Originally posted by Valhall
Are you serious? You don't know??? So let's make a fictional name, say...Mohammad Atta...took his son, Mustafa, into the middle of Time Square,
strapped him to a manhole and proceeded to stab him screaming Allahu Akbar, you'd be okay with that? You wouldn't be on this very board the next
day saying something about how deranged that was? And if you were there in Time Square at the time of incident, would you just stand and cheer "Go
Mo!"??? and when he was done say "Hell, yeah!" Is that what you're saying? Because that being unacceptable is the point Obama was making - not
in case you missed it, but BECAUSE you missed it - I point this out.
Slow down on the errors so I can keep up, please. Abraham never stabbed Isaac so your analogy is off. Do I particularly approve of this story? Nope.
But for some reason you ass/u/me/d that I did. You, Obama, and I can believe what we wish concerning religion and religious stories- it's a private
matter. But in a political speech was highly inappropriate (especially considering his speech's topic). And was this the only example Obama
mentioned? Nope but it was one of the examples I pointed out because it had nothing to do with religious law (more on this in a moment). So no that is
not what I am saying.
You also state Obama claiming this was unacceptable is the point he was making. I agree but I never missed it or else we wouldn't be talking about it
now would we? What you seem to miss is the fact of the matter: Why is Obama presenting his own opinions of biblical stories in a political speech...
ironically a speech about church and state separation
. Second, this incident with Abraham and Isaac, you erroneously assume I approve of, has
nothing to do with religious laws (the only real reason that would have been relevant). Obama was making judgments on Bible stories (even if we agree
with this opinion) and not only on religious law, therefore not involved in separation of church and state.
It would be LEGALLY unacceptable in this country to allow a father to sacrifice his son because he claimed his God told him to. And there's
legal precedence to back that statement.
You don't say. I completely agree. Oh, by the way... human sacrifice is forbidden
according to the Jewish law and Christianity. And in this
case, the religious laws (NOT religious beliefs or Bible stories) would have been the only thing remotely pertinent to his speech because Obama is
hosting a theological debate but instead a political speech about separation of church and state. The Abraham and Isaac episode was not
done according to law and Isaac was never sacrificed. Not to mention it was misleading how Obama talks about religious laws found in the Torah (that
no Jewish or Christian group is trying to implement as American law) and mentions this story as if implying it was somehow legally acceptable
according to Judaism or Christianity. Your analogy is wrong, you leap to numerous assumptions, and you end with this rude outburst:
GOOD GAWD HAVE MERCY...DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THAT FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT?
And do you not understand the irony of a man preaching about separation of church and state yet giving his own personal opinion on stories that
happened in religious texts in a political debate for the office of president? Ironic and hypocritical. Separation of church and state is something I
agree with strongly
as I have mentioned on ATS numerous times. You never know when you will suddenly find yourself in the religious minority
so, yes, separation of church and state has my full support. I feel so strongly about the subject of separation, that I find Obama's speech
distasteful and strangely hypocritical. Do you not understand the contradiction Obama displayed by doing this? "Separate church and state! But while
I am up here running for president, let me point out some things in the Bible I find odd, disturbing, oh, and let me talk about Christian and Judaic
Bible stories." Bush left the same sour taste in my mouth when he used his soap box to talk about religion as well. So, the Abraham/Isaac story was
example but he also drifted off into more obvious theological discussion. This goes against the grain of the point he is trying to
[edit on 8/25/2008 by AshleyD]