So our President gets down on his knees and prays to "God".

[cherokeeprogressive]

Our President claims that he gets down on his knees and prays for guidance in his every day governance of the United States...

How do you feel about that?

Who does he pray to? is it the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" most DU'ers use to describe the person/entity/THING Christians hold holy? Or is he to be held to be foolish for praying to an entity most DU'ers claim doesn't exist?

In the end, does our President claim to have "faith" in order to garner votes? Or does he really believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Would you defend his words in this context as simply a means to get votes or does he REALLY believe the things the Bible says?

I ask these questions because I've seen people who claim to believe in a "higher power" ridiculed here so many times I can't count. I've seen people of faith ridiculed to the point where they've left DU altogether.

So what is it? Give President Obama a PASS when he says he drops to his knees and prays regularly, and that "Christian Principles" guide the process by which he makes decisions...

Or hold him to the same standards we hold others to... meaning there's no such thing as a "higher power"...?

[dionysus]

1. i have no idea what he personally believes.. but in this country at this time, running for president

as an athiest would mean you lose.

[WillowTree]

58. So, would that fact justify lying about it?

[surfdog]

95. Yes , it would

When the people decide to judge you on a religious basis , then they deserve to be lied to

[spanone]

99. what lie

[tnvoter]

127. how do you know he's lying?

Assuming he's telling the truth, I have no issues with it.
As long as he doesn't tell me what to believe (unlike some Republicans), I don't care what he does in private.

[GOTV]

242. If, in order to be elected, the public required that ...

... you once held an Indian head penny in your hand at some point in your life - would that justify lying about it?

Yes, it would. It's an irrelevant requirement and impossible to disprove.

[Grown2Hate]

254. Great point. I went to a discussion forum between Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss at ASU this

weekend (GREAT discussion, great time meeting them afterwards!) and Dawkins says he wouldn't be surprised if we've had NUMEROUS athiest Presidents already, but that they'd never be able to admit it publically while running. He is calling for all "lame duck" athiests that never have to face the voters again to "come out" as athiests. I thought that'd be a SPECTACULAR idea!

[elleng]

2. Don't judge.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

3. I have no problem with whatever President Obama chooses to do for enlightenment.

I know he's an intelligent, good, honorable man, and I trust him.

I believe in his sincerity.

He has a terrible, frightening task, being president. Whatever helps him is fine with me.

[demtenjeep]

4. agreed

nothing wrong at all

[wtmusic]

61. +1

Whatever gets him through the night (it's alright).

[Surya Gayatri]

100. +1,000 !

You took the words right off my keyboard, Peggy!

Let him call on any comfort and rely on any relief to find the strength and wisdom to carry out his daunting duties.

This is a private matter between him and his own conscience. Not ours to judge.
SG

[treestar]

106. True, if he did yoga to relax

That would be cool, too.

[renie408]

116. +1 more

[Number23]

200. Really lovely post.

[undeterred]

229. + a brazillion

[ieoeja]

280. "Enlightenment"?

Religion is the exact opposite of enlightenment. In fact, the very era in history during which religion lost its hold on Europe is actually called "The Enlightenment". You can't get any more opposite than that.

I think the word you were looking for is "relaxation", or perhaps to clear his mind of the day's clutter.

[ScreamingMeemie]

5. Is there an option for who cares?

For those of us who are neither Christians who feel they are persecuted here, or Atheists who equally claim persecution?

I really don't care. For some of us it's all a little ridiculous...from both sides.

[phleshdef]

6. I'm an atheist. And it doesn't bother me in the least.

He isn't trying to use the power of government to shove religion down anyone's throat. Most people in this country are religious to some degree. Its just something that human beings haven't grown out of yet and I imagine it will be a prominent part of society for the rest of my lifetime. Thats just how things are.

[Luminous Animal]

33. Actually, he does use the power of goverment...

That whole faith based initiatives that he proudly states that he has expanded.

[SammyWinstonJack]

109. +1. That's okay because he's Barack Obama!

He gets a pass when others would not.

[phleshdef]

113. How is that shoving religion down your throat?

Try something that actually applies to what I said.

[MNBrewer]

97. To quote Barack Obama, "God's in the mix."

*sigh*

[Bluenorthwest]

108. He says his religion is why he stands against equality for millions of Americans....

So while throats might not get stuff pushed into them, the President certainly does promote his faith as reason for his secular opinions and actions. I mean, he and Ron Paul are in agreement, it is State's Rights, it is Sanctity, it is God in the Mix!
An atheism that appears in it's results the same as religious dogma is what is appears to be not what it says it is.

[phleshdef]

114. He hasn't done one thing to stand against equality and has done quite a bit for the cause of it.

But you are incapable of posting in a thread without going into broken record mode over his gay marriage stance, so I don't expect you to actually grant a fair judgement in that area anyway.

[_ed_]

153. Broken record?

I suppose you would have said that about Dr. King and civil rights: "he's just a broken record."

Obama said this: “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian…it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

Fair judgment? Are gays supposed to just accept this kind of outright bigotry?

[phleshdef]

158. Dr. King wouldn't go around trying to derail threads that have nothing to do with the issue....

....every single fucking time he posted. So yea, broken fucking record. You read it right and I didn't fucking stutter. And its pretty ridiculous to try and compare Dr. King to some random internet poster. Give me a fucking break.

I know what Obama said. Thats his personal belief. He however has not let that personal belief cause him to do anything to stand in the way of equality. He does not support any federal laws that prevent gay marriage. He wants to repeal DOMA. And he has done more for gay rights that all his predecessors combined. And thats my original point. He has NOT allowed his religious beliefs to translate into policies against gay marriage. Period.

[_ed_]

216. Sure

and gay people should just get in line and shut up, right? After all, he's better than the other Presidents.

"God's in the mix." Outright bigotry. My God says your marriage isn't as good as MY marriage.

The sickest thing is supposed liberals defending this. Would this kind of bigotry work against any other group?

[phleshdef]

276. In the same breathe he said that he would NOT support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage

Since you want to bring up the "God's in the mix" comment so much while conveniently leaving out that fact because it doesn't fit your agenda, I feel the need to bring that to light. Those comments he made during that Q&A with Warren back up my point 100%. Barack Obama is a Christian, like most of this god damn country is and thus he believes his own marriage to be a Christian union between a man and a woman. He however does NOT believe that should affect what we legislate as acceptable for marriage. He doesn't believe in gay marriage in a religious sense but has no intention of preventing it in a legislative sense. And thats exactly why I said he doesn't try to use the power of government to shove his religious views down people's throats and the comments he made there completely back me up on that.

And no one said gay people should get in line and shut up. I support marriage equality completely. But going around pretending that Obama is the enemy here and pretending he has done ANYTHING against gay rights is dishonest and unproductive. He has the best gay rights record of any President in history, period. Thats undeniable. And no matter how much you bitch and moan about his religious views, nothing you can say will change that.

[great white snark]

232. +1

Thanks for your rational input on this subject.

[Bluerthanblue]

165. you quote him as saying:

"Now, for me as a Christian…it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

He isn't telling others what they need to feel about marriage. He isn't saying that everyone who marries must believe they are entering into a 'sacred union'. He is talking about what marriage means TO HIM.

There are many people who follow the teachings of Christ who fully support gay marriage. I'm one of them. The UCC is an open and affirming church and there are others.

[MNBrewer]

170. For HIM, as a Christian, he's also the President.

If he allows his religious dogma to influence him in one direction, why not another (i.e., opposition to marriage equality)

[Bluerthanblue]

179. we are all influenced by all kinds of things-

there is no reason to put what you call "religious dogma" on any kind of special list. imo.

I remember when I was just a little kid, people arguing that electing JFK would mean that the Pope would control the US. People can deny that their life experiences influence the way they think- but that is a lie. I wouldn't expect a person who was GLBT to make decisions that are not in any way effected by their life.

Pres. Obama was explaining his own personal perspective in the words that were quoted. He wasn't advocating that his personal perspective be the law of the land in my understanding. The gov. of my state was not a motivated advocate for marriage equality, but we passed the bill and he signed it. Now the legislature is trying to overturn it and he has pleged to veto that if it succeeds. That doesn't mean his own personal perspective of marriage has changed, but it is the acknowledgement that his perspective shouldn't deprive others of their freedom and equal rights.

[MNBrewer]

184. Umm....

[Bluerthanblue]

186. could you

elaborate on the ummm?

I'm pretty terrible at saying what I am trying to say, and often don't realize how badly I muff something up till it's pointed out to me. What causes you to ummm?

[_ed_]

217. He's the goddamn President of the United States

How do you think it sounds to a 14 year old gay kid out there when the President says you'll never have a marriage like his because "God's in the mix?"

These issues actually matter beyond the horse race, you know.

[Bluerthanblue]

233. what?

When did he ever say to a 14yr old kid "you'll never have a marriage like this because god is in the mix"?

[_ed_]

236. You're right:

It's probably wonderful to be a young gay teen and hear the President say that heterosexual marriage is better because "God is in the mix."

[Bluerthanblue]

246. sorry...

Last edited Mon Feb 6, 2012, 02:42 PM - Edit history (1)

are you a 14yr. old gay teen? Is this the way you heard what the President said? Sorry, I don't hear him saying heterosexual marriage is better at all- or that any union of any kind is better because "god is in the mix". Perhaps you are talking about some statement that he made that I've never read or listened to. But it is also possible that you are hearing what he said through your own filter.

Should a person who doesn't share a belief in a "god" or "higher power" feel threatened, by those who do?

If Pres. Obama was in favor of a constitutional ammendment prohibiting same sex marriage and was pushing this agenda with his administration I'd be strongly against this policy. But in my understanding he is not. He has said that the constitution doesn't define "marriage" and shouldn't.

[CakeGrrl]

162. +1000

[bluestateguy]

7. My anecdotal experience with DU is this

Christian faiths are bashed and mocked regularly, including mainline progressive Christians.

Other faiths are either ignored or only subjected to the occasional token criticism.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

14. Xtians hate it when I post the hateful things Jesus allegedly said.

The bible is a terrible and inconsistent moral guide. There are many far better moral guides. There is nothing particularly moral about the illiterate, unscientific Bronze Age societies portrayed in it.

Xtianity simply cannot deal with the 21st century.

[sabrina 1]

36. What hateful things did Jesus say? Not that it matter, but as far as I know, Jesus is from the New

Testament, most of the hateful stuff is in the Old Testament. Although I admit, I am no expert on the Bible, new or old.

[Ruby the Liberal]

71. You are asking someone so filled with hate/disgust/whatever emotion

that they can't even be bothered to type out the word 'Christian'?

LOL

[BadgerKid]

104. FYI, that poster is aluding to the Greek language.

?????ό? = Christos

It was good enough for Celtic monks. See Book of Kells.

[deutsey]

112. It's been a while since I've studied the Bible closely

but I don't recall anything particularly hateful that Jesus said.

Some people may construe his prohibition of divorce as problematic (I did because my mom was a lot better off after she got divorced), or maybe what he said (paradoxically) about coming to divide followers from their families. I've also read criticisms of how Jesus "invented" hell (as Twain put it) as a concept of eternal punishment. There might be other things, but I'm just going from memory here (too lazy to get up and flip through my Bible).

Passages from Paul's letters (which pre-date the Gospels) have stuff about women being subservient to men and homosexuality being bad, etc. But a lot of scholars also believe that only some of those letters were actually written by Paul and that what he believed was a lot different from what those who wrote later in his name believed.

For example, the historical Paul was apparently certain that he was living in the end of days and that Christ would return very soon. After Paul's execution and when Jesus didn't return as soon as expected, Christian leaders began finding themselves dealing with governing an emerging institutional church. That's when letters not written by Paul that drew from his authority were written in response to issues in the developing church.

This is what I recall from my study of the New Testament from a few years back (master's level academic course and personal study). I may be overlooking something or new scholarship may have emerged that I'm not aware of.

[JNelson6563]

122. I think we can, with certainty, credit "Paul"

with the "fundraising" letters. lolz I get such a kick out of how he tries to shame congregations into giving but people think those writings are "holy". I will give them one thing, it certainly created a fundraising model for congregations of the future. Paul was more of a GOP-style visionary than anything IMO.


Julie

[whathehell]

176. Who cares what ANYONE believes, if their beliefs don't run counter to progressive values?

[deutsey]

190. I don't know

[whathehell]

196. I don't either.

I think belief is a PERSONAL matter. I consider myself an agnostic

I'm a FIRM believer in the separation of church and state

and was so even before I became agnostic.

[deutsey]

198. Kudos to you

I also believe belief is a personal matter. I wish more politicians did as well.

[whathehell]

201. Thanks!

Ditto for politicians and a lot of people on DU too!

[deutsey]

203. +1

[whathehell]

174. +1000..n/t

[Logical]

195. That is because most people only have to hear the Christian crap.....

That is what I am exposed to 99% of the time.

[whathehell]

215. They "have" to...They have no choices?

They can't walk away, slam the door, turn the TV channel, tell anyone

trying to "convert" them to get out of their face?

I doubt that anyone, unless they're bound and gagged "has to" hear anything.

[vaberella]

241. Very intolerant people who claim to want tolerance. Seriously the hypocrisy is unparalleled. n/t

[limpyhobbler]

8. I just assume he's pretending to love God to get votes.

[JSnuffy]

76. Not even an assumption..

... but rather just my senses telling me that he doesn't have strong Christian beliefs but does the bare minimum as part of his job as President.

I could be wrong...

[CJCRANE]

88. So why did he go to church for twenty years

before he became President?

Why does he mention his faith in his books?

It seems to me that it's not just religious people who believe what they want to believe...

[JSnuffy]

90. Do I know for certain what is in his head?

No..

However, I know that any savvy and aspiring politician or community leader knows that church attendance is for all intents and purposes, mandatory.

It isn't limited to just the presidency.

[Bluerthanblue]

169. hmmmm... the way we

project our own thoughts onto the motivation of others, says far more about us, than anything.

Perhaps that's the only reason you might go to church, but be careful about projecting your own reasons onto others.

[JSnuffy]

173. Good guess...

... but I don't attend church.

Maybe when I run for office.

[whathehell]

183. LOL...That is "precisely" only your guess.

You might want to refrain from stating as FACT, what is, of course,

only a possibility and a "hope" on your part.

[Obamacare]

156. That's a rethug talking point

Why can't you take him for his word, that he is a Christian? Why would he spend 20+yrs in a church if he wasn't a Christian?

[limpyhobbler]

157. God is imaginary so if he is pretending to love god that shows he is intelligent. It's a compliment.

I do take him at his word that he is Christian. I think alot of Christians are just faking it.
Alot of people spend 20+ years in church for family reasons, community reasons, political reasons. It's no big deal, everybody does it. No need to get defensive.

If I didn't think he was faking it then that would really worry me.

If he knelt at his bedside every night and really prayed for help from an imaginary friend, that would be way worse.

Do you think it would be better if the President really prayed to Jesus for guidance every day?

[whathehell]

180. Excuse, me, but the concept that God is imaginary is an OPINION, not a decided fact.

If the entire scientific establishment concedes that they can neither prove or disprove the existence

of God, I'm sure you could avail yourself of the same modesty.

I have YET to see a "believer" of any sort here who does not preface his beliefs with the words "I believe".

or "In my opinion".

You're in no better position to do otherwise.

[limpyhobbler]

191. (In my opinion) gods are imaginary. Better?

Seems redundant to me, it's clearly an opinion. Actually I wasn't trying to bring the subject up at all, as far as gods being imaginary or whatever. But it came up because I said a couple posts ago that I assumed Prez. Obama was faking his devotion. Then that other person accused me of repeating "rethug talking points", so I was trying to explain why in my opinion it is cool to pretend to believe in god just to get votes, because gods are imaginary, in my opinion. Do you know what I am saying?

[whathehell]

193. That is better, yes,

and I appreciate your courteous, non-hostile response.

The Prez may be faking his devotion, he may not be...I think he's a decent person,

either way, and I'm voting for him.

[cleanhippie]

208. Actually, the concept that god is real is an opinion, not a fact in the least.

What is fact, is that there is not one single shred of evidence to support that any supernatural being exists outside of our reality at all. What is even harder fact is that the god YOU believe in, has even LESS evidence than that.

Extarodinary claims require extraordinary evidence. THAT is what the scientific establishment concedes. Without evidence, there IS no god.

[whathehell]

213. "The concept that god is real is also an opinion, not a fact". Funny, I never said otherwise.

"Extrarordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

I made no "extraordinary claims", but as far as "reality" goes,

there was no "evidence" that germs and other micro organisms existed for millenia.

The fact that there was no "evidence" of them, obviously did not negate their "reality",

it simply delayed our realization of that fact. That is

what the scientific establishment concedes.

"Without evidence, there IS no god"...Um, no..Without "evidence",

there is simply no external SUBSTANTIATION

of God, just as there was, until the invention of the microscope,

no substantiation of germs.

[cleanhippie]

219. You can keep trying to make the false equivalencies if you want.

But I'm afraid you are only trying to convince yourself. No one else is buying it.

Have a nice day.

[whathehell]

230. Um, No. Trying isn't required...They are clearly equivalent, lol.

"No one else is buying it"?...Really?....Are the votes all in, lol?

Oh Well. This won't be the first time you've had to duck out of an argument with me.

As the saying goes: "Never engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent"

[cleanhippie]

247. You could not be more right.

You being the unarmed one and all, it would hardly be fair for me to continue.

When you're right, you're right.

Have a nice day.

[whathehell]

250. BWAHAHAHA!

I knew you would say that!

What else have you got, afterall?

[cleanhippie]

252. Bwahahaha

I knew you would say that. Afterall, all you seem I have left are thinly veiled personal insults. Other than that, you hVe nothing left at all. As usual.

Again, have a nice day.

[whathehell]

258. Gee...Such originality!

"I knew you would say that".

No you didn't.

"Afterall, all you seem I have left are thinly veiled personal insults".

You might want to check your spelling and word usage there.

Beyond that, I didn't think they were that thinly veiled.

Have a nice day!

[cleanhippie]

259. As expected, you lack any substance whatsoever.

Having to deal with the likes of you, without the benefit of a full keyboard or screen, autospell mistakes are bound to happen. I would have thought that anyone with a modicum of reason might see that. I guess even a modicum is missing from your repertoire.

Perhaps next time you can attempt to argue your point from intelligence and fact rather than simply using insults and sophomoric behavior. I think it would be an exercise in futility though, as looking at your posts here in just this thread, one easily sees that yours are childish at best, and totally irrelevant. That sure is something to be proud of. Keep up the good work, you're doing great!

[whathehell]

268. As expected, you've been reduced to babbling.

and blaming me for your typos?

Perhaps next time you'll have a better sense

of your limitations when it comes to debate,

because at this point, you're just spinning your wheels

and I simply don't have the time.

Buh bye

[cleanhippie]

270. You know, projection is treatable.

[whathehell]

271. Unfortunately, for you

mediocrity is not.

Bye, Mr. Clean -- See you on that big Ignore list in the sky!

[cleanhippie]

279. More personal attacks and insults. You stay classy now, ok?

First came the insults when you could not defend your moronic posts, now you threaten me with your ignore list.

Thanks for demonstrating that when one has no substance or coherence to their argument, they resort to name calling and willful ignorance. Textbook. Well done.

[whathehell]

281. I'm responding to yours. I will indeed "stay classy". You in turn, might endeavor to become so!

ANYONE who has followed our exchanges, would know that you are "projecting" your inability

to defend YOUR "idiotic" posts, starting with the one which aburdly tagged my sound refutation of

your original argument "false equivalence".

I understand that losing an argument is hard, but you only look sadder

when you refuse to accept it, and instead, retreat defensively to a lame, clearly

false characterization of my point, and then, to make it worse, start hurling personal attacks at me.

I'm sure you recall the old chinese proverb: "Better to be silent and be thought

a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt".?

You should really think on that one, Clean.

[cleanhippie]

282. Bwahahahaha!

I did not even bother to read your post as it is probably full of the same shit the rest of them are comprised of.

I only responded because I thought I was on your ignore list.



Hahahaha, I guess not.



On edit: I did see your last part about being silent. What will be interesting is to see if you can follow your own advice.


Good luck. We will all get to see just how intelligent you may or may or may not be. Your silence will speak volumes.


Will there be a response?

[whathehell]

283. Why would you respond if you thought I wouldn't see it?

Embarrassed at being outclassed on the thread?

BWHWHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!

Yep...That's what I thought.

[cleanhippie]

284. School on a holiday is as close to class as your posts ever get.

What was that again about silence and being thought a fool?


I think you just confirmed everyone's suspicions.

Well Done.

[whathehell]

286. BWAHAHAHA..You DID read it..Duh!

and what was that again about "personal attacks"?

You're speaking for "Everyone" again?

If I thought you represented even half of "everyone" here, I'd have left long ago.

[cleanhippie]

287. Are you ok? Do you need help?

You are losing coherence, I'm worried. Are you ok?

[whathehell]

289. Ask yourself that!

Since you never HAD coherence.

[cleanhippie]

290. I guess you do need help.

Good luck with that.

[whathehell]

291. Honey, you've had seven posts deleted in the last 90 days...You're in no position to judge!

So, good luck with THAT!

[cleanhippie]

292. Help. Seek it.

Good luck with that.

[whathehell]

293. Projection can be treated, you know.

Good luck with that.

[cleanhippie]

294. Good to hear. Hope yours gets cured.

Good luck with that.

[whathehell]

295. I don't project

I watch the sadly insecure who need to "get the last word", however lame, do it.

[cleanhippie]

296. Sure you do.

Be the sadly insecure one and get the last word. It's all yours.

[whathehell]

297. No I sure don't

and I doubt I'll have the last word, but I'm gladly let you have it,

because you are truly boring me to death.

Buh bye, bore boy.

[cleanhippie]

298. Hahahahahahahahahahaha

[Obamacare]

211. As a Christian

yes I think it would be better if the President really prayed to Jesus for guidance every day. Not everybody fakes being a Christian, some maybe, but Obama is not one of those individuals.

[whathehell]

197. My take on your question...

Many of the atheists here, IMO, "look down" on any sort of "believer", but especially "Christians",

my guess being because they MISTAKENLY imagine all "Christians"

to be of the Fundamentalist, Right Wing type....It's VERY far from the truth,

Mainstream Protestants, Catholics and Jews FAR outnumber those people.

This being the case, they don't WANT the Prez to "really" be Christian because

of the conflict between: A. Their respect for him and B. Their disrespect for

what they think is "Christianity".

I think it's all very effed up, myself, because I honestly don't care what anyone believes,

as long as they behave ethically and maintain progressive values.

[Obamacare]

212. You pretty much summed it up

This is how a lot of members of DU think and I believe its unhealthy. We are all democrats or lean democrat, we are supposed to be the party of tolerance unlike the opposite party. I'll never understand how racist right-wing fake Christians have a lock on what folks here on DU think of all Christians. As a Christian myself, this far from the truth. I just don't think its wise to alienate members of your own party because of their religion, I could've swore that was against DU rules anyway

[whathehell]

214. Thank you. I agree completely.

Belief (or the lack of such) is personal issue, in my opinion.

It IS unwise to alienate members of your own party...It's also stupidly

intolerant to insist that EVERYONE view everything in the same way.

[chrisa]

224. These posts are extremely ignorant and pretentious. Who cares what anyone else believes?

[newspeak]

231. most of the clueless bigots

love that mantra "he's a muslin." However, they refuse to acknowledge that he was raised and influenced by his mother and her parents, who were white. I don't know why, except for ignorance and bigotry, would they fail to acknowledge this. Ergo, he was raised christian, not muslin (freeper sp.).

[LogicalGenius]

9. Well...

Faith, or lack thereof, is a personal matter. I don't think we should base someone's ability to lead on whether or not he prays to a higher power. That said, I get the feeling that Obama is probably gearing up to garner votes from Protestant denominations that detest Mormons. When he talks about Christian principles guiding him, he knows that could be the determining factor for some of these religious conservative voters in the South and Midwest who cringe at the thought of having a Mormon president...people who think religion is the most important factor, and there are a lot of them. Smart politics I say.

[Fridays Child]

10. He was pretty clear about his religious beliefs, before he was ever elected, if I recall.

Just sayin'.

[nanabugg]

73. You recall accurately. And his election itself could be looked at as a miracle with all the

racism, hate, and intolerance adrift in the US. Some might even call it "evidence" of God. If Mr. Obama is re-elected, surely who at DU would question the power of prayer?

[JNelson6563]

124. "..who at DU would question the power of prayer?"

You're kidding, right? There will be an army of people working their butts off to get this man re-elected. Some will leave all behind for the duration of the campaign but you are already giving a win that hasn't happened to "god"?

I will take one pair of working hands over a thousand pairs of praying hands ANY DAY.

Julie

[cleanhippie]

209. When Obama is reelected, prayer will have nothing to do with it.

To think that it would is patently rediculous.

[Warren DeMontague]

11. Oh, Fuck. Not another "stop bashing us persecuted DU Christians" whine-a-palooza.

For fuck's sake.

He can believe whatever he wants, as can you. And some of us can claim it's absurd, subject it to logical analysis and critical thinking, or point out that there's not a single fucking shred of objective evidence to back up that belief.

Or we can say that there's just as much evidence for the Flying Spaghetti Monster as there is for "God". The exact same amount, RAmen.

Oh, sorry, pointing out that there's no evidence- that probably qualifies as "ridicule", and "bashing", huh?

So much so that you may "leave" because you've been unfairly "bashed" with "mean" "bashing" "statements" like "there's no evidence backing up your assertion of an all-powerful deity."

Sort of like how if you left the house with no shoes on, and I said "buddy, you have no shoes on", I would be "unfairly" "bashing" you and being a "mean" "bigot".

Right?


Also- "really believe the things the Bible says"? Depends. Does he own slaves? Put people to death for eating Shellfish?

The fucking Bible contradicts itself in many places. So even the fucking Bible doesn't believe all the things the Bible says.

[Ruby the Liberal]

30. "He can believe whatever he wants, as can you."

Thank you.

[Bluerthanblue]

172. yes-

[onpatrol98]

63. Hmm....this post is a bit whiny.

I mean...isn't it? You complain about people whining...with whining? Whining about whining...now, I'm starting to whine.

In another world...we'll call it the real world. Your post would be considered bigoted.

"A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs. The predominant usage in modern English refers to persons hostile to those of differing sex, race, ethnicity, religious belief or spirituality, nationality, language, sexual orientation, and age; and to those from a different region, with non-normative gender identity, those who are homeless, and those with various medical disorders, particularly behavioural and addictive disorders."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1002&pid=269495

So, I wouldn't dare demean your faith or lack of faith. I respect your right to not believe and would not dare to belittle it or you. After all, I wouldn't want to be a bigot.

In the DU world, you are given free reign to rant because others on the board share your opinion and hostility toward Christians and other believers. I find their quiet support for this behavior and the comfort zone created by the DU community to be much more unsettling.

Unfortunately, just as republicans will need to come to terms with the fact that blacks now vote, some democrats will have to come to terms that some democrats are Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc. We have strong beliefs. That's true. You don't want to be constantly bombarded with the trappings of our faith. I understand. We don't want to be constantly bombarded with vulgarity filled bigoted rants (allowed in DU world) concerning our faith.

I believe the real shame of this little tirade is the knowledge that tolerance for faith is less likely to be found on this democratic board. Me personally, that's not progressive. That's regressive.

[Warren DeMontague]

64. No. I'm given "free rein to rant" because of the 1st Amendment, Jack.

Make no mistake about it. And that includes liberal use of the word "fuck". Fuckitty fuck fuck fuck.

If vulgarity bothers you, invest in some net nanny software.

I can only imagine that thine eyes werest so offended by the presence of the word "fuck", you weren't able to comprehend what I said in that post. So try this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002269470#post49

To simplify: this thread has no purpose, other than to stir up shit.

And yes, I said shit.

[onpatrol98]

67. Um...no

"I'm given "free rein to rant" because of the 1st Amendment."

Ummm....actually, no. There are some things you would not be permitted to say on DU, Jill. Because DU would not permit it...1st Amendment or not. Because DU has rules. Some written and some unwritten. There are some clearly written rules that if you decided to go on a rant about...you would be booted. And, rightfully so. DU is a community that has decided somethings are permissible and others are not.

Religion bashing is officially not permitted, but unofficially, it is accepted. Such is life. These inconsistencies exist.

The vulgarity doesn't necessarily bother me. I tend to accept vulgarity for what it is. An individuals attempt to communicate effectively without the necessary skill set to do it properly.

My version: "You are aggravated with the amount of religion you feel is pressed upon you."
Your version: "Fu$%^ity, "FK, "FKKK".

While your language isn't helpful for a discussion between adults on the topic of religion, what I find offensive is your inability to tolerate people who are different from you. I think the notion of disagreeing without being disagreeable has some merit. I think it accomplishes more. And, I must admit. Your posts do make me feel disagreeable.

But...because I like DU, and I like you, I will work at not being so sensitive about your disparaging comments about my religion and the religions of others. Perhaps you haven't been exposed to people who are...different. Tolerance is a learned behavior, after all.

In fact, I feel inspired already.

[Warren DeMontague]

77. Where, precisely, did I make disparaging comments about your religion? I'd like the exact quote.

And, actually, your interpretation of what I was communicating in that post, actually in all my posts in this thread, is inaccurate.

What I *am* saying is that there is no point to this thread, beyond deliberately starting shit. (What's known, in the parlance, as "flamebait&quot That's the entire raison d'etre of the thread.

But I'd like you to find the specific quote where I disparaged your religion, for starts because I want to see what precisely constitutes disparagement, to your mind.

[Bluenorthwest]

111. I am always amused when folks are 'mean to others for Jesus' as you are.

You know, the Christian community is why my community does not get equal treatment under the law. Opposing the Klan is not bigotry. And the 'faith community' is similar in that they rally against the rights of a minority, at times they attack with physical force, they organize and pressure others to oppose us and the 'good Christians' allow them to do this. Yes, allow them to define the faith, unanswered. Now, the Christians here get all in a frenzy when they get criticized. Yet when they see other 'Christians' using the faith as a tool of political oppression, they do not seem to fall into anything like a frenzy, they actually seem to rationalize the oppression, and rather than seeking to speak out against the oppressors, they come here to demand that we tell them we know 'they aren't all like that'. Well of course they aren't. Most do allow that hate preaching to go without answer from the 'good Christians'. They are wounded not that Phelps slanders their faith, they are offended that others might not know they are not like Phelps. They do not wish to make that clear with actions, nor to communicate that to Phelps or to the world at large, instead they simply want others to tell them we know that they are 'Good' and not like Phelps. The priorities are stinking.
Now it is not like those 'of the cross' did not get teachings on this issue. I wonder how the wailing when 'faith' meets criticism here fits in with this:
Matthew 5:10-12

"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven...."

I see much whining and complaining. I do not see any rejoicing nor exceeding gladness. Was Jesus simply incorrect, or uninformed? Was his teaching in error? Is the way of his followers superior to the way he taught?

[cleanhippie]

210. Actually, harsh critique of religion (bashing, as you like to call it) is completly allowed.

Its the bashing of PEOPLE that is off-limits.


Maybe when you can see the difference the conversation will improve.

[renie408]

123. I have a mouth like a fucking sailor, so saying fuck doesn't bother me one fucking bit.

But being a fucking hypocrite bothers the fuck out of me. Saying that you aren't invested in other fucking people's beliefs while you fucking make any kind of fucking effort to point out that their fucking beliefs are fucking bullshit is fucking hypocritical. For fuck's sake, only a fuckwit wouldn't see that.

Why assume that it was your language and not your intent that was offensive?? Why assume that Christians can't take the liberal use of the word 'fuck'? I know some Christians that can cuss a blue streak and will tell you that there is no proscription against swearing in the Bible. If I had to guess, he has more of a problem with you pretending that your pointing out that another person's most deeply held spiritual belief lacks proof isn't an icky thing to do.

Excellent obfuscation, though.

[Warren DeMontague]

159. I want to know what specific statement you take issue with, factually or otherwise.

For one, tell me where I "point out" that anyone's beliefs are "fucking bullshit".

I want the specific quote, so we can address this.

Oh, I see, it's "pointing out that another person's deeply held spiritual belief lacks proof".. Well, I'm sorry Mr. Special Pleading-man, one does not get an automatic exemption from logical analysis and factual objective reasoning for your 'deeply held spiritual beliefs' when one brings them up in a setting full of thoughtful people who may not agree, especially when one brings them up in the context of "The Flying Spaghetti Monster", a thought experiment/joke with the exact purpose of pointing out the ludicrousness of treating "deeply held spiritual beliefs" as something that should be taught in public schools as having any scientific basis in reality.

You'll note, though, that

A) what I did was NOT the same thing as saying "your beliefs are bullshit" and also

B) my point about people conflating being 'forced to hear' what they may consider uncomfortable yet unassailable facts like "there is no objective evidence for the existence of god" with "bigotry and Christian-bashing" IS part of the problem we seem to have, here.


I thought the whole point of faith was that it doesn't need objective evidence. Which is fine. But you don't get to demand that everyone else suspend logical analysis, critical thinking, or even basic observation, because something is your "deeply held spiritual belief". If you want that, stay in an exclusive community of like-minded believers. If you want to discuss these things among people who may not all agree with you, many of whom are science-minded, you need to expect to hear, sometimes, things like "there is no objective evidence for a higher power", especially if you're trying to make some point about "The Flying Spaghetti Monster".

To expect otherwise is, again, special pleading.

[renie408]

166. *sigh* For one thing, it's Mr. Special Pleading-WOMAN, not man. And for another...

I don't have any deeply held spiritual beliefs. I have oftentimes noted that I lack the 'belief gene'. Having lived in the Deep South my whole life, I tried. Believe me, I tried. For whatever reason, religion just didn't stick for me. I had already figured out that your standard Judeo-Christian belief system didn't work for me by time I was thirteen. I distinctly recall sitting in the middle of a Wednesday evening Hi-Life meeting clutching my much thumbed through Bible and thinking, "Oh shit...none of this remotely makes any sense at all." And that was that. I never looked back. I am a full on, card carrying atheist. Ok, I don't have a card, but you know what I mean. You used to be able to check people's posts in the old version of the DU, but I can't find out how to do that on this one. But if you do, you can see where I repeatedly mention my lack of any kind of spiritual belief.

That other people have faith doesn't really impact me. That the President feels that his prayers help him to come to the right decision doesn't bother me one bit. As long as I agree with the decisions being made, I don't care if he meditates, prays, hangs upside down or what-the-hell-ever to come to a decision. It doesn't make me angry that he is a man of faith or that other people are. Honestly, it only really bugs me when it effects my kids, which here in good ole South Carolina it sometimes does. See, I don't think their spirituality is what makes people want to force their beliefs on others. That's the excuse they use. Rick Santorum isn't anti-gay marriage because his 'faith' tells him to be. He is anti-gay marriage because, for whatever reason (and I have a few ideas on that), homosexuality makes him nervous. He can't really justify that, so he is falling back on religion to do it for him. People who would feel safer if everybody were like them try to force their ideals on others. If they have a religious base, they will use that as their excuse. If they don't, they will find something else to wield as a club...*cough*...*cough*... Whatever their reasons, a person's faith or lack thereof doesn't make me angry.

But you seem angry enough for both of us, so I guess you have that end covered. You didn't specifically say that anyone's beliefs were 'fucking bullshit'; that was dramatic license and another excuse to throw in a few more 'bad' words. For that I deeply apologize. (I am being sarcastic, I don't really apologize. But it sounded nice, didn't it??) I mostly took exception to the fact that you seem to think that it was your choice of words and not their content which was found offensive. See, nobody gives a flying donkey fuck if you throw the 'fuck' word around. I think everybody here (well, most everybody) are big enough boys and girls to handle the occasional 'fuck', 'shit' or whatever. It's your anger and your equally as dogmatic as any holy roller approach I find distasteful.

[Warren DeMontague]

168. So, okay, you acknowledge that I didn't actually say it.

So what content in my words was "found offensive" (by you?)

Again, I want specifics.

Because if you actually read what I've written in this thread, you might glean that behind the apparent facade of the Angry-Atheist-who's-mad-about-faith, I have also said that it "doesn't bother me" whether the President believes, prays, what-have-you. In fact, that wasn't the point of my response at all, rather it was a direct response to the flamebait, let's-stir-up-some-shit-with-the-DU-Atheists tone of the OP.

And if you don't grok that that was the point of the thread, you should read the OP again.

[renie408]

181. I think you might contradict your message with the tone of your message.

When you say, "I don't give a FUCK if they want to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster" and then angrily go on to say some more angry stuff about blah blah blah, it kind of diffuses that whole "hey, it doesn't really bother me if other people believe in god" message. I hate to be patronizing (again, not really...but that sounds nice), but I will tell you what I have told my children for twenty years...tone counts.

Ok, I went back and read the OP and I think I am cutting them a little more slack than you are and for a couple of reasons. A) this thread hasn't been locked. And you can damn well bet somebody has turned it in. That says to me that a jury of peers didn't see this thread as flamebait. and B) I see their point. I personally haven't seen a lot of Christian bashing on the DU during my most recent addiction to this website. But it wouldn't surprise me if it happened. Especially, no offense (not really), if there are other people who 'don't mind' like you don't mind Christianity. There is a bit of cognitive dissonance going on if people love Obama, but despise Christians. Cause he IS a Christian. Or a liar. BTW...isn't it kind of wild that there are people who appear to think it is better if he is a liar than if he really is a Christian?? Man, that is something to keep a psychiatrist occupied for awhile.

As for me personally, I found it offensive that you immediately extrapolated from the response that you got that the person replying to you was offended by your liberal use of the word 'fuck'. You pulled that straight out of your ass and then ran off with it...angrily. And it was Sunday morning and I was just hanging out and you looked like a good person to get into a discussion with. Besides, I don't have a legitimate call to whip out the word 'fuck' over and over again that often and who can resist that?? I will say this, you and the raw milk Nazi kept me pretty busy this morning, so thanks!

[Warren DeMontague]

185. Okay. You're sort of contradicting yourself, here, if your assertion is that the problem is "tone"

and then going on to chide me for my extrapolation re: offense and the word "fuck". I mean, either the problem is the content- to which, no one seems to want to offer a concrete example of the content or message or inherent meaning in my post that is so offensive (I am not, remember, responsible for anything anyone else here has said, in this thread or elsewhere) OR the problem is not the content but the tone, which is so-off putting, apparently, it has rendered several people incapable of reading what I've actually said.

As for me personally, I found it offensive that you immediately extrapolated from the response that you got that the person replying to you was offended by your liberal use of the word 'fuck'. You pulled that straight out of your ass and then ran off with it...angrily.

Gotcha. However, I am privy to additional information that maybe you're not aware of, namely that that post was alerted on specifically over the word "fuck". (And the alert was voted down, 0-6) Combine that with the response further on focusing on "vulgarity", and you get where I was coming from. Maybe.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1240&pid=40804

You'll note that the use of the word "fuck" was the core of the alert.

I did say I don't care, it doesn't bother me, etc. about the President's (and other peoples') faith. Is that not sufficiently enthusiastic? Should I say I'm ecstatic that the President is a Christian? I don't care. That means I really don't care, so long as it doesn't (as it has with previous residents of the Oval Office) directly lead to things like restrictions on stem cell research. That does NOT, however, mean that I "despise Christians", nor have I ever said that I 'despise Christians', and if you can find a link to somewhere where I have said that I 'despise Christians' I would be greatly interested to see it.

[renie408]

188. Ahhh...now I understand the going nuts with the 'f' word.

As for the rest...eh. I know what I think.

I am sure that you have not SPECIFICALLY said that you despise Christians. I am sure that I have just COMPLETELY misread your posts. My bad. I cannot for the life of me figure out how I could have ever assumed that you had any kind of ill will towards people of faith. And here I pride myself on my reading comprehension. So, good for you, you lover of all people religious!! Go forth and let that light of tolerance and understanding shine on!! (do I need to add 'not really'??)

LOL...seriously, have a good night. I have to go fix dinner for my band of starving atheists...

[Warren DeMontague]

202. Peace.

Seriously. I don't have ill will towards people of faith. Honest.

I don't think they should get special dispensation to have their beliefs universally exempted from logical analysis and discussion involving evidence-based critical thought, and likewise, I understand- nay, even expect!- that people will do the same with any and all assertions *I* make. That said, I do get that Life, The Universe and Everything is a mysterious nut to crack under the best of circumstances, and that existence puts us out, in the words of the late Jim Morrison, "like a dog without a bone, an actor out on loan".. I respect that everyone works it out for themselves, and we don't all NEED to come up with the same answer.

Still, I value science, I value evidence, I value the process of objectively looking at claims and weighing their apparent validity. I like figuring things out, and if there IS a "God" (whatever that word means) then one of the coolest things "he" gave us is a brain. To think. To challenge. To question.

Nothing should be off limits from questioning, and no assertion should get special treatment or dispensation to remove it from being looked at logically.

Enjoy your dinner.

[muriel_volestrangler]

92. Warren said nothing about those holding beliefs

so your quote of someone's definition of 'bigot' is irrelevant. What he did say was "He can believe whatever he wants, as can you"; and then went on to point out how everyone is free to argue that religious beliefs have no objective basis, and can thus be compared to something like the FSM. He was talking about beliefs, not people.

You seem to want religious belief to be free of criticism. Your comparison of 'republicans will need to come to terms with the fact that blacks now vote' and 'some democrats will have to come to terms that some democrats are Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc.' is laughable. Stop playing the martyr. You have the rights all of us have; you are asking for your subjective beliefs never to be questioned. None of us get that.

[onpatrol98]

101. Apparently, you've deemed Warren the martyr

My faith is constantly questioned. On a bad day, It's questioned the most by me. So I am used to defending what I believe. Which is why I have no problem responding to you and others on DU about it? Some shy away because they want to fit in on this board. It's understood, we'll be outnumbered. So why bother? No problem for me.

You neglected to understand the point. The point is the level of blatant insensitivity on DU dealing with religion. And, you're right to return the point I mentioned about Blacks. That's the other time, I hear...don't play the martyr. Right after someone is insensitive with some racial comment (protected by free speech, of course).

What you want is the right to be insensitive? Well, you have it here on DU. But, if religion is used as a reason to denigrate groups of people, they shouldn't expect the right not to be called on it.

[Bluenorthwest]

117. Allow me to quote one Jesus Christ on how his followers should deal with persecution:

Matthew 5:10-12

"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven...."

How do your methods fit in with that teaching? Curious, we heathen read the teachings, and expect those of that faith to follow them....we are funny that way.

[muriel_volestrangler]

135. You're the one comparing themselves to a black having the vote withheld

It's you who sees yourself as a martyr. And it's you calling another DU names, ie 'bigot', when they have not denigrated a group of people.

Your problem is you think an attack on a religion is an attack on you. You really, really need to get past that basic misunderstanding. You are an individual; your religion is one part of your beliefs, that were thought up by someone else, millennia ago, and which you have chosen to follow. We can criticise economic beliefs here; and we can criticise religious ones too.

Let's be clear: we do not have to be 'sensitive' about Christianity, or any other religion. Warren was not using that to denigrate a group of people. That's in your imagination.

[Warren DeMontague]

160. I'm still waiting for you to provide me with the exact quote where I "disparaged"

Specifically, the exact quote where I 'made disparaging comments about your religion'.

Like I said, I want to know exactly what you consider disparagement, so we can discuss it.

[Honeycombe8]

141. Yes, it's a whiney post. Instead of responding intelligently to the OP...

on the subject matter, he whines about the poster, and generalizes to a whole group (using a fake assumption that it is Christians who have noticed the so-called persecution).

BTW, I'm not a Christian. But I have noticed the virulent attacks and intolerance of religious or spiritual Democrats.

[renie408]

167. +1

[Warren DeMontague]

171. Post #49 is all the intelligent response this OP is entitled to.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002269470#post49

[SammyWinstonJack]

110. ...

[cherokeeprogressive]

12. I'll edit to add... Tebow.

Tebow.

Tebow.

A football player who takes a knee in order to thank God and gets roundly TRASHED, versus a President who claims to fall to his knees to pray to GOD, and gets DEFENDED.

Am I the only one who sees a tiny bit of hypocrisy here?

[ScreamingMeemie]

15. Again I say, who cares? At this point, I'm all for putting the persecuted Christians and

the persecuted Atheists, and their incessant going on about it all, in a massive time out. Both sides are so much alike in their indignation and claims of unfair treatment here at DU that it makes my head hurt.

[cherokeeprogressive]

18. Time Out. I knew I liked you...

If you're like me, a huge glass of water before bed makes the head hurt go away...

Preventative medicine.

[ScreamingMeemie]

26. Thanks

I will try that.

[Warren DeMontague]

27. And yet, you started this thread to specify just exactly how persecuted you think you are.

Christians aren't persecuted in this country. Not even on DU.

[cherokeeprogressive]

31. I don't feel persecuted...

What makes you think I feel "persecuted"?

[Warren DeMontague]

49. What did you hope to achieve with this thread? Be honest, now.

Either

A) "Obama's an idiot, he prays" at which point you can go AHA! GOTCHA!

or

B) "Wait... Obama believes in God? Or, you know... a 'higher power'? And here, all this time, I've been comparing it to The Flying Spaghetti Monster, a cruel godless joke perpetrated upon poor unsuspecting Kansas School Board Fundamentalists who only wanted a little fairness and equal time for creationism in public school science classes.. But if Obama does it, it must be TRUE! IT'S ALL TRUE! I was wrong! Wrong! DEAR LORD, WHAT HAVE I DONE! TAKE THIS SINNER BACK UNTO YOUR BOSOM! I SEE THE LIGHT! I SEEEEE THE LIIIIIIIIGGGGGHTT!!!"

[vaberella]

235. Amen! No pun intended. n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

16. you're right... It's JUST NOT FAIR to Tebow, and his very public praying and anti-choice advocacy

why anyone would bring it up in a political context... It befuddles me. See? I'm befuddled. Surrounded by fuddles, I'm so befuddled by it.

It's like those nice cartoon vegetables. Who could have an issue with them? All they want to do is give people the "good news". Sort of like school prayer, which all decent people should understand is just trying to help the little children, who Jesus loves.

Still, I do think Mr. Tebow will survive the horrible mocking of teh godless secular arugula-eating elites, who will pay in the end anyway wink wink nudge nudge

[cherokeeprogressive]

28. So President Obama's claim of faith differs somehow from Tebows public display of same?

Could you point me to Tebow's "anti-choice advocacy"?

Bet you can't.

[Ruby the Liberal]

35. Really?

https://www.google.com/search?aq=f&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=tebow+anti+choice

Pick your battles, friend.

[Warren DeMontague]

39. You mean aside from the ad he did for "Focus on the Family"?

Let me clear up a couple things for you: One, you started this thread so you could use Obama's praying as a big club to whack DU's Atheist community over the head. Just admit it, that's what this is about.

I don't give a shit if Obama prays or not- he does his job, he respects the rights of all Americans including non-believers (wow! what a concept!)... what he does or doesn't believe as far as the universe or "God" (whatever that word means, and in case you hadn't noticed, it's a little open to interpretation) doesn't concern me, as long as, again, it's not causing him to advance a theocratic agenda or interfering with The US government's support of science, etc.

Tim Tebow has made his faith a public issue, he's openly advocated for right-wing groups and causes (above) and he's also implied that "Jesus" is involved in the winning of football games. That's fucking ludicrous.

I don't know the specifics of what Obama believes, so I can't say if it's ludicrous, or not. Some people believe "God" is a doorknob, or the Galaxy, or love. Well, doorknobs and galaxies exist, and so does love, to my mind. I don't know nor do I care about Obama's praying, because it doesn't seem to be interfering with his ability to do his job, nor is he making outlandish claims about it's relationship (i.e. Tebow) to reality.

[ScreamingMeemie]

43. GMTA

Or jinx or something.

[ScreamingMeemie]

42. Ummm...oops!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/07/tim-tebow-super-bowl-ad-v_n_436383.html

[Warren DeMontague]

66. Hey. So.... did we actually have a bet on that?

Like, for money or some cold beverages or a cool hat or something?


Just checking.

[LogicalGenius]

19. Tebow

is not the leader of the free world. It's really not the same. Tebow gets made fun of because it's absurd to think that god cares about the outcome of a fucking football game. When he drops to his knees on the field it just comes across as egocentic and stupid.

[Liquorice]

55. I agree, and saying you pray is much different than making a big

public display of it. Also, I don't know much about Tebow, but I think he does his display praying right after a touchdown or right before a big play... It's like he's telling the other team that God is on his side in this football game and is helping him win. That's just irritating and stupid. It's also different than saying you ask God for guidance. One is arrogant, crazy and narcissistic, and the other is humble.

I mean if after Obama got OBL, he dropped down on his knees with a look of satsifaction and pointed to the sky like he was thanking God, THAT would be weird. But what he said about asking God for guidance is not the same as "Tebowing."

[Luminous Animal]

57. And it is absurd to think that god cares about the leader of the "free world" who

drops bombs on children. No doubt the kid who loses a limb or life their last thought before doing so was that thank god that Obama was down on his knees and and not Tebow.

Unless, of course, you think that god is on the side of the powerful and gives a high five blowing to smithereens innocents.

Take that you fucking heathen kids. The leader of the free world is more important than you. God deems it so because they are dead and the leader of the free world is not. And god will shower riches upon the leader of the free world and his children with oodles of money for killing other people's children. The tears of those who are not family members of the leader free world doesn't mean squat.

[Arugula Latte]

145. And once you start thinking about the absurdity of a deity caring about the football game outcome

it begs the question -- where is the line at which this so-called "god" starts caring about "his" "creations"? Does "he" care if someone falls and breaks an arm? If a family dies in a car crash? Does "he" care if Haiti gets wiped out by an earthquake or masses perish in famine and war? Doesn't appear so! Oh, but I forgot. There's "a plan" that humans can't know will be revealed in the end, right?

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?” ~Epicurus

The whole thing is a house of cards that falls apart when the breeze of logic and reason blows.

[hughee99]

285. God doesn't have time to talk with Obama, he's too busy determining the outcome

of sporting events and answering "false alarms" from people having really good sex.

[Amonester]

23. Tebow is a commercial 'product' ...

The more people talk about him, the bigger his next contract will profit him.

That's the way it is.

[sabrina 1]

44. Lol, no, you're not the only one. People can be pretty inconsistent. When Bush said pretty much

the same thing, that he prayed to his Heavenly Father, he was trashed also. But everything changes when it's our team!

As for me, I don't get all the excitement over religion. Never did, I just wished that if Bush was talking to his heavenly father that that father would have told him at some point to stop KILLING PEOPLE!

Which is why I don't believe any of these politicians when they claim to be seeking guidance from their Christian God. Jesus would never guide them to drop bombs on innocent people. And if you're Christian, Jesus is who you look to for guidance.

[Ecumenist]

53. Chile, Bush was playing that for all it was worht. If you'll remember, members of his family came

out to T.R.Y to tell people that bush was a "sunday morning photo op christian" and for some reason, they were drowned out and ignored. Jesus and bush ain't never met, as my girlfriend says.

[muriel_volestrangler]

93. Who was the DUer who trashed Tebow, and defended Obama praying on his knees?

It's only 'hypocrisy' if it's the same person doing it. So, name names - who did both?

[treestar]

107. There's a huge difference

Between being President and playing in a football game.

But they both have the right to pray and then talk about it. First Amendment and all that. Who would say differently?

[Arugula Latte]

146. Of course they have the right.

But people also have the right to discuss the implications of such actions.

[NoGOPZone]

226. I'll criticize Obama too if he starts wearing eyeblack

containing "John 3:16"

[Mz Pip]

13. As long as he doesn't

expect me to do the same it's fine by me. He's never given me any cause for concern about forcing his beliefs on anyone else - like some of the Republican candidates do.

[Warren DeMontague]

21. He always makes a point of acknowledging nonbelievers, much to the chagrin of many theocrats

many of them- sadly, many people all over, including here- seem to wish Atheists would "shut up and go away", go back in our closets, don't think we're real Americans, etc.

[Ruby the Liberal]

37. Thank you.

[Bluenorthwest]

126. Unless you are a person denied the right to marry. Then he tells us that as a Christian

he must defend the Sacramental nature of Newt's marriage from us. So all apologies, he most certainly does ask us to follow his religion, although he and his wife really do not follow the rules from the same passages which apply to them.

[bhikkhu]

17. And how do you know this?

Because of something he said? - quote it (preferably in full and in context) or link to it then.

[ScreamingMeemie]

24. Here you go...National Prayer Breakfast...

"I have fallen on my knees with great regularity since that moment — asking God for guidance not just in my personal life and my Christian walk, but in the life of this nation and in the values that hold us together and keep us strong."

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/02/03/obama-panders-to-the-faithful/

[bhikkhu]

38. Thanks - and that sounds ok.

I can live with people that pray, and people that go to church, and who identify themselves as Christian just fine, as long as their religion isn't a set of blinders they use to judge other people by, and as long as they aren't determined to fit all those around them with similar blinders.

I'm sure the president's words suited the occasion and reflect how he thinks of prayer. None of his actions or decisions seem to be limited by that.

[Lil Missy]

20. praying on your knees is gesture of "humility". It speaks well of a person.

[Warren DeMontague]

22. Maybe to you

to me, it speaks of impressive joint flexibility for someone around 50, but little else.

[mia]

46. It says to me that a person is seeking the good of all as a result of his actions.

At the very least, we're free to look for inspiration in different ways.

[Warren DeMontague]

51. Glucosamine and an exercycle.

But we have crappy knees in my family.

[nanabugg]

74. Amen to that! nt

[Warren DeMontague]

25. If I wanted to be told I have to believe in a fucking Higher Power, I'd go to an AA meeting.

No thanks.

[Ruby the Liberal]

40. No one is telling you that,

Not the President, and not here (that I have seen). You are free to believe/not believe whatever you want and I would venture to say that the President likely feels the same way.

[Warren DeMontague]

47. One of the things I really appreciate about the guy, he makes a point of acknowledging nonbelievers.

Compared to what previous Presidents; like Poppy Bush- have had to say on the matter, it's refreshing.

Of course, like being pro full equality for GLBT citizens, it also seems to me like a fucking no-brainer, not to mention long overdue.

[Ruby the Liberal]

48. WAY long overdue

and a constant irritant to so many of us. :grr

As I tell fundy family, the role is the President of America, not National Pastor, and the sooner people get that through their head, the sooner we can all move past this confab of church/mosque/synagogue and state, IMO.

A girl can dream...

[Warren DeMontague]

50. And what he does in his bedroom at night is his business.

As long as he's not watching "Ice Road Truckers".

No, even that's okay.

[Ruby the Liberal]

54. I have a feeling I don't want to know what that is.

Heh.

[Warren DeMontague]

56. Man! The one time I *don't* make a dirty joke, someone thinks I do.

http://www.history.com/shows/ice-road-truckers

There's some sort of lesson there, but I'm damned if I can figure out what it is.

[Vattel]

85. no it's not lol

[mia]

29. Who are "we"?

Or hold him to the same standards we hold others to... meaning there's no such thing as a "higher power"...?

Is this the Athiest's forum?

[Ecumenist]

32. MOST DUer's are Atheists? Really? Although I'm sure a large percentage are atheistic

or agnostic, I would not go so far as to say that MOST DUer's walk that path. I believe that people should be allowed to walk the path that most works for them. It's not my place to judge Obama, you, Suzy Q, or anyone else.

I think the thing is that radical ANYTHING is generally wrong, be they Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindi, Atheist, repub, etc. To lump everyone into a lockstep path is the major problem with the opposing team and that's the last thing we should strive to emulate. If he is a Believer, that's his business. If Some Duer's walk the path of Atheism, so be it. But I don't think it's a good idea to play the game of falling into lockstep. Our tent is big enough for people of many stripes. Let it be more than lip service.

There are HUGE differences between believers who walk the path of the Christian "taliban" and REAL Christians. The Christ I was taught about was offended by "holier than thous" and went postal against the people who sought money and power over truth, kindness and compassion. I don't understand how the "christian Right" can throw the slurs at others when they should know better. Apparently, they haven't read or studied their Bible. I've spoken to Muslims who are as disgusted with the Taliban types as we are with our own homegrown idiots.

Let's not get it twisted, not all believers walk the same path and some of "us" have indeed twisted what Christianity is in order to justify the horrible things they do and say.

[ScreamingMeemie]

34. A voice of reason...here at post number 32.

[Ruby the Liberal]

45. Allow me to join the chorus.

I have just been catching up on a Showtime miniseries I missed several years ago called Sleeper Cell. It is about an FBI agent who is Muslim undercover with terror cells and every episode has an undercurrent about him trying to bring extreme beliefs into check with actual teachings. I can relate.

[Liquorice]

41. I hope he's not lying because that would be pretty

unethical to lie about getting on his knees and praying. I mean, who would lie about that?? He didn't HAVE to say he does that, so I assume he is telling the truth and he does believe in God and ask for guidance. I am a very spiritual person, so this of course doesn't bother me in the least.

[Tx4obama]

52. 2006 Senator Barack Obama: Call To Renewal - Faith and Politics Speech - video

Video of Speech here: http://sync.democraticunderground.com/1017777

[onpatrol98]

59. I'm glad he prays!

President Barack H. Obama has truly been a great president. I hope he prays in the morning and throughout his day. He'll need a lot of prayer to deal with this country. While he's at it, I hope he says a prayer for DU. I know I do.

[SammyWinstonJack]

128. Wow.

[Rex]

60. I doubt you are right about 'most' DUers.

Please, continue...

[AnotherMother4Peace]

199. That bothered me too - It's not "most" DUers & the "we" would only include the poster and some DUers

Quite frankly, it seems that spirituality is strong amoung DUers.

[Rex]

206. I agree, I think there is a huge amount of spiritual people

on DU. I think it is a stereotype to view all liberals as hearless athiests or at least MOST as hatefilled, cynical assholes. I just don't see it here. I just don't buy it.

[MADem]

62. I think President Barack Obama is a superb politician, almost as artful as W. J. Clinton.

I also think Obama is an excellent and decisive leader, too, but let's put that aside. Let's stick with the "politician" bit.

A good politician knows that a large number of voters like to hear that "humble before God" shit. They don't necessarily (though a few do) like to hear it seven days a week, or even every damn weekend....but they do like to hear it at major religious holidays like Christmas and Chanukah and Easter, and even at Ramadan (but not too much, mind you!) and at that stupid wingnut National Prayer Breakfast.

A good politician will grab a piece of red meat and throw it to the lions who demand it. It will be a lovely piece of fresh red meat, juicy, well received, but not too terribly Over-The-Top.

That's what I think he's about. If he has belief in a higher power, well, fine, whatever gets him through the day. So long as he doesn't think the higher power is telling him what to do, or has his eye on every little sparrow, I don't give a shit. Politicians often have to say stuff to get and hold office. Sometimes they even have to (gasp) compromise!

You're not going to get an openly atheist President in the White House. They'll all profess some degree of spirituality to appeal to the crowd that likes that "humble" quality in their leaders.

Did you mean to post this in the Atheist group?

[Capitalocracy]

65. May I join this whine-tasting party?

I like my whine with that special smokey flavor you can only get through flamebait.

[JNelson6563]

131. +1

lolz

[chrisa]

225. I hate whine. Too much of it gives me a headache.

[vaberella]

237. It just puts me to sleep. n/t

[Politicalboi]

68. If Obama doesn't believe, he better pretend

And he could (I hope) be doing that. Today you can't get elected if you claim yourself to be Atheist. The candidates and the media will go after you like flies on shit.

I'm sorry you feel the very few of us here who gripe about religion have driven people away. We non believers have to put up with religion, or we are the "strange" ones. Maybe some of us are tired of being forced to go to church as kids, and still have to put up with this nonsense in our government. As one who had to go to church every Sunday even Christmas TOO! I hated that. I despise religion. Exposing your kids to religion to me is child abuse. You can NEVER get that shit out of your head. It IS child abuse.

It teaches hatred, and self loath for some. I was raised catholic. You know the pedophiles. Oh and Father Micheal Whimpy was his name. All the kids liked the young priest, and his name was that of a cartoon character. He was later moved to a new church. Nobody really knew why. 30 years later, now we know.

And when I sneeze, what gives them the right to invoke god and bless me. Please save your breath.

[hyphenate]

69. I don't really care what he believes in

That's up to him.As long as his religious beliefs don't interfere with his presidency, that's okay. A lot of people have a very hard time separating a powerful figure and his practices and the religious beliefs he holds.

Everyone has something that they use in their lives to make living better for them. Some have their religions, some have their pride, most have some passion in their lives that drives them, keeps them going every day.

I know a lot of "New Atheists" deride those of Xtian beliefs, but I don't like that attitude. I grew up Catholic, and left the church in my teens, and that was the end of my formal (anf former) belief in a "god". Others I know went into completely different directions, none of them the same as the way I went. I wasn't trying to be different, but I found out when I got into some New Age practices (like Tarot, numerology, spirituality, I Ching, etc.) that there has always been a lot of animosity coming from the mostly Xtian groups, including Catholicism, and that that was never going to change. I also was stunned as I grew older how much intolerance there was--and still is--toward those of different faith.

We need to let the people believe in whatever they want. It's on of the things which came to us through the founding fathers, and that whether someone is a Xtian or a Buddhist, a Jew or a Taoist, a tea leaf reader or a spiritualist, we all have the same rights as everyone else.

Now, the thing is, not all Xtians are the same. Obama's background puts him squarely in the progressive religious context, and not in the camp of the whackadoodles. The whackadoodles are the ones that most of us more liberal peeps have the problem with. In the following list, I am referring ONLY to those people who are part of the "religious right," and not the entirety of Christiandom:

I will innumerate:

Xtians shouldn't be interfering with our public school curricula, and certainly NOT trying to introduce creationism into schools.

Xtians shouldn't be condemning ANYONE for having looser moral codes, because they're just as bad as everyone else, and probably worse.

Xtians shouldn't be looking into my rights as a woman, or trying to take those rights away from me.

Xtians shouldn't be trying to introduce or pass legislation denying someone else their basic, civil rights.

Xtians shouldn't be able to dictate to ANYONE about something as provate as their sex lives, their rights to adopt children, their rights to believe in anything they wish to believe.


BUT, this is also true about ANYONE trying to force these kinds of things on ANY other human being.

Xtians say they want to follow the tenets that Jesus Christ spoke about, and yet, they go and do everything that he said we SHOULDN'T be doing; they want fetuses to live, but don't give a shit about a real baby; they say they're pro life, but in fact most of them are pro-death penalty; and to many of them, they want every single sickening and disgusting piece of shit to be foisted on those who are not of a "Christian" group.

Many of these whackadoodles believe that they are the "chosen" ones--and they certainly don't have any kind of monopoly to being "good people." Most of the people I know are good people, and most of them are among the least religious people in the world.

So yeah, Obama can believe and follow any religious tenets he wants. It's his choice, and hell, we are still supposed to have freedom of religion, even if some think anyone who is a heathen is evil.

[Douglas Carpenter]

70. 92% of Americans - 90% of Democrats/ 85% of liberals - 94% of college graduates believe in God

So, I don't think it is anything to be too concerned about


http://www.gallup.com/poll/147887/americans-continue-believe-god.aspx

[Warren DeMontague]

78. Not only is the word "God" completely undefined, it's combined with "a universal spirit"

I'm willing to bet that many Buddhists- who believe in the Buddha-nature, a universal spirit of sorts- would be greatly surprised to hear that they believe in "God".

This is one of the points I'm trying to make in this thread, and for the benefit of the vulgarity-concerned, I'll leave the "fuckings" out of this post. There is this expectation that our politicians pay lip service to the idea of "God", but at the same time there's a real reluctance on the part of anyone- most especially ecumenical-minded religious people- to nail down what the fuck heck* exactly that word means.

The OP tries upthread to make the case about how "Tim Tebow believes in God and is ridiculed. So why not Obama?" Well, aside from the obvious and now backed up by links-n-evidence point that Tim Tebow has made his faith not just a public spectacle but a political one, AND the implication of Jesus in the outcome of football games, I think most people understand, even without a crash course in Korzybski general semantics, that Tebow's God[font size=1] 1[/font] is NOT the same thing as Obama's God[font size=1] 2[/font].

Oh, of course, the fundamentalists are all sure exactly who "he" is, his likes and dislikes, even which apps he's got installed on his facebook page... and likewise they're especially convinced that when the shit finally hits the fan, all the people believing in the "wrong" God will get the boot, or at least a stern talking to from St. Peter. But in the meantime, at least, those folks believe in something more or less approximating the "actual" God, so they can all stay on the team against the unbelievers, the secularists, the wishy-washy liberal believers, etc.


[font color="#ffffff"]remdi95 niyad[/font]

Then add to this the people who say- and this has gotta be one of the most meaningless pieces of gibberish ever floated by anyone, which is probably why, I think, Mitt Romney said it in 2008: "It doesn't matter what you believe.. only that you believe!"

...I mean, seriously. What the fuck heck* is that?

I'll tell you what it is. It's a declaration of war on logic, critical thinking, or even the entire idea not just that we can discern actual objective facts about our reality, but that we should even bother to try... and yet, it's EXACTLY the sort of Oprah-esque meaningless pablum that gets the crowds nodding and going "yes yes, we believe! Most people believe! They don't know what the fuck heck* they believe IN, but THEY BELIEVE!"


...I'll cut to the chase, then. Because I realize that even though Atheists are a mean oppressive majority on DU, in the United States of America it's more likely that an admitted axe murderer would be elected president than someone who uttered the dread words "I don't believe in God".

So, okay: 92% of Adults "Believe in God" (or a "Universal Spirit", but let's leave that part alone now for simplicity's sake).. let me repeat that: According to this poll, 92% of Adults Believe In God.

So WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

In other words, fine. 92% of Adults Believe in God. Great!


Now, Define "God".



I'll wait.





*sorry. Slipped out.

[Douglas Carpenter]

79. I have no opinion on the matter and no opinion about what defines God

And I certainly don't know what 92% of Americans - 90% of Democrats/ 85% of liberals - 94% of college graduates - mean when they say that they believe in God. But I don't really see any need to get all emotional about it one way or the other. As a charachter in Flannery O'Conner's novel, Wise Blood put it; "There is nothing worse than a man who claims not to believe when he really does."

[Warren DeMontague]

83. Really? No offense to the "Wise Blood" character, but I dropped a fucking chair on my foot

a couple weeks ago, and as far as I'm concerned, that was WAY worse than a man who claims not to believe when he really does.


I only get "emotional" when "See who believes in God? Everyone believes in God!" is used as a two by four to bonk on the heads of Atheists.

[Vattel]

87. great post

I would wager that you've had a philosophy class or two.

[vaberella]

243. I can agree to this. I'm still in battle with fellow Pantheists to not confuse our beliefs with God.

It's been tough for Pantheists when explaining their way of thinking to not compare a universal order of sorts to this concept of God. I find God limiting and ultimately ridiculous. But the more there are pantheists out there the more this idea of God start entering the dialogue.

[Warren DeMontague]

245. THANK YOU.

I don't get the resistance to even any sort of discussion about what these words mean.

Like, "according to a poll, 94% of Americans say they believe in God"... okay, what does that mean?

Because as far as I'm concerned, that poll is like "94% of Americans want you to have a nice day"... "Have a nice day" is something that people say, they think they're supposed to say it, they don't really put a whole ton of thought into saying it, and they certainly don't put a ton of effort into determining what it actually, really means.

[JNelson6563]

130. I think it's something to be terribly concerned about.

[T S Justly]

72. I don't believe him.

Now, if he were to "claim" that he gets down on his knees for Wall St., well then, there might be
something to that.

[SammyWinstonJack]

132. Ha!

[stevenleser]

260. There's always got to be someone who tries to hijack an OP to discuss what THEY want to discuss

invariably they barely touch on the OP and then go in a totally different direction and vehemently defend themeselves against the hijacking charge.

Here, let me help you out with your response to me:

"But I am on topic, see, I gave some lip service to the OP before I went on talking what I wanted to talk about"

[DrDan]

75. just a guess - but if the same questions were asked about george w bush - most of the responses

would be completely different.

Funny how that works.

[tnvoter]

133. that's because george w bush opened said he turned to his "heavenly father"

rather than his earthly father for advice. he did not hold other cultures/beliefs equal to his own. I don't think Obama is like that, and I think it would be a stretch to compare the two

[SammyWinstonJack]

134. Right?

Obama get a pass when others do/did not, on most everything.

Funny how that works

[tblue37]

80. It offends the hell out of me that there is such a relentless religious test

these days for anyone who wishes to run for political office in this country, and that our candidates feel they must treat their religious faith, whether it is real or not, as a public performance.

With so many people insisting that he is a Muslim, a commie-atheist, a Kenyan anticolonial socialist, or the Antichrist, and that anything but Christianity disqualifies him for office, he has no choice but to loudly proclaim such a faith.

[GoCubsGo]

125. That makes two of us.

I couldn't agree more. I heard a statistic the other day that something like 68% of Americans EXPECT such professions of faith from their President and other political leaders. It never ceases to amaze me how a country that is so advanced that it put a man on the moon, and gave us so many other scientific advancements, is so goddamn backwards when it comes to religion in government.

I think what upsets so many about this is that President Obama once again went into the house of his opposition, and threw their beliefs right back in their faces. He didthe same here as he does whenever he quotes Ronald Reagan. People don't like being exposed as hypocrites.

[piratefish08]

81. as long as he doesn't claim to hear god talking back, who cares?

[Leopolds Ghost]

82. Religion is on-topic for GD again? /)^3^(\

Cool

[Fumesucker]

86. All DUers are equal...

[Prophet 451]

84. I have no idea what Obama believes

If he has a religious faith, fine. So do I (although I'm not Christian) and so do millions of believers who aren't represented by the likes of Pat Robertson. When I mock people like Robertson, I'm not mocking their belief, I'm mocking their deranged interpretation of it.

That said, I am bothered that there is effectively a religious test for higher office in the USA. Who Obama prays to or whether he prays at all isn't supposed to matter.

[CJCRANE]

89. I think Obama believes in the social message of Jesus

as he has stated many times.

He has also mentioned the universal values that he believes all religions and ethics share.

And there's nothing wrong with spending time in prayer or meditation occasionally, as I'm sure most of us do.

[justiceischeap]

91. There's this thing called "Freedom of Religion"

As long as his beliefs (or anyone else's) don't interfere with my non-beliefs, what does it matter?

The big issue for me concerning politics and religion is someone like Rick Santorum, (possibly) Romney or W. They would allow their religion to dictate their policy, that's when the problem occurs, IMO.

[Vinca]

94. When it comes to religion and politicians I close my ears because

I suspect 99.9% of what they say is pandering crap. I have no idea what the POTUS honestly believes. It does bother me when Democrats turn up at the C Street prayer breakfast since the beliefs of the "Fellowship" have more to do with their banks accounts and stock portfolios than anything else. They could give a rat's ass about those in need. I sincerely hope the POTUS was pandering.

[baldguy]

98. Just as long as he follows his Lord's teaching and prays in private

And as long as he follows the Constitution, and keeps it out of the govt - I'm perfectly comfortable having elected officials having a religious philosophy to guide them. Most of the various sects of the major belief systems of the Western Tradition - Judaism, Christianity, Islam & classical rational agnosticism and atheism - certainly qualify.

[JoePhilly]

102. We all believe that there is no higher power?? And we "hold" others to that??

When did we start doing that ... I must have missed it.

Actually ... "we" don't care whether you have a religion or not ... what we don't like is for "you" to expect "us"to believe what you believe ... or to accept "you" as "our" moral leader.

I can't recall Obama making such demands on "us".

Can you?

[cthulu2016]

103. You are not understanding the Flying Spaghetti Monster

Atheists do not call anyone's god the Flying Spaghetti Monster

The Flying Spaghetti Monster is a thought experiment concept -- is the Flying Spaghetti Monster more laughable, any less likely to exist, more lacking in evidence than any other god?

Atheists do not say the christian god is the Flying Spaghetti Monster, only that it is no more valid than the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

As to your question, if Barack Obama actually believes in a god that has a personality and motives and an interest in human prayer then Barack Obama has a problem.

I think Obama is lying about his religiosity, as many folks do.

But ultimately we can only assess others by their actions. He does not act like he believes in god which is the best I can hope for.

[deutsey]

118. Thank you for that clarification

That's what I understand of the FSM as well.

[jefferson_dem]

189. Nevermind.

You're not worth the effort.

[cthulu2016]

192. The pre-edit version was funnier

[whathehell]

269. How does Obama "not act like he believes in God"?

[treestar]

105. I don't hold people to any religious standard when it comes to holding office

And President Obama does not go on about it like the Republicans do, or use it to control others, as the Republicans would. There are liberal Christians.

Atheists are a minority - they cannot expect to control politics. Why should they care about people being religious? That is what tolerance is.

[renie408]

115. I am an unrepentant atheist and have no problem with Obama's faith. What is the big deal?

So he prays, so what? Prayer is a form of meditation. It may help him find a quiet place in his mind from whence the inspiration for solutions to his ENORMOUS every day problems may come. What is wrong with that? If anybody would feel the need for prayer, I imagine it would be the President of the United States. And Christian Principles (well, some of them) guide the process by which I make decisions, so why do I care if they guide him? 'Christian Principles' are codified morality, that's all. I have many good friends that are quietly devoted Christians that don't believe in hellfire and brimstone. Christianity covers a lot of ground, folks. You can be a Jerry Falwell Christian or a Joel Osteen Christian or a Bishop Shelby Spong Christian. Personally, if held at gunpoint, I would go Bishop Shelby Spong. I learned a lot from his books.

As for the DU persecuting those of faith; well, that's just wrong.

[madmom]

119. Believing in "christian values" is one thing, christian actions are something entirely different!

[theophilus]

120. I am glad he does. I hope he will go one step beyond and actually follow the liberal teachings of

Jesus. That would be a refreshing change from the behavior of rightwing professed Christians. They don't seem to care about the true teachings. Jesus asked, "Why do you call me Lord and then don't do the things I teach?" More power to Mr. Obama.

[_ed_]

152. More power?

“I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian…it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

More power to his bigotry with respect to marriage equality?

[MNBrewer]

177. God's in the mix... he said it....

He's allowing his self-professed religious viewpoint to influence PUBLIC POLICY on something that has no affect on him, personally. Bigotry against homosexuals on his part is OK, though, because God's in the mix.

[Boombaby]

121. Facepalm

What, you expect this country to go atheist now? Dream on!

[Nye Bevan]

129. "I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman."

Now, for me as a Christian…it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

I don't have any problem with Obama's Christianity. And he's not faking it, he has been a committed churchgoing Christian since decades before he considered running for office. I do have a problem, however, with his using his Christianity as a justification to oppose marriage equality.

[Bluenorthwest]

136. That's the whole of it, right there.

So many seem to forget that part.

[renie408]

137. I think we need to redefine marriage.

My husband and I are both atheists. We are, obviously, married, hence the 'husband' thing. I won't mind if, for clarification, the government decided to reclassify our connection as a 'civil union' and save 'marriage' for church. As long as we have the same rights, obligations and benefits, what do I care what they call it? Obama IS for civil unions that have all the same force of law as marriage. And I don't see the problem there.

[Nye Bevan]

144. So if the word "marriage" could only be used for whites marrying whites, or blacks marrying blacks,

but whites marrying blacks could only enter "civil unions", you would be 100% OK with that, if the "civil unions" had the "same force of law as marriage"?

[renie408]

175. No, ALL marriages would be civil unions in the eyes of the law. No marriages. All civil unions.

White + White= Civil Union. Black + Black= Civil Union. White + Black= Civil Union. Man + Woman= Civil Union. Man + Man= Civil Union. Woman + Woman= Civil Union. I think I have covered all the bases there.

Churches would be free to feel like they have cornered the market on marriage. If there are gay people who are members of a church which recognizes gay unions, they can be married in the church. But the state would issue a Civil Union permit...to them and to anybody else that wants to establish an intimate legal partnership with another person.

I have been united with my husband for 24 years. We have two children. We would not be less married if tomorrow somebody said that our partnership was a civil union instead of a marriage. I even asked him about that this morning and he said he doesn't care what we call it. Honestly, we are atheists and I have always thought it was weird that we got married in a church (My mother...what was I supposed to do??), so we have been talking about having another service this Fall on our anniversary. I would be VERY content to call it a Civil Union service.

[Honeycombe8]

138. It is a good thing that he's a man of faith, if he thinks it is. If it gives him comfort,

calmness in the storm, confidence, humility, etc., then that is a good thing, as long as he doesn't use it as an excuse to take away things from others, as it is sometimes used.

In Obama's case, he seems to walk the walk, and not just give utterances of faithfulness.

The personal beliefs of someone else are none of my business, as long as they don't use that as an excuse to take away my rights or harm me.

I have seen others here be unyielding of people with belief in a God. I don't understand not understanding that people have different beliefs. Big deal. That's the way the world is. If a person can't tolerate that someone else holds different beliefs, that person is never going to be able to live a life of peace, congeniality, and get along with others. (Not that I'm very successful at that.)

[_ed_]

151. "as long as they don't use that as an excuse to take away my rights or harm me"

How about his quote: “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian…it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

Don't you think that's an excuse to take rights away from gays and lesbians?

[stevenleser]

261. The person already indicated as much and you already know that because you quoted them.

How many times would that person need to say it before you believe them? If ever?

"as long as he doesn't use it as an excuse to take away things from others, as it is sometimes used."

[Bluenorthwest]

139. According to Jesus any public display of prayer means they are hypocrites.

I can not argue with that. Jesus commanded his followers not to engage in public prayer. So when folks do so in his name, I just laugh.

[vaberella]

239. I don't believe Obama did public prayer. He just prayed at home...which is what he said.

Not to mention I would love the passage where Jesus told his followers not to engage in public prayer. I only say this because much of the passages I read in school were of him and his followers spreading the message of God (ie in public) which would be public prayer.

[arely staircase]

140. anyone who is disappointed by having a Christian president

had better be prepared to be disappointed for a long long time. America is not a Christian nation in the sense that the repubs say it is but it is in the sense that it is the overrwhelmingajority religion. And it is to the extent that someone professing a different faith or no faith would probably be unelectible. the best you are going to get is someone from a progressive Christian background like president Obama.

[newspeak]

142. yeah, well I don't care if he gets down on his knees and prays

I care if he starts hearing those voices from god telling him to do inhumane things-like lying to the people to get a war hard on-little boots anyone? I don't want someone hearing voices in charge of that little button.

The MSM has spent over twenty years creating the environment we have today in this country. As little boots said they are creating the reality (illusion). Are we going to buy into their corrupt, greedy, compassionless illusion, now that's the question. Maybe I'll start praying for people to finally see the light-"the truth shall set you free."

There are democrats who are socially conscious christians, and I have no problem that obama prays, as long as he doesn't listen to the "voices."

[Raffi Ella]

143. the problem here isn't his faith.

The problem I have with all of this is that Separation of Church & State is a joke at this point and YES they ALL use it to get votes- I don't CARE what he believes!

I want religion OUT OF POLITICS, period. It has no place. Believe what ever the hell you want to believe but keep it out of Politics.

If Separation of Church & State were real and enforced we wouldn't be talking about this or have a need to. We've become so desensitized to hearing religion spoken about All The Damn Time that we've forgotten it's NOT supposed to be a part of Government!

[renie408]

147. +1

[gulliver]

148. DUers are not that asses you assume they are in your post.

I'm really sick of posts that say things like "the 'Flying Spaghetti Monster' most DU'ers use to describe the person/entity/THING Christians hold holy."

Most DUers? Do you have a poll or something to back that up?

It's a lie.

[CrispyQ]

149. I take issue with his expansion of faith based initiatives, not his personal beliefs. -nt

[_ed_]

150. The existence of a "higher power" is a matter of fact

If you have factual data that proves the existence of a "higher power," then I'm all ears.

Otherwise, people that "believe" in such a deity are doing so without a shred of evidence. Obama, if he isn't lying about praying, is simply wasting his time and ours (since we pay him to be in the oval office). Prayer is irrelevant to actual physical phenomena, so our President is wasting his time that he could be using reasoning through a problem instead of beseeching a nonexistent deity.

I see the President praying the same way I would see the President using Tarot cards or trying to divine water in the rose garden: using faith instead of reason. Faith has never solved a problem; reason is the only way we solve problems.

[K Gardner]

154. What in the name of "the flying spaghetti monster" or God, does it matter? ...

Who are "we" to "hold anyone" to anything? What.. we're going to NOT support him if he believes in a "higher power"?

When was it a DU Mandate that No One Believes in A Higher Power?

Or was this a sarcastic post that I've taken out of context? Either way, I don't give a fig what Mitt Romney or Obama do, on their knees or otherwise.

[Cleita]

155. Well, there is no scientific proof either for or against a higher power.

When I was in college, in philosophy class, we had to learn the ten reasons or proof for the existence of god and ten reasons or proof that god didn't exist. Both lists were quite rational and valid. So no one can really make that statement that there is no such thing as a higher power. No one has unequivocally proved it yet. So if he wants to pray to his God. It's fine by me, as long as it doesn't influence his policies and decisions. And frankly, it wouldn't bother me if he were a Muslim as he has been accused of being. We may have a Muslim President one day in the future, if we can finally get the bigotry and prejudice out of the minds and hearts of our citizens at last.

[Warren DeMontague]

161. You do realize that your statement there about proof is considered "bashing" and "bigotry" by some.

To wit, it's exactly the same kind of denigration of religious people and faith that some people of faith claim they must endure on a daily basis here, and is apparently the reason this obvious flamebait thought-provoking OP designed to challenge the bigoted bash-happy DU Atheist community was written in the first place.

[CakeGrrl]

163. What do you care about his beliefs?

[ProSense]

178. It's all

a weird phenomenon.

Why exactly is this President's faith a source of contention? I get that the RW have pushed the meme that he's a Muslim, but given that there is such a thing as religious freedom in this country, why the constant discussion testing his faith?

A lot of people invoke MLK to criticize the President. Does MLK's religious beliefs offend anyone? He was also a man, not a saint.

I mean, it's not like the Presidency, Congress and other elected offices are filled with atheists. Why on earth single out Obama and his faith?

The issue of religion is always a source of political contention, and sometimes this happens:

Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll1143.xml

Why? Politics!

[whatchamacallit]

164. I'd be surprised if he actually believes

If I were christian I wouldn't be able to square my beliefs with the killing of innocents in opportunistic wars.

[stevenleser]

262. RW fundies feel the same about abortion and the reasoning is similar.

A RW Fundie would say, "if I were Christian, I wouldnt be able to square my beliefs with the killing of an innocent baby to satisfy my selfish desires."

In both the fundies statement and yours, there are a number of leading words that someone could take issue with. Such as

"Killing": A leader of government and any military members, as well as a woman terminating their pregnancy would say that their intent is not to kill anyone but to achieve an objective. In fact, a woman terminating her pregnancy would suggest that a first trimester fetus is not a person.

"Innocents/Innocent Baby": Again, a woman terminating her pregnancy would suggest that a first trimester fetus is not a person. A leader of a government and any military members would say they try to avoid having innocent people caught in the crossfire.

"Opportunistic/Selfish": We all know the justifications given for various wars. Some people actually believe them even in the case of Iraq. A Christian who bought the Bush/Cheney line in Iraq would not feel they were violating their beliefs. I would also take issue with fundies characterization of women's desires to terminate a pregnancy as 'selfish'. We are all entitled to live our lives and have the best lives possible because we only get one.

Now, I'll save you the trouble of some of your response. I was against the Iraq war, and in favor of our actions in Afghanistan and Libya. I am also pro-choice.

[whatchamacallit]

263. Unbelievable!

I see, anyone who doesn't accept "collateral damage" as a-ok is a fundie... I've read some twisted shit in here, but this demented apologia takes the cake.

A RW Fundie would say, "if I were Christian, I wouldnt be able to square my beliefs with the killing of an innocent baby to satisfy my selfish desires."

Why would a right wing fundie say "if I were Christian"? They *are* christian.

"Killing": A leader of government and any military members, as well as a woman terminating their pregnancy would say that their intent is not to kill anyone but to achieve an objective. In fact, a woman terminating her pregnancy would suggest that a first trimester fetus is not a person.

Let me get this straight... To avoid calling it killing, you concoct this bizarre conflation of abortion and war? Since terminating a pregnancy, and carpet bombing a village, could both be regarded as "objectives", it's the same thing? A first trimester fetus and a sentient human being are equivalent if there's an objective at work? "Please understand mr and mrs Mansoor, we didn't kill your 6yr old, we 'objective-d' her".

"Innocents/Innocent Baby": Again, a woman terminating her pregnancy would suggest that a first trimester fetus is not a person. A leader of a government and any military members would say they try to avoid having innocent people caught in the crossfire.

Are noncombatants not innocent? Your thinking is so muddled you take issue with the term then establish it as the case in your second sentence. BTW governments and the military would say lots of things to keep your support, most of it bullshit.

"Opportunistic/Selfish": We all know the justifications given for various wars. Some people actually believe them even in the case of Iraq. A Christian who bought the Bush/Cheney line in Iraq would not feel they were violating their beliefs. I would also take issue with fundies characterization of women's desires to terminate a pregnancy as 'selfish'. We are all entitled to live our lives and have the best lives possible because we only get one.

All I know is despite what the good book says, fundies rationalized the killing when they were Bush's wars. Just like you now that they are Obama's.

[stevenleser]

266. While watching you go into a tizzy was fun, you missed my point entirely. I'll try to help

#1 (Please pay attention to this one) - Neither of the views I wrote about are mine.

I'll repeat it, just in case you missed it. Neither of the views I wrote about are mine.

OK, so, you understand that now, right? I do not agree with your views, nor am I a RW Christian fundy. Those are the two viewpoints I discussed. You attacking me as if I held or was defending either one of them was amusing, but a total waste of time.

I merely pointed out how your flawed remark is similarly flawed to a RW fundy justifying being anti-abortion and anti-choice. I'll take your points one at a time. Please pay attention this time around so we dont waste more of it.

Me: A RW Fundie would say, "if I were Christian, I wouldnt be able to square my beliefs with the killing of an innocent baby to satisfy my selfish desires."

You: Why would a right wing fundie say "if I were Christian"? They *are* christian.

In your original post, you said "If I were a Christian" as if you are channeling others who are Christian who are behaving a certain way. I continued exactly along the lines you were going in. Pretty simple, right? Lets go on:

Me: "Killing": A leader of government and any military members, as well as a woman terminating their pregnancy would say that their intent is not to kill anyone but to achieve an objective. In fact, a woman terminating her pregnancy would suggest that a first trimester fetus is not a person.

You: Let me get this straight... To avoid calling it killing, you concoct this bizarre conflation of abortion and war? Since terminating a pregnancy, and carpet bombing a village, could both be regarded as "objectives", it's the same thing? A first trimester fetus and a sentient human being are equivalent if there's an objective at work? "Please understand mr and mrs Mansoor, we didn't kill your 6yr old, we 'objective-d' her". . . . Are noncombatants not innocent? Your thinking is so muddled you take issue with the term then establish it as the case in your second sentence. BTW governments and the military would say lots of things to keep your support, most of it bullshit.

Actually, its not bullshit, nor was 'I' avoiding calling it killing. The anti-abortion fundies were just talking on FR about what they believe is 300,000 innocent lives killed by Planned Parenthood per year. In their opinion, we all did it on purpose, not caring about these lives at all. We're bloodthirsty genocidal killers of innocent babies, all of us pro-choicers have this blood on our hands. Didnt you know that they felt that way?

The problem with this argument by you in terms of war, and by them in terms of abortion is, if you believe in the reason we are in any of these wars, the reality is, innocent people always get killed in war. When we drove across western europe to defeat the Nazis, tons of innocent people got hurt or killed. We bombed all of Germany and Japan's major cities to smithereens, again, tons of women and children died as a result. (Of course, when the Nazi's bombed the UK, they also killed innocents). Should we have let the Nazis have western europe because of a fear of innocents being hurt? And back then, the lack of technology meant that a lot more innocent people were killed when bombs were dropped. In terms of abortion, if you dont believe in the bible, or at least what the clergy have interpreted the bible to mean in terms of the beginning of life, you arent killing anything except for a few cells. So, do you believe in the objective of a particular war? Do you believe abortion terminates a human life? Your answers to those questions completely alter your perception of what those acts are.

None of that is exactly rocket surgery. Lets see what else made you flip out:

Me: "Opportunistic/Selfish": We all know the justifications given for various wars. Some people actually believe them even in the case of Iraq. A Christian who bought the Bush/Cheney line in Iraq would not feel they were violating their beliefs. I would also take issue with fundies characterization of women's desires to terminate a pregnancy as 'selfish'. We are all entitled to live our lives and have the best lives possible because we only get one.

You: All I know is despite what the good book says, fundies rationalized the killing when they were Bush's wars. Just like you now that they are Obama's.

Actually, you are wrong. I will never attempt to justify Iraq, ever. I supported Afghanistan even when Bush was doing it and I still support it now. My positions on both of those are on record through articles I have written. But even that is besides the point I was making that you apparently couldnt grasp. The point has nothing to do with my personal viewpoints on war or abortion, the point is the eerie similarity between the words with which you condemned Christians who supported the war and the criticisms of Christian fundies who attack Christian pro-choicers.

Both of these attacks, yours and that of the rw christian fundies on choicers rely on subjective, self-serving demagoguery.

[whatchamacallit]

267. Honestly I don't know what you're babbling about

Your first post stands as a monument to absurdity. As far as the encore is concerned... It's not WWII, we're not fighting nazis, our "objectives" in these wars are hardly clear (unless like many ignorant right wingers, you believe the war on terror can be won), and it's always so fucking easy to go abstract and theoretical about war when it's not your family's body parts scattered all over the blast zone! Yeah man, go ahead and tell me about acceptable losses from the safety of your sagging BarcaLounger.

[renie408]

182. It is absolutely fascinating to me that there are people here who are more comfortable

with think that Obama is a liar than that he is a Christian.

Not trying to start anything, I swear. I just think that is really interesting.

[RainDog]

277. most people think politicians lie

it may not be about this subject - but I would hope there are few adults who remain so naive that they think politicians don't lie.

[Warren DeMontague]

204. I must have missed the part where Obama did an ad for Focus on the Family. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

228. I'm going to wait for someone to come up with a logically coherent definition of the word "God"

and then I can tell you whether I think it's ridiculous, or not.

[Logical]

194. If he does it to get votes I am fine with it. If he really believes it.....

I am disappointed in him.

But many people have trouble breaking out of the brainwashing they received as a child.

[donheld]

205. It's NONE of your business or mine.

I find this thread very offensive and mean spirited. I'm a total Agnostic, but this is beyond the pail. I've been none too happy with Barack Obama. I've felt like he's far too cozy to Goldman Sachs. To question or belittle his faith is something I will not do.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

207. It's his personal choice

[Jennicut]

218. I don't care about one's faith or lack of faith. It is not my business.

It is ridiculous that in today's political environment that politicians still have to show they believe in God and are for the most part, Christians. However, if Obama is a Christian and believes in God then that is his choice. I consider myself a liberal Christian. I don't care what faith anyone has or if they have none. I am more a humanist then anything else. I just want to get to the day in politics where it is considered one's private right to believe in what they want to believe in and no one is questioned on it.

[randome]

221. We all deal with the reality of non-existence in different ways.

[chrisa]

222. Big deal. Who cares?

Maybe he's just a Christian who prays to God. Why is it any of my business?

[NorthCarolina]

227. Personally I suspect it's campaign BS, fodder for those inclined to put weight in such a claim.

For me however, it causes me to take pause, scratch my head and say "WTF"?

[vaberella]

234. What is your fuckin' deal?! Is it fuckin' illegal to believe in a God?!

Look, because you don't believe in it or don't care for it doesn't mean others shouldn't have the right. I'm disgusted by so called liberals who claim to look for tolerance but then at the same time don't exercise it and make religion out to be all evil. Not all people who believe in Religion are freaks. Don't get me wrong religion has it's fair share---actually above average but because I abhor the shit doesn't mean I don't think others don't have the right to practice in any way they wish their religion. I hate divisive threads like this and they should be deleted.

Fuckin' intolerant bullshit.

[Warren DeMontague]

238. You're right about the intended divisive nature of the thread

but I think you misunderstood where the OP was coming from.

[vaberella]

240. I read the post. I don't see the point.

They think Obama is making a political move by being vocal about his religion? I don't think we have enough knowledge about the man to know whether it's political or sincere. Do you? Further more...the idea of HOPE itself is an ENTIRELY religious concept that has taken a more powerful meaning over time. HOPE/FAITH are entirely connected and Obama has related much of what he said to his belief in God and raising his children religious despite the fact that he also acknowledges and welcomes all beliefs. I do not think the man is lying. However, even if he is I don't think we know enough to suggest say he is. Further more...regardless of the OP's "point" it's lost in his/her framing and utter disrespect of other people's faiths.

[Warren DeMontague]

244. Okay. Let me spell it out for you. The OP is trying to be cute, taking a swipe at DU's atheists.

I'll summarize it: "Look! The president prays! Are you going to mock him? You mock Tim Tebow! Why don't you mock the President?"

The people being disrespected in the OP are unbelievers, because that's who this little nose-tweaking flamenbait* thread is aimed at.

I've said repeatedly I don't care if the President prays or not, I only want his religious beliefs- such as they are, or may be- to not interfere (as they did in the case of the previous occupant of the Oval Office) with things like support for science or stem cell research, etc. I've also said that "God" means so many different things to so many different people, apparently, that maybe the "God" Tim Tebow thinks cares about the outcome of his football games might not be the same "God" Obama is praying to... but apparently that point is too complex or metaphysical for some of the folks on this thread to want to deal with.

That said, I do NOT believe that religion has any kind of a monopoly on "Hope" (or morality, for that matter) thank you very much.


[font size=1]*this was originally supposed to be "flamebait", obviously, but upon further reflection, I've decided I like the typo "flamenbait" better.[/font]

[RainDog]

278. +1 n/t

[Arkana]

248. I don't give a damn if the President believes in a flying cat that shits rainbows.

He's religious without being an asshole about it, and that's all atheists like me can really ask for.

[Warren DeMontague]

249. Arkana, For the thread win.

thanks, I think we're done here.

[yurbud]

251. from a Machiavellian perspective, it would be foolish for him to say anything else

It is part of the appeal to independents, but this particular part costs progressives nothing in terms of policy goals, so I don't give a shit.

I am not a Christian or theist, but I don't distrust someone just because they are.

I have known and respected many devout Christians, Jews, and Muslims.

That said, I'd be more comfortable with someone who can deal honestly with questions of the supernatural. We have no way of knowing what's going on in the ''spiritual'' realm since we only have our ''natural'' five senses to know anything, and internal emotional impressions of spiritual truth could just as likely be the result of good digestion as communion with God as CS Lewis himself said.

[BiggJawn]

253. I rather he wouldn't.

I rather nobody would. I'm tired of religion. I honestly think this would be a much more peaceful world if we could all just get past the "My gawd can beat up YOUR gawd" bullshit.

And yes, he needs to profess "faith" to get the votes. An Atheist couldn't get elected Dogcatcher in most parts of this country.

I'm gonna shut up now, before I piss somebody off and get turned over to The "Jury".

[renie408]

256. Religion isn't the CAUSE of violence.

I don't think that religion is the CAUSE of violence, per se. It is the EXCUSE given for violence. Let's face it; Osama Bin Ladin was an angry, semi-crazy guy. Whether he was Muslim or not, he was still going to be an angry, semi-crazy guy. Religion is the focal point he used. But if it isn't religion, it will go back to race or country. Haters are going to hate. I think I got that quote from some rap song my son listens to, but it is quite apt. Take away religion and the violent, crazy people of the world will find some other reason to do violent crazy things.

It's like bigotry and homophobia and all that other stuff. It isn't like taking away their religion is going to make them less bigoted or homophobic. People who are inclined to be so, are going to be so. I am not sure what to do.

[icymist]

255. You should ask him who he prays to, not us.

This is something that is supposed to be private and personal. If our President wishes us to be included with his prayers, then he will tell us. Also, I can also see where this could be 'show' but, do you really think that Obama is for show? Believe me, if I see that the man is praying, I believe that the man is really praying.

[KamaAina]

257. I wouldn't say "most" DUers are Pastafarians

besides, the FSM is not meant to be a description of god, but a parody. Pastafarianism emerged from the debate over evolution in Kansas as a reductio ad absurdum: "I say there's a Flying Spaghetti Monster, and you can't prove there isn't!"

[lonestarnot]

264. That is his fucking business, just like what I do is mine, unless of course either one of us break

the law, but then bushitler broke the law so, hmmmf, maybe it's somebody's business.

[AtomicKitten]

265. I don't care. Religion is one issue I coexist with.

It's a space I give people respectfully.

[whathehell]

272. Thank you.

It's good to see some tolerance and SANITY on this thread.

[WI_DEM]

273. You are of the mistaken belief that apparently there are no Christians on DU

As far as President Obama getting down on his knees and praying daily--if that is what he wants to do then I have no problem with it. Many people pray.

[RainDog]

274. hold him to the same standard

if he uses religion as a way to deny civil rights to others, then that religion is not good. if he uses religion as a way to demonstrate love toward all, then that's useful.

no doubt every national politician has to kowtow to the majority of Americans who have negative attitudes toward those who don't include a god as part of their belief system - but it's not up to me to determine what his actual beliefs may be.

it's odd that you are trying to use the president to slam atheists. it indicates someone who is very submissive to authority - you are trying to make a case for god because of what an authority figure does.

that's really not a worthwhile argument.

[TheManInTheMac]

275. I don't care.

I don't spend time obsessing over things people believe in that I don't. That's even sillier than religion.

[Obama3_16]

288. works for me. a lot of people are religious in this country. they feel true answers come from

a higher place--not human cognitive learning skills. So, for Obama to help them identify with him by saying he prays doesn't bother me at all.

I don't think he is sincere in doing it. If he is, fine. But I don't think he is.

[bigwillq]

299. Except for the times when he says marriage should be between a man and a woman

because of his religious beliefs, I don't really care how Obama prays, who he prays to, when he does it, how much he does it. That's his business and doesn't affect me.



"I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman," Obama responded, "for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God's in the mix."
http://equalitymatters.org/blog/201103100012


I only disagree on the marriage part because it does affect my gay brothers and sisters. It denies gay folks equal rights.