Obama's anti christian speech, page 6

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
It's impossible logically to be "right" when he takes scripture out of context (fallacy), rejects NT scripture that states Christians are no longer under the OT Mosaic law (fallacy), and ridicules Christians who do believe and follow the scriptures (fallacy).

It's impossible to be "right" if you need fallacies of logic to "prove" your point. In fact, just using 1 logical fallacy renders your entire point invalid.

A fallacy is a component of an argument which, being demonstrably flawed in its logic or form, renders the argument invalid in whole.

en.wikipedia.org...

Whoaa, take it easy "Fallacy". I am no Philosopher or logician (sp) but I did take a couple of "logic" classes in college.

I don't think Fallacy means what you think it does.

A fallacy can render an ARGUMENT invalid...it doesn't mean that the CONCLUSION is true or false, right or wrong.

And I am not sure you really have a case for an invalid argument either.

[edit on 26-8-2008 by maybereal11]

reply posted on 26-8-2008 @ 10:46 AM by orangetom1999

reply to post by maybereal11

A fallacy can render an ARGUMENT invalid...it doesn't mean that the CONCLUSION is true or false, right or wrong.

And I am not sure you really have a case for an invalid argument either.

lol lol lol...ok...gray areas...

Neither hot nor cold.

George Orwell..double speak??

How about ...let your yes be yes ..and your no be no!! pretty simple. Biblical too.

What you are saying about logic is not the same as yes being yes and no being no.

I see this alot on ATS/BTS.

You are saying logic and reason can be a legal fiction..or fiction of law..not necessarily the truth. In politics/entertainment...this is called working the audience or gray area.

Orangetom

reply posted on 26-8-2008 @ 12:15 PM by XIDIXIDIX

Originally posted by Lilitu
It proves one thing. The editor of that video is a moron. Note how he trusts no one to listen and form their own opinion. He's got to force his own misinterpretation all throughout the video to make sure the lesser morons get it "right".

YEAH tell us how we should understand what he is really doing lilipution so us lesser morons get it right. You know,, your usual misguided misinterpretation, or your usual anti christian jingles

[edit on 26-8-2008 by XIDIXIDIX]

reply posted on 26-8-2008 @ 06:15 PM by Scramjet76

reply to post by AshleyD

Separation of church and state.

You got that right. Personally I feel the best president might be agnostic. Someone who really has the courage to admit they don't know what reality is, where it comes from, what happens when you die. That is about as honest as it gets. But hey our system is packed full of religious folks all pointing the finger at one another. Since they want to act like children we have no choice but to seperate religion from government.

It would be great if politicians could talk about the possibility of God in a scientific curious-like attitude that instilled the pursuit of knowledge in people as to want to unravel the mystery of our origins. Instead they latch onto rigid beliefs which aren't reconcilable with what the next guy is spewing. I mean what a joke.

As they say... everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. So I guess keep it at home and don't let it out of the house!

It's sad that Obama will have to tread much carefully than McCain this fall. Personally I don't care if McCain is Christian and Obama Muslim. What I want to know is how they will solve the challenges this country faces using cause and effect.... the basic mechanism of our reality.

reply posted on 26-8-2008 @ 06:24 PM by Azrael75

reply to post by amitheone

he wants separation of church and state????

well that was originally meant to protect the church, he must hate the church.

he wants people to understand that not everyone here is christian??????

he must hate america and its motto of welcoming all kinds.

he is anti-christian and anti-america. it is obvious with his little speech regarding protecting both. what a slime ball.

reply posted on 26-8-2008 @ 08:36 PM by alundaio

It doesn't matter what these so-called Politicist pigs say. They are for the Corporate America, and they do not represent the People of America. He can say he worships Santa Claus and smokes crack for all I care. He's still going to levitate the powers of Corporations and Dismiss the rights of the People.

reply posted on 27-8-2008 @ 08:46 AM by orangetom1999

Originally posted by Azrael75
reply to post by amitheone

he wants separation of church and state????

well that was originally meant to protect the church, he must hate the church.

he wants people to understand that not everyone here is christian??????

he must hate America and its motto of welcoming all kinds.

he is anti-christian and anti-america. it is obvious with his little speech regarding protecting both. what a slime ball.

Separation of Church and State was not intended to protect the church. It was for the purpose of preventing what had happened so commonly in European history and also the history of most feudal nations.

In most nations the Crowns or Titles of these leaders was put on them with the consent and approval of the Religious authority..the priesthoods.
This system of Authority structure is called historically...Divine Right of Kings.

Under this system a King's or Emperor's authority or power was unlimited because it was from God by way of the priesthoods. It was a variation of Absolute Power. The founders of this country knew this history of European Mischief in government stemming from this association of government with church. They sought to separate these two factors to limit the mischief.

This system of Mischief in many nations became a way of maintaining power while fleecing the people between the kings/state and church.

The quest of every government from history is absolute power.....
Many ways have been devised to do this...but religion is always the absolute political power. History is replete with this. Not necessarily the Christian Religion but religion nonetheless is necessary for absolute power.

What you see happening today by philosophy and especially in the body politic is always variations of G.W.F. Hegel"s position of ..."The state is God." Or "The State is God on Earth."

This position has de evolved since Hegel's days to Secualar Humanism and been ovelaid into the body politic in the form of Cradle To Grave...mentality. The Government is to take care of us ..cradle to grave. We just need to give them enough money and power.

The State is God!! This is the essence of all social pholosophy/reliigion and has its historical example/fruit...its ultimate expression in the writings of Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels.

WHat you are looking at here is the body politic returning to the position of pre Seperation of Church and State ideas and philosophys all the way back to the church and state philosophys..through Secular Humanism...to consolidate the absolute power of the State or in this case..the Body Politic.
We are back to the absolute power of the state...through the new religion.The new political religious paradigm....Secular Humanism.... and not to limited government.

The body politic is once again to entrench themselves into power by the new religious paradigm Secular Humanism...being overlaid as if it were seperation of church and state. Secular Humanism is nothing more than the "State is God here on earth" Demigods. Ultimately it must return to Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels.

Thanks,
Orangetom

[edit on 27-8-2008 by orangetom1999]

reply posted on 28-8-2008 @ 03:19 AM by Buck Division

reply to post by amitheone

Here is a transcription of a portion of Obama's speech, what he said, as accurately as I could type it here while listening to the video:

#

"Democracy demands that participants translate their beliefs into universal rather than religious specific values. It requires that religious proposals be subject to argument, and agreeable to reason. If someone seeks to pass a law, it must be based on something OTHER than just the teachings of the church. You can't simply point to what your pastor said last Sunday, or evoke "God's Will", and expect that argument to be accepted by everyone without further debate.

"Although this may offend evangelicals, in a pluralistic society, we have no choice except to compromise with others. We must persuade people by referencing a commonly agreed to reality. We must compromise, and assess what is really possible. This contradicts religion, which is, at a fundamental level, uncompromising, and practices the art of dealing with the impossible. Basing your life on this may be sublime, but basing policies on this is dangerous."

#

During this portion of his speech, the letters over the screen said the following:

"This man is not a Christian. He wants to rule by his laws, and not God's law. By doing this, he puts himself above God."

#

Wow. This tape is quite prejudicial, and infammatory. It is also quite ignorant. It defies the exact thing that Obama is speaking against, ironically enough. So goes ATS responses, and America at large.

reply posted on 28-8-2008 @ 03:32 AM by Justice11

Originally posted by mthans75
Christians supported Bush in both of his last elections. Now Bush has the lowest approval rating in the history of all Presidents.

At this time, polls indicate that Christians overwhelmingly support McCain. Bush has endorsed McCain....see a pattern here. McCain is a warmonger like Bush.

Obama is much more intelligent than Bush or McCain and he deserves a chance at the Presidency.

So far, many Christians have shown intolerance for Obama.

We have far too many serious problems in this country, all of them caused by Bush's administration which showed a history of not caring about human beings.

The time has come for everyone to get serious about getting our country back on track and we need to stand up to the criminals in our government and being them down.

If we don't, there won't be any freedom for any of us, Christian or non-Christian.

Bush is doing what americans have elected him to do.Protect the United states of America.He makes a darn good poker player too.

reply posted on 28-8-2008 @ 03:34 AM by Justice11

Originally posted by Buck Division
reply to post by amitheone

Here is a transcription of a portion of Obama's speech, what he said, as accurately as I could type it here while listening to the video:

#

"Democracy demands that participants translate their beliefs into universal rather than religious specific values. It requires that religious proposals be subject to argument, and agreeable to reason. If someone seeks to pass a law, it must be based on something OTHER than just the teachings of the church. You can't simply point to what your pastor said last Sunday, or evoke "God's Will", and expect that argument to be accepted by everyone without further debate.

"Although this may offend evangelicals, in a pluralistic society, we have no choice except to compromise with others. We must persuade people by referencing a commonly agreed to reality. We must compromise, and assess what is really possible. This contradicts religion, which is, at a fundamental level, uncompromising, and practices the art of dealing with the impossible. Basing your life on this may be sublime, but basing policies on this is dangerous."

#

During this portion of his speech, the letters over the screen said the following:

"This man is not a Christian. He wants to rule by his laws, and not God's law. By doing this, he puts himself above God."

#

Wow. This tape is quite prejudicial, and infammatory. It is also quite ignorant. It defies the exact thing that Obama is speaking against, ironically enough. So goes ATS responses, and America at large.

LOL!you just descibed a New world Order video!Or zeitgeist!Or the lucifer project!Get my drift?

reply posted on 28-8-2008 @ 03:35 AM by Justice11

Originally posted by alundaio
It doesn't matter what these so-called Politicist pigs say. They are for the Corporate America, and they do not represent the People of America. He can say he worships Santa Claus and smokes crack for all I care. He's still going to levitate the powers of Corporations and Dismiss the rights of the People.

I call your B.S.You have no proof.nothing but insults and innuendo nothing more.

reply posted on 28-8-2008 @ 03:36 AM by undo

reply to post by Buck Division

i completely understand where he is coming from, regarding religious freedom. the issue i took with the speech was more along the lines of why he felt it necessary to use this argument as a foundation stone for his speech. it's already assumed in the usa that we have religious freedom and tolerance, although the tolerance appears to be a bit lopsided lately. human nature being what it is, action=reaction. everybody with a brain knows this, and i'm sure you have one, and so does obama. as a result, i'm pretty sure he brought it up and flashed it around to hitch a ride on the cresting wave of anti-christianism going on these days.

reply posted on 28-8-2008 @ 10:30 AM by orangetom1999

reply to post by Buck Division

Buck Division,

In reading your transcript of the video and what Obama said...I am forced to ask myself if you and others understand the context of what Obama is implying?

Right from the first sentence...notice the implication of "Hijacking" by the usage of the word "demands." The implied higher authority to hijack anothers actions.

"Democracy demands that participants translate their beliefs into universal rather than religious specific values.

This is a definition of bondage..not liberty. Do you and the readers in this thread understand this concept "implied " here in the quote?? That one can demand and call it liberty...that one can demand and call it the higher moral ground.

Notice the word used here.."universal" ?? Universal is a watchword...which is very anti American. It means implies and or infers that worldly standards are in play here..not necessarily American Standards. The word universal is often used in Eastern Philosophies to mean of this world..not American principles and beliefs. This is a very slick way of meaning UnAmerican principles...or in other words..dumping American Beliefs and taking on the worlds standards and expectations.
Whenever I see the word "Universal " used in any sentience..it is automatically a watchword...and my radar goes up several levels.

Any of you know about the Amish or the Mennonites? Is Obama implying that they must take up the "Universal" demands?? Or is religious freedom guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.??
Remember here ...if Obama wins this election ..does he not take the Oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?? Will he demand that we switch to "Universal" Belief systems in place of our basic religious freedoms of which he takes an oath to defend??

You are looking at a speech implying a higher moral ground even if it means we must turn out backs on our basic religious beliefs in lieu of "Universal" belief systems of the World and the World standards.

One more thing you people need to understand ..in accordance with Eastern Philosophies and belief systems...the use of the word "Universal" and the "World"..does not mean what most of us think ..in terms of the world we see daily. It means ..."Universal" and the " World" in accordance with Eastern Philosophies. This is a very different World and Universal from what most of us are trained to spot or even think.

For those of you not trained in it ..what Obama is talking about here is the religion of this world...under the god of this world. By demands..by inference..by implication..by default....that this system be allowed to play through unquestioned .....it is universal. Universal..thinking and universal philosophies are becoming in the body politic as a watchword for entitlement. We are entitled...we are royalty...by entitlement ...because we are of the higher moral ground..we are universal. It is so logical and reasonable to those easily captured by the emotional appeal of "universal."
It is nothing of the kind and it is also very UnAmerican. Unconstitutional.

All this is obvious to those trained in spotting Eastern Universal Religion principles at work.

continuing on ....

It requires that religious proposals be subject to argument, and agreeable to reason. If someone seeks to pass a law, it must be based on something OTHER than just the teachings of the church. You can't simply point to what your pastor said last Sunday, or evoke "God's Will", and expect that argument to be accepted by everyone without further debate.

Notice the continuation of the "hijacking" by sophisticated use of logic and reason.
But the Constitution guarantees religious freedom to Americans...and to be able to vote their conscience..on many issues. Notice the use here of the word..."Vote their conscience."
Notice Obama's use of the word..."requires"...implying and inferring ..takeover...default setting..within the new moral high ground. This is the logic and reason of a "Hijacking!!" By this kind of pseudo moral high ground based on logic and reason...one can in pseudo reason ..remove any freedom ..particularly religious freedom to vote ones conscience on any issue.
Religious freedoms are an Individual American Right..not subject to the requirements, demands, default settings of others.

Notice one thing here of importance..and be very careful in the future ..and observant of this one.

If Amendment One of the Constitution of the United States...is for the purpose of guaranteeing religious freedom....of the People by limiting government and Obama is, by this speech, seeking to limit or substitute this freedom..he must therefore be replacing it with a higher principle...a higher consciousness...a higher religion. What is the name of this new religion or principle which will replace the religious freedom of Americans by unlimited government.
Remember ..the purposes of Amendment One is to limit government in the religion arena. The purpose of the first Ten Amendments is to limit government across the board...and thereby guarantee the freedoms and liberty's of Americans.

continuing on..

"Although this may offend evangelicals, in a pluralistic society, we have no choice except to compromise with others. We must persuade people by referencing a commonly agreed to reality. We must compromise, and assess what is really possible. This contradicts religion, which is, at a fundamental level, uncompromising, and practices the art of dealing with the impossible. Basing your life on this may be sublime, but basing policies on this is dangerous."

"Pluralistic society" another watchword used in place of "universal." Notice the use of the "hijacking" phrase " we have no choice." This is the authority....the higher moral pretext...the justification for going to the next step in limiting freedoms. Justification to default through against the religious freedoms of Americans.
Are they going to force the Amish and Mennonites to compromise with "pluralistic society" with "Universal Principles?" How about you and me against our wishes and against our principles?? Particularly our religious principles and or scruples. Will we be defaulted over to the new paradigm..the new template of "Universal?"

This speech is a speech of bondage..not liberty. Of enslavement to universal principles and pluralistic society..not Freedom and Liberty.

Notice also here the use of the word "society." This is another watchword..often used by people of logic and reason. The Constitution of the United States is for the freedoms and liberty's of the "Individual" not for society. The Constitution is for each and every individual American...not for Society..not for a pluralistic society or universal. The use of the word society is often for the purpose of herd mentality...to easily move the herd in the direction desired. Beware of the use or misuse of the word "society" as a justification for defaulting your liberty's away from you.

I hope that some of the readers out here can see the difference in what I am saying and what Obama is describing in this speech.

This is an attempt at "hijacking" the American way of life ..especially our religious independence and freedoms and replacing them with a "universal" religion..a.. "universal pluralistic societal " demand/requirement/default setting/higher moral ground to play through.

Thanks,
Orangetom

[edit on 28-8-2008 by orangetom1999]

reply posted on 28-8-2008 @ 03:55 PM by ravenshadow13

Originally posted by kidflash2008
reply to post by amitheone

Where is the speech anti-Christian? He makes a point of which Christianity is to be taught. Should it be Catholicism since it is the largest denomination?
I am a Pagan, so I guess I don't belong in Christian America. We are NOT a Christian nation.

I am also Pagan and think religion and politics should be way apart...but REGARDLESS
Obama is Christian.
Just because you don't like him doesn't mean you can criticize his religion, especially if it's the same as yours. Doesn't matter who is a "better" Christian.

ALSO
Freedom of religion, yes. Yes, he is also using logic and reason.

Would you want someone to guide the country by God? I don't think so, God isn't exactly American, if anything. I'd rather someone use facts and statistics, especially since, again, not every American is Christian the way you are.

If you don't like that, then you can give me and Obama some tickets to another country. If you move my stuff for me, I'll leave, if you don't like the fact that I actually want someone to use their head to run the country, rather than a religious instinct.

[edit on 8/28/2008 by ravenshadow13]