First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Post Reply Only 6% of Trump supporters know President Obama's religion.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/26/15 , edited 12/26/15
Man.... people aren't very smart.


And I'm not talking about those who were polled. I'm talking about people who think the numbers are so straight-forward.... or in any way a reflection of the general populace.... or that Democrats, polled similarly, wouldn't look just as stupid.

My opinion about Trump is that he's doing what he has to in an effort to gain support.... because he is smart enough to do so. And when if/when he gets elected he will tone it down, because he's smart enough to do that, too. Not that he's my pick.

I know that Obama is supposedly Christian. I also know that people aren't always what they say they are. I'd almost guarantee at least one of our past presidents was actually an atheist, but said he was Christian for support.

*shrug* It's all politics.

I wouldn't trust any survey I didn't know the exact polling methods to, that's all I'm saying. Nothing to see here, move along.
27451 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / USA! USA! USA!
Offline
Posted 12/26/15

GrandmasterCoolio wrote:


maxgale wrote:

From 2:05 to 3:12 other sermons with equally hateful rhetoric is shown.


Sounds like someone who isn't interested in political correctness to me. Is he not politically correct enough for you Maxgale?

My point remains. He criticized the United States in controversial ways. But he never called out for its damnation. He never cried out that God should damn it except in that 2003 sermon -- the one which Obama said he disagrees with.


At 3:36 until the conclusion of the video, there is a statement from Obama how Jeremiah Wright is a someone who "sometimes says things he disagrees with."

And yet during the two decades that Mr. Obama knew him and the other members of the congregation, it never was cause for him to leave.

Because, as Jeremiah Wright reveals in interviews that I posted preceding this, Obama agreed with him.


You can agree with the message without agreeing with its phrasing. Furthermore, you can agree with some messages and disagree with others. No one needs to agree 100% with a person to respect them and/or wish to hear their thoughts, opinions, and reflections on a subject matter -- whether it be religious, political, or social.



Whatever do you mean?


That hateful rhetoric is political correctness itself. It's doubleplusgood for female minorities to say that, because of Institutionalised Racism / Patriarchy / it's *insert current year* and they are fighting the powers that be.


Political correctness is all about a certain party and a certain party only being able to speak the most awful things.


And he literally, repeatedly called for America to be damned by God. That was in 2003, and then the video later shows a sermon shortly after Sept. 11th 2001 where he says it was due to punishment for the "sins" of the country. Other statements are available online and in the links provided that show his utter contempt for America and Western Civilisation.





Yes, one can agree with someone but state it in a different way. However, Mr. Obama tried to portray himself as completely repudiating the beliefs of Jeremiah Wright. In doing so he was lying to the American public.


It is a question of character. If Mr. Obama and Jeremiah Wright were white, and the church not in Chicago but the South during segregation, and those same things were said but the people being blamed black and not white, no one would be saying, "Oh, look how tolerant Mr. Obama is. He is able to have a member of the KKK as a pastor and his political mentor, officiate his wedding, and be a member of his congregation for over two decades but of course not agree 100% with what he says. I'm sure they disagree on something. You see, the pastor thinks all black people are subhumans who deserve nothing more than to be chattel, while Mr. Obama believes all black people are subhumans who should be deported so as to not taint society."


Instead, he would be rightfully recognized as someone who subscribes to an ideology of hate.





geauxtigers1989 wrote:


maxgale wrote:





1. Mr. Wright explicitly preaches contrary to the Bible. In one example, according to the Bible Israel is a homeland given to the Jewish people by God, yet Jeremiah Wright has said:


On the plight of Palestinians, he offered a Canaanite’s perspective: “What kind of God you got that promised your ass my land?”


http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/09/what-ever-happened-to-jeremiah-wright/406522/


2. What policies?


1. Different denominations believe in different interpretations of the Bible, which is not problematic unless you're with one of the "our way or the highway" sects.

2. Obama's previous denomination, The United Church of Christ, strongly emphasizes building interfaith and ecumenical relations, which Obama has demonstrated with his spiritual cabinet and his close relationship with Pope Francis, among other things. Additionally, the UCC has typically supported civil rights, LGBT rights and women's rights (including reproductive rights). We've argued at length about that before, so I don't think any further explanation is needed.

Edit: Forgot climate change.



1. There is a difference between theological dispute, and literally saying the exact opposite of what something states. Black Liberation Theology is a political ideology, not a faith, as are Scientology and other cults.


2. Same as the above.
Adhala 
37256 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / F
Offline
Posted 12/26/15

1. There is a difference between theological dispute, and literally saying the exact opposite of what something states. Black Liberation Theology is a political ideology, not a faith, as are Scientology and other cults.


Careful with this. Many of the criticisms that can be leveled at one particular faith to label it as a cult, or a non religion, can be weighed against many of them. It is one reason why nobody has actually tried to take on Scientology, because nobody wants to open that can of worms.
32 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M
Offline
Posted 12/26/15
Who cares what his religion is?
27451 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / USA! USA! USA!
Offline
Posted 12/26/15

Adhala wrote:


1. There is a difference between theological dispute, and literally saying the exact opposite of what something states. Black Liberation Theology is a political ideology, not a faith, as are Scientology and other cults.


Careful with this. Many of the criticisms that can be leveled at one particular faith to label it as a cult, or a non religion, can be weighed against many of them. It is one reason why nobody has actually tried to take on Scientology, because nobody wants to open that can of worms.




If using the original meaning of cult (a practice which promises hidden knowledge available only to initiates), then both Black Liberation Theology and certainly Scientology are described, along with the other ancient cults of kings as forms of political movements / structures is, I think, a good way to broadly describe actual cults without including faiths created from ecclesiastical dispute.
5019 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 12/26/15
Who the fuck cares? Let's just hope time goes by fast so he can leave Office.
Posted 12/26/15 , edited 12/26/15
Adhala 
37256 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / F
Offline
Posted 12/26/15

maxgale wrote:
If using the original meaning of cult (a practice which promises hidden knowledge available only to initiates), then both Black Liberation Theology and certainly Scientology are described, along with the other ancient cults of kings as forms of political movements / structures is, I think, a good way to broadly describe actual cults without including faiths created from ecclesiastical dispute.


I sit corrected. Very well, proceed.
7553 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Ark-La-Tex
Offline
Posted 12/26/15

maxgale wrote:

1. There is a difference between theological dispute, and literally saying the exact opposite of what something states. Black Liberation Theology is a political ideology, not a faith, as are Scientology and other cults.


2. Same as the above.


The UCC is in full communion with all other mainline Protestant churches. They're not some random outlier.
3349 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M / Ente Isla
Offline
Posted 12/26/15 , edited 12/26/15

maxgale wrote:

Whatever do you mean?


That hateful rhetoric is political correctness itself. It's doubleplusgood for female minorities to say that, because of Institutionalised Racism / Patriarchy / it's *insert current year* and they are fighting the powers that be.


Political correctness is all about a certain party and a certain party only being able to speak the most awful things.



http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/politically%20correct



And he literally, repeatedly called for America to be damned by God. That was in 2003


That's what I just said Maxgale.


He never cried out that God should damn it except in that 2003 sermon -- the one which Obama said he disagrees with.


We agree there.


and then the video later shows a sermon shortly after Sept. 11th 2001 where he says it was due to punishment for the "sins" of the country. Other statements are available online and in the links provided that show his utter contempt for America and Western Civilisation.


1. Cite a source that proves Obama was there during that sermon or heard about his, "America's chickens have come home to roost," remark.

2. Is that idiom and its meaning well-known? Maybe it's because of my status as a young whippersnapper, but I've never heard anyone say that. I had to look up the definition of it.


Yes, one can agree with someone but state it in a different way. However, Mr. Obama tried to portray himself as completely repudiating the beliefs of Jeremiah Wright. In doing so he was lying to the American public.


When did he ever say that?


It is a question of character. If Mr. Obama and Jeremiah Wright were white, and the church not in Chicago but the South during segregation, and those same things were said but the people being blamed black and not white, no one would be saying, "Oh, look how tolerant Mr. Obama is. He is able to have a member of the KKK as a pastor and his political mentor, officiate his wedding, and be a member of his congregation for over two decades but of course not agree 100% with what he says. I'm sure they disagree on something. You see, the pastor thinks all black people are subhumans who deserve nothing more than to be chattel, while Mr. Obama believes all black people are subhumans who should be deported so as to not taint society."




1.
"Well if these remarks were flipped on their head within a completely different historical context and timeframe," then yeah, they'd be viewed differently... and rightfully so! Any word uttered, any sentence said, and any statement made depend highly upon the context in which they are made. Taking a situation, flipping it on its head, and shoving it into a completely different scenario is an incredibly flawed method of making one's point because it introduces a variety of completely new factors, results in the disappearance of old ones, and ultimately ends up creating a comparison where the two situations -- the hypothetical one and the real one -- are vastly different from one another.

2.
Regardless of Jeremiah's remarks, he never said that whites are inferior to blacks and/or that they should be slaves. You're adding a racial element to this where there is none.

3.
As there is no racial element and Jeremiah (at least to my knowledge) has not organized literal lynch mobs and intimidated other human beings into submission with acts and/or threats of violence, comparing him to a member of the KKK is a flawed comparison at best.

4.
Has anybody called Obama tolerant for being a part of Wright's congregation?


1. There is a difference between theological dispute, and literally saying the exact opposite of what something states. Black Liberation Theology is a political ideology, not a faith, as are Scientology and other cults.


You're assuming that Wright is a fundamentalist.

27451 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / USA! USA! USA!
Offline
Posted 12/26/15

geauxtigers1989 wrote:


maxgale wrote:

1. There is a difference between theological dispute, and literally saying the exact opposite of what something states. Black Liberation Theology is a political ideology, not a faith, as are Scientology and other cults.


2. Same as the above.


The UCC is in full communion with all other mainline Protestant churches. They're not some random outlier.




Which is what mainline Protestantism has become. A political ideology masquerading as faith. One of the leaders of the UCC is also the director of Americans for the Separation of Church and State. (Strangely enough, the UCC also sued, I believe, to help abolish laws against homosexual marriage. Strange how they couldn't respect the separation of church and state there, eh?)
14767 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/26/15 , edited 12/26/15

GrandmasterCoolio wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

I don't even know President Obama's religion for sure, seems so inconsequential. Is it Christian?


Yes. It's Christian
There's a myth going around the right that he's a Muslim -- presumably emerging from a mix of post 9/11 hysteria, baseless rumor, and misinformation.


And a funny name, that kept getting confused with somebody else's.
Oh, that, and--more to the point, in Trump's case--the current frustration among the Republicans that if they can't block or out-popular the current sitting Democratic president...maybe they can disqualify him on a technicality! That means all his legislation would have to be taken back, too, since it wouldn't count!
Y'know, like if they found his birth certificate, and it turned out he wasn't really a citizen, that means he couldn't really have been allowed to be president all those years, and they'd have to repeal all that healthcare! (And who put his money where his mouth was to fund that bit of lunacy, anyone?)

Which is pretty much the reason they were getting so rabid over the idea of impeaching Bill Clinton, just because of the freakin' "Didn't" thing.
They thought it would be like Nixon, and that anyone who was impeached had to leave office. Must have been disappointing for them.
60713 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 12/26/15
I know he is christian but I imagine he chose that religion for political purposes. His true beliefs are a mystery to me. He might not even believe in anything. Hell he could worship anime gods for all I care. Muslims are not bad and their scripture is no worse than the bible...

Im more interested in campaign platforms, at the start I thought trump had a chance, then he opened his mouth. Although the media is really amplifying what he says beyond what he means. The trouble is they don't really have to make him sound worse, everything he says is controversial.
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 12/26/15 , edited 12/26/15

GrandmasterCoolio wrote:


maxgale wrote:

Considering that Mr. Obama "didn't agree" with and was shocked, SHOCKED when confronted with the beliefs of the pastor who was one of his political mentors and whose congregation he was a part of for over two decades I would say Mr. Obama has no clue what his religious beliefs are himself.



Here's more on this:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mk3LXvVlsI4



Yes. Because pastors are talking dolls which never say anything new and repeat two or three phrases whenever you pull their string on Sunday (or Saturday if you're a Seventh-Day Adventist).


Just like Presidents.
Posted 12/27/15

descloud wrote:



True, but yet Jfk was also a democrat who never bothered to hide anything when it came to religion. No doubt he received very harsh criticism but yet he succeeded in what he set out to prove. If a few words is all it takes to make someone forget their dream of being president in today's time. Then America has seriously gotten soft and it's no wonder our presidents lie about things they should be proud of.


Back then, it was socially acceptable? I don't even see a lot of Republicans go on sermons and other stuff. Being religious can make you look crazy to voters. It's all popularity and votes.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.