Outraged by Glenn Beck’s Salvo, Christians Fire Back

[foxpaws]

Outraged by Glenn Beck’s Salvo, Christians Fire Back
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
Published: NYT March 11, 2010

Last week, the conservative broadcaster Glenn Beck called on Christians to leave their churches if they hear preaching about social or economic justice, saying they were code words for Communism and Nazism.

Glenn Beck urged Christians to leave churches that used what he called code words for Communism and Nazism.

This week the remarks prompted outrage from several Christian bloggers. The Rev. Jim Wallis, who leads the liberal Christian antipoverty group Sojourners, in Washington, called on Christians to leave Glenn Beck.

“What he has said attacks the very heart of our Christian faith, and Christians should no longer watch his show,” Mr. Wallis wrote on his blog, God’s Politics. “His show should now be in the same category as Howard Stern.”

In attacking churches that espouse social justice, Mr. Beck is taking on most mainline Protestant, Roman Catholic, black and Hispanic congregations in the country — not to mention plenty of evangelical churches and even his own, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Mr. Beck said on his radio show on March 2, “I beg you, look for the words ‘social justice’ or ‘economic justice’ on your church Web site. If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words.”

“Am I advising people to leave their church? Yes! If I am going to Jeremiah Wright’s church,” he said, referring to President Obama’s former pastor in Chicago. “If you have a priest that is pushing social justice, go find another parish. Go alert your bishop.”

Religion scholars say the term “social justice” was probably coined in the 1800s, codified in encyclicals by successive popes and adopted widely by Protestant churches in the 1900s. The concept is that Christians should not merely give to the poor, but also work to correct unjust conditions that keep people poor. Many Christians consider it a recurring theme in Scripture.

Mr. Beck himself is a convert to Mormonism, a faith that identifies itself as part of the Christian family, but is nevertheless rejected by many Christians.

Philip Barlow, the Arrington professor of Mormon history and culture at Utah State University, said, “One way to read the Book of Mormon is that it’s a vast tract on social justice.”

“A lot of Latter-day Saints would think that Beck was asking them to leave their own church,” he said.

Mr. Barlow said that just this year, the church’s highest authority, the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, issued a new “Handbook of Instructions” in which they revised the church’s “threefold mission” and added a fourth mission statement: Care for the poor.

 

[shagdrum]

"Social" justice is a very noble ideal but, in the real world, it is probably the most dangerous of any ideal because it is unattainable and leads to an off-hand rejection of what is good and works in society in favor of abstract utopian postulations based in, ultimately, arrogant assumptions about human nature; basically making the perfect the enemy of the good. A great example of this would be Orwell's 1984; an attempt to achieve a utopia leads to a dystopia. It is why every traditional communist/socialist nation has become a tyranny.

Those who promote social justice notoriously do so in insidious ways. Co-opting Christianity toward that end is not uncommon. Just look at Black Liberation Theology.

Social Justice is the cornerstone of what can be described as a "substitute" religion; a secular "faith". Promoting it through insidious means is rather common. Social justice as implemented through the framework of classical liberalism is what modern day liberalism/progressivism is. Promoting social justice through the framework of Christianity is another approach; as Black Liberation Theology shows.

 

[04SCTLS]

“What he has said attacks the very heart of our Christian faith

The truth hurts.
Religion and it's ideals of taking care of one's fellow man is voluntary(in this country) socialism.

 

[fossten]

Welcome to LAST WEEK, foxpaws...

Jim Wallis is a leader of the lefty faction of churches. He's not a Christian.

 

[Calabrio]

The truth hurts.
Religion and it's ideals of taking care of one's fellow man is voluntary(in this country) socialism.

Charity is NOT the same thing as socialism.
They don't even resemble each other.

Isn't it convenient that the person at the forefront of this attack on Beck, the one responsible for the quote you just provided is also President Obama's "Faith Adviser," Jim Wallis.

And who is Jim Wallis?

Jim Wallis

A self-described activist preacher and the founder of the publication Sojourners, Jim Wallis has long championed the cause of communism. Forgiving its brutal standard-bearers in Vietnam and Cambodia the most abominable of atrocities in the 1970s, Wallis was unsparing in his execration of American military efforts. Demanding greater levels of “social justice” in the United states, he was silent on the subject of the murderous rampages of Cambodia’s Khmer Rouge. Very much to the contrary, several Sojourners editorials attempted to exculpate the Khmer Rouge of the charges of genocide, instead shifting blame squarely onto the United States.

Expressing in 1979 his hope that “more Christians will come to view the world through Marxist eyes,” Wallis blamed America entirely for the political tensions of the Cold War era. “At each step in the Cold War,” he wrote in November 1982, “the U.S. was presented with a choice between very different but equally plausible interpretations of Soviet intentions, each of which would have led to very different responses. At every turn, U.S. policy-makers have chosen to assume the very worst about their Soviet counterparts.”

In the 1980s Wallis embarked on an editorial crusade in Sojourners to undercut public support for a confrontational U.S. foreign policy toward the spread of communism in Central America. He published bitter denunciations of the American government’s sponsorship of anti-communist Contra rebels against Nicaragua’s Sandinista dictatorship, and condemned the United States for waging an “undeclared war” against “the people of Nicaragua.”

To this day, Wallis remains fiercely opposed to free markets. In many interviews, he has stressed his belief that capitalist systems “have failed the poor and they have failed the earth.” Moreover, he depicts America as the central cause of human suffering around the world. Asked in a January 2003 interview about the then-looming Iraq War, Wallis stated that because the United States had previously supported undemocratic regimes, it now had no right to preemptively oppose one in Iraq. “Saddam Hussein is an evil man,” Wallis said, “but so are many rulers around the world. Other human rights violators just as bad have been on the U.S. government’s payroll.… We have a history here that isn’t very admirable.”

On June 28, 2006, Barack Obama spoke at a Sojourners-sponsored Call to Renewal Conference, where he identified Jim Wallis as “my friend.”

On March 20, 2008, Wallis wrote a piece about Obama’s then-recent speech on race, in which the presidential candidate had addressed the controversy that arose over the racially charged remarks of his pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Posted on Obama’s campaign website, Wallis’ piece read, in part, as follows:

“It was an amazing day, and, we may look back to conclude it was a historic day. Before Barack Obama's speech on Tuesday, after the now infamous statements from his former pastor, the issue seemed to be a test of him. But after what may go down as one of the most significant addresses ever given about the history and future of race in America, the issue may now be a test of us. The examination of a candidate was transformed this week into an examination of a nation….

“Every American needs to watch and listen to Barack Obama’s speech about the future that the U.S. could have…. After the constant replaying of the same video tapes [of Rev. Wright’s sermons] … we listened to an invitation to turn the page and move forward….

“This was a speech that actually posited new hope for opportunity and equality, and even the beginning of the kind of racial reconciliation and unity which few have dared to speak of since the end of the civil rights movement…. The most honest and compelling speech about race in decades could open the promise of a deeper national conversation about our racial past and future than we have had for some time….”

To view a comprehensive profile and numerous additional resources about Jim Wallis, click here.

This is Marxist Liberation Theology.
You can go to his "blog" if you'd like further evidence of this:
http://blog.sojo.net/tag/liberation-theology/

Beck is 100% right on the mark wit his claim.
And this orchestrated attack on him from an adviser of Obama, then picked up in the NY Times (the White Houses print media outlet, and the echoed through the rest of the media) is a deliberate attempt to further polarize him and isolate him from the traditional, religious people who have (or may in the future) listen to him. And isn't it convenient that this distraction comes up during what is expected to be the final week of the radical Obamacare take over of healthcare?

Coincidence? Maybe.

 

[04SCTLS]

Charity is NOT the same thing as socialism

.

So then you think that religion is charity?
I think it's a form of voluntary socialism, god filled instead of godless.

And who is Jim Wallis?

Religion is one of the refuges of scoundrels and demagaugues.
We give a big pass to people in this country just because they say they're religious.( well some religions) and let them say almost anything under that protection.

 

[Calabrio]

.
So then you think that religion is charity?
I think it's a form of voluntary socialism, god filled instead of godless.

You'll have to elaborate on this point, but i don't think I could disagree more.

I think that religion tends to encourages and promotes voluntary charity. Socialism/Marxism compels redistributing wealth at the barrel of a gun, using the power of government to enforce it.

Religion would speak of personal responsibility and the CHOICE of whether, who and what that you offer this charity. In the "socialist" examples, you abdicate that personal responsibility and leave it to the government to satisfy in your place.

Vastly different.

But ultimately, you aren't forced to worship at the church, temple, or the mosque. But under a communist system, we're all forced to bow before the alter of government.

Religion is one of the refuges of scoundrels and demagogues.

Power is the lure for refuges and scoundrels and demagogues, and they will abuse and bastardize the institutions that they pervert in their pursuit of that power.

Wallis has taken the cover of religion to advance his radical political agenda. He's the person who is spearheading this attack on Beck and I think his motivation is transparent and contemptible.

 

[fossten]

.

So then you think that religion is charity?
I think it's a form of voluntary socialism, god filled instead of godless.

Total, complete nonsense. That's like saying capitalism is socialism without any government restraints. You can't fit the square peg of socialism into every round hole. You routinely fail to attribute Free Will to Christianity.

There is no comparison to the Christian principle of helping your fellow man in need out of a sense of desire to please God. Socialism would confiscate that which the government did not produce and give it to him who does not deserve it.

Example: The self actualization and blessing obtained by giving from the heart truly satisfies the self interest of the individual. Alternatively, socialism allows some nameless, faceless bureaucrat to forcefully rip your income and pay for someone's abortion, which goes against the Christian's principles. Resentment and distrust of government result, as well as a smaller pile of money available for meaningful charity.

 

[shagdrum]

The truth hurts.
Religion and it's ideals of taking care of one's fellow man is voluntary(in this country) socialism.

Socialism is social justice through collectivist means. Christianity does not promote social justice or collectivism.

Simply promoting the idea of "helping your fellow man" is not the same thing as social justice. Social justice is the idea that a more equal society is a more just society. Christianity does not promote helping your fellow man to create a more equal society.

Know what you are talking about...

 

[foxpaws]

So, how do you feel about a right wing pundit telling you how to judge your church - and a right wing pundit that isn't even Christian if you go by Foss's definition...

I am insulted... He knows nothing about the work of my church, or how my church helps the poor, or works to have the conditions that the poor have to survive in improved. Yet, he thinks I should leave my church based on some narrow minded view of 'social justice'.

Churches across the board have been practicing social justice for centuries. If you not only give food to the poor, but you work at telling the poor that they can rise up against a dictator that closes their churches, that is 'social justice' in the mind of the church. Many churches worked in the Soviet Union against the government to allow people to worship. That is social justice (note shag - church's definition) - and yet, that is wrong according to Beck.

 

[fossten]

So, how do you feel about a right wing pundit telling you how to judge your church - and a right wing pundit that isn't even Christian if you go by Foss's definition...

I am insulted... He knows nothing about the work of my church, or how my church helps the poor, or works to have the conditions that the poor have to survive in improved. Yet, he thinks I should leave my church based on some narrow minded view of 'social justice'.

Churches across the board have been practicing social justice for centuries. If you not only give food to the poor, but you work at telling the poor that they can rise up against a dictator that closes their churches, that is 'social justice' in the mind of the church. Many churches worked in the Soviet Union against the government to allow people to worship. That is social justice (note shag - church's definition) - and yet, that is wrong according to Beck.

Fox, if you're not willing to respond to all of our responses, don't expect anyone to respond to this tripe.

 

[Calabrio]

So, how do you feel about a right wing pundit telling you how to judge your church - and a right wing pundit that isn't even Christian if you go by Foss's definition...

Foxpaws, if you're not interested in honestly discussing these things, why don't you take your propaganda and bomb throwing elsewhere.

Is this the talking point you've been asked to bring up? Change the subject from the liberty stealing, constitutional shredding Healthcare nightmare being assaulted on the American people this weekend?

You've completely, and likely deliberately, misrepresented what he said.
And it's cute how you made certain to include a quick attempt to isolate him by referencing his Mormonism too. You couldn't pass up that opportunity? Are you on the clock right now?

I am insulted...

He didn't suggest you do anything nor did he judge your church.
He suggested that his audience look at their church and make sure that the congregation or church that they participate in represents them.

Why are you offended by this?
Because, like all Progressives, you resent it when someone pulls the curtain back on your movement? Because it's easier for your type to advance your social and political agenda from the shadows than it is to do it out in the open?

Again, why are you offended? Are you a member of a church that advances such communist/marxist/progressive social and political views under the code word "Social Justice?" In your case, that's probably a good place for YOU to worship. It reflects your worldview.

However, it wouldn't reflect the majority of Beck's audience.

He knows nothing about the work of my church,

Did he mention your church by name?
Of course not.

Yet, he thinks I should leave my church based on some narrow minded view of 'social justice'.

More misrepresentation.
He didn't say people should leave their church if they use the term social justice. He simply pointed out that the term is frequently used euphemistically to describe a social and political movement. And that if you see the term frequently being used, it's worth investigating and seeing if the church or congregation you're with reflects your values.

It's as simple as that.
Regardless how you misrepresent it.

Churches across the board have been practicing social justice for centuries.

No they haven't. It's a 19th century term.
Churches have embraced charity, but that's vastly different than "social justice" addressed by the government.

Many churches worked in the Soviet Union against the government to allow people to worship. That is social justice (note shag - church's definition) - and yet, that is wrong according to Beck.

You're deliberately changing the subject and confusing the issue.
We don't live in the Soviet Union, though those same liberation theologians that have embraced "social justice" have been the same ones who have supported and defended the tyrannical regimes of the Soviet Union and Vietnam. They are the same ones that have supported fascist regimes.

Quick example, relevant to Beck.
Leftists propagandists like yourself have frequently tried to compare Beck to Father Coughlin from the 1930s. He was a religion broadcaster who was very vocal in his opposition to FDRs agenda.

To the propagandists and the non-inquisitive tools working for the media, that's as far as they investigate, convinced that the association with Beck is solid.

But it's not.
Father Couglin originally supported FDR, he even called the New Deal "Christ's Deal." He was anti-communist, but he was a fascist. He supported the unions. He was anti-semetic. And he was a proponent of "SOCIAL JUSTICE.

In fact, the periodical he published was titled "SOCIAL JUSTICE." He lead the organization the "National Union for Social Justice."

The man was a fascist, anti-capitalist preacher working under the banner of social justice.


Many people and churches use the term "social justice" without knowing what it actually means or the history of the term. Beck made a simple point, if you see the term being used take notice, ask questions and investigate it. And if the values and priorities of the church don't represent you, you should consider leaving it or changing it.

Churches can be bastardized for political causes.
And the leftist who often do it disguise their motivations, just as they have in the education.

So don't take offense, Foxpaws. He wasn't necessarily talking to you or about your church. He simply suggested that everyone ask questions and know what they are supporting.

Seems reasonable to me.

 

[shagdrum]

Churches across the board have been practicing social justice for centuries. If you not only give food to the poor, but you work at telling the poor that they can rise up against a dictator that closes their churches, that is 'social justice' in the mind of the church.

That is NOT social justice.

You don't get to redefine what social justice is. Using the excuse of "it's the Church's definition" is irrelevant and a blatant attempt to mislead.

If you are going to equivocate then you are wasting everyone's time...

 

[foxpaws]

Foxpaws, if you're not interested in honestly discussing these things, why don't you take your propaganda and bomb throwing elsewhere.

Is this the talking point you've been asked to bring up? Change the subject from the liberty stealing, constitutional shredding Healthcare nightmare being assaulted on the American people this weekend?

You've completely, and likely deliberately, misrepresented what he said.
And it's cute how you made certain to include a quick attempt to isolate him by referencing his Mormonism too. You couldn't pass up that opportunity? Are you on the clock right now?

I posted the article because I thought it was an interesting look at how religion is being drawn into a battle concerning 'social justice'.

I also thought it was important to show people how churches have historically defined social justice - and yes shag it does matter how they view social justice, they have been going about their 'social justice' for far longer than any political group such as socialists or progressives. It is important to see the difference so people can understand that when the Vatican posts 'social justice' on their website, they have a huge historical context that they are dealing with when they practice social justice, and it has very little to do with Becks narrow, modern day, definition.

He didn't suggest you do anything nor did he judge your church.
He suggested that his audience look at their church and make sure that the congregation or church that they participate in represents them.

What were Beck's unifying words? "I beg you, look for the words social justice or economic justice on your church web site," he told his audience. "If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words. Now, am I advising people to leave their church? Yes! If you have a priest that is pushing social justice, go find another parish. Go alert your bishop and tell them, 'Excuse me are you down with this whole social justice thing?' If it's my church, I'm alerting the church authorities: 'Excuse me, what's this social justice thing?' And if they say, 'yeah, we're all in that social justice thing'--I'm in the wrong place." ​

I think he wants me to leave my church Cal... Well, perhaps, since there are very few churches that have priests and bishops, perhaps it is only those people... like those who belong to the Catholic Church (once again social justice all over their website) or maybe Episcopalians.'. Greek Orthodox...

Why are you offended by this?
Because, like all Progressives, you resent it when someone pulls the curtain back on your movement? Because it's easier for your type to advance your social and political agenda from the shadows than it is to do it out in the open?

So, somehow the progressives and the Catholics are now in bed with each other? Or maybe it is now the majority of organized churches and the Democrats who somehow have created an evil alliance.

Joining any other conspiracy theorists on this one yet Cal?

Again, why are you offended? Are you a member of a church that advances such communist/marxist/progressive social and political views under the code word "Social Justice?" In your case, that's probably a good place for YOU to worship. It reflects your worldview.

However, it wouldn't reflect the majority of Beck's audience.

The fact that a man, who isn't even a Christian (in fact, if you go by some religious comparisons, Mormons and Muslims have more in common than Mormons and Catholics) is telling Christians how they should worship is disgusting.

It is like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad telling Christians how they should find a church - blick.

Did he mention your church by name?
Of course not.

Came within a hair's breath of Catholicism, once again, priests and bishops are pretty defining (however there are bishops in the Mormon church, but no priests). He didn't say your preacher, your alderman, your clergyman, your TV evanglist, your church elder.

More misrepresentation.
He didn't say people should leave their church if they use the term social justice. He simply pointed out that the term is frequently used euphemistically to describe a social and political movement. And that if you see the term frequently being used, it's worth investigating and seeing if the church or congregation you're with reflects your values.

It's as simple as that.
Regardless how you misrepresent it.

Nope, he is creating some sort of idea that even the catholic church must be in bed with the progressives... that most organized religion is. Because Cal, most organized religions use the term 'social justice'.

No they haven't. It's a 19th century term.
Churches have embraced charity, but that's vastly different than "social justice" addressed by the government.

But, you better believe that term is on many, many church's websites - and that is the barometer that Beck is using. Do you see it - it means they are bad. Beck doesn't even try to explain the difference in how politicians use the term, and how the church has traditionally used the term. Why not explain the church's use of the term, rather than tie it up with the political usage.

I hope he has fun fighting the Catholic church - there are already letter writing campaigns going... and if he thought having the Color of Change boycott was bad... whew... the Catholics boycotting your show... wow...

You're deliberately changing the subject and confusing the issue.
We don't live in the Soviet Union, though those same liberation theologians that have embraced "social justice" have been the same ones who have supported and defended the tyrannical regimes of the Soviet Union and Vietnam. They are the same ones that have supported fascist regimes.

I posted the blinking article Cal - I posted it to show how the right has gone way over any boundaries now. To create some sort of conspiracy between almost any mainstream church and socialism is wrong. Not only is it wrong, it is irresponsible.

Many people and churches use the term "social justice" without knowing what it actually means or the history of the term. Beck made a simple point, if you see the term being used take notice, ask questions and investigate it. And if the values and priorities of the church don't represent you, you should consider leaving it or changing it.

Nope - he said if you see the term - run... if they say they are into the social justice thing (which almost all of them will say that they are) quit - you are in the wrong place - you aren't in a Glenn Beck approved religious source. I guess the Mormons would qualify, but, since I am a Christian, I won't be joining the Later Day Saints any time soon - but, heck even they believe in social justice...

Kent P. Jackson, associate dean of religion at Brigham Young University, said in an interview: “My own experience as a believing Latter-day Saint over the course of 60 years is that I have seen social justice in practice in every L.D.S. congregation I’ve been in. People endeavor with all of our frailties and shortcomings to love one another and to lift up other people. So if that’s Beck’s definition of social justice, he and I are definitely not on the same team.” ​

Note - how the church defines social justice -

Churches can be bastardized for political causes.
And the leftist who often do it disguise their motivations, just as they have in the education.

So don't take offense, Foxpaws. He wasn't necessarily talking to you or about your church. He simply suggested that everyone ask questions and know what they are supporting.

Seems reasonable to me.

The left now taking over churches - I thought that was the right's mandate...

What will happen if the 'new right' (like Beck) alienates the religious right?

Perhaps you should look at Matthew 25 - it explains this quite well...

 

[shagdrum]

I guess the Mormons would qualify, but, since I am a Christian, I won't be joining the Later Day Saints any time soon - but, heck even they believe in social justice...

Kent P. Jackson, associate dean of religion at Brigham Young University, said in an interview: “My own experience as a believing Latter-day Saint over the course of 60 years is that I have seen social justice in practice in every L.D.S. congregation I’ve been in. People endeavor with all of our frailties and shortcomings to love one another and to lift up other people. So if that’s Beck’s definition of social justice, he and I are definitely not on the same team.” ​

Note - how the church defines social justice

All you have shown is that Mr. Jackson doesn't know what social justice is.

It is the height of conceit to think that you can redefine something like social justice to mean what you want it to mean and not mean what you don't want it to mean.

Social justice does not mean charity or "helping your fellow man". It is the idea that a more equal society is a more just society; egalitarianism.

Milton Friedman famously championed helping the poor yet categorically rejected the notion of social justice. Under your flawed understanding of social justice, that would be impossible.

If you miss the distinction between helping the less fortunate out of a sense of decency and helping the less fortunate to move toward a more equal society, then you don't understand social justice.

 

[foxpaws]

All you have shown is that Mr. Jackson doesn't know what social justice is.

It is the height of conceit to think that you can redefine something like social justice to mean what you want it to mean and not mean what you don't want it to mean.

Social justice does not mean charity or "helping your fellow man". It is the idea that a more equal society is a more just society; egalitarianism.

Milton Friedman famously championed helping the poor yet categorically rejected the notion of social justice. Under your flawed understanding of social justice, that would be impossible.

If you miss the distinction between helping the less fortunate out of a sense of decency and helping the less fortunate to move toward a more equal society, then you don't understand social justice.

The church defines social justice differently than a political view of the term 'social justice'.

That is why it is so wrong for Beck to do this - he is taking a term that is used one way (in the church) and is applying a political definition to it.

The village has been incorporated!

Very good for the village if now it has a set of laws and will be recognized by other villages as a legal entity...

Very bad if the big bad city next to the village has incorporated it... it has been absorbed and will never be heard from again...

 

[shagdrum]

The church defines social justice differently than a political view of the term 'social justice'.

Then "the church" is wrong. There is no "alternate" type of social justice.

It is more likely that some people in the church don't understand what social justice is and are misapplying the term. However, there are some that bastardize Christianity to promote their personal social views; like Black Liberation Theology.

 

[foxpaws]

Heritage Foundation? Shag - are they wrong?

Seek Social Justice
A Small Group Study Guide

Problems like poverty, addiction, and homelessness are serious and complex. Passion alone won’t solve them. Seek Social Justice is a six-lesson DVD small group study guide that provides a framework for understanding and engaging human need. Combining real-world examples of effective action with the wisdom of Christian leaders like Chuck Colson, Al Mohler, and Marvin Olasky, it will challenge your ideas about social justice and how to transform lives in need.​

“I am grateful to The Heritage Foundation for including the needs of the poor in this innovative new study resource—and for inviting and encouraging us to translate our good intentions into actions that really make a difference.”
- Gary Haugen, President and CEO, International Justice Mission

 

[shagdrum]

Heritage Foundation? Shag - are they wrong?

It is being intentionally misapplied in an attempt to redefine it.

When they talk about "rethinking social justice", that suggests that they are trying to co-opt the term toward a different end then equality. Much in the same way that modern "liberalism" co-opts the idea of liberalism toward egalitarianism instead of individual liberty.

The fact is that the term "social justice" is rooted in philosophy. That is where it started and that is what defines it. John Rawls book A Theory Of Justice is considered the defining work on social justice, however the idea has been around for centuries.

Equality/fairness is what defines social justice. If that is not the focus, then what is being discussed is not social justice.

 

[fossten]

Fox' entire premise is whether or not she can pull off redefining 'social justice.'

Give it up, fox. Nobody's buying, You're devolving into 'proof by assertion now.'

11. "If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside... every positive has its negative."

 

[fossten]

What will happen if the 'new right' (like Beck) alienates the religious right?

What do you care?

 

[foxpaws]

I think with all of these challenges being met and with all of the work, and determination going on, we will be able to go this additional distance and achieve the ideal, the goal of the new age, the age of social justice.
Dr Martin Luther King 1963 WMU Speech

So we're helping to increase opportunity by relieving debt and opening trade, encouraging reform, and delivering aid that empowers the poor and the marginalized. And the record of this administration in promoting social justice is a strong record and an important record. Social justice begins with building government institutions that are fair and effective and free of corruption.
George W Bush March 5th 2007 Speech discussing Western Hemisphere Policy

We hold the moral obligation of providing for old age, helpless infancy, and poverty is far superior to that of supplying the invented wants of courtly extravagance.
Thomas Paine

Beck shouldn't be concern on whether or not God is on his side - but rather - he should be worrying if he is on God's side. Beck has placed his politics in the realm of a holy war...

Shag you are getting the ideal of social justice mixed up with how social justice is achieved. It does not have to be achieved only by government decree -

 

[shagdrum]

I think with all of these challenges being met and with all of the work, and determination going on, we will be able to go this additional distance and achieve the ideal, the goal of the new age, the age of social justice.
Dr Martin Luther King 1963 WMU Speech

MLK was rumored to have some socialist views

We hold the moral obligation of providing for old age, helpless infancy, and poverty is far superior to that of supplying the invented wants of courtly extravagance.
Thomas Paine

Relevance?

Again, charity in the name of decency IS NOT SOCIAL JUSTICE!

Social justice has very specific meaning and the idea can be traced back to before Paine was around.

Beck shouldn't be concern on whether or not God is on his side - but rather - he should be worrying if he is on God's side. Beck has placed his politics in the realm of a holy war...

That would be you, not Beck. Driving a wedge between Beck and conservatives of faith is a potentially effective way of ostracizing and de-legitimizing him.

Shag you are getting the ideal of social justice mixed up with how social justice is achieved. It does not have to be achieved only by government decree -

Actually, you are the one confusing social justice with the means of achieving it.

Charitable acts are, in and of themselves, not examples of social justice. What makes them examples of social justice is the intention behind them; namely, equalization.

Charitable acts in the name of decency are not social justice. Only charitable acts in the name of equalization are social justice.

Equating social justice with charity is a very effective means of tricking people into supporting social justice. However, it is based on a lie.

 

[Calabrio]

Again, Beck isn't taking issue with people's faith.
Nor do he besmirch or attack anyone's religion.

The point was about dishonest people like Foxpaws who bastardize and politicize religion to serve their agenda. If your church leadership is advancing a political agenda that is inconsistent with your values, you should know.

The use of the word "social justice" is an indicator that this may be the case. If so- Beck suggests that you ask questions and find out if that particular congregation reflects your values. If not, you should go somewhere else. It has NOTHING to do with God. It has nothing to do with your denomination. It has nothing to do with your faith.
But that fact is, leftists are using religion to advance their political, statist cause without necessarily making it know to the public.

All of this is irrelevant to foxpaws. She doesn't care.
Despite all that she's proudly told us in the past, today she is conveniently religious and deeply offended.

The fact is that she's repeating a very aggressive and desperate attempt to attack Glenn Beck, to isolate and destroy him. To misrepresent themselves and convince conservative Christians that he is their enemy. She even has repeatedly pounded on the"Mormon" attacks. It's really disgusting. Glenn Beck has been an extremely effective dissenting voice slowing the radical lefts take over of this country. He has cause irreparable damage to the President's brand simple by using the mans own words against him. Because of this, people like foxpaws will destroy him.

 

[foxpaws]

MLK was rumored to have some socialist views

So he was entirely socialist - that is how Beck judges - if you might embrace one or two ideas of socialism, then you are a socialist - there is no middle ground in the world of Beck.

Relevance?

Again, charity in the name of decency IS NOT SOCIAL JUSTICE!

Social justice has very specific meaning and the idea can be traced back to before Paine was around.

Paine was considered in favor of social justice, and that quote is often used to support that view.

That would be you, not Beck. Driving a wedge between Beck and conservatives of faith is a potentially effective way of ostracizing and de-legitimizing him.

Beck would have only himself to blame. He might want to research how various churches view social justice before he starts to claim that those words are code words for communism and fascism.

Actually, you are the one confusing social justice with the means of achieving it.

Charitable acts are, in and of themselves, not examples of social justice. What makes them examples of social justice is the intention behind them; namely, equalization.

Charitable acts in the name of decency are not social justice. Only charitable acts in the name of equalization are social justice.

Equating social justice with charity is a very effective means of tricking people into supporting social justice. However, it is based on a lie.

George W Bush, the Catholic Church, the Mormons, the Heritage Foundation, the Lutherans, the Methodists, Marin Luther King Jr., etc. all are confused shag? Or maybe you are looking at social justice meaning equal outcome?