Republicans: Obama must defend Christian values

Grant said:

Well if you met thousands of Kenyans all over the country and discussed Barrack Obama with them then I take you at your word.

Click to expand...

Of course we talked about Obama. I lived in Kenya for two years my last visit, Nairobi to the mountain and around a bit. Sure, there was the occasional conspiracy theorist, just like in the US, but the average Kenyan knows his father was born there, not him. They know he has relatives. They know what tribe his father is from, etc. There is no marking for "birthplace of Obama" and no one (rare CTers excepted) claims Obama was born in Kenya. The CTers easily concede when even slightly confronted (by other Kenyans, not me), unlike in the US.

Cardinal said:

Well, I hope you can understand why you've confused some people (myself included) seeing as the part you quoted wasn't referring to the first amendment.

Click to expand...

It isn't difficult. The argument between left v right, for 40 plus years is one pitting "of" v "from"... The wording is clear.

ecofarm said:

Of course we talked about Obama. I lived in Kenya for two years my last visit, Nairobi to the mountain and around a bit. Sure, there was the occasional conspiracy theorist, just like in the US, but the average Kenyan knows his father was born there, not him. They know he has relatives. They know what tribe his father is from, etc. There is no marking for "birthplace of Obama" and no one (rare CTers excepted) claims Obama was born in Kenya. The CTers easily concede when even slightly confronted (by other Kenyans, not me), unlike in the US.

Click to expand...

Obama's former literary agency misidentified his birthplace as Kenya while trying to promote the then-Harvard Law grad as an author in 1991.

According to a promotional booklet produced by the agency, Acton & Dystel, to showcase its roster of writers, Obama was "born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii."

Click to expand...

'Born in Kenya': Obama's Literary Agent Misidentified His Birthplace in 1991 - ABC News

How can you blame the CT'ers when it wasn't the CT'ers who PUBLISHED that Obama was born in Kenya. It was HIS OWN PEOPLE who started the issue. It didn't take a person with a tinfoil hat to come to the conclusion Obama was born in Kenya, all it took was someone who READ HIS OWN BOOK!!!

JoeTrumps said:

'Born in Kenya': Obama's Literary Agent Misidentified His Birthplace in 1991 - ABC News

How can you blame the CT'ers when it wasn't the CT'ers who PUBLISHED that Obama was born in Kenya. It was HIS OWN PEOPLE who started the issue. It didn't take a person with a tinfoil hat to come to the conclusion Obama was born in Kenya, all it took was someone who READ HIS OWN BOOK!!!

Click to expand...

Most people do not base their knowledge of the world on a single promotional booklet misprint that no one read over 20 years ago.

I suppose if someone read that promotional booklet and nothing else about Obama, and then lived under a rock for 20 years, I could understand their confusion.

The things that pass for "Mainstream News," these days.

:coffeepap

I get a kick out of these fringe lunatics and their faux-outrages and their habit of speaking for Americans. "Americans want this. Americans want that."

What the Mainstream of America wants is for you guys to crawl back under your rocks and shut your pie-holes. :lamo

JoeTrumps said:

'Born in Kenya': Obama's Literary Agent Misidentified His Birthplace in 1991 - ABC News

How can you blame the CT'ers when it wasn't the CT'ers who PUBLISHED that Obama was born in Kenya. It was HIS OWN PEOPLE who started the issue. It didn't take a person with a tinfoil hat to come to the conclusion Obama was born in Kenya, all it took was someone who READ HIS OWN BOOK!!!

Click to expand...

It takes a conspiracy theorist to latch on to something so flimsy and refuse to let it go despite the enormous amount of evidence to the contrary, actually.

And, please, don't act like this was the basis for the birther lunacy. Don't pretend that whole "SHOW US THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE NO WAIT THATS NOT GOOD ENOUGH" nonsense didn't happen.

Deuce said:

It takes a conspiracy theorist to latch on to something so flimsy and refuse to let it go despite the enormous amount of evidence to the contrary, actually.

And, please, don't act like this was the basis for the birther lunacy. Don't pretend that whole "SHOW US THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE NO WAIT THATS NOT GOOD ENOUGH" nonsense didn't happen.

Click to expand...

I'm not defending anyone pal. I'm saying if you publish a biography and it says you are an astronaut(though you never were), don't fall down dead when some people refer to you as an astronaut even if you deny it. That may make the accusers unreasonable, but it doesn't make them lunatic conspiracy nuts either. get the difference?

JoeTrumps said:

I'm not defending anyone pal. I'm saying if you publish a biography and it says you are an astronaut(though you never were), don't fall down dead when some people refer to you as an astronaut even if you deny it. That may make the accusers unreasonable, but it doesn't make them lunatic conspiracy nuts either. get the difference?

Click to expand...

Yes, if NASA then released a document proving I was not an astronaut and they decided I was an astronaut anyway, they're a lunatic conspiracy nut. If I myself say that was a mistake, my parents say it was a mistake, my wife says it was a mistake, the guy who wrote it says it was a mistake, NASA releases a document proving it was a mistake, and someone still thinks I'm an astronaut, they're a lunatic conspiracy nut. Do you get it now? If a simple records check of NASA's personnel shows that I was never an employee there, and you continue to believe a brochure, you're a conspiracy nut.

If you have proof in a court of law that I am not an astronaut, but think I'm an astronaut because a brochure said so, you're a lunatic conspiracy nut.

You're acting like this brochure exists in some vacuum and completely ignoring the broader situation. At this point in time, it is impossible to believe Obama was born in Kenya without being a moron.

j-mac said:

It isn't difficult. The argument between left v right, for 40 plus years is one pitting "of" v "from"... The wording is clear.

Click to expand...

Can you effectively say who is "left" and who is "right" though? I've made that mistake myself before with some people and they have made that same mistake with me. Some views I am left of and some I am right of. The whole defining who is left and who is right is difficult in many cases. How do you determine who is right and left when they hold multiple stances of both?

Deuce said:

If you have proof in a court of law that I am not an astronaut, but think I'm an astronaut because a brochure said so, you're a lunatic conspiracy nut.

Click to expand...

yes, because public opinion always waits until there is "proof in a court of law" before making judgement on public figures. yep yep

Grant said:

It might not be wise to use Uganda, or any African country, as the best Christianity has to offer. Again they are reading the OT, with which I have little use, and are not following the teachings of Jesus Christ, which is exclusive to the NT. In fact there is a great deal of stifling of free speech though you might not be aware of it because mush of it may not arrive at your inbox. Perhaps you can start a thread on the subject.

When you talk of "the Bible" you should separate the OT from the NT. If Christians are against foul language or public nudity then they are clearly losing the battle. Who is winning?

Click to expand...

Look. You are not understanding that other Christians use the OT to justify their actions but that does not make them not Christians just because they do not believe the same things you do about what parts of the Bible apply.

There is not a "great deal of stifling of free speech". Much of what people want to claim is stifling free speech is reactions to people saying things others don't approve of. That is not stifling free speech.

One of the greatest examples in the past is the Dixie Chicks incident. That was blown up as people trying to take away their free speech. Guess what? It wasn't. It was a protest in reaction to what they said. They were free to say more, as they did. But others are also free to react (in legal ways) to what they said, including not buying their stuff, not hiring them, not playing their music on air, talking negatively about them, and more. The same thing works for others when it comes to same sex marriage and homosexuality. Both sides have faced people who got "stifled" over this. Recently, it is more the anti-ssm people because the tide has turned. But no one is prevented from speaking negatively about either homosexuality, homosexuals, or same sex marriage. But they are facing consequences (fair and unfair) for what they say and do, just as others do when they say other things.

Grant said:

Just calling yourself a Christian doesn't make you one. I feel that too many people who call themselves Christians are overly influenced by the OT, causing many of them to behave irrationally.

Click to expand...

Believing in Jesus and Jesus is the way to God is the only thing it takes to be a Christian. Again, you are committing the "No True Scotsman" logical fallacy here.

JoeTrumps said:

yes, because public opinion always waits until there is "proof in a court of law" before making judgement on public figures. yep yep

Click to expand...

No, but if at a later date that proof arises and you just dig in further, that's the conspiracy nut.

You see, being wrong doesn't make you a tinfoil hatter. Being wrong, discovering you are wrong, and then stubbornly inventing more and more elaborate reasons why you secretly are right makes you one.

Being a birther in 2008 meant you might just be ignorant. (Some people honestly had just not been aware of that proof, limiting yourself to ultra right wing media will do that) Being a birther in 2014 means you're insane.

roguenuke said:

Look. You are not understanding that other Christians use the OT to justify their actions but that does not make them not Christians just because they do not believe the same things you do about what parts of the Bible apply.

There is not a "great deal of stifling of free speech". Much of what people want to claim is stifling free speech is reactions to people saying things others don't approve of. That is not stifling free speech.

One of the greatest examples in the past is the Dixie Chicks incident. That was blown up as people trying to take away their free speech. Guess what? It wasn't. It was a protest in reaction to what they said. They were free to say more, as they did. But others are also free to react (in legal ways) to what they said, including not buying their stuff, not hiring them, not playing their music on air, talking negatively about them, and more. The same thing works for others when it comes to same sex marriage and homosexuality. Both sides have faced people who got "stifled" over this. Recently, it is more the anti-ssm people because the tide has turned. But no one is prevented from speaking negatively about either homosexuality, homosexuals, or same sex marriage. But they are facing consequences (fair and unfair) for what they say and do, just as others do when they say other things.

Click to expand...

The Dixie Chicks incident was a minor kerfuffle years ago and Christians had every right to do what they did in protest, just as the Dixie Chicks had every right to say what they did.

Christians, like the Black majority and Muslims, have every right to speak out against Gay marriage or any social issue, which they do.. Recall Barrack Obama, also apparently a Christian, was against Gay marriage and that Blacks and Latinos also supported Proposition 8 in California?

What's happening is that it is Christians, more than any other group, who are being criticized for their opinions. But I'm sure they can handle it.

I'm white. I'm 26. I'm American. I'm Atheist.


The last thing we need is Christian values. Just look how f*cked up your average cross wearing Christian person is and how pissed off they constantly are over their fairy tales not being followed precisely.

shrubnose said:

Leading Republicans on Thursday insisted that America's leaders must do more to defend Christian values at home and abroad, blaming President Barack Obama for attacks on religious freedom as they courted religious conservatives expected to play a crucial role in the next presidential contest.

Read more of this article here: http://news.yahoo.com/republicans-obama-must-defend-christian-values-192212780




If these guys had said that Obama must defend America's 1st Amendment values they would have had my and a lot of other peoples support.

I don't believe that this will win many elections for them.

BTW: if anyone can point out where it says in the U.S. Constitution that defending Christian values is the presidents job, I'd like to see it.

This sounds like a bunch of far right religious malarkey to me.




"Better days are coming." ~ But not for today's out of touch, running out of time, GOP

Click to expand...

Must? that's a hoot.

Grant said:

The Dixie Chicks incident was a minor kerfuffle years ago and Christians had every right to do what they did in protest, just as the Dixie Chicks had every right to say what they did.

Christians, like the Black majority and Muslims, have every right to speak out against Gay marriage or any social issue, which they do.. Recall Barrack Obama, also apparently a Christian, was against Gay marriage and that Blacks and Latinos also supported Proposition 8 in California?

What's happening is that it is Christians, more than any other group, who are being criticized for their opinions. But I'm sure they can handle it.

Click to expand...

No, Christians are not being criticized fir their opinions. Social conservative control freaks are, and rightfully so.

Grant said:

The Dixie Chicks incident was a minor kerfuffle years ago and Christians had every right to do what they did in protest, just as the Dixie Chicks had every right to say what they did.

Christians, like the Black majority and Muslims, have every right to speak out against Gay marriage or any social issue, which they do.. Recall Barrack Obama, also apparently a Christian, was against Gay marriage and that Blacks and Latinos also supported Proposition 8 in California?

What's happening is that it is Christians, more than any other group, who are being criticized for their opinions. But I'm sure they can handle it.

Click to expand...

I'm not Christian and I still don't buy anything from the Dixie Chicks. The point was the response is not stifling free speech but it is no different than others who do basically the same thing that was done to the Dixie Chicks to people like voice their opinion on same sex marriage or homosexuality.

It doesn't matter who may have been against something in the past. People change their minds. In 1970, 70% of the US population still believed that interracial relationships were wrong and should be illegal still. By 1985, that had come pretty close to half the population thinking differently. This wasn't all due to young people growing up. It was due to people changing their minds. Just like this guy:

Republican senator with gay son now backs gay marriage | Reuters

This is what happens when people you know and love are gay and you realize that they aren't different from you and they just want to be treated equally.

Anyone has a right to speak out against or for anything they want, but that does not absolve them of social consequences of what they say or do (even when it's legal), as we seen with the Dixie Chicks, Paula Dean, Mel Gibson, Michael Richards, and others. We have seen it on both sides, so it is not right to pretend it has only happened to "Christians" or those who are against same sex marriage or homosexuality. Carrie Underwood faced backlash from supporting it.

Celebrities Who Were Caught Being Racist | List of Offensive Celeb Comments (Page 6)

Carrie Underwood Faced Backlash for Supporting Gay Marriage - Us Weekly

Eventhough, a lot of famous female (at least) country singers support it, including Dolly Parton, Reba McEntire, and Martina McBride. Even many male country singers and bands support it. And this is a group whose main fans are going to be the most likely people to be anti-ssm. When JC Penny's ran an ad a few father's days back featuring two gay fathers, people were calling for a boycott.

JCPenney Responds to Homophobic Boycott Calls with Gay Father's Day Ad

The same thing happened to Nabisco when they ran ads with rainbow colored Oreos in support of same sex marriage. Honey Maid faced a call for a boycott just in the past year over its commercial featuring (omg) a gay couple with a kid.

Nabisco's Gay-Inclusive Honey Maid/Teddy Grahams Commercial Slammed By One Million Moms

So yes, there are calls to boycott brands/people from those who are anti-ssm just as much as from those who are pro-ssm. They fail. Why? Because the majority are major household brands/names that people don't want to give up over such a stupid issue. In reality, the who Eich thing should not have gone where it did (I didn't approve), but it was due mainly to a company worried about their bottom line and recognizing that people support same sex marriage, especially young people, more than they are against it and that their main demographics in many areas (but especially technology) is young people. People overreact.

TheNextEra said:

Can you effectively say who is "left" and who is "right" though? I've made that mistake myself before with some people and they have made that same mistake with me. Some views I am left of and some I am right of. The whole defining who is left and who is right is difficult in many cases. How do you determine who is right and left when they hold multiple stances of both?

Click to expand...

Overall? Why would I need to attach that label to know how they stand on a singular issue like this? all I need do is read their stance.

For example, I am pretty sure that you would say I am "right wing" right? But on some things like gay issues I don't hold the typical right wing viewpoint. does that change my leanings?

Ryan5 said:

I'm white. I'm 26. I'm American. I'm Atheist.


The last thing we need is Christian values. Just look how f*cked up your average cross wearing Christian person is and how pissed off they constantly are over their fairy tales not being followed precisely.

Click to expand...

What frightens you so much about Christians?

Kobie said:

No, Christians are not being criticized fir their opinions. Social conservative control freaks are, and rightfully so.

Click to expand...

Completely false. Christians are absolutely under attack rhetorically for their beliefs by people like you.

`

Paxaeon said:

`

Click to expand...

such a broad brush...is that all Christians? Do you start a conversation with "are you a Christian"? and if they are refuse to speak to them?

j-mac said:

For example, I am pretty sure that you would say I am "right wing" right? But on some things like gay issues I don't hold the typical right wing viewpoint. does that change my leanings?

Click to expand...

Depends on other issues I suppose if we were to take a look at all your stances, I don't think you would be considered right-wing when all that is said and done.

I am pro-second amendment, pro-gay marriage, pro for the right of a woman to have an abortion but I would rather her not, pro-welfare (if it was reformed), pro-SSN ( in the fact that government should have NEVER got it's hands in the pool), against the Iraq War, against bailouts, against trickle down economics as it shows it doesn't work when the upper class hordes their money.

These are just a FEW stances of mine and they go all over the board. I bet if you were to list all of yours they would as well.

j-mac said:

Completely false. Christians are absolutely under attack rhetorically for their beliefs by people like you.

Click to expand...

No Chrisitians are not under attack. What is under attack is the discrimination that Christians want to do.

What I find hilarious is the same backery that wouldn't make a cake for a gay wedding because thy said the SANCTITY of marriage was too important, made a cake for a dog wedding. That's the type of BS that gets called out on Christians.