Sanders: Scripture calls for renewed focus on justice in US

[TexasTowelie]

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders says Scripture calls for a renewed focus on justice as Democrats campaign to replace President Donald Trump.

The Vermont senator also tells a church congregation in Columbia, South Carolina, that the United States needs “a nation and government that works for all of us, not just wealthy campaign contributors.”

Black support is crucial for Democrats trying to win in a state that holds the South’s first primary on the 2020 election calendar and has a heavily black Democratic electorate.

Like some of his fellow presidential contenders, Sanders has rolled out endorsements from a number of black state lawmakers.

Read more: https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/article/Sanders-Scriptures-call-for-renewed-focus-on-14873699.php

[The Valley Below]

1. "Scripture?"

[comradebillyboy]

2. Sounds a lot like pandering from Bernie the atheist.

Which scripture is Bernie speaking of? One can find a Bible passage to support almost any point of view. I'd guess Bernie's grasp of scripture is almost as good as Trump's.

[TwilightZone]

4. He has disavowed being an atheist.

Possibly because it would likely be political suicide in a national election.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/03/athiesm-us-politics-2020-election-religious-beliefs

[ehrnst]

7. Indeed, there's that. Personally it doesn't matter to me the religious beliefs of pols.

Honesty about it is far more important.

Pandering is the opposite of that.

[LiberalLovinLug]

5. Kinda like how The Bible is Hillary's favorite book of all time

You think Democratic candidates should ignore the black churches? Or any church?

[ehrnst]

6. False Dilemma and a False Equivalence

Last edited Sun Dec 1, 2019, 05:55 PM - Edit history (1)

A false dilemma is a type of informal fallacy in which something is falsely claimed to be an "either/or" situation, when in fact there is at least one additional option.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

One can go to black churches and still not pretend that one is a fan of Christian scripture, when one is avowedly not a Christian.

Also, HRC said that the Bible was the book that had the biggest influence on who she is, not that it was "her favorite book of all time." Also, she didn't say this on a campaign stop.

Clinton opened up about her favorite books and authors, name-dropping famous literary names like John Grisham, Toni Morrison and Walter Isaacson.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/books/review/hillary-rodham-clinton-by-the-book.html?ref=review&_r=1

But accurately representing what she said and in what setting doesn't present an opportunity to get a derisive little shiv in on HRC, and doesn't prop up a false equivalence, does it?

False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which two completely opposing arguments appear to be logically equivalent when in fact they are not. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

[LiberalLovinLug]

8. Oh come on. Politicians from all stripes, Trump being the most bizarre example, speak to churches

And even Trump attempts to quote scripture.

https://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/01/18/donald-trump-quotes-scripture-sort-of-at-liberty-university-speech/



Obama quoting scripture, and like Sanders, he got it wrong too

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/10/obama-quotes-nonexistent-bible-verse-during-speech/



Hillary quoting scripture

https://www.ajc.com/news/national/hillary-clinton-quotes-scripture-her-concession-speech/frDouiz2gDdgQlOkVZon3I/


And Sanders bristles at being labelled an atheist. He prefers the term "non-religious". Which if many other Democrats and a few Republicans too, were honest, they'd say the same thing. But why should ones non-belief preclude them from speaking to, or even quoting scripture to, those that do adhere? It is a sign of respect. He's quoting passages that they believe in. Now if he'd have quoted scripture at an atheist convention, THAT would be rude.

[ehrnst]

14. Yep, still a false equivalence and a false dilemma.

Facts are facts, and facts are important.

Speaking of "Oh come on" moments... applying different standards for particular politicians when it comes to "pandering" doesn't add to one's credibility on a topic.

And no, HRC didn't do anything close to what Trump did concerning pandering to evangelicals. She was raised as a social justice Methodist, for pete's sake.

[George II]

10. Hillary Clinton was raised as a Methodist and has been one all her life....

But what does Hillary Clinton have to do with Sanders lecturing Methodists about Christian Scripture?

[LiberalLovinLug]

11. A bigger question:

What does a candidate quoting scripture to a black church have anything to do with anything? At least as far as this being some terrible faux pas in a candidate that wants to speak to every group. Should candidates just ignore important voting blocks in fear that some annonymous poster on a message board will try and embarrass or "expose" them?

it goes on the same pile as; criticizing a protester for using a fossil fuelled bus to get to the climate change protest.
ie...our world is set up, for almost a century now, and structured as a gas powered transportation system, and if we must still use it in order to help make changes to eventually make it obsolete, then that is just how it goes, for now.

If the world, or more precisely the USA, is set up, structured, and many folks conditioned to see the world through the scriptures, then using their language to speak to them, even if you don't deep down share their faith, is what a good politician does.

[George II]

12. I agree - I actually thought you were supporting him being there. I think it's a blunder....

....for a non-Christian to go to a Methodist Church worship service and lecture them about the New Testament.

He could very easily have addressed them at a meeting called for that purpose or at a scheduled event like a pot luck dinner, picnic, etc.

Sorry, I guess I misunderstood you.

[LiberalLovinLug]

13. No such luck George

We rarely see things the same way. And this is no exception.

My point was.......so what? (I support his right to speak to any group or not to, its a free country) Its also his job as a politician.

That many adhere to a religious outlook, and see the world though that lens. As the automobile, the world is structured to pander to them. It makes sense to use the same language,, even quoting the scriptures, to show you are not bigoted against them just because they believe something you do not.

Does one have to be a die hard evangelical Christian to dare to quote passages from the Bible? Can one not find inspiration in historical literature, even though one may not share all the authors philosophies? And is not one allowed to speak them out loud?

I don't get what the fuss is all about. Besides, its not like Sanders has not spoken with other audiences he had disagreements with, like a Fox News town hall. Which Buttigieg did as well. Its about reaching the largest audience.

My example above of even Obama botching an attempt at quoting scripture. "Obama quotes nonexistent Bible verse during speech about immigration" Obviously he was not a hard line die in the wool true believer either based on that blunder showing his lack of Biblical knowledge. But the last thing I'd do is go on a message board and criticize Obama for daring to use the Bible to make a point, considering many Americans see the world through that lens. I'm also a non-religious person. But I totally understand why any American politician would not hesitate to accept invitations to religious places and even honor them with using their own scriptures to make a point.

[ehrnst]

15. I find that standards applied to some politicians are not applied to others.

For instance, misrepresenting that Hillary said "the bible is my most favorite book ever" is considered an acceptable way to portray her as "pandering," while when other politicians get a pass for quoting scripture when they have stated they are "non-religious" because "simply politics, and "reaching the largest audience."

[LiberalLovinLug]

16. I was wrong in misquoting Hillary

I should have researched that more. The exact quote was:

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/books/review/hillary-rodham-clinton-by-the-book.html

If you had to name one book that made you who you are today, what would it be?

At the risk of appearing predictable, the Bible was and remains the biggest influence on my thinking. I was raised reading it, memorizing passages from it and being guided by it. I still find it a source of wisdom, comfort and encouragement.

She was asked "which book made her who she is". Rather than which is her favourite book. My mistake. But it seems like splitting hairs. In fact you could argue that the book that is the "biggest influence on (her) thinking" and "made her who she is today" played an even bigger role than a "favourite" book.

And I never said I had any problem with her "pandering" to the religious segment. (even though I don't share their "faith" ) I've never criticized any Democrat for doing that. That is in fact my point. Democrats should not have to shy away from speaking to any audience to reach more voters, whether its Fox News or the Black Church. I don't even know why I waded into this thread. I'm sure, thankfully, this story will disappear into the void along with every other dumb inconsequential event in the primaries by tomorrow. Its a non-story.

[ehrnst]

18. Your characterization of her quote made it clear you thought she was pandering...

in order to make Sanders' statements in a church appear much less so by comparison. Pointing that out is not "splitting hairs." This is about what a politician on the campaign trail said in a church.

Democrats should not have to shy away from speaking to any audience to reach more voters, whether its Fox News or the Black Church.

Not one in this thread said or implied that they should. That's attacking a Straw man.

Is that clearer?

[NurseJackie]

17. I remember that one time where the members of an historically black church ignored Bernie...

I remember that one time where the members of an historically black church ignored Bernie... it was when he had a rally in North Charleston, SC. BS can't even get AA and POC to attend a rally at an historically BLACK church in a MAJORITY BLACK neighborhood, within a MAJORITY BLACK city.

His rally (although well-attended) had so LITTLE ethnic diversity that it looked like he could have been somewhere Vermont. In fact, based on the statistics, the demographics at that rally was even whiter than Vermont.

It's obvious that the AA and POC community are rejecting BS and the BS campaign. They did then, and they still do NOW. He can't make headway. He hasn't been able to refine and tune his message.

BS just doesn't connect with that community. The BS message just isn't resonating.

All I'm saying is, with such a humiliating rejection by the AA and POC communities, and without their vote, BS doesn't stand a chance. I can understand that he wants to "make an effort", but at this late date, if the AA and POC communities haven't embraced the BS message or the BS campaign, I think it's a safe bet that they never will. All polls indicate that they have already made up their mind.

[Skidmore]

3. What an odd statement.

Don't recall any place in "scripture" calling for a campaign talking point as a prescription for what ails us. Pandering doesn't fix his problems.

[Blue_true]

19. "It is will be easier to thread a rich man through the head of a needle than to get him into

the kingdom of heaven", something like that. Except the people who were whacked on during donkey riding days were ten dollarnaires and 20 dollarnaires (or shekels or polished stones, or whatever). Inflation has brought it all to billionaires and one day it will be trillionaires.

[Quackers]

9. Umm...

[Blue_true]

20. To have been a fly on the wall in that church when he made that analogy.

I wonder whether Killer Mike was with him.