Talk:Billy Graham
|
|
Look I am not saying that you should not include the anti jewish remarks about Billy Graham, but that was one thing in a life that has span 80 years. Why not include some of his good points too?
God's Own Quarterback. Williamv1138
I find Billy Graham's anti-jewish comments grossly unacceptable. But given the length of Graham's service, both negative and positive, his remarks are only one relatively small footnote in the full complex story of who Graham is and what is does or doesn't do. The paragraphs here should either be in a far longer article on Graham or if in a stub sized piece, reduced to a line to two with an explanatory footnote. In the current format, they dominate the article and (no doubt unintentionally) POV it by making one issue dominate and be given an importance far beyond what it should have in a balanced article. If this was an article on Billy Graham and anti-semitism, then they would be OK, but on Billy Graham the man they are unbalanced. ÉÍREman 04:22 May 7, 2003 (UTC)
In this edit (http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Billy_Graham&diff=801961&oldid=683892), marked as "minor" and given the edit summary "(fixing links typos, etc)", user:Stevertigo made a number of changes, several of which were not minor and intended to slant the article in an anti-Israeli direction. I reverted. AxelBoldt 21:23 17 May 2003 (UTC)
wikipedians interested should begin adding the good points of Graham's 80 years of service. Kingturtle 21:25 17 May 2003 (UTC)
Looks like there is some vandalism on this page may need to be reverse
Whether or not the man is anti-Semitic, the section of this article dealing with his alleged anti-Semitic remark is sloppy, sloppy, sloppy -- unworthy of Wikipedia. For instance, take a look at this pap:
- In a 1994 book, the author H. R. Haldeman recalled a White House conversation between Graham and then president Richard Nixon...
Nixon was president in 1994? That's news to me! I suppose the contributor meant that Haldeman wrote about a conversation he overheard between Graham and Nixon when Nixon was president. And by the way, why do we have to take the contributor's word that Haldeman wrote this in some book. What book? Does it have a name? An ISBN?
And take a look at this error in the use of quotation marks:
- He said the Jewish stranglehold has got to be broken or the country's going down the drain" and went on...
Is the second clause an exact quote from Graham? If so, why doesn't it begin with a quotation mark? If not, why does it end with a quotation mark?
And by the way, where do all these quotes come from? Are they the contributor's own transcription from the tapes he/she listened to him/herself? Are they from transcriptions someone else made? Are the transcriptions published somewhere, where someone else could check them for accuracy? And what about the denials and excuses the contributor quotes Graham as making: where did they come from?
All this should be documented.
And if the contributor has such ready access to quotes by Graham, I wonder why the reader has to rely on the contributor's summation of what Graham said about Jews and the media and pornography.
Don't play at being a journalist, BE ONE. ô¿ô 23:53, Aug 3, 2003 (UTC)
---
I think reference should be made to the antisemitic charges. Omitting such a reference is contrary to the idea of npov too.
I've deleted unsubstantiated remarks re 'anti-semitism' written as if they were fact. If they are the views of one contributor, that's one thing - this is an encyclopedia which, it is hoped, will eventually have some credibility for being independent and factual. Agendum 00:20, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
--- I've written a new section on his anti-semetic remarks. It is very well-documented what he said, and I don't believe you'll find any factual errors in my addition, nor, I think, will you find it to violate NPOV. As for those who argue that such submissions don't belong in an article about him, his remarks are an important element in how many people think about him, and bear weight on his message.
the prejudicial essence of evangelism ...
Christian evangelicalism - like many absolutist dogmas - has as its essence an authoritarian and dismissive prejudice against contrary beliefs and philosophies. To refer to Mr. Graham's disparagement of jews as anti-semitic is not only stating the obvious, but arbitrarily distinguishing it from his prejudicial remarks about many other beliefs and holdings. As a secular humanist, I find the very idea of original sin to be prejudicial. I would encourage seekers to reject any doctrine which disparages any inocent, loving and peaceful person or group, and to embrace beliefs and philosophies that further the goal of a peaceful and just world. regards, jeroboam bramblejam
presidential funerals
IIRC Graham spoke at the Nixon funeral in 94Smith03 01:35, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Later Years
Why not make a section about Rev. Graham's later years? And possibly mention the NYC crusade that very well may be his last.