Obama's anti christian speech, page 4

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 12 times

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 05:30 AM by Valhall

Originally posted by AshleyD

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?

NOT THE POINT! I might just be the saving hand of God by being the American law-abiding citizen and blowing Mo's head off before he stabs his son.

The point is, we would not listen intently to Mo tell us how Allah (or if Mo was Joe and his God "God") told him to strap his son to a manhole and gut him in order to save the world.

We'd be thinking - hmmm, going to be an insanity defense in this one...and we'd be calling cops, wrestling the knife out of his hand and trying to free the boy.

Stop acting like you can't get Obama's point. Because if you don't stop acting like it, I'm going to start believing you really can't...and that's scary dense.

[edit on 8-25-2008 by Valhall]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 05:58 AM by declassified

reply to post by mattguy404

That is exactly why i don't except Christianity, because you all push your beliefs on everyone and claim your religion as best.i grew up in a catholic family so i know how stupid conformation of big religion is, it's basically like if the owners of fox instead grew up to own all the churches. i'd rather know i believed what i believe instead of letting people fill my head with nonsense every sunday. let obama say what he may because the smart people will not let some anti-obama nuts push their propaganda on them. be pro-everything, not pro-Christianity anti-everything else!!

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 06:06 AM by Valhall

I'll help you out some. Here's Obama's point.

Let's elect ol' Abe as our next president. Now, our nation's leader will:

Announce that God has told him we aren't where He wants us to be and we need to sell or just leave behind everything we can't strap to a camel's back and follow good ol' Abe.

"Where we going?" Congress asks.

Abe replies, "Don't know. God said He'll tell me when we get there."

So all 300,000,000 of us start out on our fun-filled convoy and along the way we watch our illustrious leader lie twice to foreign leaders that the First Lady is really his sister thereby placing her at risk to be sexually accosted just so he doesn't get in harms way. Oddly, she goes along with it.

A little further along our journey (still not having a clue where we're going) we find out our President boinked the First Lady's personal assistant and has sired an illegitimate son.

But then the wonderful news the First Lady's going to have the First Son and we think things are getting normal except we're a long darned ways from home and still clueless about where we're headed...and Abe has had all the men cut rather sensitive parts of their body in a really odd ritual and has kind of shown potentially unhealthy reverence to the said body parts...he said God told him to do it. Good news, he says God said we get UBER blessings from it.

The new baby comes and lo and behold the personal assistant and her son are missing! Word on the street is that the First Lady demanded she be kicked out of the convoy so our great leader had left her and the little boy to die out in the desert. Hope they do okay.

We finally get to our final destination which is a little patch of shade not near big enough for all of us under one lone Oak tree in the middle of the desert and ol' Abe starts singing THIS LAND IS MINE! GOD GAVE THIS LAND TO ME!!!

By that time half the nation has just left with Abe's brother because it's just getting too weird. (They are later declared ungodly and there's a whole sordid tale about them and their laciviousness...but that's another story that's reserved for justifying driving all the homosexuals out of the campground.)

Then one afternoon we see ol' Abe (who seems unable to be honest with many people) tell his wife him and his son are going out to work the sheep...

no worries, the boy lived through it and Abe says we're in for even more UBER blessings now!

No - thank you. I don't want my country ran by some one like that. And that - would be Obama's point. The running of my country is not to be left to personal religious convictions of one man. If it were, it would be a theocracy and we would appoint a King divinely chosen by God. We're not in that business here. And we don't ever need to get in that business.

Our leaders need to have strong morals - I personally prefer they have strong spirituality - but that's because I AM a Christian and prefer to have some one in our political positions that believe there is a Higher Power with spiritual obligations on how we treat one another. My point being, I believe I would rather NOT have an atheist president, but at the same time, if the atheist is the best candidate to lead this country, I would not rally in the street to have him excluded from the process...because religious beliefs aren't part of the requirements for being President of the United States. The only place they come into play is in the heart of the voter. And I think - if you so prefer - you should not vote for Obama if you spiritually feel you shouldn't. But it's a low and a false accusation to claim he is anti-Christian, or that this speech is such. It's just not correct.

[edit on 8-25-2008 by Valhall]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 07:26 AM by truthquest

Originally posted by Lightworth
reply to post by evanmontegarde

Speaking of the First Amendment, very few are aware of the part of that Amendment that states that it's patently illegal for an American to wage war while being under the influence of religion.
[edit on 24-8-2008 by Lightworth]

It is every Americans right to do everything and anything they want under the influence of religion, as long as they are not overstepping the rights of others. Please recognize your senseless hate of religion. Admitting there is a problem is the first step.

[edit on 25-8-2008 by truthquest]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 09:10 AM by AshleyD

reply to post by Valhall

Val. Since I already brought up the fact he is discussing and targeting specific religions in a speech ironically about separation of church and state, I am now going to point out something else: It's a straw man and a dramatic one at that. "We have to keep religion out of government because if we don't, the nutties will be running around stabbing their children in the name of God!" Whether or not everyone can see what just happened, that is what his connection implied. And whether or not he meant it, THAT was how it came across to me. "Look at all this weirdness in the Bible. If we don't keep religion out of the government, this could happen to you!"

Other than a few loonies out there who need to be locked up in a padded cell, 99.999% of Christians and Jews would never do such a thing and they sure aren't trying to make it legal (the pertinent issue). That was Obama's implication, intentional or not. Really, who is trying to get this legalized? Nobody!

Again I say, politicians need to keep their interests limited to the political aspects of the separation of church and state without sticking their noses in their [In Obama's case] potential constituents' specific holy texts. Then, it is level. You can't say stay out of my realm but let me poke my nose into yours.

The examples he used were terrible, he committed factual religious blunders (another reason for him to limit his public opinion to the general political area of church/state separation and not get on a soap box. He is a politician- not a theologian), then he resorted to straw men. Obama didn't only bring up general political issues regarding separation of church and state (appropriate) but instead specific religions and texts (inappropriate and hypocritical).

I don't see Sharia law trying to be made American Law, I don't see any Christians or Jews trying to implement Levitical Law as American law, prayer has been taken out of school, religious items have been removed, are being removed, and are not allowed on government property, creationism is not taught in science class, etc., It looks like he already has what he wants and brings up an example that's not even a genuine threat, nevertheless in a legal sense. He should have stuck to the politics and not specific religions, texts, and stories. That should be very clear. He violated the very thing his speech is about by venturing into discussing specific religions using his political pedestal. Oops!

As they say, 'Practice what you preach.'

You keep mentioning abhorrent actions carried out by religious extremists as if you think I approve of them. I don't. I never even stated my personal opinion on the example Obama mentioned (until later correcting your assumption that I must endorse it or I must have been defending it). Never did I mention my personal support of the incident or similar incidents but instead stuck to the relevant discussion: Obama's inappropriate behavior, his hypocrisy, and his use of straw men scare tactics.

[edit on 8/25/2008 by AshleyD]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 09:22 AM by Anonymous ATS

It is the 1st Amendment!

separation of church and state is generally traced to a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to the Danbury Baptists, in which he referred to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as creating a "wall of separation" between church and state. The phrase was then quoted by the United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1947.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 09:24 AM by orangetom1999

reply to post by Valhall

LOL LOL LOL Valhall,

The point is, we would not listen intently to Mo tell us how Allah (or if Mo was Joe and his God "God") told him to strap his son to a manhole and gut him in order to save the world.

Zooooooooooommmmm!!!!

totally over your head...olde man. The point is that since the Cross ...God will not be telling anyone to strap anyone to any cross or manhole cover ...etc etc etc...in order to save anything. " It is finished!"

We as humans cannot save anyone or anything. God does the saving ..and for his purposes...not ours. We would not be the saving hand of God in the Biblical sense.

I get Obama's point exactly ...we are all ONE. All Religions are the same Religion. Our humanity is the most valuable commodity out there.

As to your second post explaining it to us....once again you get the whole story out of context...in order to make your points..and like Obama are wont to substitute your Humanistic translation. Translate that ..drama queen translation.

No - thank you. I don't want my country ran by some one like that. And that - would be Obama's point. The running of my country is not to be left to personal religious convictions of one man. If it were, it would be a theocracy and we would appoint a King divinely chosen by God. We're not in that business here. And we don't ever need to get in that business.

NO we don't need to get into that business. But we also need to be very careful about what passes for leadership in that politics itself is a religion often disguised to be something it is not.

If this were not so...then why do so many politicians come across as if they have the solution and can make this a better country/world by voting for them. After you see this happen enough..over and over ...you begin to realize how much faith it takes to believe in them. They want to work for EDEN here on this earth. Just keep pulling the leavers in the voting booth..pushing the right buttons.

I believe I would rather NOT have an atheist president, but at the same time, if the atheist is the best candidate to lead this country, I would not rally in the street to have him excluded from the process...because religious beliefs aren't part of the requirements for being President of the United States.

Hmmmmm!!??? Valhall...you do know what the track record of Atheist governments is historically ...correct??
You know what I mean right?? Governments like Soviet Russia and today Communist China in taking care of their peoples or the business of their peoples???
You need to carefully rethink this process. If religious beliefs are not part of the process or requirements for president...than Obama is not talking at all about religious beliefs in his speech per se.....he must be talking about another another belief system...not any of the religions he mentions in his speech. Something or a concept beyond all of this. A higher moral system.

If this is so Valhall...what is the name of this belief system Obama is wont to promote in this speech?? The higher morality..what is the name of this system.

But it's a low and a false accusation to claim he is anti-Christian,

Obama has no monopoly on this anti Christian concept. Our government has been doing this since the civil war back in the 1860s. Slowly but they have been doing it. The pace is accelerating as they are dumbing down most of American with Humanist educations principles in our public schools, on the Boob tube, and through movies....where the bulk of America gets their educations today.

I AM a Christian and prefer to have some one in our political positions that believe there is a Higher Power with spiritual obligations on how we treat one another

This is not a Christian statement. A higher power could mean anything...like the gods of Hollywood, sports, and the altar of television/movie beliefs.
A Christian statement would be ..The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob guide us as to how we treat one another.

When I see videos like Obama's as posted by the OP and then read your posts on this topic and video .. Valhall...one thing becomes clear and clear not by what you say .. but also by what is missing from both yours and Obama's positions.

Valhall...you might want to check your positions again in your posts as it becomes quite obvious to those versed in Christianity..as it is obvious in Obama's positions...metaphorically speaking...these concepts seem to be above your pay grade.

I can see this clearly by the drama in your posts in attempting to substitute your personal beliefs for what is stated in the Word. Others out here can also see this. This is precisely what Obama is also doing...though he is doing a much smoother job of it.

Ashley D,

I don't see any Christians or Jews trying to implement Levitical Law as American law,

What someone is hoping and planning to implement into American Law..and overlay as if it is the new American Law...is Noahide Laws...through the United Nations. These laws will be implemented by default ..without the consent or knowlege of most of the American Public. These laws will be the Law of the Sovereign...feudal sovereign law. Totally UnAmerican in principles and pedigree.

This is exactly what the Pharisees and Hebrew leadership were doing in the Olde Testament in the "traditions of men"...being overlaid on the Law of Moses as if it were the Law of Moses. It was no such thing. This is why it must be done carefully and privily.

Thanks,
Orangetom

[edit on 25-8-2008 by orangetom1999]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 10:16 AM by umbracode

why are you americans so addicted and attached to "christianity"?
What if a president is atheist?
the politics has nothing to do with religion,it should be free from these dogma.

Plus, you always see satana everywhere.Evolve youself ,we are in 2008 not in te middle ages.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 10:33 AM by AshleyD

Originally posted by umbracode
why are you americans so addicted and attached to "christianity"?

Personally, it's not Christianity I worship- it is the Christ. And yes, I am 'addicted and attached' to Jesus and have no shame in admitting it. That's my right.

What if a president is atheist?

Then that is their right. The only control I have over a president being atheist or not is my personal vote. If an atheist president is elected, then the majority spoke. My rights end where the president's begin and the other voters who elected an atheist as president. God allows everyone to make their own religious choices so I have no right to do any different. My vote is the only say I have in the matter. If a president is atheist? I wouldn't like it but that is the way it goes. I placed my vote ('my voice') and the majority placed their vote ('their voice'). The majority spoke, Ashley doesn't get her way, and life somehow manages to go on.

God is in control. Not AshleyD, not the Christians, and not the atheist president.

[edit on 8/25/2008 by AshleyD]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 10:59 AM by orangetom1999

Originally posted by umbracode
why are you americans so addicted and attached to "christianity"?
What if a president is atheist?
the politics has nothing to do with religion,it should be free from these dogma.
Plus, you always see satana everywhere.Evolve youself ,we are in 2008 not in te middle ages.

Hmmmmm...You came out of the same intellectual stables as Valhall...yes??

You do know that many atheists are in fact humanists..yes..??

You also know that Humanism has pantheistic overtones yes?

You also therefore know that pantheism has its origins in Pagan religions...and is therefore also very often anti Christian...yes??

YOU do also know that historically logic and reason has its origins in the Gnosis religions..the religions of sophism....paganism....yes. Intellectualism..and these religions cross over with pantheism

What is the belief system of politics today?? It is sophism...gnosticism..intellectualism ..and attempting to combine pantheism...as a dogma.(environmentalism) This is obvious once it is pointed out to people who can think further than the next "instant gratification." All of this hidden under the guise of Humanism.

There are those of us out here who read and study these religions..not only from the Word itself ..but often from Occult/Pagan/Pantheistic writings themselves.

We can see and tie in.. the connection to the body politic.

In the Word..this is often defined as "Whoredom." The buying and selling of the souls of a people and eventually a nation for power and control and using deceptive techniques to accomplish this goal.

In intellectual circles this is often called "Politics." And it is a religion. It is hiding and concealing itself under the guise of Humanism...under logic and reason..gnosticism/sophism/intellectualism/panthiesm. The term for this kind of whoredom..and concealment...is Occult. And we are back to religion here.

I also know this because no where in the Word do you ever see an instruction to appeal to our base passions. You do however see this in paganism...concealed under logic and reason. You can see this also in many of the posts here on threads like these.
In genuine pagan/occult writings and dissertations..you do see the appeal to passions/emotions. You also see this fingerprint among the body politic as a tool to keep the voters on the string. To make them predictable and controllable, malleable..to guarantee votes.

Thanks,
Orangetom

[edit on 25-8-2008 by orangetom1999]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 11:03 AM by Andrew E. Wiggin

ya know...if i were writing a book based on twisted facts and outright LIES by people who oppose barack Obama

i'd have a book twice the size of the bible its self.

His "rant" isn't against Christianity

It's against ignorant bastards who take their own versions of Gods words and Christ's teachings and twist them and lie about them in order to fit their own racist or bigoted agenda.

Please - before you go posting ignorant garbage - allow your brain a few more seconds of open-shutter time to absorb what you're looking at a little clearer.

If you listen to his words - and disregard the biased title - you will hear that he's saying "factioning of the religion is a bad idea"

because your version of Christianity is going to differ from that of Rev. Al Sharpton by a long shot.

But unfortunately what Sharpton does as a "christian" gets associated to the religion its self

even though most of it goes against the very teachings of Christ himself.

if i ever decide to write a book - im going to have to let the 3 amigo's in on the profits - because all the material i need is right here at ATS

I believe it'd belong in the Psychology section under " here are some examples of how brain washing can affect your judgment"

and it'd simply be titled Obamaphobia

I'd sell millions

[edit on 8/25/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

[edit on 8/25/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 11:15 AM by Valhall

Originally posted by orangetom1999

Hmmmmm...You came out of the same intellectual stables as Valhall...yes??

Well, apparently the stables I came out of didn't allow braying jack-asses scared of anyone who won't agree to believe exactly as them.

I'm okay with my address thank you....now, you mozey on down toward your side of the pasture.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 11:34 AM by orangetom1999

reply to post by Valhall

LOL LOL LOL..I'm sorry..Valhall..I cant help myself..

This is actually a very serious topic line but I am having difficulty associating your response above this post with seriousness...passion ..yes...intelletcualism...no.

Thank you for clarifying the point I was making about occult religions and passions/emotions.

However..it would be well if you could debate or re butt the points I was making...in my posts. Not this technique of yours which in fact clarifies or solidifies my points about politics/paganism/occult religions...appealing to passion and emotions... and our baser instincts.

This is not intellectual, moral, or any other high ground.

But it is definitely passion..no doubt about it.

However...on a serious note ..we are in danger here of straying off topic..by debasing this thread with passions.
Let us try to stick to the points presented in responding to them..point by point. Not base passions.

Thanks,
Orangetom

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 11:59 AM by undo

to me, the speech sounds like he's pandering to muslims by denigrating jewish literature (torah/old testament) and to atheists, by pointing out that this is a secular, ecumenical nation in contrast to the light bush has been cast in as a papal adjunct, on a crusade for the vicar of christ.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 12:35 PM by undo

has anyone else noticed that when something negative is said about old testament texts, it's never mentioned that the old testament is a jewish text? this is a very sly maneuver, meant to bypass the "anti-semetic" moniquer, attributing the text solely to christianity and denigrating it that way instead. amazing really.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 12:43 PM by AshleyD

reply to post by undo

I brought it up on page two. What made it funny [read: sad] was that Obama used excerpts from the Old Testament to discuss Christianity then made the statement that we need to realize Jews live in this country, too (among other faiths and atheism). When... the Old Testament is basically the texts of the Jewish Tanakh.

I also stated his focus on the OT sounded more like a slam against Judaism than Christianity due to this fact. Sadly, too many people don't realize the Old Testament Christian texts are essentially the Jewish 'Bible' (known as the Tanakh). You can't discuss the OT in an attempt to target Christianity without targeting Judaism and their sacred texts as well. It was awkward to see him do that and then say the Jewish faith also needs to be respected.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 12:48 PM by undo

reply to post by AshleyD

it was a very craftily written speech. it covers all the bases while contrasting
bush and what he represents (a persona that was generated almost entirely in the media and has nothing to do with reality) with christianity and christians. then he goes forth to conquer like 1 of the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse and let's christians in general, take the fall for his decisions. the media just ate that up and smeared it all over the place, further infuriating muslims against the western world. the careful, methodical, exacting and deliberateness of it all, is mind boggling.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 01:12 PM by AshleyD

reply to post by undo

I completely agree. Just as a side note, it is also so frustrating when people automatically assume Christians or all Christian support Bush. You say you are a Christian? Then you are immediately perceived as a Bush supporter by many people. I saw allusions to this in this thread directed towards those of us who expressed displeasure with Obama's speech. Bush was mentioned a few times as a contrast to Obama.

If they only knew the truth. A Christian who finally figures out what Bush is really up to contrasted with what we are being led to believe, I can't imagine them still supporting Bush. It is frustrating every time I claim to be displeased with Obama or that I am a Christian, it is assumed I automatically support Bush. Very frustrating because it couldn't be further from the truth. It's a presumptuous and ignorant deflection attempt. Not to mention ironic because I am displeased with Bush for the very reasons I am disappointed with Obama. The details aren't important as to why for the peanut gallery but I am sure you would know why.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 01:34 PM by stonespiral

Wow. The ignorance in that video is awe-inspiring. When are people going to give up stuff like this and talk about the issues that matter? Obviously not any time in this election.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 01:42 PM by undo

Originally posted by stonespiral
Wow. The ignorance in that video is awe-inspiring. When are people going to give up stuff like this and talk about the issues that matter? Obviously not any time in this election.

my question as well. what did isaac and abraham have to do with the issues?