no question this guys should be ousted, immediately. You cant effectively govern if this is your belief. All the time, people mis-use the concept of church vs. state but this is an example of where religious views drive an elected officials bias and thats unacceptable.

New Ala. gov: Just Christians are his family
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. – Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley told a church crowd just moments into his new administration that those who have not accepted Jesus as their savior are not his brothers and sisters, shocking some critics who questioned Tuesday whether he can be fair to non-Christians.

"Anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I'm telling you, you're not my brother and you're not my sister, and I want to be your brother," Bentley said Monday, his inauguration day, according to The Birmingham News.

The Anti-Defamation League on Tuesday called Bentley's remarks shocking.

"His comments are not only offensive, but also raise serious questions as to whether non-Christians can expect to receive equal treatment during his tenure as governor," said Bill Nigut, the ADL's regional director.

Speaking at Dexter Avenue King Memorial Church after the official inaugural ceremony, Bentley told the crowd that he considered anyone who believed in Jesus to be his brothers and sisters regardless of color, but anyone who isn't a Christian doesn't have that same relationship to him.

As a devout Agnostic, I'm with you on this one Jim.... Wow... just wow...

If I was to be born again, would I end up with a second belly button?

Sad.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How does someone who want to govern everybody in the state, but only considers Christians his "brothers and sisters" even get elected? This is crazy!

How does someone who want to govern everybody in the state, but only considers Christians his "brothers and sisters" even get elected? This is crazy!
I get yelled at every time for this but....

"Itz dem dere bass-ackwards Southern folk."

The Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi area is probably the dumbest region in the country.


From the 2000 Census data
Percent of people with a High School Diploma by state:
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg2/01/177302301.gif

Percent of people with a College Degree by state:
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg2/10/176623310.gif

just playing devil's advocate...if he was addressing a Christian congregation and referring to his "brothers and sisters in Christ"( a common term) those who have not accepted Jesus would not be "brothers and sisters in Christ" by definition...why would non-Christians be offended, has he committed a crime or not given someone a fair shake as evidence of some bias? if he were Muslim and referrend to his Muslim brothers and sisters..those that have accepted Allah? or a black pastor referring to his "black brothers and sisters"...would there be the same reaction????
seems a little picky, if you want to argue separation of church and state you ought to ignore what he does in the privacy of his own religeon as long as it doesn't interfere with his governing which I'm not sure has been shown to be the case... the liberal argument in defense of say...Obama or Reverend Wright would be to say that technically he is right...he is not your brother...he said he'd like to be but he's not by definition and if you have not accepted Jesus you would not by definition be a "brother or sister in Christ"...did he criticize of attack those that were not? he told the congregation that he wanted those sitting there to be his brother/ sister...through Christ by accepting Christ....HORROR!!!
we're so easily offended :rotf2: REMOVE HIM IMMEDIATELY !

hey, did the "anti-defamation" league have anything to say about the press and the left blaming certain people for the slaughter in Arizona with absolutely no evidence to link them?

scott - here is what he said

"Anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I'm telling you, you're not my brother and you're not my sister, and I want to be your brother," Bentley said Monday, his inauguration day, according to The Birmingham News.

I interpret this as saying, I believe that you cannot be equal to me or part of my clan if you're not a christian. If that was my state, I'd be ripshat. I would say that my non-christian dollars must not be good for you either and you can kiss my pagan taxes good bye! I'd feel the same way if it was muslim, jew, buddhist or hindu. A leader cannot give preferential treatment to ANY religion. Its against the constitution. Maybe thats not what he meant, but it sure sounds it to me.

I think governors need to watch what they say (and all politicians above dog catcher...wait , dog catchers too now a days). The fact he was in church addressing presumably all Christians makes it a lot less insensitive than if he said it at his inauguration speech. These days everything possible is used to get some hot headlines but to me , what a guy says in hurch to fellow believers is OK as long as its just relative to those inside the walls of the church with him.

This guy and link should do an evening comedy show together though. There would never be a dull moment as they contorted themselves to get their feet further into their mouths.

scott - here is what he said

"Anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I'm telling you, you're not my brother and you're not my sister, and I want to be your brother," Bentley said Monday, his inauguration day, according to The Birmingham News.

I interpret this as saying, I believe that you cannot be equal to me or part of my clan if you're not a christian. If that was my state, I'd be ripshat. I would say that my non-christian dollars must not be good for you either and you can kiss my pagan taxes good bye! I'd feel the same way if it was muslim, jew, buddhist or hindu. A leader cannot give preferential treatment to ANY religion. Its against the constitution. Maybe thats not what he meant, but it sure sounds it to me.


your post says..."told a church crowd"
"Speaking at Dexter Avenue King Memorial Church after the official inaugural ceremony"
sounds like he was imploring the "church crowd" to accept Jesus Christ and become his brother or sister in Christ...not complicated unless you are looking for a Boogieman
I guess we can only elect non-religous folks

Sounds that way to me too. Time will tell if spinning "clarifying" these remarks will change that in any way. You may dedicate your life to Jesus, that's fine, but if you are the Guv/Public Servant, you dedicate your work to your constituents.

It's not clear here if he made his comment at a public inaugural address or to a group of parishioners at the Dexter Ave. King Memorial Church, or both.

If the latter (in church), I think he is still allowed to politik and curry the voting favor of a group of Christians by saying he considers them to be his brothers and sisters, presumably in Christ, and those, not in Christ, are not such brothers and sisters. And it might be considered an insult to those Christians to imply that, as Christians, they could not govern "fairly."

On the other hand, if he made his comments in a public inaugural address, it would be irrelevant to his office as Governor. And it would be irrelevant no matter what type of brother or sister he meant. The fear that he might favor a sort of sibling over one who isn't is a legitimate fear of political nepotism. Of course, we already have a rampant taste of that in our party system in which favors are given to our fellow bro's and sis's in party affiliation. But that's OK, since we have greater trust in our politicians than we do in Christians.

if he were Muslim and referrend to his Muslim brothers and sisters..those that have accepted Allah? or a black pastor referring to his "black brothers and sisters"...would there be the same reaction????


Hell yeah there would be.....heck this board here would light up like a Times Square X-Mas tree.

There would be just as much outrage....just from different people.

your post says..."told a church crowd"
"Speaking at Dexter Avenue King Memorial Church after the official inaugural ceremony"
sounds like he was imploring the "church crowd" to accept Jesus Christ and become his brother or sister in Christ...not complicated unless you are looking for a Boogieman
I guess we can only elect non-religous folks

we can elect religious folks but they are BOUND by the constitution not to use religion to give preferential treatment or bias in any way.
He clearly said that if you do not accept Jesus, you are not his brother. If that is true, he cannot effectively govern.

Hell yeah there would be.....heck this board here would light up like a Times Square X-Mas tree.

There would be just as much outrage....just from different people.

if an elected Muslim said, at his place of worship, you here, are my brothers and sisters(in Allah) and if you are here in this Holy place with me, praise be to Allah, and you have not accepted him as your saviour, praise be his name, then you are not my brother or sister in Allah, but I would like for you to be my brother and sister, praise be his name....

that would upset people...yikes?

let me know when they're about to burn a witch at the stake, OK?

we can elect religious folks but they are BOUND by the constitution not to use religion to give preferential treatment or bias in any way.
He clearly said that if you do not accept Jesus, you are not his brother. If that is true, he cannot effectively govern.

So you can effectively govern only if your constituents are your brothers?

I think unions refer to themselves as a "brotherhood"...and commmunism is a defacto religeon....hmmmmm

I guess he can be just as fair as the Arian Nation. :smash:

So you can effectively govern only if your constituents are your brothers?

imho, you can only effectivley govern if you view all people - race, religion, creed as equal. Yes, I believe that and believe our founding fathers believed it to.

As a conservative, I want the government out of my life. If I want to have witch orgies in my basement with fellow practitioners, its my business. As a private business owner, I should be allowed to hire only witches if thats what I want.
But for a public official, I think its different. He/She should not express preferential treatment for anyone. I can see your and scotts point that this took place in a church and he was addressing fellow Christians and I think that adds some context to his statment. But its a slippery slope.

imho, you can only effectivley govern if you view all people - race, religion, creed as equal. Yes, I believe that and believe our founding fathers believed it to.

As a conservative, I want the government out of my life. If I want to have witch orgies in my basement with fellow practitioners, its my business. As a private business owner, I should be allowed to hire only witches if thats what I want.
But for a public official, I think its different. He/She should not express preferential treatment for anyone. I can see your and scotts point that this took place in a church and he was addressing fellow Christians and I think that adds some context to his statment. But its a slippery slope.

I think you are working too hard at this...Church Congregations, various clubs and affiliations refer to their members as "brothers and sisters" on regular basis, you have something in common making you a part of that organization, doesn't mean you look down or treat others outside the club differently although it does happen in some circumstances I'm sure, Churuch Congregations generally preach that you treat those outside the congregation better and with compassion....

you were ready to convict this guy with little more than a sound bite

you were ready to convict this guy with little more than a sound bite

yes and I have been that way with Obama, Biden, Pelosi and Clinton. I believe firmly in a shoot first ask questions later approach

yes and I have been that way with Obama, Biden, Pelosi and Clinton. I believe firmly in a shoot first ask questions later approach

atta boy...consistency in everything! :)

we can elect religious folks but they are BOUND by the constitution not to use religion to give preferential treatment or bias in any way.
He clearly said that if you do not accept Jesus, you are not his brother. If that is true, he cannot effectively govern.

"He clearly said that if you do not accept Jesus, you are not his brother. If that is true, he cannot effectively govern"

I think that you can govern fairly to people who are your brothers and to people who aren't your brothers.

If we can overlook the racist, hateful bile that Obama listened to for 20 years, this is nothin'. Let's see how he actually governs.

if an elected Muslim said, at his place of worship, you here, are my brothers and sisters(in Allah) and if you are here in this Holy place with me, praise be to Allah, and you have not accepted him as your saviour, praise be his name, then you are not my brother or sister in Allah, but I would like for you to be my brother and sister, praise be his name....

that would upset people...yikes?

let me know when they're about to burn a witch at the stake, OK?

Considering how people got fired up about a congressmen being sworn in on a Koran or a Mosque being built near Ground Zero....I'm pretty sure that if an Elected Muslim official excluded Christians in this country....I'm pretty sure somebody would get there panties in a bunch

"If the Holy Spirit lives in you that makes you my brothers and sisters. Anyone who has not accepted Jesus, I want to be your brothers and sisters, too," Bentley said.

After his speech, Bentley said he did not mean to insult anyone.

Responding to questions about it, Bentley's office released a statement Tuesday saying he believes "he is the governor of all of Alabama."

"The governor clearly stated that he will be the governor of all Alabamians. Democrat, Republican and Independent, young, old, black and white, rich and poor. As stated in his (inaugural) address, Gov. Bentley believes his job is to make everyone's lives better," the statement said


he's just a "typical white person"

Considering how people got fired up about a congressmen being sworn in on a Koran or a Mosque being built near Ground Zero....I'm pretty sure that if an Elected Muslim official excluded Christians in this country....I'm pretty sure somebody would get there panties in a bunch

I would absolutely agree with you that if Bentley said he wanted to exclude non-Christians in this country it SHOULD get RIJIMMY's panties in a bunch. But, as Spence might say, not sure that's what Bentley said.

imho, you can only effectivley govern if you view all people - race, religion, creed as equal. Yes, I believe that and believe our founding fathers believed it to.

I agree with what I think you're intending to say here. I think we both agree with the founders that we are all equal before the law. But I don't think they believed that we are equal in every other way. Even on the face of it, that is not true--certainly cannot be true in your religious belief. If you view your religion as equal to all other religions, or all other religions as equal to yours, and, even further, you see all atheism and agnosticism as equal to your religion, that's a nice egalitarian attitude, but it eliminates any reason to have your religion.

As a conservative, I want the government out of my life. If I want to have witch orgies in my basement with fellow practitioners, its my business. As a private business owner, I should be allowed to hire only witches if thats what I want.

Again, I mostly agree with your sentiments, but go easy on wanting government out or your life. Not only ain't that gonna happen, but we sometimes get so sick of big brother intruding that we forget it's our duty to kick him out of where he doesn't belong. The Lone Ranger ain't gonna do it for us. Unfortunately for our peace of mind we must be more, not less, involved with government. I think the founders wanted that.

But for a public official, I think its different. He/She should not express preferential treatment for anyone. I can see your and scotts point that this took place in a church and he was addressing fellow Christians and I think that adds some context to his statment. But its a slippery slope.

I don't think Bentley was expressing preferential treatment, rather he was expressing personal religious attitude. I saw no expressed nor implied intent to treat those outside of his religious community with politically preferential treatment. If some wish to take his statement as a threat, I can see how they could--all statements of personal preference or belief can be seen as a threat to those of differing persuasion, even if no threat was meant. It could, as you say, be a slippery slope--even in a direction other than you imply. If we are cowed into not making overt statements of belief for fear of offending or threatening others, freedom of speech may become a dead letter. Again, I understand that in a public forum, his statement would be inappropriate, but in a private congregational setting, it was an expression of brotherhood with co-religionists.

I don't think Bentley was expressing preferential treatment, rather he was expressing personal religious attitude. I saw no expressed nor implied intent to treat those outside of his religious community with politically preferential treatment. If some wish to take his statement as a threat, I can see how they could--all statements of personal preference or belief can be seen as a threat to those of differing persuasion, even if no threat was meant. It could, as you say, be a slippery slope--even in a direction other than you imply. If we are cowed into not making overt statements of belief for fear of offending or threatening others, freedom of speech may become a dead letter. Again, I understand that in a public forum, his statement would be inappropriate, but in a private congregational setting, it was an expression of brotherhood with co-religionists.

For me the issue is that he said it, and whether intended or not, it became public news. His non-Christian constituents may perceive that they may not be treated the same as the "brothers and sisters" that are Christian. Doesn't matter if it was said in church or on the town square. Everything said in front of more than a handful of people, especially strangers, is going to become public if there's anything remotely controversial.

Remember, perception is reality.

is this him??

YouTube - Does This Excite You? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-EYqSEFOSs)

I get yelled at every time for this but....

"Itz dem dere bass-ackwards Southern folk."

The Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi area is probably the dumbest region in the country.


From the 2000 Census data
Percent of people with a High School Diploma by state:
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg2/01/177302301.gif

Percent of people with a College Degree by state:
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg2/10/176623310.gif

JD--since the maps have no margin notes, can't tell what the colors mean. But, whatever the dark green to light green to yellow States mean, there seems to be little to marginal correlation between the two maps. So, I assume either that getting a high school diploma doesn't mean going on to college, or that those who get college degrees move to other States--perhaps for better economic opportunities. Could be a lot of bass-ackwards Southern folk who got college degrees moved to the smart-asswards States and skewed the map colors.

is this him??

YouTube - Does This Excite You? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-EYqSEFOSs)

Alright, I know I shouldn't click on videos you post, but my curiosity got the best of me. That one is strange, but explain to me why the video below is listed as the top "suggestion" video when you go on Youtube and watch the video you posted?
YouTube - Daft Bodies - Harder Better Faster Stronger (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl6RJyZdBSU&feature=fvw)

For me the issue is that he said it, and whether intended or not, it became public news.

For me it is not an issue. I am not of his brand of religion, nor do I wish to constrain how he expresses it, so long as his pursuit of happiness doesn't deny me mine.

His non-Christian constituents may perceive that they may not be treated the same as the "brothers and sisters" that are Christian.

He was schmoozing his base. Politicians are always in campaign mode. Like any "good" politician, I assume he'll say something different when he addresses a non-Christian audience. Or, he might actually be a true believer and will always speak this way. Then, of course, he should immediately be thrown out of office. Anyone who is dumb enough to speak the truth in politics, cannot be trusted to govern. And we know how those Christians are out to trample our freedoms.

Doesn't matter if it was said in church or on the town square. Everything said in front of more than a handful of people, especially strangers, is going to become public if there's anything remotely controversial.

Every politician must make statements of political intent to get elected. One man's political intent is a threat to another man's opposite political desire. The opposition will always twist those statements into negative pretzels. All statements, in politics, are controversial, positive or negative. It's the risk of political speech. I prefer the pol who speaks his intentions truly and freely to the smoothy who tells you what you want to hear. As for Bentley, his constituents have his term in office to determine how he treats non-Christians. Then they can vote. But to demand that he immediately be thrown out of office becuase he told his religious bretheren that they were his brothers and sisters, and that those that didn't believe in Christ were not, but that he would like to be their brother--this is a more controversial and dangerous demand than what Bentley said.

Remember, perception is reality.

Only for those whose perception is clear and not fogged over by rhetorical nonsense. For the rest, reality is more like an apparition

Only for those whose perception is clear and not fogged over by rhetorical nonsense. For the rest, reality is more like an apparition

You sound a lot like Spence.:rotf2::rotf2:

Seriously, this is a pretty big deal because the media made it one. Front page MSN stuff. You know as well as anyone that people are going to read the headlines and pass judgement based on what they read. Doesn't make it right, but it's how people are. You may use critical thinking (now I'm using Spencisms) when looking at something like this and dismiss it as nothing more than a politician targeting a specific group to get their vote. Most people don't put as much thought into things, especially all those dumbass rednecks down in the buttcrack of America (now I'm using JohnnyDisms).

I thought hypocrisy was reserved for the libs but you guys have proven me wrong.
If that was a muslim that said it, you'd be freakin out.

I thought hypocrisy was reserved for the libs but you guys have proven me wrong.
If that was a muslim that said it, you'd be freakin out.

I just went back and re-read one of the articles about this. This guy said that those who belive in Jesus are his brothers and sisters. He added that wants those who don't believe in Jseus to become his brothers and sisters. Now I don't think he really wants everyone to convert to Christianity, but it sure sounds that way. He really stepped in the dog poop.

You sound a lot like Spence.:rotf2::rotf2:

Thanks. But I can't even hope to achieve the Spencerian mythos of THE CENTER. I have the fundamental flaw of attaching to a specific point in space and time. The CENTER eludes me as it constantly shifts leftward into the nirvana of political perfection. :)

Seriously, this is a pretty big deal because the media made it one. Front page MSN stuff. You know as well as anyone that people are going to read the headlines and pass judgement based on what they read. Doesn't make it right, but it's how people are. You may use critical thinking (now I'm using Spencisms) when looking at something like this and dismiss it as nothing more than a politician targeting a specific group to get their vote. Most people don't put as much thought into things, especially all those dumbass rednecks down in the buttcrack of America (now I'm using JohnnyDisms).

That's true. Probably why those smartass bluenecks in the egghead center of America keep voting for the Barney Franks, and Kerrys, etc. But, since the regions have their peculiarities, what MSN thinks is a big deal might not impress the buttcrackers, and what Bentley says to them is, in its way, comparable to what Franks says to the Eastern airheads, and Bentley may shock the MSNers and get re-elected. Of course, the MSNers would prefer Jimmy's demand that he immediately be thrown out of office.

That's true. Probably why those smartass bluenecks in the egghead center of America keep voting for the Barney Franks, and Kerrys, etc. But, since the regions have their peculiarities, what MSN thinks is a big deal might not impress the buttcrackers, and what Bentley says to them is, in its way, comparable to what Franks says to the Eastern airheads, and Bentley may shock the MSNers and get re-elected. Of course, the MSNers would prefer Jimmy's demand that he immediately be thrown out of office.

yup, me and the MSNers see eye to eye.

uhhhh.......ok

BTW - read an article last week on Eric Holder. there was some crime against a black kid, maybe in georgia and holder dropped everything to go down there. His office stated something like " Mr Holder, as black man, thought it was important for him to be there" .
My immediate thought? He should be thrown out. he is making decisions based on race. He is showing preferential treatment to a case based on race, illegal.

yup, me and the MSNers see eye to eye.

uhhhh.......ok

BTW - read an article last week on Eric Holder. there was some crime against a black kid, maybe in georgia and holder dropped everything to go down there. His office stated something like " Mr Holder, as black man, thought it was important for him to be there" .
My immediate thought? He should be thrown out. he is making decisions based on race. He is showing preferential treatment to a case based on race, illegal.

The difference between Holder and Bentley, at this point, is that Holder is politically ACTING preferentially. Until Bentley does, there is no comparison here.

The difference between Holder and Bentley, at this point, is that Holder is politically ACTING preferentially. Until Bentley does, there is no comparison here.

that is true.

Connecticut and Massachusetts have a higher percentage of degrees. Perhaps it is true that public servants bring wealth in those states! LOL Maybe that's why they deserve so much higher pay...or maybe they are brothers and sisters,,,

Connecticut and Massachusetts have a higher percentage of degrees. Perhaps it is true that public servants bring wealth in those states! LOL Maybe that's why they deserve so much higher pay...or maybe they are brothers and sisters,,,
Evidence that overpaid public servants "bring" wealth to an area? You know, as opposed to exploiting that wealth by leveraging a stranglehold on services through their contracts and bloated Union demands.

Evidence that overpaid public servants "bring" wealth to an area? You know, as opposed to exploiting that wealth by leveraging a stranglehold on services through their contracts and bloated Union demands.

JD speaks the way it is. I've lost a few contracts this year this at the DoD level. Influence as a 'paid' consultant.