The reason is simple...

Christianity stands in the way of the agenda; abortion as a means of population control, and dissolution family values in favor of state imposed values.

In a society that depends on government handouts, a smaller population is easier to manage/control. The proverbial "pie" of government resources is only so big. The more mouths to feed, the smaller the piece of "pie" for each and the faster it runs out. So you need to control the number of "mouths". Thus abortion to limit new births. (But this is not enough. Be on the watch for ways a government might cull the heard in order to control the drain of resources which sick and elderly place on the system.)

In order to transform a nation you need to break the chain of tradition. Therefore, the village needs to usurp authority from parents over how children are raised. Dissolving the family unit interrupts the handing down of traditional values from one generation to the next, allowing the state to fill that void with values fitting their best interests.

Thus the smear campaign on religion in general and Christianity directly as that is the most outspoken religious proponents of life and family values.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Obama is a politician. Hardly the object of worship or religious experience.

Exactly. but the question remains. Why is Obama and should we call it Obama-mania or how ever best to describe, that feeling that is invoked in quite a few.

I mean, the election was hardly a mandate of the people. Certainly incomparable to Reagan's second election. And while venerated as the "national grandfather" by some, Reagan was never really thought of nor treated in such a manner.

While politically, I agreed with many of Reagan's policies. I am and was quite opposed to his strike busting of ATC and the Teamsters. One would think of all the years of being president of a very strong union (SAG) Reagan would have been more sympathetic to their cause and demands.

The Deregulation of the trucking industry, continues to take unfair advantage of truck drivers today. I can make that statement, many that understand the changes to the industry would agree. And even the most hardcore Republicans can say, yeah that hurt the truckers once they know the details. No one would call me a bleeding heart tree hugging card carrying member of the ACLU for that statement either. Unless they were just jerking my chain.

But even here on ATS much far worse things have been said over the debate of just healthcare reform...let alone the Birth Certificate issue.

Now some may think that the point of this is a long-winded and quasi-subtle way of calling Obama the anti-christ. Far from it, for me anyways. If I would call him anything of that matter it would be the Beast from the Sea. A political leader beloved by the masses that helps introduce the anti-christ to the world. Of course if that was true, then he would have had to been born in Hawaii



[edit on 27-10-2009 by Ahabstar]

Originally posted by Rhetoric

And Obamas name hasn't been used to justify the murder and oppression of Millions of people throughout the world.

Well, not yet anyway. Give him a little more time - but not more than his allotted 4 years - and I'm sure there will plenty of well-deserved blame to heap on obama.

Actually, he's already off to a great start with his afghanistan war.

Originally posted by Ahabstar

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic


People agree with him and his policies, but I have yet to see anyone... ANYONE worship him.

We can cover than from day one at the inauguration as many in the crowd chanted "Who's House? Obama's house."

I could go much farther in depth, but even a reading of various large threads on ATS with an objective mind can see the zeal and fervor in some posters.

Don't forget the european "rapture" with some there wanting to proclaim obama "president of the world".

Originally posted by Ahabstar
Why is Obama and should we call it Obama-mania or how ever best to describe, that feeling that is invoked in quite a few.

As I said, many people agree with Obama's policies. Many feel excited and hopeful about his presidency. YOU choose to call this "Obama-mania" and "Obama Worship". That doesn't mean it's any more valid than calling the crowds who cheered Bush after 9/11 or the people who wanted his likeness carved on Mt/ Rushmore. "Bush-Mania" or "Bush-worship". People aren't any more enamored with Obama than they were Bill Clinton or Abraham Lincoln.

I mean, the election was hardly a mandate of the people.

I disagree. Obama was hired to do some specific things. By the people.

If I would call him anything of that matter it would be the Beast from the Sea. A political leader beloved by the masses that helps introduce the anti-christ to the world.

Ah, I see. Well... if you have questions about why people see Obama as a biblical figure, perhaps you should ask yourself. Because you, more than anyone else in this thread, keeps equating him to a biblical figure. You want to know why? Ask yourself.

Originally posted by centurion1211
Don't forget the european "rapture" ...

Ooh, I take that back. Seems you have some company. You guys say you wonder why people equate Obama to a biblical figure... You're the only ones doing it. The ONLY people I've heard talk about Obama in these terms are anti-Obama folks. The anti-christ, the rapture, Obama worship, "Beast from the Sea"... Yeah. Ask yourselves.

Obama is no more "worshipped" than any other celeb, cause that all he is. People cried for the Beatles, MJ, backstreet boys, Eminem, etc, its the cult of personality , simple as that.

I suppose when a new president/prime minister/leader comes into power, the people cling to hope. So, when any new leader is bashed, you are essentially bashing the peoples' hope. Or, that's how they feel. The general public generally doesn't recognise the leaders' actions so much as their promises for change. So they gain an iconic status, as is to be expected. The people want someone they can follow, albeit blindly. I have not been an Obama supporter from the beginning; I was (and still am) waiting to see what he accomplishes as a president rather than 'jumping to gun' with my opinion, so to speak.

As far as religion (specifically, Christianity) goes, I guess that's considered 'old news'. We have been through it; we aren't switching out Jesus' every 4 years and judging his actions. We are all well aware of his actions. Also, I thought this was interesting:

Bashing Christ? I dont believe anyone bashes Christ...even back in my hardcore athiest days when I used to smugly laugh at all theists, I never bashed Christ...exist or not, the guys life (the story of it) is a nice chap that raged against the machine. Whats not to like

It's true; you don't hear of a lot of people actually bashing Christ. He's not a hard guy to like. I don't necessarily believe in him, but I do think that, for the most part, he was spreading a great message. Since Christ is respectable but the actions of the churches and religious leaders generally are not, then it's difficult for any rational person to lash out and 'bash' Christ. As far as Obama goes; he represents his government directly. People who look to him (whether they love him or hate him) and make an assessment based on his personality/charisma initially. This is all we have to form an opinion on. If the leader is charismatic and has desirable qualities, then it is easy to praise him. Most people do not wait to form a verdict upon his actions; they tuck their fears away behind the hope that this time it will be different because this is a man that they feel they can trust (due to his appearance, demeanor, and countless other factors undoubtedly).

So, needless to say there is quite a difference between Christ and Obama; most obviously that Christ has been and gone and his actions are well known, and people have already established their beliefs. People are still in the process of establishing their beliefs on Obama, since these are things happening in the present time. Most have pre-emptively formed an opinion. Those people will likely be the ones to strike out, because they feel that people are encroaching on their hope and optimism by doubting his abilities/potential, even if they have no evidence that he will fulfill his promises, or that he will be a better leader. This is why this way of thinking tends to be blinding.

Always keep an open mind, and deny ignorance! In order to do this, you need to have collected sufficient evidence to make form a proper opinion.

Originally posted by Ahabstar

There were those that openly wept when Obama won the election. Surely you will not say that it was simply because their candidate won. It was far more than that.

And I am not talking about the significance of the first black president either.

I think you are trolling. If you want to know why anyone cried the night President Obama was elected ask them...or read a newspaper.

His policies and politics aside, that was a milestone for the country. People of intelligence can recognize that. They can disagree with his policy views and his politics while at the same time acknowlde the historical nature of the victory.

Colin Powell cried when Obama was elected...but you believe it is because Colin Powell has Obama confused with Jesus?....You are trolling.

Collin Powell was moved by the moment the same way many other Americans were moved. President Obama was elected despite his race, not because of it as some right-wing groups like to claim, and for many Americans the first POTUS of color elected represented a long overdue realization of one of our founding principles..."all men are created equal"

As far as his policies and politics...have at it, some of it is warranted, accusing folks of confusing Pres. Obama with Jesus because they were moved by that moment....You are trolling.

COLIN POWELL, FORMER U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE:
President-Elect Obama did not put himself forward as an African-American president. He put himself forward as an American, who happened to be black, who happened to be African-American, and that ought to come after the title.

So, we're very, very proud to have a new American president, who also happens to be an African-American. .And that very fact moves us so far along the continuum that African-Americans have been traveling for the last 230 years of our nation, and to the last 400 years of the existence of colonies in America.

And so I have to share in the pride that all Americans have now for the fact that America did this. And as I watched it, as I watched finally, one of the newscasters cut to the chase and said, he's won, it's over. Pretty moving moment.

HUGH RIMINTON, CNN ANCHOR: There was a tear?

POWELL: Everybody cried. And we saw all of the crowds in Washington, in New York, Chicago. Look what we did. Look what we did.

RIMINTON: And it hasn't worn off yet -- especially by the look on your face?

POWELL: No, no. No. I'm not ashamed of it. My family, my wife, my kids, everybody.

Whether you voted for Mr. Obama or not, you have to take enormous pride in the fact that we were able to do this. We were able to have a contest between two political parties, four different candidates, two on either side, competing in a typical American way, which is hard fought. You fight for your position. It's what our founding fathers intended. They wanted a clash of ideas. And from that clash of ideas, the people are informed and the people make their choice.

[edit on 27-10-2009 by maybereal11]