good people spout nonsense every day. I may be sensible on one subject and ridiculous on another. But I don’t think we have trained our young people to appreciate this. I struggle daily with my own Special Snowflake.
I was thinking more about this when I took my afternoon stroll through the neighborhood. The fact that black families were stronger under slavery (and I will assume this is true) proves nothing about black people’s ability to maintain strong families. Presumably their domestic arrangements were dictated and enforced by their owners. It seems to me that they therefore have no evidentiary value. On the other hand, if the data show that blacks seventy-five years ago formed stable marriages and avoided illegitimacy to the same extent that whites did, that really does indicate that a recent catastrophe has destroyed the… Read more »
And the fact that what you are seeing in the US is seen in the welfare classes in other Western nations including in non-Blacks and peoples that have never been slaves.
This is totally random but I had an idea you trained in science. When Kepler thought that nesting the Platonic solids would reveal the distances of planets from the sun, was there any reason for him to think this or was it completely in error? It’s time for the weekly Jill and Special Snowflake tutorial!
I am familiar with Kepler doing this but don’t know why. Just random thoughts here. It may come from an Aristotelian view of the universe which needed to be overcome by the scientists. Aristotle was right on deductive logic and completely wrong in his science. He held sway far too long. Plato and the platonic solids antedate Aristotle (I presume). There was an idea that the heavens were perfect. Mathematicians like the platonic solids (we do). If Kepler had some rough distances to the planets he may have noticed that the proportions (we love proportions too) were similar to proportions… Read more »
She lives with me and goes to a local college. Right now she is playing a mistress in a French farce which I will be seeing tomorrow. She also takes lessons in voice, ballet, jazz, tap, aerial yoga, and drama, so I don’t see her too often. She is taking an online astronomy class which I find interesting and she finds lethal. Unless it can be put to music and performed on Broadway, it escapes her interest. She does not read Mablog, and that is altogether a good thing. If she read my fond remarks, I would undoubtedly be found… Read more »
Oh! the drama! ; – )
Jilly, if the “truth” ever comes out, what with truth being stanger than fiction and all,
tell any offended snowflakes that your musings sound like the beginning of a good script!
Writer / producers do the best in tinsel town anyway! ; – )
She lives in fear that I will start my own blog, having given me enough material for several lifetimes. The unpardonable crime is when I use her as my source and actually succeed in being funny. The young take themselves so seriously.
The young take themselves so seriously.
Hence “snowflake”? That is your nick name you use with her?
Special Snowflake, but only behind her back. It would be wrong of me to reveal her real name. Though why that is, when she has 2000 friends on Facebook to whom she reveals the most intimate details of her life, is beyond me.
I find it best to use amusing names when they are being precious. Or the like. When a kid asks the parent’s favourite child my wife’s policy is to have a long explanation of why we love all our children the same. I tend to pick a kid that isn’t the kid asking.
There is only one of her, so when push comes to shove, I allow myself to be overheard muttering to the cats. Whom I love equally. (Not equally with her but with one another.) I have come to learn that actors are on stage all the time. They do not have bad days; instead, they have days in which they rediscover the Utter Futility of Everything and the Impenetrable Loneliness of the Human Condition. They don’t get mildly irritated; they Become Enraged at the Perfidy that surrounds them. A headache is the Agony of a Thousand Knives. I would chop… Read more »
“special snowflake”
The Special Snowflake (Also referred to as one with the “Special Snowflake Syndrome” or “SSS”) is a person who believes they are different and unique from everyone else because of something there are or do. This thing they are or do, most commonly is something is something many many other people are doing, E.G. Genderfluid, Therian (Otherkin), etc. Special Snowflakes almost always have a superiority complex.
Some Special Snowflakes are protesting at Target because they aren’t allowed to wear their costumes inside.
; – )
Special Snowflakes are typically raised by Helicopter Mothers. I’m sorry to say that I was the Air Wolf of helicopter mothers.
I always keep a fantasy band name in the running. Recently it’s been “the drama queens” , I’m thinking of changing the fantasy band name to “special snowflake syndrome”!
????????????
I meant to add that I was really excited to read about the astronomers who used Newton’s theory to hypothesize that there must be an unknown planet out there to explain the disturbances in Uranus’s orbit. That they not only knew it had to be there but mathematically calculated its location so accurately that Neptune was found the very next year. Right where they said it would be. I often wish I had been given a better brain for science because I love it without being remotely good at it.
Oh its not a hatchet job at all… har har har.
Black families were not better off under slavery, at least not when they were being split up and sold off for maximum profit. Various metrics, such as illegitimacy and divorce, are higher among blacks now, but then they are higher among all groups. If that was the point, then you could have merely said that black families were stronger in the past, rather than crafting your statement in the most controversial way possible. Seriously, it’s like you want people to misunderstand you. All that aside, that article is just a lazy guilt-by-association argument. Surely even Greg Gianforte is allowed to… Read more »
Did Wilson “craft” the statement, or was he just responding to a statement crafted by HuffPo?
This quote is cited:
“one could argue that the black family has never been stronger than it was under slavery.”
I took it to be an actual quote from Southern Slavery, As It Was. I don’t know if that’s the wording they used in the interview though.
You need to provide stats not anecdotes. We all know that families were split up. This is evil. Doug has condemned this in his writings. But how many families had both parents then and now?
“Various metrics, such as illegitimacy and divorce, are higher among blacks now, but then they are higher among all groups.” Matt, how many white guys have 9 or 10 kids with various women? How many white gals have 9 or 10 kids with different men? How many white gals have large number of kids without even knowing who produced the sperm? How may white guys have that many kids and don’t support any of the women? Illegitimacy is a huge part of the culture and deliberate destruction of the black family by the democratic party is another portion of this… Read more »
Deliberate destruction? I hold no brief for the Democrats/liberals/progressives, but I’m not going to accuse them of having destruction as their specific and deliberate aim. Arrogance, un-realism, and political pandering, yes, but I don’t believe they set out to produce the kind of dissipation that resulted from their policies.
I will accuse them of deliberate destruction based on observing how they do attack the family structure and why they do it. A family unit is a source of power and when you can separate and divide it, you can create vulnerability, dependence, and a more easily controlled and manipulated population. Dems have been involved in a form of gentrification and social engineering for decades and it is not just the black community that has been targeted, but working class white people, too. Your average lefty liberal probably has little awareness of this and some people believe it is simply… Read more »
By now there are vested interests involved, that much is true, and that’s part of what I meant by my reference to political pandering. It is hypothetically possible some social “engineers” are consciously aware they benefit from destruction of normal family structure and are motivated to work toward that end, however I would imagine they mostly are just indoctrinated plus they intuitively act to perpetuate a system by which they benefit. Once again, grand conspiracy theories are not needed to explain what is/has been going on when plain old fashioned arrogance and self-serving will suffice.
“Once again, grand conspiracy theories are not needed to explain what is/has been going on when plain old fashioned arrogance and self-serving will suffice.”
That’s a good point. I mean the world has gone so mad that you can speak a simple truth, like people being motivated by nothing more than “some old fashioned arrogance and self-serving,” and yet it will sound like a grand conspiracy, as if it must have been orchestrated by a secret cabal or something.
Yes, the Great Society and numerous programs since then are designed to destroy families. This is obvious by actually reading bills in the old, printed Congressional Record or by looking at the Library of Congress web site.
Christians failed to engage our government in a Godly manner for decades and now we have ungodly government deliberately and willfully destroying families and Christianity in America. The examples of this are all around us and cannot be denied.
Link, please.
https://www.congress.gov//
Look for current legislation on the left side pulldown menu
LOL. Just look for the “Family Destruction Act”, eh?
ASHV I had to run chores and didn’t get back to your question until now. No, you have to look for the bill sponsor, bill title, number and so on. The site provides the original proposal, the changes and the final bill. It is an easy method to keep track of actual verbiage in Congress.
Unfortunately, it is not as easy to track the Congressional Skunks who vote one way for the public and then later change their vote against their constituency.
There are about 2.2 million male prisoners in the United States, and 37% of them are black. The unemployment rate among blacks is double that of whites. The American inner city looks like it has been the victim of a concerted bombing campaign, which is actually true, come to think of it. And all the damage has been done by daisy-cutter whiteness. This point has been made several times lately, but when we refuse to assign any responsibility to the black who commits crimes, who has abortions, and who fathers children with no intention of supporting them, we are regarding… Read more »
No, Jilly. We’re taking extenuating circumstances into account and adjusting for some government social engineering that has been going on. One can be both a victim AND responsible for ones own behavior.
That’s probably why she said, “When we refuse to assign any responsibility….”
I think maybe the destruction of your family, extreme poverty, record breaking incarceration rates, and having your inner city neighborhood looking like the victim of a bombing campaign, just might be punishment enough?
Or is there some other punishment you and Jilly would like to inflict on black folks?
Yes, that’s exactly what I said — they should be punished. Can you never be anything but ungenerous?
No, they should be treated with sufficient respect to acknowledge that they play a role i the choices they make, even though the hand they have been dealt is extremely difficult.
What’s the preferred alternative, actually treating them like children or idiots who have absolutely no responsibility for their choices? What does that say about the people in those circumstances who do stay out of jail and parent their children? They just lucked into it?
Yes, we are clearly the hard-core racists here. Which is actually quite funny considering the comments I get from the Other Side. Not being willing to regard blacks as moronic children is clearly racist. Regarding my black neighbor as equal to me in her capacity for rational thought and moral conduct just shows the punishment I am willing to inflict on her. Why do we bother?
I “lucked” into a good marriage and healthy children. What would you have me say to those who have not been so fortunate? Sucks to be you? I guess you should have made better choices?
What you say is but for the grace of God there go I and you start accepting responsibility for the suffering around you. What you do not do is refuse to look at the very real circumstances that brought them where they are.
You made no rational choice and there was nothing that indicated what you could expect of the man before you married him? There was nothing about him that said to you “here’s a good man”, rather you just got luck of the draw? Have you done nothing at all yourself to make the marriage a good one?
I agree with that. But I think that sympathy for those who have suffered oppression should never lead us to see them as unable to exercise autonomy or to devalue their ability to make moral choices. Sometimes I think there is a tendency to do this too much in accounting for the problems of racial minorities or other groups which have historically been marginalized. If you regard me as criminal, I can always reform. But if you regard me as a helpless pawn, there is no hope for me.
Maybe there is something wrong with your perception of black folks as criminals in need of repentance?
Well all criminals need repentance, and some criminals are black.
That’s true, but in this context Wilson is suggesting that the socially engineered destruction of black families and political policies have done a significant amount of harm. To completely blow past that and start speaking of personal responsibility and those ,”sinful black people” is really flipping annoying.
And maybe there is something wrong in your perception of me that you find it necessary to insult me (and Jane as well, this time) and then claim it wasn’t personal. Of course, you haven’t denied it is personal yet, but your track record suggests that you will. I would respect you much more if you brought your issues with me into the open. I enjoy engaging with an honest opponent, even one who makes it clear that for reasons unknown to me I have provoked her hostility. I do not enjoy engaging with someone who makes accusations and backs… Read more »
I forgot, you insist on personalizing absolutely everything and acting as if you are being insulted and victimized.
I’m not interested in people who can’t have real discussions.
A perfect example of what I said. You think there is nothing uncharitable in alleging that Jane and I wish to inflict punishment on black people even though your rational mind must tell you that is false. Incidentally, I think that is a very serious accusation for one Christian to make against two others, especially when it is based on an unwillingness to understand our position. Here is a hint for you: if you do not intend your ill-natured remarks to be taken personally, do not call your opponents by name. It tends to detract from the credibility of your… Read more »
ME, perhaps you are in need of repentance also. The ground is level at the foot of the cross.
Or perhaps we need to be honest about what is actually being said in these threads over and over again. Regarding people as half wits, children, helpless pawns, or else criminals who need to reform, is demeaning and disrespectful.
Are you claiming that nobody fits in those categories?
Well, I have you pegged for 3 or four of them.
ME , there are plenty of individuals in their 30s who think and act like children or helpless pawns. This is easy to see if you work with them or pay attention to sales staff while you are out shopping. This is a result of our failed government education system. There is a difference between professionals living with their parents because the company the professional worked for closed the doors and the untrained individual living in the folks basement or upstairs bedroom playing video games and asking when dinner will be ready. You say there is a disconnect between the… Read more »
I wasn’t living in the U.S. at the time, but I remember reading that Appalachia was also a focus of the war on poverty. Were the results there similar in terms of fostering social pathology and promoting family breakdown?
“It is not a matter of not being able to be responsible, it is a matter of not wanting to be responsible.” Yes, but it is easy to speak those words from the perspective of someone who has not been impacted by relentless social engineering, by people like Jesse Jackson, and by some huge economic hurdles. Take for instance white people, white people in their 40’s suddenly applying for social security/disability allegedly due to permanent depression caused by chronic unemployment. That’s a real thing in the world, there’s been a huge spike in disability claims since Obama came into office.… Read more »
Could you try reading my post again? I said, specifically, that I do not regard people as half-wits, children, pawns or criminals. I said that when we refuse to regard black people as capable of moral choice, then we are acting as if we regard them that way. Or is it simply easier to decide I must have said something hateful?
I told the reporter that it looked like a hit piece on somebody because of a passing acquaintance with me. No, no, not at all the reporter said.
I have heard one should record all his conversations with reporters.
The “reporter’s” name is “Dana Liebelson”.
‘wonder if that’s the short version of liebel wilson?
It is probably not the short version of liebel Gianforte. ; – )
Bad peice, bad pun. : – )
“Why would I say that the black family was better off under slavery? Because it is true.” Douglas, I have done my best to resist responding. But this is beyond the pale, dear brother. You can offer, from here to kingdom come, all of the depressing statistics on the current state of the black family, but they will never come close to justifying this statement. And the fact that you would double down on such a statement makes me despair that you could ever apologize for or retract anything of substance. But I guess it’s all in your “theology of… Read more »
Jack, you may want to spend some time reading actual historical documents rather than just the current narratives. A book I am reading now on slavery in the Caribbean lumps slavery there with slavery in the American colonies. The casual reader would not discern the difference at all. Where are the black families now, Jack? They are almost nonexistent. Where are the black Dads providing for their wives and children? They are gone. Where are the black families? Destroyed by ignorant Christians who thought the Federal government would do a better job of taking care of people than the church.… Read more »
Dave, I’ve read many, many actual historical documents regarding slavery. You are the one who needs to brush up, if you are defending Doug. You can start with Thomas Jefferson’s famous and familiar words on the subject, in his Notes on State of Virginia:
“The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other.”
Jack, I read just as much as you do, but you are wrong on this point. I am not defending Doug at all, but rather defending actual, unrevised, unemotional history. How can we decry any injustice if we are unwilling to actually see the truth and instead avoid it. How can we address similar Biblical issues if we avoid that which is written in scripture? Where are the black families now, Jack? If I had 7 or 15 kids with 8 or 9 girls and didn’t provide support or fatherly guidance for them at all what would you say was… Read more »
Hey, Dave, thanks for taking the time to ‘whitesplain all that.
Jack, the Bible teaches us about slavery and how masters and slaves should relate to each other. We cannot get away from the truth of scripture. I cannot help it if scripture goes against today’s popular thinking. You cannot run away from Biblical slavery either. You are incorrect here. Where are the black families right now? That is the question. In the antebellum south, with Christian masters, black families were maintained. There was a husband, a wife and kids all living together. Now today, with our unholy master, there are hardly any black families. There are no fathers living with… Read more »
Dave, no doubt there were some Christian masters, somewhere in the South, who genuinely cared about maintaining the black family unit. But to characterize it as “In the antebellum south, with Christian masters, black families were maintained” is a gross distortion. The antebellum “Christian” South as a whole couldn’t care less about maintaining black slave families. It’s really not hard to find countless accounts of black families cruelly ripped apart. And of course that was only a part of the inhumanity of Southern slavery. You need to expand your reading a bit. I too bemoan the current state of the… Read more »
I also find it an odd view. No matter how kind an master might have been, the slave family could not conform to the Christian ideal in several important ways. The father could not be the central authority figure to his children. His wife owed her primary obedience, not to her husband, but to her owner. Neither parent had primary authority in directing the children’s activities, teaching them, or disciplining them. If modern Christians deplore the fact that children in this culture seem to be owned by the state as much as by their parents, how can we point to… Read more »
Jillybean, where are the free blacks? They are few and far between in the USofA. The master was the master, but kids were responsible to their parents as well as the master. Yes, a dad in the home was a great constraint on kids.
Rethink your chain of command, Jilly. How does a corporal in charge of several men maintain his authority when there is a sergeant above him and an officer above the sergeant? It works out quite well and is not the disaster that you envision.
Happy Lord’s Day
You too! I honestly don’t know enough about the subject to know how it would work, although I would assume it meant that the master and slave father shared the same goals when it came to the children. But I do wish the focus of the discussion would shift to the time period before 1950 when blacks did have strong families with fathers in the home. There must have been poverty and we know there was segregation; yet families were intact and fathers were masters of their homes. What changed after 1950 (which was before the war on poverty)? Did… Read more »
Wars destabilize the warring nations in addition to those on the sidelines with the loss of trade and normal relations. Often after wars there is a period of relief and craziness because those who were not killed or severely injured are trying to forget what they saw on the battlefield. The rebuilding of destroyed areas requires more capital and the distraction allows for an easy step away from God.
Church influence declined after WW II and the socialist policies desired by those behind the scenes were pushed forward.
“But I do wish the focus of the discussion would shift to the time period before 1950 when blacks did have strong families with fathers in the home.”
Of intrest to me in that time period is the delta blues music, which has thematc elements similar to gangster rap.
https://youtu.be/3MCHI23FTP8
“One can only say “The black family was better off under slavery” if one is willing to say “It is better to grow up as a slave with a father in the home than as a free man without one.” Would any of us think this is true for ourselves?”
That was kind of the point of ‘Song of the South’.
I’ve never seen that. I only know it from Splash Mountain. Was the black guy the father figure?
The story starts with little Johny and his mother being left at Grandmothers plantation while father goes away on buisness. Everyone agrees that him leaving is a bad thing but he goes anyway. Grandmas line at the beginning is “The boy needs his father. That’s what his mother needs to but she wont admit it” and the rest of the movie from the human perspective shows how true that is.
I had no idea. Where did a young man like you get a copy of it? I thought it had been withdrawn years ago. All I know Zippidy-doo-dah which is what they play right before you go down the chute and get drenched! But not as wet as you get on Jurassic Park. I went on a 100 degree day, and was rather sorry I was wearing a thin cotton dress!
https://www.google.com/search?q=song+of+the+south+dvd&client=ms-android-samsung&prmd=svin&source=lnms&tbm=shop&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjGoar704jPAhVO4GMKHYqWDd4Q_AUIBygB&biw=360&bih=559
It’s aparently back in circulation. My parents have a copy on dvd and I’ve found it on a couple movie streaming sites. I’d heard it it was withdrawn ‘because racism’, but after seeing it the nonfeminism is more culturaly jarring than it’s depiction of slaves.
Back on topic I think having a father in the home is better than not, a family is better together as slaves than disolved and free.
“One can only say” is not correct and sets up a false dichotomy. Disney really isn’t a good starting point for societal issues. That is the same as our actors testifying to Congress on various issues because the acted the part in a move or TV show.
Our discussions always need to start with what scripture says.
Jack, you are a Christian brother; but you are completely wrong on this topic. Jack, the ground is level at the foot of the cross and you ignore black slave masters, white slaves in the antebellum South, the gospel preached to black slaves, the education that was given to them, the trades that were mastered. These facts are well documented in older texts, yet, today it is popular to demonize everything without knowing the true historical facts. Where is the black family today, Jack? Where is the Bible teaching and preaching in the black family today? Where is the black… Read more »
Dave, for whatever 30/20 lines you think I’m missing on the eye chart, you are missing the BIG E: MASTER/SLAVE. For you to say that the black family was better off under that arrangement means you are historically clueless. End of discussion (at least my part).
Jack, you missed the biblical portion of slavery completely. Master/slave is in the Bible and the rules for slavery are in the Bible. You are denying scripture with your shortsighted viewpoint. Your emotions and populist view are demonstrated by “‘whitesplain.” You are caught up in the current world view and not a biblical worldview. We are slaves to Christ. The Bible points out how masters are to treat their slaves and how slaves are to treat their masters. Master and slave are not a big E unless you are using populist worldview thinking. We do not have the authority to… Read more »
“Where is the black family today, Jack? Where is the Bible teaching and preaching in the black family today? Where is the black father in the black family today?”
Fatherlessness and slavery are different things. You can argue against both.
Completely correct CC. The push here is about the condition of the black family rather than the broader issue slavery. No father means no family in the general use of the word family. Under the current godless master, black families are much worse off than under slavery in the antebellum South. The issue is clouded because everyone jumps high and start chattering like squirrels at the word slavery. Current thinking disregards white slaves in America, the Caribbean, Africa and South America. We don’t differentiate between slavery as taught in the Bible and as practiced by heathens. There were huge differences… Read more »
“Under the current godless master, black families are much worse off than under slavery in the antebellum South.”
Worse because they don’t have fathers and therefore don’t have proper families. How much is this inflicted on them by their master now as opposed to in the antebellum south?
It looks like you and Jack are talking past each other.
Let’s forgot the fact that marriage stats during after slavery were greatly skewed in the “strong” families direction; both by the whites who didn’t want to admit what slavery and Jim Crow was doing to blacks, but also by the blacks who were ashamed of the state of their families.
I’ll instead round up my family and surrender to the nearest white person, you know, because it’ll make it stronger. I’ll encourage my fellow blacks to do the same.
If you are on welfare, you have already surrendered to an ungodly master.
Or so says “Two Corinthians”. Same is true if you have a mortgage after all. But when I surrender to my white neighbor I won’t have to worry about any of that.
Well, remember you can surrender to your black neighbor since the first “All American” slave owner was a black man and in the northern and southern states there were black slave owners. Of course, you could surrender to an American Indian because they kept slaves of all types. Or you could travel to Africa and turn your family in to the descendants of those black Africans who sold their fellow blacks into slavery and kept the best for themselves.
Please feel free to exercise your Surrendering My Family Rights to whichever group you feel best suits your needs.
In the last generation 13 million black children have been dismembered, at rates much higher than the rates of white dismemberment. Many of their bodies were sold for parts. Of those who are allowed to live, who are granted entrance into this tolerant society of ours, about 58% will grow up without their biological father. This is an illegitimacy rate that is somewhere north of grotesque. There are about 2.2 million male prisoners in the United States, and 37% of them are black. The unemployment rate among blacks is double that of whites. The American inner city looks like it… Read more »
Roses are red,
Violets are blue,
FAAAK is back trolling,
For me and for you.
Roses are red,
Carnations are white,
FAAAK has shoulder chip
And he only wants a fight.
Greetings 40… I like reading Pastor Wilson’s posts because they make me think. I will definitely give you credit for writing replies that do the same. I gather from your posts that you espouse individual responsibility for one’s actions/choices as being paramount. Any hint that Pastor Wilson’s religion, or politics, or personal opinion might differ from that is met with strong opposition. I get that. My question, for you (or any other reader) is when we talk about statistics, or human behavior in the collective, can we say that a group (most often described in majority or minority terms) is… Read more »
“When black people murder their unborn children (at five times the rate of whites), bring up 75% of the ones they don’t kill in single parent households, commit violent crimes at about 8 times the rate of white people, and destroy their neighborhoods”
Perhaps 40 is in favor of blacks murdering their unborn children, what with them being at war with civilization and all.
“Liberalism is little more than whiteness supreme, whiteness on stilts, whiteness-in-a-bottle.”
Quote of the day!
Douglas, I myself never thought you were implying that slavery had nothing to do with the state of the black family. The retraction that you still need to be make is for saying: “The black family was better off under slavery.” Just try reading those words as a black individual. Or even as another white individual. Or pick any color you please. You cannot make that statement work–under any conceivable context.