They had set the date and printed and mailed out all the invitations, but the day before wedding bells were to ring for Charles and Te'Andrea Wilson, they say they got some bad news from the pastor.
"The church congregation had decided no black could be married at that church, and that if he went on to marry her, then they would vote him out the church," said Charles Wilson.
The Wilsons were trying to get married at the predominantly white First Baptist Church of Crystal Springs -- a church they attend regularly, but are not members of.
"He had people in the sanctuary that were pitching a fit about us being a black couple," said Te'Andrea Wilson. "I didn't like it at all, because I wasn't brought up to be racist. I was brought up to love and care for everybody."
Methinks this church needs to be brought to the attention of both the IRS and the denomination's organizing body.
So there's a few things going on here that Hedgie left out of the OP for some reason. Perhaps they didn't fit his spin.
- The Pastor said he was getting pressure from a "small minority" to not allow this wedding.
- The Pastor said that he said no to them because he didn't want to make his Church the site of a protest and did not want to have their wedding interrupted by Protestors
- The Pastor did marry them at a different church.
Those 3 facts actually add some much needed perspective to this story.
So really, the issue here is, should the Pastor have listened to the vocal minority in the interest of a wedding being a peaceful a day or should he have stood up for their right to be married at the wedding, protestors be damned?
So there's a few things going on here that Hedgie left out of the OP for some reason. Perhaps they didn't fit his spin.
- The Pastor said he was getting pressure from a "small minority" to not allow this wedding.
- The Pastor said that he said no to them because he didn't want to make his Church the site of a protest and did not want to have their wedding interrupted by Protestors
- The Pastor did marry them at a different church.
Those 3 facts actually add some much needed perspective to this story.
So really, the issue here is, should the Pastor have listened to the vocal minority in the interest of a wedding being a peaceful a day or should he have stood up for their right to be married at the wedding, protestors be damned?
Good point. Not like there is any precedent in Christianity for standing up for what you believe is right regardless of the suffering it could cause.
The choice should have been up to the bride and groom, protestors be damned. The priest was a coward and has no moral authority.
+2
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
Alabama is still one of those states where frat boys will get drunk and chuck golf balls at black people as they drive by, yelling "N*****" all the while. A friend of mine tells me occasionally of how much she was harassed for being even a little publicly affectionate with her girlfriend. Sounds horrifying. I've only visited, but they come down to New Orleans all the time to party and be racist here.
Roll tide!
EDIT: While it is actually in Jackson, (Alabama news station though) There's a lot of conflux in gulf coast states. Mississippi is generally considered the lowest rung on the ladder for deep south states even in 'Bama.
So there's a few things going on here that Hedgie left out of the OP for some reason. Perhaps they didn't fit his spin.
- The Pastor said he was getting pressure from a "small minority" to not allow this wedding.
- The Pastor said that he said no to them because he didn't want to make his Church the site of a protest and did not want to have their wedding interrupted by Protestors
- The Pastor did marry them at a different church.
Those 3 facts actually add some much needed perspective to this story.
So really, the issue here is, should the Pastor have listened to the vocal minority in the interest of a wedding being a peaceful a day or should he have stood up for their right to be married at the wedding, protestors be damned?
To points one and two, there is this thing called "courage of your convictions"; if the pastor isn't racist and it is "a small minority" that is being douchebags, then he should have told them "This is 2012 not 1912, segregation is something that I will not have in this church and if you don't like it then go ahead and find find a church that is ammenable to Klan folk".
So there's a few things going on here that Hedgie left out of the OP for some reason. Perhaps they didn't fit his spin.
- The Pastor said he was getting pressure from a "small minority" to not allow this wedding.
- The Pastor said that he said no to them because he didn't want to make his Church the site of a protest and did not want to have their wedding interrupted by Protestors
- The Pastor did marry them at a different church.
Those 3 facts actually add some much needed perspective to this story.
So really, the issue here is, should the Pastor have listened to the vocal minority in the interest of a wedding being a peaceful a day or should he have stood up for their right to be married at the wedding, protestors be damned?
A small minority that had enough power to threaten the position of the pastor.
And yes, the pastor should have told the bigots "Bring it." Because it is 20-fucking-12, and you don't stop bigots by coddling them. You stop them by standing up to them. You stop them by shining a big ass light on them, and then telling them "Go ahead, be bigots - but everyone will know what you are."
So there's a few things going on here that Hedgie left out of the OP for some reason. Perhaps they didn't fit his spin.
- The Pastor said he was getting pressure from a "small minority" to not allow this wedding.
Maybe the pastor should have seen this as an opportunity to teach the small minority a little something about Christian values, which is kind of, his thing.
So there's a few things going on here that Hedgie left out of the OP for some reason. Perhaps they didn't fit his spin.
- The Pastor said he was getting pressure from a "small minority" to not allow this wedding.
- The Pastor said that he said no to them because he didn't want to make his Church the site of a protest and did not want to have their wedding interrupted by Protestors
- The Pastor did marry them at a different church.
Those 3 facts actually add some much needed perspective to this story.
So really, the issue here is, should the Pastor have listened to the vocal minority in the interest of a wedding being a peaceful a day or should he have stood up for their right to be married at the wedding, protestors be damned?
A small minority that had enough power to threaten the position of the pastor.
And yes, the pastor should have told the bigots "Bring it." Because it is 20-fucking-12, and you don't stop bigots by coddling them. You stop them by standing up to them. You stop them by shining a big ass light on them, and then telling them "Go ahead, be bigots - but everyone will know what you are."
I won't disagree with you on these points. I'm more curious to find out what exactly the Pastor feared for when he caved into their demand. Did they threaten his life? Was he afraid of losing revenue from them? What was it that got him to listen to a "small minority" and not the majority of his church?
So there's a few things going on here that Hedgie left out of the OP for some reason. Perhaps they didn't fit his spin.
- The Pastor said he was getting pressure from a "small minority" to not allow this wedding.
- The Pastor said that he said no to them because he didn't want to make his Church the site of a protest and did not want to have their wedding interrupted by Protestors
- The Pastor did marry them at a different church.
Those 3 facts actually add some much needed perspective to this story.
So really, the issue here is, should the Pastor have listened to the vocal minority in the interest of a wedding being a peaceful a day or should he have stood up for their right to be married at the wedding, protestors be damned?
A small minority that had enough power to threaten the position of the pastor.
And yes, the pastor should have told the bigots "Bring it." Because it is 20-fucking-12, and you don't stop bigots by coddling them. You stop them by standing up to them. You stop them by shining a big ass light on them, and then telling them "Go ahead, be bigots - but everyone will know what you are."
I won't disagree with you on these points. I'm more curious to find out what exactly the Pastor feared for when he caved into their demand. Did they threaten his life? Was he afraid of losing revenue from them? What was it that got him to listen to a "small minority" and not the majority of his church?
So there's a few things going on here that Hedgie left out of the OP for some reason. Perhaps they didn't fit his spin.
- The Pastor said he was getting pressure from a "small minority" to not allow this wedding.
- The Pastor said that he said no to them because he didn't want to make his Church the site of a protest and did not want to have their wedding interrupted by Protestors
- The Pastor did marry them at a different church.
Those 3 facts actually add some much needed perspective to this story.
So really, the issue here is, should the Pastor have listened to the vocal minority in the interest of a wedding being a peaceful a day or should he have stood up for their right to be married at the wedding, protestors be damned?
A small minority that had enough power to threaten the position of the pastor.
And yes, the pastor should have told the bigots "Bring it." Because it is 20-fucking-12, and you don't stop bigots by coddling them. You stop them by standing up to them. You stop them by shining a big ass light on them, and then telling them "Go ahead, be bigots - but everyone will know what you are."
I won't disagree with you on these points. I'm more curious to find out what exactly the Pastor feared for when he caved into their demand. Did they threaten his life? Was he afraid of losing revenue from them? What was it that got him to listen to a "small minority" and not the majority of his church?
They threatened to vote to remove him as pastor of their church. Many Protestant denominations that don't have a strong hierarchy allow congregations a good amount of latitude in selecting their clergy, especially American branches that incorporated democratic traditions into their structure.
So there's a few things going on here that Hedgie left out of the OP for some reason. Perhaps they didn't fit his spin.
- The Pastor said he was getting pressure from a "small minority" to not allow this wedding.
- The Pastor said that he said no to them because he didn't want to make his Church the site of a protest and did not want to have their wedding interrupted by Protestors
- The Pastor did marry them at a different church.
Those 3 facts actually add some much needed perspective to this story.
So really, the issue here is, should the Pastor have listened to the vocal minority in the interest of a wedding being a peaceful a day or should he have stood up for their right to be married at the wedding, protestors be damned?
A small minority that had enough power to threaten the position of the pastor.
That sad part is these days, the "small minority" have all the power, regardless of the context apparently.
Glad they did end up getting married, albeit at a different church, but that Pastor clearly has his work cut out for him back at his own church.
So there's a few things going on here that Hedgie left out of the OP for some reason. Perhaps they didn't fit his spin.
- The Pastor said he was getting pressure from a "small minority" to not allow this wedding.
- The Pastor said that he said no to them because he didn't want to make his Church the site of a protest and did not want to have their wedding interrupted by Protestors
- The Pastor did marry them at a different church.
Those 3 facts actually add some much needed perspective to this story.
So really, the issue here is, should the Pastor have listened to the vocal minority in the interest of a wedding being a peaceful a day or should he have stood up for their right to be married at the wedding, protestors be damned?
A small minority that had enough power to threaten the position of the pastor.
And yes, the pastor should have told the bigots "Bring it." Because it is 20-fucking-12, and you don't stop bigots by coddling them. You stop them by standing up to them. You stop them by shining a big ass light on them, and then telling them "Go ahead, be bigots - but everyone will know what you are."
I won't disagree with you on these points. I'm more curious to find out what exactly the Pastor feared for when he caved into their demand. Did they threaten his life? Was he afraid of losing revenue from them? What was it that got him to listen to a "small minority" and not the majority of his church?
Guys! Read the article! The pastor sounds like a nice guy!
Here you GO!
["I didn't want to have a controversy within the church, and I didn't want a controversy to affect the wedding of Charles and Te' Andrea. I wanted to make sure their wedding day was a special day," said Weatherford. ]
and at the end of the article
["I was prepared to go ahead and do the wedding here just like it was planned, and just like we agreed to," said Weatherford. "I was just looking for an opportunity to be able to address a need within our congregation and at the same time minister to them."]
So there's a few things going on here that Hedgie left out of the OP for some reason. Perhaps they didn't fit his spin.
- The Pastor said he was getting pressure from a "small minority" to not allow this wedding.
- The Pastor said that he said no to them because he didn't want to make his Church the site of a protest and did not want to have their wedding interrupted by Protestors
- The Pastor did marry them at a different church.
Those 3 facts actually add some much needed perspective to this story.
So really, the issue here is, should the Pastor have listened to the vocal minority in the interest of a wedding being a peaceful a day or should he have stood up for their right to be married at the wedding, protestors be damned?
A small minority that had enough power to threaten the position of the pastor.
And yes, the pastor should have told the bigots "Bring it." Because it is 20-fucking-12, and you don't stop bigots by coddling them. You stop them by standing up to them. You stop them by shining a big ass light on them, and then telling them "Go ahead, be bigots - but everyone will know what you are."
I won't disagree with you on these points. I'm more curious to find out what exactly the Pastor feared for when he caved into their demand. Did they threaten his life? Was he afraid of losing revenue from them? What was it that got him to listen to a "small minority" and not the majority of his church?
Guys! Read the article! The pastor sounds like a nice guy!
Here you GO!
["I didn't want to have a controversy within the church, and I didn't want a controversy to affect the wedding of Charles and Te' Andrea. I wanted to make sure their wedding day was a special day," said Weatherford. ]
and at the end of the article
["I was prepared to go ahead and do the wedding here just like it was planned, and just like we agreed to," said Weatherford. "I was just looking for an opportunity to be able to address a need within our congregation and at the same time minister to them."]
The article is, like, super short. Come ON!
Yes, he's a nice guy. Too bad he's also a coward. Again, you don't combat bigotry by caving.
Guys! Read the article! The pastor sounds like a nice guy!
Here you GO!
["I didn't want to have a controversy within the church, and I didn't want a controversy to affect the wedding of Charles and Te' Andrea. I wanted to make sure their wedding day was a special day," said Weatherford. ]
and at the end of the article
["I was prepared to go ahead and do the wedding here just like it was planned, and just like we agreed to," said Weatherford. "I was just looking for an opportunity to be able to address a need within our congregation and at the same time minister to them."]
The article is, like, super short. Come ON!
Yes, lets read the article:
Church officials say they welcome any race into their congregation. They now plan to hold internal meetings on how to move forward, should this situation occur again.
Second last paragraph. These people actually are wasting time and effort on deciding how to move forward with this instead of saying "Hey you know what? According to this book here about 20th century american history, segregation was shut down 48 years ago. Maybe instead of pissing and moaning about how some african american folks in good standing want to get married in our church you should put that effort into building a time machine so that you can go back in time to the early 1950's. Might take a lot of time to figure out how to do that, so why don't you go ahead and take sundays off until you can pull it off."
Guys! Read the article! The pastor sounds like a nice guy!
Here you GO!
["I didn't want to have a controversy within the church, and I didn't want a controversy to affect the wedding of Charles and Te' Andrea. I wanted to make sure their wedding day was a special day," said Weatherford. ]
and at the end of the article
["I was prepared to go ahead and do the wedding here just like it was planned, and just like we agreed to," said Weatherford. "I was just looking for an opportunity to be able to address a need within our congregation and at the same time minister to them."]
The article is, like, super short. Come ON!
Yes, lets read the article:
Church officials say they welcome any race into their congregation. They now plan to hold internal meetings on how to move forward, should this situation occur again.
Second last paragraph. These people actually are wasting time and effort on deciding how to move forward with this instead of saying "Hey you know what? According to this book here about 20th century american history, segregation was shut down 48 years ago. Maybe instead of pissing and moaning about how some african american folks in good standing want to get married in our church you should put that effort into building a time machine so that you can go back in time to the early 1950's. Might take a lot of time to figure out how to do that, so why don't you go ahead and take sundays off until you can pull it off."
I was responding to Michelanvalo's post where he questioned the pastor's decision to hold the marriage at another church. I wholeheartedly agree that if they haven't already, the officials should say "Racism will not be tolerated in our churches and if you do racist shit you can't come, at all.". Hopefully they're trying to figure out what could be done beyond that to decrease milder, unspoken racism among their members (like people who don't really mind blacks coming to church and say nothing of it but would NEVER sit beside them)
Edit: I mean, if they ARE trying to figure out some way to make everyone forget this as soon as possible while changing nothing, I think they are total assholes. I'm not trying to defend stuff like that, I just think it's unfair to assume that they are all secretly racist. But maybe you have more prior knowledge of the religious leaders in the area, I knew almost nothing about them before this thread popped up (I'm not American).
We elected a black president, so obviously racism is over, so I don't believe this happened
And you can't make me
Because if I accept it as true I will be depressed for a week
rue was black????
racism has either gotten worse, or is more out in the open since obama
From my limited exposure with it, my understanding of racism is that people who are racist tend to get more audible when some new unspoken ceiling is breached at which point they come crawling out of the woodwork.
The choice should have been up to the bride and groom, protestors be damned. The priest was a coward and has no moral authority.
I don't disagree with you. But to be fair, "stand up for your ideals even when your livelihood is on the line" sounds a lot easier when it's someone else's livelihood that's on the line. We can all stand up here, on this anonymous liberal forum, and say we wouldn't have caved and we would have sacrificed our careers to stand up to racism. But I'm sure that being actually confronted with that choice and all its consequences in real life is a different experience from thinking about it in the abstract, and I wouldn't be 100% confident that anyone wouldn't cave to the pressure (myself included) until then.
Methinks this church needs to be brought to the attention of both the IRS and the denomination's organizing body.
There is nothing there that would endanger the church's tax-exempt status. Churches are allowed to be racist.
Yet another reason why we shouldn't subsidize religion in this country.
Not just racist, but they have the right to deny sacrements to anyone for pretty much any reason. I live nowhere near Alabama and there's baptist churches in my town that won't allow a black to marry a white, and even the more open and accepting churches have hangups on interfaith marriages. But it's not just that. When I got married, I had to go through a fairly involved and infinitely awkward process that had the potential to end with the priest saying, "I won't perform this marriage and the Church won't recognize it if you get married another way," for a multitude of reasons like, "not moral enough," "not likely to instill the proper Christian beliefs in children," and even, "intending use birth control after marriage."
The choice should have been up to the bride and groom, protestors be damned. The priest was a coward and has no moral authority.
I don't disagree with you. But to be fair, "stand up for your ideals even when your livelihood is on the line" sounds a lot easier when it's someone else's livelihood that's on the line. We can all stand up here, on this anonymous liberal forum, and say we wouldn't have caved and we would have sacrificed our careers to stand up to racism. But I'm sure that being actually confronted with that choice and all its consequences in real life is a different experience from thinking about it in the abstract, and I wouldn't be 100% confident that anyone wouldn't cave to the pressure (myself included) until then.
I think there's a difference between me keeping my head down and just trying to stay out of the way as an IT guy, versus doing it as a priest.
Like, supposedly, part of his job description is "do the right thing in the face of adversity." That is, assuming you hold the priesthood to the bar they've set for themselves by their words, rather than the one they've set for themselves by their actions.
Posts
There's a whole lot of stupid going on.
And you can't make me
We burned Georgia to the ground once, we can do it Alabama too
- The Pastor said he was getting pressure from a "small minority" to not allow this wedding.
- The Pastor said that he said no to them because he didn't want to make his Church the site of a protest and did not want to have their wedding interrupted by Protestors
- The Pastor did marry them at a different church.
Those 3 facts actually add some much needed perspective to this story.
So really, the issue here is, should the Pastor have listened to the vocal minority in the interest of a wedding being a peaceful a day or should he have stood up for their right to be married at the wedding, protestors be damned?
Aw, I was coming here to make this post.
Good point. Not like there is any precedent in Christianity for standing up for what you believe is right regardless of the suffering it could cause.
The choice should have been up to the bride and groom, protestors be damned. The priest was a coward and has no moral authority.
Roll tide!
EDIT: While it is actually in Jackson, (Alabama news station though) There's a lot of conflux in gulf coast states. Mississippi is generally considered the lowest rung on the ladder for deep south states even in 'Bama.
To marry them at another church is spineless.
To be fair, everyone there is probably armed.
A small minority that had enough power to threaten the position of the pastor.
And yes, the pastor should have told the bigots "Bring it." Because it is 20-fucking-12, and you don't stop bigots by coddling them. You stop them by standing up to them. You stop them by shining a big ass light on them, and then telling them "Go ahead, be bigots - but everyone will know what you are."
So... the folks at the other church would form a militia to protect them? :?
I really wouldn't be surprised if there was some kind of shootout, no. Weird shit happens out here all the time.
This just reminded me of this this old story.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/15/interracial-couple-denied_n_322784.html
Maybe the pastor should have seen this as an opportunity to teach the small minority a little something about Christian values, which is kind of, his thing.
I won't disagree with you on these points. I'm more curious to find out what exactly the Pastor feared for when he caved into their demand. Did they threaten his life? Was he afraid of losing revenue from them? What was it that got him to listen to a "small minority" and not the majority of his church?
Threatened to vote him out.
I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.
Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
They threatened to vote to remove him as pastor of their church. Many Protestant denominations that don't have a strong hierarchy allow congregations a good amount of latitude in selecting their clergy, especially American branches that incorporated democratic traditions into their structure.
That sad part is these days, the "small minority" have all the power, regardless of the context apparently.
Glad they did end up getting married, albeit at a different church, but that Pastor clearly has his work cut out for him back at his own church.
Guys! Read the article! The pastor sounds like a nice guy!
Here you GO!
["I didn't want to have a controversy within the church, and I didn't want a controversy to affect the wedding of Charles and Te' Andrea. I wanted to make sure their wedding day was a special day," said Weatherford. ]
and at the end of the article
["I was prepared to go ahead and do the wedding here just like it was planned, and just like we agreed to," said Weatherford. "I was just looking for an opportunity to be able to address a need within our congregation and at the same time minister to them."]
The article is, like, super short. Come ON!
Yes, he's a nice guy. Too bad he's also a coward. Again, you don't combat bigotry by caving.
Yes, lets read the article: Second last paragraph. These people actually are wasting time and effort on deciding how to move forward with this instead of saying "Hey you know what? According to this book here about 20th century american history, segregation was shut down 48 years ago. Maybe instead of pissing and moaning about how some african american folks in good standing want to get married in our church you should put that effort into building a time machine so that you can go back in time to the early 1950's. Might take a lot of time to figure out how to do that, so why don't you go ahead and take sundays off until you can pull it off."
I was responding to Michelanvalo's post where he questioned the pastor's decision to hold the marriage at another church. I wholeheartedly agree that if they haven't already, the officials should say "Racism will not be tolerated in our churches and if you do racist shit you can't come, at all.". Hopefully they're trying to figure out what could be done beyond that to decrease milder, unspoken racism among their members (like people who don't really mind blacks coming to church and say nothing of it but would NEVER sit beside them)
Edit: I mean, if they ARE trying to figure out some way to make everyone forget this as soon as possible while changing nothing, I think they are total assholes. I'm not trying to defend stuff like that, I just think it's unfair to assume that they are all secretly racist. But maybe you have more prior knowledge of the religious leaders in the area, I knew almost nothing about them before this thread popped up (I'm not American).
The point of this thread isn't 'This pastor sucks'
Its that racists are assholes.
rue was black????
racism has either gotten worse, or is more out in the open since obama
Well then, in that case, we're kinda done here.
From my limited exposure with it, my understanding of racism is that people who are racist tend to get more audible when some new unspoken ceiling is breached at which point they come crawling out of the woodwork.
"internet"
Yet another reason why we shouldn't subsidize religion in this country.
I don't disagree with you. But to be fair, "stand up for your ideals even when your livelihood is on the line" sounds a lot easier when it's someone else's livelihood that's on the line. We can all stand up here, on this anonymous liberal forum, and say we wouldn't have caved and we would have sacrificed our careers to stand up to racism. But I'm sure that being actually confronted with that choice and all its consequences in real life is a different experience from thinking about it in the abstract, and I wouldn't be 100% confident that anyone wouldn't cave to the pressure (myself included) until then.
Yeah, not everyone is hero, some people just want to be left alone.
This does not make them cowards.
Like, supposedly, part of his job description is "do the right thing in the face of adversity." That is, assuming you hold the priesthood to the bar they've set for themselves by their words, rather than the one they've set for themselves by their actions.