| Author |
Message |
Anomalie
Just Arrived


Joined: Apr 05, 2005
Posts: 6
|
Posted:
Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:08 am |
|
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid353515028?bctid=416343938
A very interesting speech by Barrack Obama on the religion and politics. He makes some quite ballsy statements, for a politician, on biblical inerrancy, abortion and separating church and state. He draws the line pretty much exactly where I would like it to be drawn.
What do you guys think? |
|
|
|
 |
Brian37
Master of Logic


Joined: Oct 04, 2003
Posts: 9384
|
Posted:
Tue Feb 12, 2008 6:23 am |
|
I aint voten for no darkie!
(Note to self: Start running, they're bringing the clubs and torches to get you Brian37)
All kidding aside.
I do get the sense of a genuine disire to seek overlap. I do get the sense that he wants the government partisipation to be extended, via mentioning Jews and Muslims being brought in. I loved the fact that in front of a church congregation that he said that one of his family members was an atheist. And he also said that he would rather have a secular politician state their values than pretend to be something that they are not.
So it was certainly a positive move toward more inclusion in political voices.
HOWEVER, I susspect that he is pushing the bounderies but still pandering to maintian a religious vote.
It still bothers me that politicians go into churches at all. If Obama says he wants to bridge the gap, for example, between black baptists and white evangelicals, in seeking overlap, which IS possible once you get past Robterson and Keys. But it seems a stumbling block if that Evangelical sees you "winking" to your side while extending your hand to the other.
Again, if he wants that, and I agree with the common law overlap and that morals can transend, then he needs to invite all citizens to a neutral setting.
I am not 100 percent happy with all the speech. But it is a definate improvement and DOES seem to widen the umbrella called America. In all seriousness, as long as I dont recieve another unwanted spam from his handlers(campain organizers) I will vote for him.
Not because I agree with everything said in that speech. But out of all the candidates he does truely seem to not want anyone, theist or atheist left out of having a voice.
But, he seems to downplay "God" in the pledge being unimportant and that bugs me for the same reason he stated in his speech about Keys speeking for him as a Christian. THAT IS WHY "GOD" should not be in the pledge. For the same reason it is NOT in the oath of office, because it means something different to everyone else.
He isnt my utopian canidate, but he certainly opened alot of doors to minorities, not just black Christians, in that speech. For right now, he has my vote. |
|
|
|
 |
realityslayer
Just Arrived

Joined: Feb 12, 2008
Posts: 5
Location: Charleston, SC
|
Posted:
Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:59 am |
|
I enjoyed this speech. He said a lot of ballsy stuff here, especially considering his immediate audience, for example '...religious people don't have a monopoly on morals..., or ...his father was an atheist, his mother was a freethinker and that he had and still has doubts. There is no doubt or argument that he is pandering to the religious, but that is his job right now. He is applying for a job to represent everyone, religious people included.
Don't get caught up in hatred. A church is just a building. Being bothered (because you're an atheist) that politicians go into churches is equivalent to a vegetarian protesting a politician giving a speech in a greasy-spoon restaurant serving hamburgers and cheese steaks! You have to go where people are. I haven't done any research, but I'm willing to bet that Barack (or any other politician, for that matter) gives more speeches in religious-neutral, public, atheist-approved spaces than he does in churches.
For the record, I don't believe that any god(s) exists. But, let's be real. A lot of people in America do believe in the supernatural. Politicians can't pretend that these people aren't important if they want to get elected or stay in office. Even so, this speech kept this audience's ego in check and always included statements which included people of faith as well as those without.
Overall a good, balanced speech. I have to agree with Brian37, out of all of the candidates, he has my vote. |
|
|
|
 |
satansballs
Intern


Joined: Oct 26, 2003
Posts: 242
Location: Arizona
|
Posted:
Fri Mar 21, 2008 6:53 pm |
|
Why was he not saying this 6 months Ago? He did this Because he Had to.I'm Not Impressed.People Forget, He's Still a Politician. |
|
|
|
 |
jcgadfly
Grand Poster


Joined: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1414
Location: Bloomington IN
|
Posted:
Wed Jul 02, 2008 3:43 am |
|
And then he pulls this crap..
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us/politics/02campaigncnd.html?hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1214931390-8W6UQGnnR6WJZ5T0oouqhw
Obama Plan Would Expand Faith-Based Program
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JEFF ZELENY and JOHN M. BRODER
Published: July 2, 2008
With an eye toward courting evangelical voters, Senator Barack Obama is presenting a plan on Tuesday to expand President Bush’s program of investing federal money in religious-based initiatives that are intended to fight poverty and perform the work of social services.
“The fact is, the challenges we face today — from saving our planet to ending poverty — are simply too big for government to solve alone,” Mr.
Obama is expected to say, according to a prepared text of his remarks.
“We need all hands on deck.”
<snip> |
|
|
|
 |
ArisSlatr
Grand Poster


Joined: Feb 09, 2004
Posts: 1334
Location: NY - Guess where and you get a cookie!
|
Posted:
Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:20 am |
|
Seriously,
I was so happy where this was going. Now it looks like he's pandering to mixing religion and state! |
|
|
 |
 |
jcgadfly
Grand Poster


Joined: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1414
Location: Bloomington IN
|
Posted:
Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:23 am |
|
Sorry to wreck it for you... |
|
|
|
 |
ArisSlatr
Grand Poster


Joined: Feb 09, 2004
Posts: 1334
Location: NY - Guess where and you get a cookie!
|
Posted:
Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:25 am |
|
You should be. This got me so riled up I had to pretend to be surprised a politician lied. Now the real question is can Obama redeem himself? |
|
|
 |
 |
Cygnus
Graduate Thinker


Joined: Mar 26, 2008
Posts: 550
|
Posted:
Wed Jul 02, 2008 2:53 pm |
|
John McCain would be no better than Barak in matters of faith. I would vote Obama over McCain any day. At least Obama is much more tolerating and progressive towards these matters and I myself do not intend to be a single issue voter. |
_________________ "Buddha says: "Do not flatter thy benefactor!" Let one repeat this saying in a Christian church: it immediately purifies the air of all Christianity."
-Friedrich Nietzsche |
|
|
 |
jcgadfly
Grand Poster


Joined: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1414
Location: Bloomington IN
|
Posted:
Wed Jul 02, 2008 8:56 pm |
|
Agreed, Cygnus.
I'd vote in a ham on rye over John McCain. I just hate seeing politicians suck up to the Religious Right. |
|
|
|
 |
kmisho
Grand Poster



Joined: Dec 06, 2005
Posts: 1678
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
|
Posted:
Thu Jul 03, 2008 2:27 am |
|
Don't forget it was the most radical fundies that despised the idea of a faith-based initiative because ::gasp:: some money might end up in the hands of Buddhists or Muslims and not just Christians.
When it was republicans offering it, there was a nod-nod-wink-wink understanding that money would be mainly funnelled into christianity. They won't get these covert assurances from Obama. |
|
|
|
 |
jcgadfly
Grand Poster


Joined: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1414
Location: Bloomington IN
|
Posted:
Thu Jul 03, 2008 3:15 am |
|
| kmisho wrote: |
Don't forget it was the most radical fundies that despised the idea of a faith-based initiative because ::gasp:: some money might end up in the hands of Buddhists or Muslims and not just Christians.
When it was republicans offering it, there was a nod-nod-wink-wink understanding that money would be mainly funnelled into christianity. They won't get these covert assurances from Obama. |
We can hope. Unfortunately, my suspicion is that Obama will want to avoid being labeled as a closet Muslim that he'll go overboard helping the fundies. |
|
|
|
 |
kmisho
Grand Poster



Joined: Dec 06, 2005
Posts: 1678
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
|
Posted:
Fri Jul 04, 2008 3:12 am |
|
| jcgadfly wrote: |
| kmisho wrote: |
Don't forget it was the most radical fundies that despised the idea of a faith-based initiative because ::gasp:: some money might end up in the hands of Buddhists or Muslims and not just Christians.
When it was republicans offering it, there was a nod-nod-wink-wink understanding that money would be mainly funnelled into christianity. They won't get these covert assurances from Obama. |
We can hope. Unfortunately, my suspicion is that Obama will want to avoid being labeled as a closet Muslim that he'll go overboard helping the fundies. |
I don't think this is very likely because on the other hand going overboard would look like he's compensating, i.e. that he really is a closet Muslim and thus fighting extra hard keep the secret.
This is how negative propaganda works. Apathy from the target looks like confirmation. Outright denial looks even more like confirmation. |
|
|
|
 |
Cygnus
Graduate Thinker


Joined: Mar 26, 2008
Posts: 550
|
Posted:
Fri Jul 04, 2008 11:42 am |
|
Well, he is probably pandering to someone at any rate which is just what politicians do. |
_________________ "Buddha says: "Do not flatter thy benefactor!" Let one repeat this saying in a Christian church: it immediately purifies the air of all Christianity."
-Friedrich Nietzsche |
|
|
 |
|
|