Posted on 04/16/2007 6:28:04 AM PDT by Nextrush
Dear Oprah:
After Don Imus's comments and his apology, you're promoting a discussion that you say "needs to happen" on your show today.
Fair enough.
But what exactly is the "discussion." I've heard many describe the comments of Imus last week as "racist, sexist" and "approaching homophobic."
Those are pretty charged words in and of themselves.
But before we go any further we need to define ourselves.
Oprah, you were a mystery to me when I watched the newscasts you presented on WJZ-TV Baltimore in the 1970's. The promos for you even said: "What is an Oprah?"
I think it's taken almost 30 years to figure out who you are. The definition came in your interview with Bill O'Reilly when you used the term "secular progressive" to describe yourself.
To me "secular" implies non-religious, athiest or maybe agnostic. "Progressive" implies far left, following Karl Marx, a way to avoid the unpopular-discredited terms like "Communist" or "Socialist."
I define myself as a conservative, libertarian and a follower of Jesus Christ (Christian). I'm in favor of rights like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as written by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence. I'm dead serious about protecting human life and freedom of speech.
I can handle "offensive language" but God forbid we would turn around and ban "religious speech" anywhere and especially in public places like our schools.
What do you think we need to do as a "secular progressive" about this Imus thing?
As one who is "progressive" (following Karl Marx) I get the feeling you would like these bad words to be used to arouse people to anger and to want to change society like Marx espoused.
Heck, we even have the "N" word and I don't mean "nappy" being used in skits at one local school to raise "consciousness" about "diversity." It sure made a lot of students angry.
And what's all the anger supposed to lead to. It appears to be violence in some cases. I get the feeling that some of your fellow "progressives" with the title "Reverend" in front of their names want to re-create the 1960's. I've heard stories about them getting death threats or bomb threats.
Or maybe all the anger is supposed to lead to "hate crime" laws we see springing up everywhere making certain words a crime?
Is this really the direction we need to go?
Back to Imus. I don't believe in using this kind of profanity to describe a girls sports team. But what if we start telling other people they can't?
He was absolutely right to apologize to them, because they took the offense.
Was it only yesterday we watched Eddie Murphy with his "Velvet Jones School of Technology" commercials on "Saturday Night Live." Remember that booklet he advertised: "I Wanna Be A Ho."
Oh, well getting back to the issue here. People get put down all the time, demeaned and humiliated.
All this hoopla about "racism, sexism and homophobia" ignores the facts that there are plenty of other put downs out there, expecially about people like myself.
Several years ago Senator Edward M. Kennedy spoke of conservative, Christian people nominated by President Bush to federal court positions as "neanderthal."
That means an inferior race in my book. So conservative, Christian people are part of an inferior race. Is that what you think, Oprah?
Once I sat in the peanut gallery of a political meeting while a Christian, conservative female candidate spoke. I overheard one guy saying to another: "She's one of them holy rollers. Not bad looking."
But what am I demanding because my people have been wronged with words. Unlike "secular progressives", I don't want "hate crime" laws to control what people say about other people.
Are "racism" "sexism" etc. the real problems considering that all people get put down by others in one way or another.
Or is the problem in our hearts that are and should be beyond the reach of government.
I know that conservatives who opposed the Civil Rights movement supported the notion of "changing hearts" as opposed to "changing laws" but I always believed in two things.
One, that God is soverign and works all together for good, the Civil Rights movement and all its conflict alongside the changing of human hearts that provided the real progress for race in America.
Two, that dealing with these hatreds and the words that follow them is a moral thing, a heart thing.
Jackie Robinson was brought into Major League Baseball in 1947 when a man with a conscience, Branch Rickey (he helped to start the Fellowship of Christian Athletes), did the right thing. There were no "hate crimes" or Civil Rights laws and Robinson made it without them.
I don't know if you understand but from my perspective secular forces have always dominated society and those things you often think are relgious are simply humanistic and legalistic rules disguised as "religious" ones.
How do you feel about "religion" Oprah? Have people wronged you who were "religious?" Honestly Oprah the people who have hurt me the most were "religious" ones.
You know, some people who are "religious" and or call themselves "Christians" add rules to the basic ones (The Ten Commandments).
The first one about loving God and loving your neighbor as yourself would certainly deal with this hating of others.
Jesus himself said in the Sermon on the Mount that the commandment says not to kill, but Jesus went on to say that we should understand that means that you shouldn't be angry with another person without a cause.
I don't know why people have to have other rules about not being a racist, not smoking or eating fatty foods.
I just wish we would get serious about the first Ten Commandments, but that's probably not where you're at right now.
However, consider the idea that the Imus thing is about what's in our hearts, not about the need to create new rules about what people can or can't say.
Thank You, Nextrush
When will Oprah have the Duke Lacrosse team on her show?
Black leaders are jumping on the opportunity to get back on the front page with their hyped “racism in America” rants...they have been displaced by Hispanics/Illlegals on the news, and they needed something to re-stoke their racist fires.
I didn’t want this post to get too long, so I cut that part out.
They certainly were wronged, falsely accused and called terrible things.
The Duke lacrosse players would make good guests for Oprah’s continuation of this “dicussion.”
Great post!
I haven’t watched Oprah in many, many years. I think her show - and those like hers - are detrimental to families across the country.
White heterosexual males cannot be “victims”, they are what is wrong with society.
I agree with you. In fact I tend not to watch any daytime shows except the news once in awhile during the day. Instead I find myself on FR more often then not during the day until my daughter gets home from school.
I've never seen her TV show and won't watch it today, either.
My disinterest in her and her 'opinions' has nothing to do with liking or not liking her as a human being; I'm sure she is a "nice" well-meaning person.
I just can't be bothered taking up valuable time watching or listening to vacuous populists whose adoring audience is mostly made up of other relativistic, politically/religiously unsophisticated mentalities.
Of course each is entitled to his opinion, but who, other than those described by Lenin as 'useful idiots', would assign any weight at all to effluvium? What else would one call the opinions that spring from the minds of shallow, emotionally immature people?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.