Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

The charges are fairly easy to verify, but in this day and age, we glorify and exalt all sorts of unsavory types. I do find it ironic that the race card is thrown out because the truth is brought out about a black icon.

I also find it ironic that as a nation, we celebrate the birth of two men: Jesus and MLK. (At least we have the date correct for MLK.)

Was he an important figure? Certainly, and the changes that he helped bring about are great. I wish more people of all races would heed his words of being the best you can be at whatever you do.

But, do we need to idolize a man of this sort? Do we need to worship this man and honor him with a holiday (holy day) in his honor?

 

If the charges are easy to verify, could someone do so for us please?

Does anyone idolise him? I doubt it.

Holiday = holy day and worship?
A bit of a stretch. That implies that we worship the fallen dead on Memorial Day, America on Independence Day, and veterans on Veterans Day, etc.

I have no problem with the MLK holiday. The changes he brought about are indeed great and it is those changes which are celebrated (not worshipped).

 

From the OP

"Many say" is gossip, Gods word takes a dim view on gossip. Even if it is true, in this great country of ours a person has the right to choose the polical party the wish to support. That is what makes our country great. Even if it is the Communist party.

So what, he can be called what he wishes. My real name is not DeeJay, I doubt yours is Seeker. Why is this important.

Do you have any proof of this. If not it is more gossip. Even if you do have proof this is the sin of a dead man who has been judged by God, if true. The only reasons I can think of to publicly call out a persons sins are 1. if they are running for office that would place them in leadership 2. if they were encourageing others to follow in their sin. I would condone privately speaking to someone to urge them to repent of sins, but he is dead.

"As a young boy" As a young boy I was a Mormon because all my friends were. Whats your point.

Is this a call you are alowed to make. Please enlighten us as to other historical figures that were not saved.

Documentation please. If true I sugest you do not follow his doctrine. Still this is no reason to publicly degrade and gossip about a dead man.

This describes a multitude of people. Ben Franklin was a Deist should we start a thread bashing him.

Are there copies of MLKs sermons I can read. Not his political speaches. The sermons he preached on Sunday in Church.

Again are we permited to judge anothers salvation.

Yet you do, this is one of the most hateful purposeless thread I have read since the bashing of Rosa Parks.

I do not think it is wise or purposeful to look back and judge for ourself if the dead were Christian or not. The Lord has already made that judgement, he does not need your help.

MLK holiday is not a religious holiday. It is not about a single individules doctrine or his political affiliation. It is a celebration of a struggle against injustice in this country. One of its main leaders was MLK and his name and face was attached to this struggle for the purpose of a holiday. When you attack MLK you send a message (intended or not) that you are attacking the civil rights strugle. If you want to deal with the sins a dead man commited then detach them and deal with them individualy with out bring the sinner into it. Remember we are all sinners.

I would encourage the moderators of this forum to look at this topic and the message it sends to lurkers. Ask, does this topic have a purpose that is worthy to be discussed here, and how will it edify the body of Christ.

 

I see its purpose to teach us that we don't take everything we read on a discussion board at face value. If it can teach us to do that it will serve a purpose.

Roger
C4K
Moderator

[ January 09, 2006, 03:25 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

Yes, but is it sending the wrong message about Baptists and the Body of Christ in general. I know people are watching. I found this foum by typing Baptist into google.

This just touches a nerve because several times when wittnessing I have had to spend a lot of time defending myself aginst charges of raceisem because I am Baptist. I can see where people get that idea.

 

And I have had to defend myself against charges of racism because I believe in equality of the races and detest quotas, and because I am opposed to loud, thumping stereos. Doesn't mean I'm racist, does it?

I don't care if King were as white as David Duke: The things he did without any public repentance of which I am aware should prevent him from being a public icon. Why not make a holiday for Elvis or Wilt Chamberlain? The Harlem Globetrotters and Muhammed Ali did a lot for racial equality. Don't forget Jackie Robinson and others.

Why single out this man who certainly did not live an exemplary lifestyle and put him on a pedestal?

BTW, what kind of "proof" would you like? There are plenty of links, with many more declaring "not true!" I also have books, but I'm not going to sit here and scan page after page in. Some of them state that he should still be looked up to in spite of his behavior because of what he accomplished. (Even the ones supporting him don't deny his bad behavior; at least the ones that are older and aren't written as revisionist history.)

 

Just some proof Hope, from a reputable source. If the proof is so obvious, perhaps you could point us un the right direction.

No one is saying Dr King was perfect. However, let us know which of the charges in the OP have a basis in fact and which are baseless.

Revisionist history goes both ways. Real history is based on documented facts. Could you present some of those please?

 

The womanizing and adultery are easy to verify, however, the "shocking" sex acts, unless repetitively referring to the womanizing and adultery are not.

The plagiarism for his thesis was not mentioned in the OP. (If I'm not mistaken, this was not revealed until the 80's.)

However, as far as his religious views go, I would have to actually study his work, and I'm not inclined to do so at this moment.

This information (what I've stated here, not the religious stuff) was in history class when I was in school. However, it has now been removed as it is politically incorrect.

Oh, King also plagiarized sermons, but I personally don't have a problem with that, if he found a sermon that was "perfect" as is. (As long as he doesn't try to take credit for it.)

Here's a link that reviews a book about King's plagiarism: King's Plagiarism

Here's a book written by one of King's closest friends and supporter that talks about King's promiscuity: And the Walls Came Tumbling Down

How about the staff at Stanford that are in charge of the King Papers Project: King Papers Project from Stanford

I can provide more, if you want.

 

This is like Westboro church, to bad you couldent be there to protest MLKs funeral.

There are 12 dead solders in a helicoptor crash they are geting alot of news. You got any dirt on them to share. One of them has to be a sinner.

I think I will refraine from posting on this thread any further as it is bothering me quite alot.

 

It's so strange that so many have come to the defense of someone so controversial as MLK saying "you shouldn't degrade a dead man" and "what's the point of this OP?" Where are these kind of posts when everyone is degrading Jack Hyles? I guess no one can throw the race card in there...

 

Some folks you are better off not to write about, because so many do not want to hear something different.
My son which is 35 now talked me into letting him go to the local HS one year and I did. We took him out of a Christian school. He wanted to play ball and see if he was as good as the local ball players.
He did well but 3/4 of the way through the season in history he was to write a report on JFK. He wrote a good report but it didn't make JFK look good. All was true but he got a 0 because the teach was very pro JFK. He also was kicked out of school for two weeks. I never send him back, put him back in Christian school.
On MLK I've read over the years many good thing as well as bad. But like JFK most people have their minds made up. Wish I could add to it but I haven't done any reading of him to speak off in ove 30 years or so.

 

I haven't seen much defence of the man here, just a documentation of charges.

All men are due that right and privilage.

 

Just a question here, Bob! You say your boy got "kicked out of school for two weeks."---was it because of the JFK report?

 

Yes!! At that time JFK was someone youd didn't write bad things about, I guess. I'm sure we could have gone to the school board and got it over turned but I didn't.
He wrote about the PT boad deal, and how JFK had his ear so near the grown to get the feeling of the people but didn't do much and how Harry Truman said JFK ear was so near the ground that it was full of grasshoppers. He was not as loved in office as he was after his death. He used newspaper clipping of the time of before and when he was in office and other writtings.

 

Agreed.

Karen

 

Yes!! At that time JFK was someone youd didn't write bad things about, I guess. I'm sure we could have gone to the school board and got it over turned but I didn't.
He wrote about the PT boad deal, and how JFK had his ear so near the grown to get the feeling of the people but didn't do much and how Harry Truman said JFK ear was so near the ground that it was full of grasshoppers. He was not as loved in office as he was after his death. He used newspaper clipping of the time of before and when he was in office and other writtings. </font>[/QUOTE]Makes you wonder exactly what was going on aboard that PT boat when it was met broadside by that Japanese Destroyer----I imagine a lot of "horseplay" maybe!!

I have not one shred of respect for JFK at all period!

 

It is my belief that the King holiday should never have come into being. While its creation was being debated in Congress, one member pointed out that it could never pass if they were to take a secret ballot. The bill passed not because of its fitness, but because of political fear.

But some of us are not afraid, even though the charge of "racism" can end a man's career more quickly than a charge of pederasty.

I myself don't have the time to write another essay documenting the problems with King. Many have been written by his sympathizers (excusing him, of course). But my summary would be that his self-avowed Marxism, his repeated hiring of Communists, and his obvious sympathy with the many Communist fronts he fellowshipped with, disqualify him as a great American. His prolific fornication with just about anything that produced friction and his apostate theology disqualify him as a "Rev." His plagiarism disqualifies him as a "Dr." His birth certificate disqualifies him as "Martin Luther."

Many disreputable, hateful people have publicized the documentation of King's record. And so have many reputable researchers whose work is available at the public library.

If he were not held up as an icon, I would be as bored with his life as with any other hypocritical apostate with zipper trouble--and there are plenty to choose from. But he is held up as a Christian and American icon; and we can see from the example of ancient Greece and Rome that a people will not rise above the morals of their icons.

The King holiday is a national disgrace and is a foundational pivot in the remaking of America from what the founders envisioned into another type of country.

 

When someone wants to make a holiday in their honor and they are calling themselves "reverend" and they have cheated and lied their way into that position along with other things, and people want to put them on a pedestal because of the great things they have done, then you can expect to see me express that they certainly don't deserve it.

 

Your excellent sources are obviously better than the FBI since after six years of investigation, they had no evidence of the above claims with the exception of having two alleged former CPUSA members in his advisory staff.

 

What is the point of all of this?

It's racism. Pure and simple.</font>[/QUOTE] Where do you get that?

Actually that website is questionable enough that I would require alot more documentation. It is however more or less acknowledged that he was an adulterer.

You are kidding right? JFK's sex life et al are roundly criticized... OTOH, he probably did more for real civil rights with the 1964 Civil Rights Act than the demagogues Seeker points to combined.

In fact, this Act seemed to be a well thought out, constitutional effort to secure equal rights under the law for blacks. The later things like Affirmative Action went beyond the constitutional limits for government. Two wrongs don't make a right.

So how does that make MLK untouchable?

Seems to me that Jefferson's name has been fairly well drug through the mud in recent years... including a film that documented his affair with Salley Henning.

One difference between MLK and these "white" guys though is that he has a holiday named for him... which I think was part of the point above. How have we enshrined him as a hero greater than say Washington, Lincoln, and, yes, JFK?

Really? Where did the OP say it was because he was black? Where did the OP say you shouldn't discuss similar flaws in white men?

I think we have too many federal holidays...

But to your point. A man should be deserving of the honor regardless of his color. If Washington, Madison, Jefferson, Lincoln, et al don't... then I hardly see how MLK does. Perhaps a "Civil Rights" day would be more appropriate and palatable.

You did seem to me to have overreacted... do you have some sort of stake in this issue?