You're using an expressly theological term which refers to something that can only be expunged by faith in a savior. It's nice of you to grant some whites a dispensation, but that only reinforces the analogy. And by what right do you get to decide who gets to be saved and who doesn't?
You're using an expressly theological term which refers to something that can only be expunged by faith in a savior. It's nice of you to grant some whites a dispensation, but that only reinforces the analogy. And by what right do you get to decide who gets to be saved and who doesn't?
No, the term Original Sin is being used figuratively, or perhaps as an analogy to a defects with forever ramifications. (See systemic racism). No analogy is a perfect match in all its particulars. No one thinks the Original Sin of slavery is religious in the sense it can only be expunged by faith in a savior. It can be expunged by public policy, laws, and a change in social mores.
What's a "defect with forever ramifications" except a permanent blot? And how can a permanent blot be cleansed except through permanent atonement? That's why woke theology requires unending proselytism and why it differs from conventional liberalism.
Even conventional liberalism is dissatisfied with the US efforts to eliminate the systemic racism established by past government policies. A significant number of elected official opposed civil rights for blacks in the 1960s. The right simply declares that systemic racism disappeared-poof-with the passage of the Civil Rights Act they opposed, and have undermined in insidious ways ever since.
Today, the right is opposed to teaching the shameful parts of history because it might make students uncomfortable. Well sure, that 's how we get to "never again." The pitfall the far left never avoids is going too far like statements that all white children are racists by virtue of being white. People like Cruz grab these fringe ideas from people who are usually not Democrats and try to claim they represent the view of the Democratic party.
You're using an expressly theological term which refers to something that can only be expunged by faith in a savior. It's nice of you to grant some whites a dispensation, but that only reinforces the analogy. And by what right do you get to decide who gets to be saved and who doesn't?
No, the term Original Sin is being used figuratively, or perhaps as an analogy to a defects with forever ramifications. (See systemic racism). No analogy is a perfect match in all its particulars. No one thinks the Original Sin of slavery is religious in the sense it can only be expunged by faith in a savior. It can be expunged by public policy, laws, and a change in social mores.
What's a "defect with forever ramifications" except a permanent blot? And how can a permanent blot be cleansed except through permanent atonement? That's why woke theology requires unending proselytism and why it differs from conventional liberalism.
Even conventional liberalism is dissatisfied with the US efforts to eliminate the systemic racism established by past government policies. A significant number of elected official opposed civil rights for blacks in the 1960s. The right simply declares that systemic racism disappeared-poof-with the passage of the Civil Rights Act they opposed, and have undermined in insidious ways ever since.
Today, the right is opposed to teaching the shameful parts of history because it might make students uncomfortable. Well sure, that 's how we get to "never again." The pitfall the far left never avoids is going too far like statements that all white children are racists by virtue of being white. People like Cruz grab these fringe ideas from people who are usually not Democrats and try to claim they represent the view of the Democratic party.