OT: Jonathan Isaac answers media (unecessary) questions

[Roco14]

"Disrupt" the nuclear family is not the same thing as "it takes a village". The latter most people would agree with. The former is a call to destroy the fundamental unit that Western civilization has built around and replace it with a new model. I can absolutely see him taking offsense at that statement. Speculation, of course, but I bet if you polled 1,000 pastors, 999 of them would find that part very troubling.

Exactly. Thank you. People need to stop interpreting it the way they choose and literally read the words on the website. We disrupt the nuclear family? Doesn't exactly align with Christian values.

I think you stopped reading after disrupt. There absolutely nothing offensive or controversial following that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When you're an organization as big as BLM, you better be careful with the words you choose on your mission statement. You don't think they had high-end writers, proofreaders, etc. to carefully make sure they got their message out there exactly as intended?

I don't think it's offensive or controversial. I just don't think someone with deep Christian values would approve of that choice of words. They have had an opportunity to change their text, but they haven't. That alone is telling.

[shefcurry]

Sounds like the consequences of being a bigot. Who says you should only lose your livelihood for professional transgressions?

Also, this man who was "cancelled" is currently the CEO of a company.

Right. So as long as you express a personal belief contrary to social consensus, it's fair game to... burn you at the stake. If you're a sinner, you deserve whatever punishment you get. Sound familiar? Why not bring back scarlet letters too? But instead of "A" for adulterer, the sin is now "R" for racist.

Cancel culture is nothing new. We've been here before. "Progress" looks a lot like the 17th century.

Dude, what?

Was he burned at the stake or is he actively the CEO of a company????

This man is literally still alive, running a business, and seemingly doing just fine. He is not cancelled.

He lost his job and couldn't get another one. He had to start his own company because nobody would hire him. Is it right for me to steal your car as long as you eventually buy another one? It doesn't make it wrong as long as you can still drive, right?

You want a different example? What about Bari Weiss who was bullied into resigning from the New York Times by co-workers who didn't like that she had a different opinion? Or the editor who was fired for running an Op-ed that had a right-wing slant?

There's hundreds of examples like this. Speak left wing mantra only or the Twitter mob will ensure your career is over.

[kj_]

"Disrupt" the nuclear family is not the same thing as "it takes a village". The latter most people would agree with. The former is a call to destroy the fundamental unit that Western civilization has built around and replace it with a new model. I can absolutely see him taking offsense at that statement. Speculation, of course, but I bet if you polled 1,000 pastors, 999 of them would find that part very troubling.

I think that’s way too extreme a reaction to the word “disrupt”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Disrupt means disrupt. This isn't rocket science. They're not claiming it takes a village. This is much stronger than that. It is a political mission statement.

Yes, disrupt the oppressive norms that forced a patriarchal family structure upon them when cultural genocide took place. Yes, disrupt that and open up the doors for other ways of thinking and living. You did read the part about with family consent? That was an important part of the statement as well.

This statement does not mean Black Lives Matter is coming for your children. It doesn’t mean BLM is going to force anything upon anyone or destroy life as you know it.

To make the leap there is ridiculous for anyone... you, Isaac or any pastor of any colour. It’s simply nonsense and an attempt to discredit an organization.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[shefcurry]

Disrupt could be defined as drastically alter or destroy the structure of. So destroying or abolishing the family unit. This is a key tenet of the Communist Manifesto and why people label the BLM organization as Marxist (you could argue on the technicalities of marxism vs communism). The purpose is to enhance reliance on the state. Now does this align with Isaac's religious beliefs? I would assume not.

Not just "could be defined". That's literally what it means.

Black Lives Matter to most people is just a statement saying that they support black people in their fight for social justice. Which is what 99.9% of people think they're supporting when they say Black Lives Matter.

Black Lives Matter the organization is a political advocacy organization whose mandate is much, much larger than simply racial justice. It just happens to (cleverly) share a name with the dominant choice of words that people use to express support for the black community. Likely only one in 10,000 actually knows about what the political advocacy organization is about or trying to do.

This is a bit unfortunate because Isaac is put into a position where he's in favor of the former, but against the latter, and since 99.9% of people don't know the difference, it creates a lot of this kind of confusion.

[Fairview4Life]

Right. So as long as you express a personal belief contrary to social consensus, it's fair game to... burn you at the stake. If you're a sinner, you deserve whatever punishment you get. Sound familiar? Why not bring back scarlet letters too? But instead of "A" for adulterer, the sin is now "R" for racist.

Cancel culture is nothing new. We've been here before. "Progress" looks a lot like the 17th century.

Dude, what?

Was he burned at the stake or is he actively the CEO of a company????

This man is literally still alive, running a business, and seemingly doing just fine. He is not cancelled.

He lost his job and couldn't get another one. He had to start his own company because nobody would hire him. Is it right for me to steal your car as long as you eventually buy another one? It doesn't make it wrong as long as you can still drive, right?

You want a different example? What about Bari Weiss who was bullied into resigning from the New York Times by co-workers who didn't like that she had a different opinion? Or the editor who was fired for running an Op-ed that had a right-wing slant?

There's hundreds of examples like this. Speak left wing mantra only or the Twitter mob will ensure your career is over.

The two examples you cited are both gross misunderstandings of what happened. If you want a real example, you can look to David Shor, or even like the Dixie Chicks or whoever. It’s also nothing new.

[shefcurry]

I think that’s way too extreme a reaction to the word “disrupt”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Disrupt means disrupt. This isn't rocket science. They're not claiming it takes a village. This is much stronger than that. It is a political mission statement.

Yes, disrupt the oppressive norms that forced a patriarchal family structure upon them when cultural genocide took place. Yes, disrupt that and open up the doors for other ways of thinking and living. You did read the part about with family consent? That was an important part of the statement as well.

This statement does not mean Black Lives Matter is coming for your children. It doesn’t mean BLM is going to force anything upon anyone or destroy life as you know it.

To make the leap there is ridiculous for anyone... you, Isaac or any pastor of any colour. It’s simply nonsense and an attempt to discredit an organization.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Okay, but now you're saying something a lot more than what you said before. "disrupt the oppressive norms" might be offensive to someone who might not see the nuclear family structure as oppressive. There, exactly, is the disagreement.

[Fairview4Life]

I know before supporting black lives matter or protesting police violence everyone went to a single chapters website to read what a few of them thought. Do you think anyone protesting police violence actually knows anything about some online manifesto, or cares? Bringing that **** up is just a really lazy way to try and discredit the movement.

[ATLTimekeeper]

"Disrupt" the nuclear family is not the same thing as "it takes a village". The latter most people would agree with. The former is a call to destroy the fundamental unit that Western civilization has built around and replace it with a new model. I can absolutely see him taking offsense at that statement. Speculation, of course, but I bet if you polled 1,000 pastors, 999 of them would find that part very troubling.

I think that’s way too extreme a reaction to the word “disrupt”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Disrupt means disrupt. This isn't rocket science. They're not claiming it takes a village. This is much stronger than that. It is a political mission statement.

It means that they intend to disrupt the requirement of a nuclear family. That's the part you don't get.

[Johnny Bball]

I doubt Isaac would protest the notion that other people outside of immediate family can provide care for one another.

"Disrupt" the nuclear family is not the same thing as "it takes a village". The latter most people would agree with. The former is a call to destroy the fundamental unit that Western civilization has built around and replace it with a new model. I can absolutely see him taking offsense at that statement. Speculation, of course, but I bet if you polled 1,000 pastors, 999 of them would find that part very troubling.

Exactly. Thank you. People need to stop interpreting it the way they choose and literally read the words on the website. We disrupt the nuclear family? Doesn't exactly align with Christian values.

What the **** are you talking about. Half the families in either country don't fit the definition of nuclear family for one reason or another, yet you cling to something that isn't reality? Does everyone have to meet your definition of nuclear families? And saying that other people are trying to change and recognize it doesn't exist anymore is reversing progress to the 1700's? The blind hypocrisy is incredible. If it fits you, nobody is taking it away. Ever.

Not once did any of you complain about peoples civil rights being violated over the last year, so you can stop pretending they will be now by a group of people not even in place to do it.

[kj_]

Disrupt could be defined as drastically alter or destroy the structure of. So destroying or abolishing the family unit. This is a key tenet of the Communist Manifesto and why people label the BLM organization as Marxist (you could argue on the technicalities of marxism vs communism). The purpose is to enhance reliance on the state. Now does this align with Isaac's religious beliefs? I would assume not.

Not just "could be defined". That's literally what it means.

Black Lives Matter to most people is just a statement saying that they support black people in their fight for social justice. Which is what 99.9% of people think they're supporting when they say Black Lives Matter.

Black Lives Matter the organization is a political advocacy organization whose mandate is much, much larger than simply racial justice. It just happens to (cleverly) share a name with the dominant choice of words that people use to express support for the black community. Likely only one in 10,000 actually knows about what the political advocacy organization is about or trying to do.

This is a bit unfortunate because Isaac is put into a position where he's in favor of the former, but against the latter, and since 99.9% of people don't know the difference, it creates a lot of this kind of confusion.

You’re the true .1%er. When someone says, “I know what they are really about” is typically code for “I’m a bigot”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Johnny Bball]

Disrupt could be defined as drastically alter or destroy the structure of. So destroying or abolishing the family unit. This is a key tenet of the Communist Manifesto and why people label the BLM organization as Marxist (you could argue on the technicalities of marxism vs communism). The purpose is to enhance reliance on the state. Now does this align with Isaac's religious beliefs? I would assume not.

Not just "could be defined". That's literally what it means.

Black Lives Matter to most people is just a statement saying that they support black people in their fight for social justice. Which is what 99.9% of people think they're supporting when they say Black Lives Matter.

Black Lives Matter the organization is a political advocacy organization whose mandate is much, much larger than simply racial justice. It just happens to (cleverly) share a name with the dominant choice of words that people use to express support for the black community. Likely only one in 10,000 actually knows about what the political advocacy organization is about or trying to do.

This is a bit unfortunate because Isaac is put into a position where he's in favor of the former, but against the latter, and since 99.9% of people don't know the difference, it creates a lot of this kind of confusion.

You’re the true .1%er. When someone says, “I know what they are really about” is typically code for “I’m a bigot”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Who in their right mind could possibly believe that everyone saying black lives matter means we want a Marxist government for example, because it's one person's belief that's not even part of the platform. How do these people even believe themselves when it so evident it's just the worst argument. Maybe its because far right people feel a need to believe everything spoon fed to them, so they think everyone else does.

[shefcurry]

I think that’s way too extreme a reaction to the word “disrupt”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Disrupt means disrupt. This isn't rocket science. They're not claiming it takes a village. This is much stronger than that. It is a political mission statement.

It means that they intend to disrupt the requirement of a nuclear family. That's the part you don't get.

I get it quite well. I'm saying many people disagree with the whole idea. The nuclear family is the perceived bedrock of a lot of western morality. Saying you're disrupting the nuclear family structure is perceived as a direct attack on the foundational moral principles of a whole culture. To a lot of people, this is a very big deal. Christian imagery, in particular, uses the nuclear family a lot. Of course disrupting that would sound an alarm for Christians that this isn't something to be taken lightly.

[shefcurry]

Disrupt could be defined as drastically alter or destroy the structure of. So destroying or abolishing the family unit. This is a key tenet of the Communist Manifesto and why people label the BLM organization as Marxist (you could argue on the technicalities of marxism vs communism). The purpose is to enhance reliance on the state. Now does this align with Isaac's religious beliefs? I would assume not.

Not just "could be defined". That's literally what it means.

Black Lives Matter to most people is just a statement saying that they support black people in their fight for social justice. Which is what 99.9% of people think they're supporting when they say Black Lives Matter.

Black Lives Matter the organization is a political advocacy organization whose mandate is much, much larger than simply racial justice. It just happens to (cleverly) share a name with the dominant choice of words that people use to express support for the black community. Likely only one in 10,000 actually knows about what the political advocacy organization is about or trying to do.

This is a bit unfortunate because Isaac is put into a position where he's in favor of the former, but against the latter, and since 99.9% of people don't know the difference, it creates a lot of this kind of confusion.

You’re the true .1%er. When someone says, “I know what they are really about” is typically code for “I’m a bigot”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you even know what the definition of bigot is? Because you gotta look in the mirror brother.

[Pointgod]

Disrupt could be defined as drastically alter or destroy the structure of. So destroying or abolishing the family unit. This is a key tenet of the Communist Manifesto and why people label the BLM organization as Marxist (you could argue on the technicalities of marxism vs communism). The purpose is to enhance reliance on the state. Now does this align with Isaac's religious beliefs? I would assume not.

I hope you didn’t pull anything this reach. Lol at the word salad of Communist and Marxist. Just repeating right wing talking points.

[Fairview4Life]

The nuclear family is the bedrock of western morality? Lolol

[Roco14]

"Disrupt" the nuclear family is not the same thing as "it takes a village". The latter most people would agree with. The former is a call to destroy the fundamental unit that Western civilization has built around and replace it with a new model. I can absolutely see him taking offsense at that statement. Speculation, of course, but I bet if you polled 1,000 pastors, 999 of them would find that part very troubling.

Exactly. Thank you. People need to stop interpreting it the way they choose and literally read the words on the website. We disrupt the nuclear family? Doesn't exactly align with Christian values.

What the **** are you talking about. Half the families in either country don't fit the definition of nuclear family for one reason or another, yet you cling to something that isn't reality? Does everyone have to meet your definition of nuclear families? And saying that other people are trying to change and recognize it doesn't exist anymore is reversing progress to the 1700's? The blind hypocrisy is incredible. If it fits you, nobody is taking it away. Ever.

Not once did any of you complain about peoples civil rights being violated over the last year, so you can stop pretending they will be now by a group of people not even in place to do it.

And do you think that's a positive thing? I've got news for you - it's not. Go read up on the statistics of suicide, crime, drug abuse, etc. and how they link to children growing up in single parent homes. It's impossible for everyone to grow up in a healthy family structure, but saying you'll disrupt, obstruct, impede, unsettle, hamper, destroy, or damage (all synonyms) the nuclear family structure does not align with Christian values. Isaac (and everyone else) has every right to not stand for an organization that puts out that message.

An organization that big has every single word proofread meticulously so let's not pretend it's some meaningless text.

[ATLTimekeeper]

Disrupt means disrupt. This isn't rocket science. They're not claiming it takes a village. This is much stronger than that. It is a political mission statement.

It means that they intend to disrupt the requirement of a nuclear family. That's the part you don't get.

I get it quite well. I'm saying many people disagree with the whole idea. The nuclear family is the perceived bedrock of a lot of western morality. Saying you're disrupting the nuclear family structure is perceived as a direct attack on the foundational moral principles of a whole culture. To a lot of people, this is a very big deal. Christian imagery, in particular, uses the nuclear family a lot. Of course disrupting that would sound an alarm for Christians that this isn't something to be taken lightly.

No, you didn't get it. Read your own post. If many people disagree, then they also aren't reading the section properly.

As for Jonathan Isaac, I have no knowledge of what he thinks about BLM or if he's even read their website. I know he's devoutly religious, and I also know he was raised by a single mother, and that he was also likely helped along the way with both a Christian community and basketball community. I'm making my own assumption that he probably would agree with BLM on this one.

[ItsDanger]

Disrupt could be defined as drastically alter or destroy the structure of. So destroying or abolishing the family unit. This is a key tenet of the Communist Manifesto and why people label the BLM organization as Marxist (you could argue on the technicalities of marxism vs communism). The purpose is to enhance reliance on the state. Now does this align with Isaac's religious beliefs? I would assume not.

I hope you didn’t pull anything this reach. Lol at the word salad of Communist and Marxist. Just repeating right wing talking points.

At least one of the BLM founders claimed to be a "trained Marxist". That is fact. There are several straight comparisons to Marxism right on their website. That is no reach. Claiming the opposite is a reach. Marx quote: "Die Religion ... ist das Opium des Volkes" From wiki: The full quote from Karl Marx translates as: "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people".

Now, if I am an ordained minister like Isaac, that is offensive. We could argue that BLM isn't strictly Marxist but just has some aspects that are similar (which maybe some of you are). But its really open to interpretation based on your own beliefs. I suspect Isaac has come to his own conclusions. When you hear players say "we want to have our own message", what exactly do you think they are referring to?

Other people could perceive this differently and that is fine. We can have different interpretations. I just think BLM could have worded their mission statement a lot better but apparently chose not to.

[kj_]

Exactly. Thank you. People need to stop interpreting it the way they choose and literally read the words on the website. We disrupt the nuclear family? Doesn't exactly align with Christian values.

What the **** are you talking about. Half the families in either country don't fit the definition of nuclear family for one reason or another, yet you cling to something that isn't reality? Does everyone have to meet your definition of nuclear families? And saying that other people are trying to change and recognize it doesn't exist anymore is reversing progress to the 1700's? The blind hypocrisy is incredible. If it fits you, nobody is taking it away. Ever.

Not once did any of you complain about peoples civil rights being violated over the last year, so you can stop pretending they will be now by a group of people not even in place to do it.

And do you think that's a positive thing? I've got news for you - it's not. Go read up on the statistics of suicide, crime, drug abuse, etc. and how they link to children growing up in single parent homes. It's impossible for everyone to grow up in a healthy family structure, but saying you'll disrupt, obstruct, impede, unsettle, hamper, destroy, or damage (all synonyms) the nuclear family structure does not align with Christian values. Isaac (and everyone else) has every right to not stand for an organization that puts out that message.

An organization that big has every single word proofread meticulously so let's not pretend it's some meaningless text.

I’m pretty sure BLM isn’t saying everyone should grow up in a single parent home exactly as they have for generations. Which would make your silly attempt at bringing a “statistic” about suicide, drug abuse, blah, blah, blah irrelevant.

Finding offence in the “disrupt” nuclear family statement is a massive reach and more likely thinly veiled LGBTQ or racial hatred.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[beanbag]

Right. So as long as you express a personal belief contrary to social consensus, it's fair game to... burn you at the stake. If you're a sinner, you deserve whatever punishment you get. Sound familiar? Why not bring back scarlet letters too? But instead of "A" for adulterer, the sin is now "R" for racist.

Cancel culture is nothing new. We've been here before. "Progress" looks a lot like the 17th century.

Dude, what?

Was he burned at the stake or is he actively the CEO of a company????

This man is literally still alive, running a business, and seemingly doing just fine. He is not cancelled.

He lost his job and couldn't get another one. He had to start his own company because nobody would hire him. Is it right for me to steal your car as long as you eventually buy another one? It doesn't make it wrong as long as you can still drive, right?

You want a different example? What about Bari Weiss who was bullied into resigning from the New York Times by co-workers who didn't like that she had a different opinion? Or the editor who was fired for running an Op-ed that had a right-wing slant?

There's hundreds of examples like this. Speak left wing mantra only or the Twitter mob will ensure your career is over.

Lol, Bari Weiss resigned because she was called out on her trash opinions. It's not bullying if you spew a bunch of garbage and a bunch of people in your newsroom call you on it. She walked away and wrote some sanctimonious bull because she couldn't handle being challenged.

Do you have a name of the other person you are talking about?

Your analogy also makes no sense.