Pat Robertson claims Haiti is cursed; earthquake caused by Haiti's pact with the devil.

[SuperFemme]

Originally Posted by Selenay

(I'm not sure if this is rhetorical or not, so I'll answer as though it is not )

According to the bible (proverbs 26:2b), "An undeserved curse does not come to rest." Likewise, Micah 5:12 says that God will, "destroy your witchcraft and you will no longer cast spells." I'm assuming "you" is those dang French, who cursed the Haitians.


Also, if we're talking specifically about Christians who follow the new testament, not those who follow solely the bible, 1 John 4:4 specifies that Children from God don't have to worry, because, "The one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world," meaning that Christ is greater than Satan, so curses are worthless.

It wasn't rhetorical. Thank you Selly for answering.

I am most concerned not with just this (and many others) remark from Roberston, I am concerned that shows like "Meet the Press" regularly have Robertson and other 700 Club correspondents on as pundits. They are not political figures, have no bearing on the inner workings of the USA or other nations. Yet, they are on show after show spouting this rhetoric as though they have a role in things. As though it was fact.

Lots of people are *sheeple* and believe everything on television. That impact is what worries me and scares me in my heart of hearts.

[always2late]

Originally Posted by SuperFemme

It wasn't rhetorical. Thank you Selly for answering.

I am most concerned not with just this (and many others) remark from Roberston, I am concerned that shows like "Meet the Press" regularly have Robertson and other 700 Club correspondents on as pundits. They are not political figures, have no bearing on the inner workings of the USA or other nations. Yet, they are on show after show spouting this rhetoric as though they have a role in things. As though it was fact.

Lots of people are *sheeple* and believe everything on television. That impact is what worries me and scares me in my heart of hearts.

Its a mistake to believe that the "Pat Robertsons" of the world have no bearing on the inner workings of the US. The man has half a billion dollars coming in yearly for his "mission". Politics (and politicians) are controlled by money and Pat Robertson is heavily invested in politics (not just in the US, he is also heavily invested overseas).

Its a mistake to think that Pat is just a moronic old fool (although he is). That fool and others of his ilk control votes in our Congress and Senate. THAT is what is really terrifying about this.

[labete]

Originally Posted by always2late

Its a mistake to believe that the "Pat Robertsons" of the world have no bearing on the inner workings of the US. The man has half a billion dollars coming in yearly for his "mission". Politics (and politicians) are controlled by money and Pat Robertson is heavily invested in politics (not just in the US, he is also heavily invested overseas).

Its a mistake to think that Pat is just a moronic old fool (although he is). That fool and others of his ilk control votes in our Congress and Senate. THAT is what is really terrifying about this.

Robertson is a man of frightening undue influence, and his ilk are highly influential in U.S. politics. Take a look at Wikipedia on "The Fellowship" aka "The Family" (Google for lots more info, or watch Rachel Maddow give you an overview.)

The United States isn't as politically conservative, especially on social issues, as it is because of the "Moral Majority" or high levels of voter backlash against boogeymen. There is some of that, but it's not where the power is. It is because there are people with loads of power and money who are very invested in ensuring that conservatism, and who network, recruit, support in all kinds of ways, people to do the work to make that happen. Some of the faces change, but the mission statement remains the same. It's like the "good ol' boy network," but specifically for socially conservative Christianist politicians and political workers (lobbyists, Congressional and White House staffers, etc.).

Some of them are cynics looking for a good hook into power, and others are true believers in the cause, but either way the net result is the perpetuation of ultra-conservative mores, especially in circles of influence.

[suebee]

Originally Posted by labete

Robertson is a man of frightening undue influence, and his ilk are highly influential in U.S. politics. Take a look at Wikipedia on "The Fellowship" aka "The Family" (Google for lots more info, or watch Rachel Maddow give you an overview.)

The United States isn't as politically conservative, especially on social issues, as it is because of the "Moral Majority" or high levels of voter backlash against boogeymen. There is some of that, but it's not where the power is. It is because there are people with loads of power and money who are very invested in ensuring that conservatism, and who network, recruit, support in all kinds of ways, people to do the work to make that happen. Some of the faces change, but the mission statement remains the same. It's like the "good ol' boy network," but specifically for socially conservative Christianist politicians and political workers (lobbyists, Congressional and White House staffers, etc.).

Some of them are cynics looking for a good hook into power, and others are true believers in the cause, but either way the net result is the perpetuation of ultra-conservative mores, especially in circles of influence.

I agree with you Labete, but this particular incident went further than conservatism - it's pretty clear racism.

[labete]

Originally Posted by cybersuebee

I agree with you Labete, but this particular incident went further than conservatism - it's pretty clear racism.

I understand, but from where I sit, they are inextricably linked. Conservatism is about preserving a way of life based on the kyrarchy; racism is an integral part of that.

Now, many people may call themselves conservative or hold conservative positions without consciously supporting racism, without believing in the most base credo of racism (that there are natural or divinely-given differences among races which result in racial superiority and inferiority), but when their choices and actions support a kyriarchy that reifies positions of privelege linked to race, class, ethnicity, sex, gender, religion, national origin, etc., the end result is one of reaffirming those racist beliefs and their power in our culture.

[Jess]

Originally Posted by labete

I understand, but from where I sit, they are inextricably linked. Conservatism is about preserving a way of life based on the kyrarchy; racism is an integral part of that.

Now, many people may call themselves conservative or hold conservative positions without consciously supporting racism, without believing in the most base credo of racism (that there are natural or divinely-given differences among races which result in racial superiority and inferiority), but when their choices and actions support a kyriarchy that reifies positions of privelege linked to race, class, ethnicity, sex, gender, religion, national origin, etc., the end result is one of reaffirming those racist beliefs and their power in our culture.

Hope not to derail, but what is kyrachy/kyriarchy? I tried to look it up so I could read your post in context, but can't find a definition.

Much appreciated.

[labete]

Originally Posted by Jess

Hope not to derail, but what is kyrachy/kyriarchy? I tried to look it up so I could read your post in context, but can't find a definition.

Much appreciated.

Sorry, I typed too fast and misspelled at least once. It's kyriarchy.

Kyriarchy – a neologism coined by Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza and derived from the Greek words for “lord” or “master” (kyrios) and “to rule or dominate” (archein) which seeks to redefine the analytic category of patriarchy in terms of multiplicative intersecting structures of domination…Kyriarchy is best theorized as a complex pyramidal system of intersecting multiplicative social structures of superordination and subordination, of ruling and oppression.

Patriarchy – Literally means the rule of the father and is generally understood within feminist discourses in a dualistic sense as asserting the domination of all men over all women in equal terms. The theoretical adequacy of patriarchy has been challenged because, for instance, black men do not have control over white wo/men and some women (slave/mistresses) have power over subaltern women and men (slaves).

- Glossary, Wisdom Ways, Orbis Books New York 2001

Basically, it's a more complex model of power-over structures which acknowleges that while someone might have privilege (been misspelling that one all day!) in some areas, that same person may be lacking privilege in others. Under the standard "patriarchy keeps us down" rhetoric, it is understood that the people with most power in our culture (and yes, I'm being somewhat U.S.-centric, as it is what I know best) are white men. But what about white men who are blue collar workers? Or homeless? Or not able-bodied? Or transmen? Or gay? They may all still get privilege on the basis of race and gender, but privilege is not static and is relative and their resulting position in the kyriarchy may be significantly lower than, for example, a successful, able-bodied black male entrepeneur.

Does that help?

[SuperFemme]

Originally Posted by always2late

Its a mistake to believe that the "Pat Robertsons" of the world have no bearing on the inner workings of the US. The man has half a billion dollars coming in yearly for his "mission". Politics (and politicians) are controlled by money and Pat Robertson is heavily invested in politics (not just in the US, he is also heavily invested overseas).

Its a mistake to think that Pat is just a moronic old fool (although he is). That fool and others of his ilk control votes in our Congress and Senate. THAT is what is really terrifying about this.

Yeah. That was kind of my point.

I was being literal and logical in that he has WAY to much power for a moronic old fool.

[Tommi]

Originally Posted by SuperFemme

It wasn't rhetorical. Thank you Selly for answering.
I am most concerned not with just this (and many others) remark from Roberston, I am concerned that shows like "Meet the Press" regularly have Robertson and other 700 Club correspondents on as pundits. They are not political figures, have no bearing on the inner workings of the USA or other nations. Yet, they are on show after show spouting this rhetoric as though they have a role in things. As though it was fact.

Lots of people are *sheeple* and believe everything on television. That impact is what worries me and scares me in my heart of hearts.

Amen = so be it *,
as exclaimed by the many watching Robertson and cronies on TV.

I was cruising the Pacific Coast highway from San Diego along a beautiful stretch enjoying the view of the ocean** when I crashed..No.not really** the ocean, and heard a story about the voodoo curse being lifted by a group years ago. So I guess Pat R. didn't know God reversed the worse curse cause Pat doesn't listen to public radio . If we are what we eat, are we what we listen too also.? Thinking I will tune in to the Kids channel so I can be a super hero today.. Since the airwaves bring the truth, as does the written word to many, thought I would contribute to the knowledge base.. tells the truth and nothing but the truth so help me God. (doesn't say which God) So, here is the link and part of the story I heard...for those who like to read..--->http://redtory.wordpress.com/2010/01/13/haiti’s-“devil-pact”-explained/

Excerpt below:

So there… even if one actually subscribes to the “Devil Pact” legend, as Robertson appears to, the unholy contract was voided some years ago by Christian do-gooder


On 14 August 1997, God’s people in Haiti experienced a historic victory over Satan, a milestone in winning our country back for God. The reason lies in history. The slaves brought here from Africa have suffered incredibly for many years. On 14 August 1791, a slave leader by the name of Boukman called a secret meeting in a wood called Bois-Caiman near Cap Haitien, which was attended by a large number of slaves. They celebrated a satanic ceremony, sacrificing a pig and drinking its blood, swore to serve the Devil and dedicated Haiti to him. For 206 years, Bois-Caiman was a very holy place, a high place which could only be entered by witch doctors during Voodoo ceremonies. For 206 years, they have been meeting there every August 14 to sacrifice to Satan.

A number of Christian leaders, including Paul and Gerald Clerie of Vision: Haiti and Christian leaders among the large numbers of Haitians in the USA, Canada, France and other countries, called Christians to unite on 14 August 1997 to pray and fast that Haiti would return to God. In Haiti’s towns, villages and mountains, Christians came together to fast and pray, held victory marches in the streets and a large event in the capital from 6am to 10pm during the holy invasion.

Our church members started their march in front of the President’s palace and marched for 6 hours to the place where the satanic ceremony took place 206 years ago. We had informed the government and media of our intentions weeks before the event, and were told that the witch doctors would be there, as they were every year. When we arrived, they had hidden themselves, unable to directly confront the Christians. It was a significant spiritual battle to reach the tree under which the pig was sacrificed in the original ceremony. We formed a Jericho march, circling the magic tree seven times. On the seventh time around, God gave many people a vision of the Devil fleeing from the area. The Christians were overjoyed. We cancelled the satanic contract and broke the curse, before celebrating communion and dedicating the area as a place of prayer. We also declared 14 August to be a national prayer day, on which people should pray that Haiti will return to God.

On the same day, several witch doctors were saved during the events in the capital. Three days after our holy invasion, the witch doctors returned to Bois-Caiman to bring their sacrifices and call on the spirits. After days of effort, nothing happened, because we had commanded the spirits never to return and dedicated the area to Christ.

The witch doctors complained to the government and media. At first, the government also protested, speaking in a press release of ‘terrible damage to a Voodoo holy place in which no Christian had set foot for 206 years.’ By the grace of God, the government relented and respected our legal right as Haitians to gather at any place on Haiti, including Bois-Caiman, where they now allow all Christian groups to meet. The place is now very popular, and local Christians gather there daily for prayer and fasting. All Haitians now know that the country no longer has a pact with the Devil; the contract has been cancelled, the curse broken.

So there… even if one actually subscribes to the “Devil Pact” legend, as Robertson appears to, the unholy contract was voided some years ago by Christian do-gooder..." see link for full story.

There is hope. We have our own Planet...speaking the language of LOVE...