Obama's anti christian speech, page 5

privacy

Pages: << 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 12 times

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 01:46 PM by PammyK

I am a Christian. I don't see anything wrong with what he says. There are many Religions in our country. He must speak for them all.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 02:09 PM by maybereal11

The bible as we know it was written by men and then edited to suit an agenda by politicians in rome. It is a magnificient accounting of biblical times, but as wrought with bias as any historical record kept by man.

Extremism exists in all religions...this thread is proof of that.

Acceptance and love of our fellow men (and women). This goes for different faiths as well. Abandon that premise of christainity and you can have the crusades or the inquisition.

This is the second time I have qouted West Wing this week (see the link) .....Bartlett on the bible. It might be noted for the sake of context that the Character of President Bartlett was a divinity student who opted to go into public service rather than the priesthood, but still devoutly Christian.

www.youtube.com...&hl=en&fs=1

[edit on 25-8-2008 by maybereal11]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 02:17 PM by AshleyD

Originally posted by PammyK
There are many Religions in our country. He must speak for them all.

Hm. My opinion is somewhat different. If separation of church and state is the issue at hand, then he must speak for none of them.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 02:36 PM by Valhall

Originally posted 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.

Hey - Abraham is a Patriarch to both Jews and Arabs. The Islamic religion holds him in high regard. He is considered the epitome of the true Muslim and the annual Hajj is a retracing of his, Hagar's and Ishmael's journey. Islam, which they of course consider the one true religion, is called the "Path of Abraham".

Give it a break on the anti-semitic claims. If his "affront of Abraham" insults the Jews, it insults the Muslims...you can't claim it was just aimed at the Jews.

[edit on 8-25-2008 by Valhall]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 03:13 PM by nunya13

I'd like to see what Christians would be saying about this video if the Muslims made up 80% of this country and they wanted to make their doctrines and beliefs into laws. And it was John McCain in this video quoting the Qu'ran.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 03:38 PM by Scramjet76

reply to post by AshleyD

If Obama had said the same thing about atheism, they would have been jumping his case.

I don't think Obama is attacking christianity. It's religion in general. One look at human history should tell you why people feel apprehension towards religion. The very folks we know as "the terrorists" happen to be very deeply religious. It just so happens that 80% of americans are christian so christianity often takes the brunt of the blow.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 03:47 PM by undo

Give it a break on the anti-semitic claims. If his "affront of Abraham" insults the Jews, it insults the Muslims...you can't claim it was just aimed at the Jews.

well this is what wiki has to say on that:

In Islam, Muslims believe that the Qur'an teaches that God's command to Abraham was to sacrifice his older son Ishmael rather than Isaac.

en.wikipedia.org...

it's being subtlely pointed out by using isaac as the example, not ishmael. sometimes, it's what they don't say, rather than what they do say, that makes the point.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 03:50 PM by AshleyD

reply to post by Scramjet76

Thanks for your post. Well, looking through history we can also see the atrocities and murders committed under secular/atheistic governments as well (tens of millions). So that cancels out that. The problems always have one common denominator: People.

Anyways, instead of getting into the always morbid debate of who killed more people, did more damage, and why, I would say the fact that remains is this: Separation of church and state. And it sounds as if you and I fully agree on that, even if for slightly different reasons. I'm against it because I would refuse to submit to another religion's deity if the tables ever turned and you sound like you are a against it due to the general reasons of anyone having to submit to a religion they are not a part of. Fair enough.

[edit on 8/26/2008 by AshleyD]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 03:58 PM by undo

they've created a strawman (the democrats and republicans) in the guise of
the all powerful judeo-christianity, when this nation hasn't been judeo-christianity for a very long time and even when it was predominantly judeo-christian, it was still run by people who were deists. lol

oh the spectre of those islamic terrorists and christian fundies is a very useful tool for manipulating the masses.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 05:03 PM by Anonymous ATS

reply to post by amitheone

How is an observation of what is so.. and observably true.. offensive? Much less anti-christiant?

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

Well that's definitely a strawman's argument on the Isaac versus Ishmael point because Obama's statements were directed toward the actions of ABRAHAM, not Isaac or Ishmael. But you WANT TO CHARGE HIM WITH ANTI-SEMITISM so you'll perform mental masturbation in public to get it done.

You people are truly pathetic. But carry on, there's entertainment value in this.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 06:42 PM by Lukewiththecomputer

Originally posted by AshleyD

Originally posted by Lukewiththecomputer
How could you miss the point of his speech that much?

Please explain: What did you personally feel was the point of his speech? Also please explain (if you wish) in your own opinion why a presidential candidate should be concerned with issues of religion? Not setting you up for anything. It's an honest question and an answer I'd like to hear from your view. Thanks.

Edited for clarification: I'm not referring to the separation of church and state issue (which is understandably something a politician would be concerned with). I'm referring to his criticism of a specific religion(s)... oddly enough which is his own claimed religion. But that is neither here nor there at the moment. I'd like to know why a politician feels the need to stick his nose in a particular religion's texts. Especially a politician who displays his own ignorance of said religions in his speech by missing an obvious fact I pointed out above.

[edit on 8/24/2008 by AshleyD]

Personally i believe that in any (multi-cultural or not) society that religion and race should not be a tool for politicians to manipulate peoples emotions to get them to agree with specific opinions and polices. we all know how much race and religion play a role in the American presidential race and it really shouldn't; by always raising the question of race or religion the country is in danger of provoking sectarianism attitudes, which he fairly, honestly and truthfully points out.

in my opinion he talks about Christianity in this context because Christianity has been used as a tool of attack and defence, i recall seeing a reporter interviewing some government official after 9/11 , the reporter asked weather there was any suspicion of a controlled demolition and the official said it was 'blasphemy' to ask a question like that, just one example of misuse of peoples faith in Christianity.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 07:22 PM by undo

Originally posted by Valhall
Well that's definitely a strawman's argument on the Isaac versus Ishmael point because Obama's statements were directed toward the actions of ABRAHAM, not Isaac or Ishmael. But you WANT TO CHARGE HIM WITH ANTI-SEMITISM so you'll perform mental masturbation in public to get it done.

You people are truly pathetic. But carry on, there's entertainment value in this.

he mentions isaac, specifically. and i don't have a specific problem with obama. i have a problem with racism of ANY KIND, including your statement of YOU PEOPLE... just what people would that be? people with blonde hair? people with freckles? people who have an opinion that differs from yours? what, did i grow a third arm suddenly?

[edit on 25-8-2008 by undo]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 07:30 PM by undo

anybody who thinks about it for longer than a few seconds, will realize this has never been an issue of religion or race. it's always been an issue of money and power. and i doubt seriously, that'll ever change.

as a result, the speeches of these official leaders, are typically laced with carefully placed concepts to draw the intended response from the target audience - those voters they hope to inspire to support them financially, in their campaigns.

if you still believe our votes actually count and that it has nothing to do with money, i have some nice mountain property to sell you in the everglades.

[edit on 25-8-2008 by undo]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 07:45 PM by AshleyD

reply to post by Lukewiththecomputer

Thank you so much. I agree with some of what you say and disagree with other parts but am still very grateful you took the time to reply.

Originally posted by Valhall
You people are truly pathetic.

No need for rudeness and hostility. Passion and confidence in what you know or believe is an admirable trait but you just insulted a very nice and intelligent woman who is a great contributer to this site. You've also been condescending to other members in this thread. Yes, I know who you are but I don't care at the moment. Enough is enough. You are being downright nasty to other members who don't share your opinion on the topic.

[edit on 8/26/2008 by AshleyD]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 07:48 PM by undo

reply to post by Lukewiththecomputer

very logical and very true.
it's not the religious folk, the white or black folk, it's
agendas, plans within plans, and the means of achieving those ends
via careful use of the language

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 07:54 PM by Quazga

Originally posted by Alora
He mocked the bible by repeating passages from it? When was he wrong about anything he said? I'll tell you-- never. There is nothing wrong with proposing the separation of government and religion. It is, after all, one of our fundamental rights. One that usually goes ignored by christians. There is nothing wrong with bringing up certain parts of the bible that are too archaic to be useful in modern society, and the parts that are too outlandish to be taken as historical accuracy.

I agree with the point he was trying to make: we are a nation of different beliefs, and that is ok.

To me, you all sound scared and hateful....but mostly scared.

edited because someone forgot to proofread, AGAIN. *sigh*

[edit on 23-8-2008 by Alora]

Completely Agree.

This is why you have so many stars... :-)

You just got one more

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 08:07 PM by DINSTAAR

reply to post by mental modulator

I am not a believer and I am a tax paying AMERICAN... You cannot force your beliefs on me anymore then I could strip your beliefs from you.

You are a believer. You are a full fledged statist and you are forcing me to pay taxes because you believe it is the right thing to do. I say 'you' as in the democratic majority so it isn't directed toward you alone.

Land of the free??? I thought so...

It should be, but we are forced to do things against our own judgment and well being on a daily basis. You said you were a tax paying American, that's fine. What if I want to be a non-tax paying American? What if I do not want or need government to hold me up? What if the real religion is unadulterated obedience to government?

Obama is not a Christian, he is a Statist. He wants us to believe in the system. He wants us to believe in 'change' without drastic measures of changing anything. Actually, he wants us to believe in 'change' without any semblance of change.

For Obama to say that we should rule by common laws (he pluralized it) and logic means nothing. He is blowing smoke up our butts, and has no intention of following through.

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 08:14 PM by undo

reply to post by DINSTAAR

and they all do that. there are little incremental changes, along the way, and the occassional ground shaker (legalized abortion), but overall, the change is so gradual, we hardly notice it at all. and usually those changes are safely tucked inside other more popular bills so they slide in without much fanfare or bruhaha.

ah well, life on planet earth. it's interesting at least.

[edit on 25-8-2008 by undo]

reply posted on 25-8-2008 @ 08:36 PM by sardion2000

Worst. Propaganda piece ever. ever.

this is not a one line post.