"Mississippi Burning" case sentence....

[Dr Mordrid]

The so-called "Mississippi Burning" case was the murder of 3 young civil rights workers by the Ku Klux Klan back in the 1960's.

The story of this incident was made into a movie of that title (an excellent one) but there was one piece missing: one member of the conspiracy had never been convicted for various reasons.

This situation was finally remedied when Edgar Ray Killen, 80 and infirm, was convicted of 3 counts of manslaughter. Manslaughter was included as a lesser included offence to the original murder charges when the judge turned the case over to the jury.

This was at the request of the prosecutor and is often done when the evidence is iffy for a murder conviction, which is often the case when so many years have passed; witnesses die, evidence is lost or deteriorates etc. Info here;

http://www.courttv.com/trials/killen/062105_verdict_ctv.html

A few minutes ago the judge handed down sentence on Mr. Killen: 20 years for each victim to be served consecutively, meaning he got 60 years. Obviously for an 80 year old man the difference between this sentence and life for murder is nil.

Good for the judge in this case. Many had said that Mr. Killen should be put under house arrest or be given some other such consideration due to his age and infirmity, but IMO the SOB deserves exactly what he got....if not more.

Dr. Mordrid

[Jessterw]

Good to hear.

[Helevitia]

Good for the judge in this case. Many had said that Mr. Killen should be put under house arrest or be given some other such consideration due to his age and infirmity, but IMO the SOB deserves exactly what he got....if not more.

Indeed and Amen.

[Brian Ellis]

I assume he'll get 20 years off for good behaviour, so I wonder what he'll be doing in 40 years time?

Of course, he can restart as a Southern Baptist preacher, as he is obviously a superb Christian, like many of his particular sect

[Dr Mordrid]

You're painting with WAY too wide of a brush Brian.

1. Not all Baptists are the same. You should be making a firm distinction betwen southern Baptist (small s = locale) and Southern Baptist (large S denotes a distinct church that is just a subset of all Baptists).

Not all Baptists were on the wrong side during the civil rights era, nor were all Southern Baptists. That said many of the southern Southern Baptists were segregationist, though this view was not always shared with their northern parishes.

This was the way of things back then, even among atheists. Bigoted atheists were present in about the same proportion and were just as bad as their religious counterparts, so they get no props from this former civil rights marcher.

BTW: Dr. Martin Luther King was a southern (small s) Baptist minister.

2. THE MAJOR driving force behind the civil rights movement of the 50's and 60's were the Christian churches of all denominations, and this included many Southern Baptists.

2. In our church (Lutheran) the pastors and those from other denominations were organizing people to go to said events. Chief among the organizers were those of the Baptist persuasion, but also represented were Southern Baptists, Catholics, Presbyterians, Anglicans, Mormons, Jews and many other faiths.

3. I was in many of these demonstrations as part of my church group, not only in the Detroit area but in many of those in souithern cities that are now in the history books. When we arrived at the march location many times the organizing was done in Southern Baptist churches, both those that were majority black and white, as were most of the meals served to the marchers.

By far not all southern Southern Baptist parishes were "bad" dispite what may have been coming out of their regional leadership.

Dr. Mordrid

[KvHagedorn]

Just more rapacious slander against Christianity in general, Doc. Frankly, I'm so sick of it I could spit.

[az]

And what do you say about the original topic of this thread, KvH?

AZ

[KvHagedorn]

I don't think it means much at this stage.. the guy is practically dead already. They should have done something about it way back when a prison sentence would mean something.

[Brian Ellis]

I don't think it means much at this stage.. the guy is practically dead already. They should have done something about it way back when a prison sentence would mean something.

That is not answering az's question. How can you correlate a Christian preacher with also being a segregationist murderer? Surely the two cannot be compatible in the same person, can they?

And I did not introduce the point as "rapacious slander against Christianity". I was sarcastically pointing out that racial hatred was incompatible with Christianity. If anything, I was libellous (not slanderous) against racism, not against Christianity (although the mind boggles how one can be slanderous or libellous against a crime). I may not agree with everything that Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism or any other religion stands for, but I hope I have never been either slanderous or libellous against any of them or any genuine believer who follows the precepts of his/her respective religion. But I denounce vigorously any person who attempts to use it as a cloak for activities that go against the very tenets of their so-called religion or who even preach against those same tenets.

It is for this reason I denounce people like the Rev. Ian Paisley as unChristian, having been the leader of a group which caused hundreds of deaths in N. Ireland in the name of bigotry. Idem, the "religious" leaders of Islamic fundamentalism when they preach anti-Qu'ranic hatred. Idem, all forms of religious bigotry. I cannot associate such people with the faith they purport to preach, simply because I respect their various faiths too much to bring them down to their heathen level.

Just more rapacious slander against Christianity in general, Doc. Frankly, I'm so sick of it I could spit.

Having studied Christianity quite deeply, even at Westminster College, Cambridge, which is the theological college of the English Presbyterian Church, and having travelled widely in countries with faiths other than Christianity and discussed such things with some of their religious leaders, to found my own notions of comparative theology, I believe I'm fit to discuss such matters impartially, possibly more so than those who have never questioned why their own religious sect no longer follows the tenets of their true faith (and which one does?). And I see no reason why Doc's post should have inspired your wrath, either. Of course, my sarky comment was a generalisation, although I did not tar all Southern Baptists and certainly not all Christians (I did say 'many of his particular sect') with the brush of bigotry. Much of the evil of all religions is interpretative sectarianism: by definition, the moment that two of the faithful cause schism, then you can bet your bottom dollar that neither is a true believer.

I hope that my oecumenistic thinking will help broaden your mind.

[Dr Mordrid]

You have to take KvH's comment with a knowledge of what's happening here in the US.

Many US Christians feel a bit like they're in the bullseye when it comes to how they're treated by the less intelligent of the social secularists, which of course make up a disproportionate share of the whole secular movement.

Far too many of these intellectual midgets make all Christians out to be responsible for everything negative in the world, ignoring the basic teachings of even atheist philosophers.

Instead of trying to find common ground with Christians they take every opportunity to provoke Christians at every turn. Not smart when the vast majority of Americans identify themselves as Christians.

Of course this brought on a backlash, causing Christians to become more politically active in the last 20+ years in self defense, which ticks off the secularists even more.

And so it goes.

Dr. Mordrid

[RedRed]

Many US Christians feel a bit like they're in the bullseye when it comes to how they're treated by the less intelligent of the social secularists, which of course make up a disproportionate share of the whole secular movement.

Far too many of these intellectual midgets make all Christians out to be responsible for everything negative in the world, ignoring the basic teachings of even atheist philosophers.

Instead of trying to find common ground with Christians they take every opportunity to provoke Christians at every turn. Not smart when the vast majority of Americans identify themselves as Christians.

Of course this brought on a backlash, causing Christians to become more politically active in the last 20+ years in self defense, which ticks off the secularists even more.

Its the same for Catholics.

We have our problems - paedophile priests, worse, the coverup from the heirarchy of the church - yet the basic creed of the faith and the core beliefs of the practicioners are essentially sound (and which I respect, and respect people for having).

I agree that it is not really appropriate to broad-brush attack a whole faith for the actions of a few.

I had hoped that the new Pope would take immediate, public action - he would have known - but so far I seem to have been dissapointed.

[Wombat]

I don't think it means much at this stage.. the guy is practically dead already. They should have done something about it way back when a prison sentence would mean something.

They would have had a hard time of it. They looked at trying him in the '60s, but no white man had ever been convicted for killing a black.

[KvHagedorn]

Even if this is so, he still killed (or conspired to kill) two white people too.

[Umfriend]

Who were traitors to their own kind, even worse than blacks?

[schmosef]

I don't get what you're trying to say Umf.