Posted on 01/19/2015 2:35:57 PM PST by millegan
Today we remember the great civil rights leader, Martin Luther King Jr. Nearly universally respected, King is particularly commended by secular liberals.
This is highly ironic because King, a baptist minister, embodied many of the things that secular liberals today dislike the most about “conservative” Christians.
If you actually read what King wrote and said, you might be surprised (or not surprised) to find that he regularly appeals to God, the Bible, and even the natural law. Put any of these words in the mouth of a conservative Christian today and liberals would probably label the person a “fundamentalist,” sound the alarm of a coming theocracy, and silence the person with appeals to an extreme form of “separation of church and state.”
Here are a few examples of what I’m talking about:
(Excerpt) Read more at churchpop.com ...
I understand he was an expert on the book of nookie.
He was hardly a saint in his private life but I really do believe that in a lot of matters, he was on the side of the angels.
There's a huge difference between standing up for the right to vote as guaranteed in the law - and standing up for the 'rights' of people who break the law with impunity.
Don’t go pointing out facts! Just let the stupid left pontificate and dream, you racist crackers!
on friday , we Drove by the seminary he attended in Chester, pa. Crozer Theological Seminary. Baptist at the time. beautiful building.
Rev. MLK, Rev. Jesse Jackson, Rev. Al Sharpton, Rev. Jim Bakker.
These are not examples of actual Christian leaders .
Oy. FReepers are delusional.
You are aware, that MLK’s real name wasn’t Martin, aren’t you? It was Michael.
His father changed his name, the trivia point doesn’t interest me though.
“This is highly ironic because King, a baptist minister, embodied many of the things that secular liberals today dislike the most about “conservative” Christians.”
He was an adulterer, plagiarist, and consorted with communists. What’s not for a secular liberal to love?
In those days they silenced people by calling them communists. It is important to remember that yes King did have people in his movement that were card carrying communists. But the catalyst was J. Edgar Hoover. He also hated the Kennedy's and the Kennedy's wire-tapped King.
Who is right and who is wrong? There are people in the Tea party for example that I would proudly defend and then there are others I would most likely not want to associate with. I am not talking about leaders, just people. I think we all know extremists that we'd rather not be grouped together with. As a private citizen I have the luxury of staying away from them. As a leader of a movement, I am not sure how aware someone would be of all of his followers. Maybe he knew maybe he didn't.
In his position during that time, maybe he did know and the cause was greater then him being called a communist. 20/20 hindsight is always a hazard when looking at history. You have to judge the people in the time that they lived and in the context of what they should have known in that time frame.
So was he a communist? I don't think so. The communism of the time was definitely anti-theology. It was also the 60's and Newspeak was in full swing. Bad was good, good was bad etc. Fringe protesters were as clueless then as they are now. Unions routinely bus people in and hand them a sign. This is not new.
I don't think you can just label someone a communist unless he actually preached it. From what he has written, I don't see it. As for his alleged behavior, well I won't be the one to cast the first stone. If it's true shame on him, but who amongst us is without sin?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.