Skillful use of tools by tools
For the Atheistic heathen Obama supporters amongst you…
“It was because of these newfound understandings that I was finally able to walk down the aisle of Trinity United Church of Christ on 95th Street in the Southside of Chicago one day and affirm my Christian faith. It came about as a choice, and not an epiphany. I didn’t fall out in church. The questions I had didn’t magically disappear. But kneeling beneath that cross on the South Side, I felt that I heard God’s spirit beckoning me. I submitted myself to His will, and dedicated myself to discovering His truth.
“That’s a path that has been shared by millions upon millions of Americans - evangelicals, Catholics, Protestants, Jews and Muslims alike; some since birth, others at certain turning points in their lives. It is not something they set apart from the rest of their beliefs and values. In fact, it is often what drives their beliefs and their values.
“And that is why that, if we truly hope to speak to people where they’re at - to communicate our hopes and values in a way that’s relevant to their own - then as progressives, we cannot abandon the field of religious discourse.”
Mr. Barack Obama, June 26, 2006.
Religion used as a tool, to secure an election; religion used by a skillful tool, to marginalize the negatives of disbelief. Now we find out that Trinity Universal Church of Christ is a afro-racist organization with ties to the New Black Panthers and had a minister who exhorted God to damn America, from the pulpit.
Obama would’ve gotten more respect from me if he had simply stayed home on Sunday mornings. But that wouldn’t get him any votes, now would it?
IOKIYAR
By the way, nice try, but you really have done nothing to establish that Obama is using religion as a “tool,” certainly not any more than any other politician every does. You also haven’t established that Obama is insincere in his beliefs, nor have you established that his church is a “racist” organization by any standard other than “lots of conservatives say so.”
I’m with Sean Braisted on this one.
First you say I didn’t establish Obama’s ‘tool usage’, then you say in the same sentence that even if I did point out his obvious machinations (which I did) it wouldn’t matter to you, because everyone else does.
Did you mother ever say to you “Little Johnny, if everyone else throws their grandmother under a bus, you shouldn’t throw yours under a bus just because they did”.
I guess if you did throw your gramma under a bus, then you would justify it in some DemoLiberal way.
Because that’s the way you are~!
Sean Braisted?
Please. Stop. Now.
Laughing is sometimes painful, if carried on for several minutes.
then you say in the same sentence that even if I did point out his obvious machinations (which I did) it wouldn’t matter to you, because everyone else does.
That’s not at all what I said. The only reason I point out that pretty much every politician exploits religion for personal political gain is to illuminate the double-standard that exists concerning this. When Democrats do it, it’s Horrible, Horrible, Horrible, but when Republicans do it, well that’s just expected behavior. I sure as hell won’t defend religious pandering from either party. But again, I’m not convinced that Obama’s doing all that much pandering in the first place.
But go ahead and read all of your biases into what I write, irrespective of what I actually do write.
“…When Democrats do it, it’s Horrible, Horrible, Horrible…”
Maybe that’s because Liberals and Democrats are always pushing for more secular governances; are supporting killing unborn souls; are for just about anything that is, in religious terms, based on biblical morality.
Rare enough to see a Democrat who’s spiritual and means it. It’s easy to catch a hypocrite, when that hypocrisy is built into the Party’s Baggage.
And, the ACLU!
Maybe that’s because Liberals and Democrats are always pushing for more secular governances …
Which is not contradictory with being spiritual or religious at a personal level, and which, to my knowledge, Obama essentially also supports.
are supporting killing unborn souls
Assuming one equates a blastocyst with an “unborn soul.” Anyway, as we all know, Conservatives and Republicans much prefer killing born souls, especially brown-skinned ones overseas, and the mentally retarded…
are for just about anything that is, in religious terms, based on biblical morality.
I’m betting you meant to say against rather than “for” here. But if the sole basis for something is “biblical morality,” then yes, I’m against it. Of course, in most cases, “biblical morality” and secular morality walk hand-in-hand. It’s just when you start trying to encode stuff like “God hates fags” or other such nonsense into law that we secular government liberals get our panties in a collective twist.
Rare enough to see a Democrat who’s spiritual and means it.
Only if one’s definition of “spiritual” is “someone who violates Matt 6 at every possible opportunity” (i.e., many conservative Christians).
And, the ACLU!
Yeah, heaven forbid anyone defend the first and fourth amendments… Those bastards!
Yes, I think that a human life, at whatever stage, is worthy of protection. But does partial birth abortion involve blastocysts? And what are the brown-skinned and mentally retarded references to?
nedwilliams:
“Partial-birth abortion” is a political term, not a medical one, and not even a particularly accurate one, at that. But I don’t have any major objection to a ban on “convenience” third-trimester abortions, by whatever method. In any case, if human life “at any stage” is worthy of protection, I expect you to start calling for action on the nearly 80% of all pregnancies that end in natural abortion (something like 78% of all fertilized eggs fail to implant in the uterine wall, meaning that if life begins at conception, almost 80% of all “souls” are doomed).
The brown-skinned people reference refers to the conservative “bomb/invade first, ask questions later” attitude toward foreign policy in the Middle East and Central America. As for the mentally retarded reference, I’m talking about recent court cases as to whether capital punishment of the mentally retarded is unconstitutional. Most conservatives supported allowing it, complaining about “activist judges” striking it down.
Yes chump, we need all the human lives we can get so they can grow up and die in war or torture/kill brownskinned people in the name of KKkristianity… to try and save face for Bush, your great KKKristian warrior who sends kids to die.
To anyone who thinks that my tone can be a bit uncivil, I’d like to direct their attention to the above comment for a wee bit of perspective.
Jim, Obviously this blogger and this “Ned” guy must be proud residents of Dumbfuckistan.
tgrisch:
I would stay civil, b/c I’m a lot more likely to read your comment and possibly get something out of it(not likely) , rather than ‘Ol Jim’. His vocabulary seems very slim. Maybe it’s because nothing he says ever makes any sense.