It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Max_TO
reply to post by amazed
Very good point you make as well .
Just for the record I do not make Obama threads all that often nor do I often post in the different threads out there about Obama .
Could I be over reacting , very possible .
Did the title of this thread create the very debate that I was trying to avoid , the religion card , possible , however in all honestly it was not my intention to do so . Nor did I which to create an Obama bashing thread and I hope my past posts here prove that .
Would I cut my lawn for Obama , sure .
Did the direction set out in this post by myself as well as others , on both sides of the debate , turn this issue into something that its not , again very possible .
Once again time will tell .
[edit on 1-5-2009 by Max_TO]
Originally posted by bongsmoker
Simple explanation. Obama is the anti-christ and obviously if he didn't cover up the Christian symbol it would hurt him. So he doesn't want everyone to find out the truth and just covered it up from feeling the pain.
Originally posted by Trauma
You have to cover up Jesus if you are a servant of Satan. The implication here is that Obama is some sort of satanic demon or possibly the anti-christ. Who knows?
Originally posted by Max_TO
I do however take offense to these " small " changes that we seem to be seeing more and more of now a days that seem to forever change the country .
And as for is crafty PR people that you speak of could they be the same handlers that advised him to bow to every one he met well over seas ?
Maybe he needs some new handlers .
Originally posted by spiritwomyn
I thought Obama was a Christian? So if he wants a symbol representing Christ covered what does that reveal?
Originally posted by Max_TO
reply to post by amazed
If any form of government ever comes to your house and makes a request of you to cover your religious symbols of choice I would be happy to come stand by your side and defend your right to display whatever you like as guaranteed by the Constitution .
Originally posted by Max_TO
reply to post by evil incarnate
Funny you should mention the Swastika , as I pointed out at the beginning of this thread , the U.S. Naval barracks in Coronado, California is in fact shaped exactly like a Swastika .
Originally posted by Max_TO
reply to post by amazed
If any form of government ever comes to your house and makes a request of you to cover your religious symbols of choice I would be happy to come stand by your side and defend your right to display whatever you like as guaranteed by the Constitution .
Originally posted by Max_TO
reply to post by evil incarnate
I was answering a question that I was directly asked , it wasn't me that asked the question I was only replying . If you look to the top of this page you can see the question that I was asked .
You may be using my words but you are taking them out of context .
As for the Swastika-Shaped Government building am I to understand that you do not have a problem with government building such places ?
Originally posted by Max_TO
I agree government should have nothing to do with religion and thats exactly why he should have let it be .
Why should the government show up at a place to give a speech and then request that the place " modify " there religious symbols ?
If I am not mistaken that could also be seen as an infringement on ones right to expression or ones freedom of speech .
Who really cares if its christian , Muslim or whatever , not the point .
Originally posted by Max_TO - posted on 1-5-2009 @ 02:40 AM
When the " christians " are all gone who do you think they will go after next ?
Now , whether or not any government official likes the symbol or not should not matter at all as long as its a granted right as per the constitution . I am sure no one here would pretend to claim that simply because Obama , or anyone else , has there picture taken while standing under a symbol doesn't imply his/there following of that particular group , as represented by so displayed symbol .
Originally posted by Max_TO
reply to post by evil incarnate
So I was wrong to answer a direct question as asked to me ? ok ?
I was also wrong to think that its ok for the government to publicly fund the construction of a building shaped like a Swastika , ok again , sorry I should say its ok to build it with public money as long as he doesn't stand on it ? sure .