Churches Want to Pay “Reparations” to Black People and “Native” Americans

Not giving black people money is the same as enslaving them all over again.

How low can evangelical churches go?

Well, if you thought supporting Israeli baby murderers was the bottom – you were wrong.

They are committed to just going lower and lower and lower.


The faith community should guide the way on reparations for America’s history of slavery and racial discrimination and help the nation’s process of reconciliation and healing, religious leaders said during a panel held to discuss the issue.

U.S. religious groups have seen widespread interest in reparations, especially among Protestant churches that were active in the era of slavery. Many are starting or now considering how to make amends through financial investments and long-term programs benefiting Black Americans.

The Episcopal Diocese of Maryland voted last year to create a $1 million reparations fund, likely to finance programs supporting Black students, nursing home residents, small-business owners and others. The vote followed years of research into how the diocese had benefited from racial inequality and slavery.

“If not the faith community, who? And if not now, when?” said the Right Rev. Eugene Sutton, the first Black cleric to hold the post of bishop of the diocese.

“Perhaps one of the reasons why so many in our society are saying, ‘Well, I can be spiritual, but I don’t have to belong to any religious organization,’ is because religious faith communities have failed to live up to their scriptures and to our words,” Sutton said. “We need to put our money where our mouth is. And reparations is one way to do that.”


Supporting black reparations will make FEWER people abandon the church like it’s a sinking ship!

Panelists were asked what they tell those who oppose reparations on the grounds that they’re not guilty of slaveholding or racism and shouldn’t be asked to pay for those crimes. Sutton said it’s not about guilt but a responsibility to repair the damage caused.

“Reparations is not a transfer of money from white people to Black people,” Sutton said. “It’s rather what this generation will do to correct the wrongs that previous generations have started.”

Clearly, there is no way to transfer responsibility without transferring guilt. In the context of a crime, guilt and responsibility are the same thing. It’s just a word game to say “it’s not about guilt but responsibility.”

According to this report, virtually every church in America is doing this.

In Minnesota, the Swedes are even talking about the Indians!

They want a truth and reconciliation commission for things that happened hundreds of years ago!

The Minnesota Council of Churches has cited a host of injustices — from mid-19th century atrocities against Native Americans to police killings of Black people — in launching a first-of-its kind “truth and reparations” initiative.

The initiative engages a diverse collection of 25 Christian member denominations, including some that are predominantly Black, and will model some of its efforts on South Africa’s post-apartheid Truth and Reconciliation Commission. It is based in Minneapolis, where the police killing of George Floyd last May sparked global protests over racial injustice.

“When I was growing up, white supremacy was a problem of the South. … Within the last five years, just here in Minneapolis, we’ve had the killing of Jamar Clark, Philando Castile, George Floyd, Daunte Wright,” said the Rev. Jim Bear Jacobs, the council’s director of racial justice. “All of this within 7 miles of each other, each one of those young men all at the hands of police, all unwarranted killings.”

How did we, as a city of Minneapolis, how did we get to this point? And the only answer one can arrive at is white supremacy.”

Why don’t they arrive at a definition of what “white supremacy” is?

It is just standard protocol whenever you’re talking about anything to draw up definitions. But we’re now being told that “white supremacy” is both the core problem and the defining order of the entirety of Western society – and yet none of the people saying this feel the need to define it.

Andrew Anglin, editor of Tranny Watch, has joked about being a “white supremacist.” This website was labeled a “white supremacist” website. But even back then, before the whole society went nuts, this term was never defined.

If this is a real thing, why can’t there be a definition?

No one should be able to keep talking about this unless they agree to provide a working definition of the term.

Remember: even the Jews were forced to provide a working definition of anti-Semitism! The Jews! They forced them to provide a definition!

The US State Department (archive link) and other international groups were forced to look at and either accept or reject this definition of anti-Semitism. Now, you can agree or disagree with the definition – I don’t agree with it – but at least it exists!

We have no definition of “white supremacy” and no stated plan to establish a working definition of the term. That can only lead a person to believe that this is in fact an even bigger hoax than anti-Semitism!