by Ben Berwick

Apparently Racism is on Life Support…

… That’s the latest absurdity to come from Paul of Blogging Theology. It is not surprising that he would argue racism isn’t really a problem, given his own racially charged comments in recent times, as well as his defence of anti-Semite David Irving. I wonder if the argument he is supporting would wash with Breonna Taylor, or Ahmaud Arbery, or George Floyd? Perhaps Paul would finally care to show enough courage and conviction to explain why he thinks that black people in the USA face problems of greater poverty?

BLM…

David of Theology Archaeology continues to baffle me with his unwitting irony. Apparently everything I say is a distortion of the facts and the truth, yet, even a cursory glance at his commentary on the Black Lives Matter website reveals that it’s not me distorting anything… BLM site quotes will be in blue, David’s remarks in pink.

Firstly, the wording of the BLM landing page:

We need to see what you see. Black Lives Matter is a central target of disinformation and you are a key line of defense. Report suspicious sites, stories, ads, social accounts, and posts about BLM.

And David’s remarks…

This is on the landing page and notice it does not say help us get the truth. That is because the truth demands honesty on BLM’s part and hinders their agenda and behavior.

So… wanting to filter out dishonest misinformation has nothing to do with wanting to find the truth? I don’t know how David can arrive at such conclusions. It is obvious that if you are asking to help nullify deceitful content, it’s because you want the truth to come out.

We affirm the lives of Black queer and trans folks, disabled folks, undocumented folks, folks with records, women, and all Black lives along the gender spectrum. Our network centers those who have been marginalized within Black liberation movements.

So they support illegal immigration, ignore mental health issues that leads to transgender and other LGBTQ preferences, as well as being very generic on how they support black people with records.

Then they are very prejudiced people who practice discrimination injustice and unfairness, thinking themselves as liberators instead of rebels:

How to begin to unpack this… it seems David is more upset that BLM is inclusive, rather than that they’re discriminatory. BLM is looking out for all black people, which is absolutely fine in my book, and that’s hardly unreasonable. I’d love to know how it’s actually a form of discrimination to be so inclusive.

There’s more (check out the link) to look at, but I don’t have the time to go through all of it right now.

The Conservative Religious Right…

Would sooner have black people simply be quiet. This is why Paul posts ridiculous commentaries about racism not really being an issue, but rather an invention in this day and age. It’s why David can make such bizarre posts about BLM, and why he complains so much about the existence of protests. It’s an expression of a desire to silence the black community.

51 thoughts on “Apparently Racism is on Life Support…”

    1. Gladly. There are many to choose from. Shall we discuss why BAME individuals are twice as likely to die in custody when restraint is required? https://www.inquest.org.uk/bame-deaths-in-police-custody

      How about the McPherson Report, which acknowledged institutionalised racism within policing practices? https://www.inquest.org.uk/bame-deaths-in-police-custody

      What about being falsely accused of shoplifting, and more likely to be passed up for promotion at work? https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/02/revealed-the-stark-evidence-of-everyday-racial-bias-in-britain

      Whilst you decide which example is best to dissect, perhaps you will be courteous enough to answer the question I originally posed in my post – why do you think black people have a greater problem with poverty in the USA?

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. What’s interesting is that *after* I provided him with several examples of systemic racism in the UK, he went back to his post and replied to a comment, saying there’s no evidence of systemic racism in the justice system. He moved the goalposts, and yet, still manages to be wrong.

        Like

    3. It’s quite interesting Paul, that you now claim on your site, in the comments, that there is no evidence of systemic racism in the justice system. Are you referring to the UK, or USA? Because as you are now aware, in the UK BAME individuals are more likely to die in police custody. They are more likely to die at the hands of the police in the USA too. Perhaps you would care to clarify?

      Like

      Reply

      2. This, by any chance…

        Justice Department statistics and scientific studies that show there is no evidence of “systemic bias” against blacks in the justice system.

        And yet, there is indeed evidence. I’ve provided you several links. You’ve simply made a statement. Have you looked at the Macpherson Report? It reached the conclusion that there was institutional racism within the ranks of the UK police force.

        But then, if you’d bothered to look at *my* reply to you yesterday, you’d have noticed that 🙂

        Like

      8. I asked you first remember? 😉 You wanted evidence of systemic UK racism, and you received it. You shifted the goalposts to the justice system, sneakily (gee, I wonder why), and now you have *plenty* of evidence to prove that too.

        Like

      10. Didn’t say I wouldn’t, but I asked you first. You’re being a troll, looking for a cowardly excuse to maintain your racism. Once again you display utter contempt for the principle of honesty, and therefore contempt for Islam. Stop being a racist Paul.

        Like

      12. So you admit that you are happy to be dishonest? When you ask for evidence, shift the goalposts because it contradicts your misleading ideals, and then get caught out again, the best you can do is run away? You’re so fond of demanding people jump to your tune, but I see through your deceitful, hateful agenda. You’re a liar Paul, a dishonest coward, and you display utter contempt for the beliefs you claim to uphold. Now crawl back into your racist hole, and wonder why you’re in there alone.

        Liked by 1 person

      14. Except you won’t. You’ll make vapid posts, endorse racism, homophobia and bigotry, and then whine when you’re called out for it. Why are you so committed to making Muslims and Islam look bad with your dishonesty and hate?

        Liked by 1 person

      16. In case you haven’t noticed, I don’t try to silence you, you silly boy. Your comments are allowed through, so everyone can see that you resort to name-calling in the face of reasonable questions and arguments that you are afraid of. You, on the other hand hand, are so afraid to be challenged on your site, that you are banning and blocking people left right and centre. You don’t want a place of respectful discussion, despite what your site says.

        Liked by 1 person

      17. As I said my blog is my business your blog is yours. I will continue to express my views on race, Islam, homosexuality and feminism. I will ban whosoever I see fit. Whatever you may say.

        Like

      18. Well, I can’t stop you from being a homophobe, or a racist, or misogynistic, or dishonest… And I certainly can’t get you to think about little things like evidence and facts… The biggest irony in all of this is that I have a tiny bit of extra respect (albeit minute) for the evangelical running around this thread, for at least he doesn’t run away the moment the conversation becomes challenging.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. ” I’d love to know how it’s actually a form of discrimination to be so inclusive.”

    how about making some people follow the law and letting others disobey and ignore it? Inclusiveness does not mean avoiding following the law. Jesus said whomsoever will may come to him but he did not say some have to give up their sins and illegal behavior while others do not in order to be saved.

    Your brand of inclusiveness is unjust, unfair and illegal

    “why he complains so much about the existence of protests. It’s an expression of a desire to silence the black community.”

    Nice distortion, there are proper channels to go through to have your voice heard.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Please. You are merely upset that black people are speaking against some atrocious miscarriages of justice. You think protests about this should happen in a very specific way, so as not to inconvenience people. You made that view clear with your remarks about Kaepernick’s peaceful protests. Did he make you uncomfortable David? Is that why your outrage centres over him kneeling on ‘company time’? Surely what you should be upset about is the systemic failure of US law enforcement when it comes to the treatment of black people. They are 2.5x more likely to die than white people are in encounters with police in the US.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. Don’t falsely accuse me of things I am not doing. Injustice happens to everyone, look at the family court and the laws surrounding child custody and alimony etc. Injustice happens to men all the time as there was a man who committed suicide because the judge made his child support and alimony payments higher than his monthly salary– he was white.
        You seem to be really blind to what injustice is and why those not in favor of the protests are saying what they are saying. I am not doing an injustice to my faith as all I can speak is the truth which happens to contradict yours, the BLM and other protester’s message.
        You are not correct in this issue nor are those other groups.

        Like

      2. You’re just repeating your earlier falsehoods David. You know full well why the protests are happening – they are happening *because* of injustice. You never did answer whether or not what happened to George Floyd was justice, you instead hid from actually addressing that.

        You claim to speak the truth – do you suppose Jesus would find what happened to Floyd to be justice?

        I’ll leave you with a thought. Martin Luther King organised many protests. He was arrested, as were his followers, at some of these protests. Sometimes his followers were arrested simply for gathering in a public place. You speak of following the law, but sometimes the law is *not* just. If it were, Martin Luther King and his supporters wouldn’t have been arrested.

        Like

  5. The Conservative Religious Right…Would sooner have black people simply be quiet.

    I’m pretty sure that’s why they come up with a “reason” every type of protest is wrong. Kneeling insults the troops (…no… just no…). Marching means looting (even when there’s video of black Americans chastising looters/destroyers of property… not to mention that, world-wide, the looting/damage has probably cost less than one post-game riot in Philadelphia).

    Clearly, the only way to get today’s “slave patrol” to stop killing people for being accused of a crime (or having the audacity to be asleep in one’s own bed), is to sit down & shut up. 🙄 🙄 🙄

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. It does seem to be a pattern with the religious right… And not all of them, but many. What we have in this very thread is an inconsistent Muslim who is afraid of evidence and who cherry picks sources… And a radical Evangelical who moves goalposts the instant he can’t justify his position.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  6. https://us.yahoo.com/news/muhammad-alis-son-said-dad-174437494.html
    Muhammad Ali’s son said his dad wouldn’t have supported Black Lives Matter movement or protests over George Floyd’s death
    This article is a good read
    The point made by Ms. Lynn is erroneous and reads into the opposition made by republicans her own thoughts. The resistance to kneeling is just telling everyone that there is a right time and place to peacefully protest. The playing of the national anthem is not it.
    Insulting other people is not the way to get your message heard

    Like

    Reply

    1. Whatever Ali’s children have said (and I’ll grant they would be best placed to judge their father’s views), an interesting fact remains that Ali suporoted the highly controversial movement started by Malcolm X, which supported (among other things) black supremacy and racial segregation. In fact, Malcolm X supported violent rebellion from what he considered to be the cruelty of white rule.

      That isn’t to say that Muhammad Ali would have supported every viewpoint of Malcolm X (in fact Ali was a vocal advocate for integration), but it goes to show how the lines can be blurred in all this.

      More to the point, this doesn’t invalidate the protests or why they’re happening. You still continue to ignore how peaceful avenues to protest get ignored, and you fail to recognise that even military veterans have said kneeling during the anthem is not an insult, but in fact is a right of expression that they fought for.

      Ariel’s points are entirely valid, and you haven’t really addressed them, much like when you call any point of mine ‘distorting’ without ever actually explaining why.

      Like

      Reply

    2. I’m going to have to assume that the mention of Muhammad Ali’s son was in reference to something Timon said, since it has nothing to do my comment.

      In the U.S., there have been limits put on Freedom of speech only when it presents a serious risk. A prime example being: a person cannot yell “fire” in a crowded movie theater. Kneeling during the national anthem presents no risk – except that it presents the protest to an IMMENSE audience & draws attention to the issue at hand.

      To kneel during the National Anthem is… what? Rude? OK, but it is entirely appropriate. Decorum dictates, in the U.S., one should not remain seated during the song. I posit the players aren’t seated – but that they’re symbolically indicating their place in the system oppressing them. They can’t stand, as the weight of the deaths of black citizens at the hands of police holds them down.

      Additionally, I posit that peaceful protest can have no effect unless it insults the powers that be. How can one change a system rooted in oppression without being rude, being provocative, raising the issue where it can be seen nationwide?

      I can’t see how making some people feel uncomfortable is more pressing than black people being murdered. To uplift the oppressed, those not under the yoke must stand discomfort to help. I believe it’s what Christ would stand for.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    1. Oh, I’m well aware of his latest racist commentary, but thanks for sharing this. It seems that in addition to being indecisive about his faith (I believe this isn’t the first time he has denounced his beliefs), Paul has descended into a state of open bigotry.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.