Martin Luther King Jr. was not a man of principle. He was a liar, and a communist. In the words of Ezra Taft Benson:

“The man who is generally recognized as the leader of the so-called civil rights movement today in America is a man who has lectured at a communist training school, who has solicited funds through communist sources, who hired a communist as a top-level aide, who has affiliated with communist fronts, who is often praised in the communist press and who unquestionably parallels the communist line. This same man advocates the breaking of the law and has been described by J. Edgar Hoover as “the most notorious liar in the country””

What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same.

End of story. End of discussion, goodbye and goodnight, nothing more needs to be said.

Like those famous people mentioned, many of our forebears and those who built the foundations of this land were imperfect. They were human. They doubtless made mistakes and fell short from time to time. But the mistakes were minor when compared with the marvelous work they accomplished. To highlight the mistakes of a person and gloss over the greater good is to draw a caricature. Caricatures are amusing, but they are often ugly and dishonest. A man may have a wart on his cheek and still have a face of beauty and strength, but if the wart is emphasized unduly in relation to his other features, the portrait is lacking in integrity.

There was only one perfect man who ever walked the earth. The Lord uses imperfect people—you and me—to build strong societies. If some of us occasionally stumble, or if our characters may have been slightly flawed in one way or another, the wonder is the greater that we accomplish so much. (Gordon B. Hinckley, via Quoty)

I find King’s speeches, writings, and causes to be incredibly moving and I am grateful that he gave them, that he wrote them, and that he got involved with such inspirational action – whatever his personal vices may or may not turn out to be in the final accounting.

I also echo Connor when he notes that many of the causes that King championed are still ongoing struggles and I hope that more people can turn their limited time and efforts to helping in those struggles rather than casting stones (at King or one another lol).

Know what’s even harder than working with someone who’s married to their views? Working with someone who spews opinion as fact, offering no basis for their views. You leave me no room to critique your logic, because you have none.

Michael, I’ve offered sources and reasons for believing in those sources. You’ve only refuted those sources and reasons with complaints about how myopic or close-minded I am…. yet in doing so you offer *no* premises, *no* counter sources, *no* argument in return.

I’ve justified my position, yet you continue to sling baseless accusations from the sidelines, devoid of any argument on your own.

This’ll be my last reply to you on this thread, as this sort of irrational name calling behavior has a tendency to antagonize, rather than to explore the topic at hand.

I’ll place Cecil Adams’ opinion on the same shelf as yours until you provide me a reason for giving them any weight. His opine doesn’t even make sense. I wouldn’t consider someone who was a fraud and a hypocrite also to be a great American. Makes no sense at all.

Are we all frauds and hypocrites at some level? Yes. Why are great leaders in America exempt from the same forgiveness we allow each other every day? And how in the world does this somehow tarnish this man’s record?

If anyone is going to be accused of myopia, it would be those that are so short-sighted on MLK’s average human faults that they somehow miss his monumental advances in other areas of his life.

Why is it that you’re so antagonistic? Why is it that I’m accused of focusing on the bad and ignoring the good simply by not giving the man saint status? Can great things not be accomplished by less than great men? I don’t understand this preservation of reputation… if he is shown to be of less than savory character someday, what do you stand to lose? I really am not trying to say either way, I just don’t get this. I have a feeling that what it comes down to for you is President Benson vs your opinion though, again. Correct me if I’m wrong. If MLK’s reputation and honor can be upheld, it’s one more arrow in your quiver against Benson’s words and his politics, no?

However one might try, it is a virtual impossibility to engage them in meaningful and substantive conversation due to their inability to hear anything that tends to be counter productive to their self imposed worldview which they received from listening to those who are of the same stripe. The only accomplishments one might realize is that they are masterful at confusion and rhetorical hyperbole. There are certainly scriptural warnings against following after these souls due to their consistent methodology at deceiving even the very elect among us. Their skills are finely honed and polished due to the nature of the spirit with which they associate their dominant thoughts. One can only hope that they will awaken themselves from the stupor of thought which leads them toward the point of no return.

Right back at you, sir.

I will offer this final opinion from someone other than myself and the many other sources available to seek out and find the truth. I do so in complete agreement with the author:

As every reasonable observer has commented, neither King’s sexual wanderings nor his scholarly misdeeds detract from his core achievement. By continually publicizing black grievances while putting a palatable, nonviolent face on resistance to jim crow, King paved the way for the landmark civil rights legislation of the 1960s and a major turnaround in public attitudes about race. But there’s no getting around the fact that he was a complex and deeply flawed man. Was he a great American? No argument here. Was he a fraud and a hypocrite? He was that, too.

–CECIL ADAMS

Hello? The original post is all about the good he did, which we all acknowledge. Who’s forgetting that?

You and Mr. McKee who apparently would rather focus on these unproven allegations (which also would be dismissed as hearsay in a court of law) against a good man who did much good in this nation. Don’t hold him to the standard of your church if he did not get an opportunity or did not accept the standards of your church.

You’re welcome to your own opinion. It must be opinion, because you offer no reasons for your view.

It should go without saying, that I disagree with you completely. First-hand accounts from a life long friend thrown out as hearsay?

The ruling from the board at Boston University isn’t hearsay. You can find it. It’s documented, so I don’t understand what you’re talking about.

I’ve justified my sources. They’re only a person removed from Dr. King himself. If you can’t find reason in that, our discussion is probably over.

@Carissa

I apologize – I was on the defensive and I realize I read you wrong. There are some in this thread that seem to want to think this great person should be discredited for what I would categorize as the follies of man.

Yes, I already read the entire review, and the point I was trying to make was that he said he didn’t know conclusively one way or the other.

you’re focusing on something that *might* be bad, and forgetting about the mountains of good this man did

Hello? The original post is all about the good he did, which we all acknowledge. Who’s forgetting that?

In my country you’re innocent until proven guilty

Now that makes more sense.

I do not believe, in a court of law, that we could attach credibility to your sources without questioning motive. Notwithstanding, your evidence would certainly be dismissed as “hearsay.”

Read the review, where he clarifies that statement.

http://www.booknotes.org/Transcript/index_print.asp?ProgramID=1442

Now, the main thing, Martin Luther King wanted not to be a deity. He wanted to be just an ordinary man. He did not want to be a saint or viewed as a saint. He was just a human being, capable of becoming and producing and leading his people out of the wilderness of segregation into the promise land, saying to me, privately, long before he said it from the Memphis pulpit, “Ralph, I may not get there, but I have been to the mountain top.” “Take my people on across this Jordan to the land of Canaan”, “And I want freedom for all Americans.” And he freed many white people and poor people who were black, American Indians, the native people of this country and he was just a marvelous and fantastic leader and I am surprised that they would center on four pages and I didn’t ever say that he had sex with anybody. I said that when I was awakened, he was coming out of the room with this lady and maybe, I don’t know what they did, he never told me he had sex with that lady. He may have been in there discussing and debating and trying to get her to go along with the movement, I don’t know, the sanitation workers track. I did not say that later that when we arrived at the motel, the Lorraine Motel, that he engaged in sex. I merely said that this Kentucky Legislator was there and when I discovered that he was in good hands, I took off and went to bed because it was about 1:30 to 2 in the morning. I did not try to dodge the issue.

Urban legend? Maybe, but your evidence doesn’t prove it didn’t happen. All known copies of the FBI tapes on MLK are sealed in the National Archives until 2027, right? I’m not trying to say either way because I don’t know, just saying… case not closed like you seem to imply.

In my country you’re innocent until proven guilty. I’m not saying he’s perfect. I’m saying you’re making too much out of nothing. I’m saying you’re focusing on something that *might* be bad, and forgetting about the mountains of good this man did.

The moral allegations against MLK are not much more than urban legend.

Abernathy said:

“… when I was awakened, he was coming out of the room with this lady and maybe, I don’t know what they did, he never told me…”

Urban legend? Maybe, but your evidence doesn’t prove it didn’t happen. All known copies of the FBI tapes on MLK are sealed in the National Archives until 2027, right? I’m not trying to say either way because I don’t know, just saying… case not closed like you seem to imply.

Re: sexual stuff:

And The Walls Came Tumbling Down, Ralph Abernathy (close associate of MLKs)

http://www.booknotes.org/Transcript/index_print.asp?ProgramID=1442
NYT Review of the book

Re: plagiarism

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/mlking.asp
(Includes text on ruling from Boston University – note they didn’t think his degree should be revoked since the paper was still an intellectual contribution)

—–

Oh, and please don’t quote me anything from Drue Lackey (biased policeman), or the FBI (who was on a biased goose-chase for a communist), or spam emails. :)

From whence come your FACTS?

The moral allegations against MLK are not much more than urban legend. I suppose some people somehow feel empowered by pulling down someone who has accomplished so much.

Deplorable moral character? Wow I thought he had a holiday named after him. I also thought he was a respected member of the Christian community. I thought he was an anti-war crusader.

If you’re referring to the accusations by the FBI, you might read up on how the tapes were made, who asked for them, and why. You might read memoirs from a close friend who reported that he was quite the womanizer, but never knew about any sex scandals.

What the FBI found was “midnight talk”. A bunch of guys talking late at night about women. Bad? Yeah, probably. Does this somehow shatter a lifetime of accomplishment?

And do you really know what he plagiarized? One third of part of a paper. A third. He still got his degree. Some argue it was a stylistic choice anyway. Does that mean we start negating things like Nobel Peace prizes and *leading* the civil rights movement?

One of the most insidious and problematic areas of ignorance in our nation lies in the fact that the populous accepts the lies perpetrated by those in government and the media who are rapidly bringing this nation to a state of moral acceptance the likes of which is mete for destruction.

One reason they’re skeptics is because so many fall prey to conspiracy theory (omg he was a communist), urban legend (he copied stuff for his Dream speech), and trite rumor (did you know he was a sexual predator?).

Check your facts, please.

You are absolutely correct in your analysis. I, too, believe MLK made statements which were admirable and worthy of consideration notwithstanding his deplorable moral deficiencies and his repulsive plagiarism. Unfortunately the vast majority of the American people were not made aware of his less than sterling character and I believe the American people have a sacred duty to demand that truth prevail when they are considering the leadership potential of any public figure. One of the most insidious and problematic areas of ignorance in our nation lies in the fact that the populous accepts the lies perpetrated by those in government and the media who are rapidly bringing this nation to a state of moral acceptance the likes of which is mete for destruction.

The comment by Obi wan liberali is a prime example of my point and it shows an absolute disconnect from reality and truth. “By their fruits…….