• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama condemns those who seek to 'hijack religion'

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
41,104
Reaction score
12,202
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama on Thursday condemned those who seek to use religion as a rationale for carrying out violence around the world, declaring that "no god condones terror."

snip

"Unless we get on our high horse and think that this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ," Obama said. "In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150205/us--obama-prayer_breakfast-f3b989dcc5.html

I searched two pages of the BN forum, and couldn't find this story anywhere, and my apologies if it was already posted...But, come on folks....Give me a damned break! :doh This would be like Churchill during WWII telling us that although the Nazi's were bad, that maybe they were justified for what the Moore's did centuries earlier....It's a load of crap!

There is no equivalency....It's a false narrative that once again leads some to believe that Obama protects, and runs cover for terrorists.
 
I searched two pages of the BN forum, and couldn't find this story anywhere, and my apologies if it was already posted...But, come on folks....Give me a damned break! :doh This would be like Churchill during WWII telling us that although the Nazi's were bad, that maybe they were justified for what the Moore's did centuries earlier....It's a load of crap!

There is no equivalency....It's a false narrative that once again leads some to believe that Obama protects, and runs cover for terrorists.
How is it a false narrative? Because it's not what you want to believe? Or because it's not your religion?
 
How is it a false narrative? Because it's not what you want to believe? Or because it's not your religion?

You really don't see the problem with excusing what is going on today with ISIS, to that of events of 500 and 800 years ago? Really?
 
Well I don't think it's wise to mix religion with politics. But it is done anyway.

That said he did tell the truth, people should not hijack religion or use it as a weapon.

But again, having said that, I don't like seeing people mix religion and politics.
 
You really don't see the problem with excusing what is going on today with ISIS, to that of events of 500 and 800 years ago? Really?

That is not true. Obama has not provided any cover for ISIS whatsoever.
 
How is it a false narrative? Because it's not what you want to believe? Or because it's not your religion?

You are right, it is not false. However, we need to be careful about mixing religion with politics. For example, I found it particularly disturbing when on the death of bin Laden, Obama appeared to indicate that the U.S. could do such things because we are one nation under God. I did not like that at all. And another example, it is said that George W Bush said God told him to go fight terrorists and get the Palestinians a state. While it may have been necessary to do those things, it is offensive AND DANGEROUS to bring God into the matter in such a political way.
 
I searched two pages of the BN forum, and couldn't find this story anywhere, and my apologies if it was already posted...But, come on folks....Give me a damned break! :doh This would be like Churchill during WWII telling us that although the Nazi's were bad, that maybe they were justified for what the Moore's did centuries earlier....It's a load of crap!

There is no equivalency....It's a false narrative that once again leads some to believe that Obama protects, and runs cover for terrorists.



Mornin JMac. :2wave: Here is what Jonah Goldberg has to say about this.....oh and he takes BO peep to task. He needs to be more vocal and keep the Highlight on the BO's incompetence. ;)


When Obama alludes to the evils of medieval Christianity, he fails to acknowledge the key word: "medieval." What made medieval Christianity backward wasn't Christianity but medievalism. It is perverse that Obama feels compelled to lecture the West about not getting too judgmental on our "high horse" about radical Islam's medieval barbarism in 2015 because of Christianity's medieval barbarism in 1215.

It's also insipidly hypocritical. President Obama can't bring himself to call the Islamic State "Islamic," but he's happy to offer a sermon about Christianity's alleged crimes at the beginning of the last millennium.

We are all descended from cavemen who broke the skulls of their enemies with rocks for fun or profit. But that hardly mitigates the crimes of a man who does the same thing today. I see no problem judging the behavior of the Islamic State and its apologists from the vantage point of the West's high horse, because we've earned the right to sit in that saddle.....snip~

Obama's Comparison of Christianity, Radical Islam Defies Logic - Jonah Goldberg - Page 2


cowboy.gif
 
You really don't see the problem with excusing what is going on today with ISIS, to that of events of 500 and 800 years ago? Really?
That's not what he did. He wasn't excusing the actions of ISIS at all. He was saying the actions of ISIS are not a reflection of a religion and to not erroneously associate the two. As an example, and to keep Americans from climbing up their high horse, he simply reminded us our past is full of evil acts committed in the name of religion, that were not religious at all.

Take off your "I hate everything Democrat" hat and try to see what's actually being said.
 
I searched two pages of the BN forum, and couldn't find this story anywhere, and my apologies if it was already posted...But, come on folks....Give me a damned break! :doh This would be like Churchill during WWII telling us that although the Nazi's were bad, that maybe they were justified for what the Moore's did centuries earlier....It's a load of crap!

There is no equivalency....It's a false narrative that once again leads some to believe that Obama protects, and runs cover for terrorists.

He didn't excuse ISIS, he called them barbarians and evil. He was merely pointing out that you can't judge all muslims by the actions of the few. And he was doing that because our fight against them becomes easier if the moderate muslims are on our side.
 
How is it a false narrative? Because it's not what you want to believe? Or because it's not your religion?

Because it's a contextually shallow narrative.

Christianity's use in the Crusades was not significantly different than some of its contemporaries, nor were the actions of the Crusades markedly outside of the cultural norms of what would be considered the developed world at that time. While that in no way excuses the violence that occured or the attrocities committed, the reality is that one must look at it at least in part within the context of the time it occured.

This is not the case with regards to ISIS. Their methods and actions are significantly outside the cultural norms of the developed world. Their aggressive attempts to conquerer areas of land and claim them for their own, specifically in the name of their religion, is not in line with rather common actions of other nations/groups in this age.

While it's accurate to suggest violence has occured in the name of other religions in the past, attempting to equate radical islam of today to christanity of the crusades as a means of suggesting people should not criticize it by getting on their "high horse", without any defference given to the contextual realities between the two situations, is ridiculous.

I'd be interested as well to see how many of the liberals/democrats seemingly agreeing with Obama's reasoning are also ones who like to get on their "high horse" about racist elements that align themselves with the Tea Party Movement or with the Republican party...you know, considering that at some point in previous history Democrats had racist elements aligning themselves with their party and groups. Will they or Obama employ the same method of declaring such elements as "not real" Tea partiers or Republicans and condemning those who attempt to conflate the two, even if they're doing so by describing them as a direct subset?
 
Mornin JMac. :2wave: Here is what Jonah Goldberg has to say about this.....oh and he takes BO peep to task. He needs to be more vocal and keep the Highlight on the BO's incompetence. ;)

While I can very much understand the view that Obama has been incompetent on some things, I don't agree with the author's assertion at all that we have a right to sit on a high horse and judge. That is the very thing that people like OBL do. They go out and kill people in the name of God, while at the same time violating religious principles by such murder. That is not to say that we should not say that what ISIS and other terrorists do is wrong, and Obama did indeed condemn ISIS in his speech

“We see ISIL, a brutal, vicious, death cult that, in the name of religion, carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism, terrorizing religious minorities like the Yazidis, subjecting women to rape as a weapon of war, and claiming the mantle of religious authority for such actions.”

But this stuff of saying that God told me to go fight terrorists in Afghanistan is way over the line, and Obama's assertion that we could do things like kill OBL because we are one nation under God is dangerous. That is indeed a high horse that we have no right whatsoever to climb upon, and anyone who thinks that we do is simply wrong.
 
Last edited:
How is it a false narrative? Because it's not what you want to believe? Or because it's not your religion?

Funny how they were fighting Muslims that decided to take over someone else's stuff then too. Seems to be a recurring issue..
 
I'd be interested as well to see how many of the liberals/democrats seemingly agreeing with Obama's reasoning are also ones who like to get on their "high horse" about racist elements

That makes no sense whatsoever and is merely partisan bias. You do it, but don't climb on a high horse and say I am better than you, listen to what I say or I will burn you alive.
 
I searched two pages of the BN forum, and couldn't find this story anywhere, and my apologies if it was already posted...But, come on folks....Give me a damned break! :doh This would be like Churchill during WWII telling us that although the Nazi's were bad, that maybe they were justified for what the Moore's did centuries earlier....It's a load of crap!

There is no equivalency....It's a false narrative that once again leads some to believe that Obama protects, and runs cover for terrorists.

The O administration supported the MB in Egypt, used al Qaeda to overthrow Gaddafi in Libya, smuggled arms through the Benghazi annex via Turkey to the terrorist groups fighting president Assad, who has been wagging his own war on terrorism. Where have you been hiding if its just now come to you that US foreign policy is FAIL???????
 
While I can very much understand the view that Obama has been incompetent on some things, I don't agree with the author's assertion at all that we have a right to sit on a high horse and judge. That is the very thing that people like OBL do. They go out and kill people in the name of God, while at the same time violating religious principles by such murder. That is not to say that we should not say that what ISIS and other terrorists do is wrong, and Obama did indeed condemn ISIS in his speech

But this stuff of saying that God told me to go fight terrorists in Afghanistan is way over the line, and Obama's assertion that we could do things like kill OBL because we are one nation under God is dangerous. That is indeed a high horse that we have no right whatsoever to climb upon, and anyone who thinks that we do is simply wrong.




Mornin' Steel. :2wave: He was trying to equate that with Christianity. He just forgot that the Christians had a reformation. When Islam has theirs then they to can sit in the Saddle too.

Until then.....Islam best do what they need to. In order to take back their religion.
 
Obama = Jeremiah Light
 
Mornin' Steel. :2wave: He was trying to equate that with Christianity. He just forgot that the Christians had a reformation. When Islam has theirs then they to can sit in the Saddle too.

Until then.....Islam best do what they need to. In order to take back their religion.

Hi MMC!!! As always a pleasure.

Although I hear what you are saying, we should also recognize that although there was a reformation, there are still people who profess to be Christians killing people in the name of God. Recall Jim Jones. I'm telling you that everyone of us needs to be very careful about using religion for our on selfish ends. There is quite a bit of it in the world today. That is a big problem and sometimes it is very difficult to see it. I have personally seen some very intelligent people make very big mistakes in this way. Again, we don't need to be jumping on that high horse. Jesus could do that, but he could also tolerate being crucified and feeling no malice toward the perpetrators. Are we that qualified? If not, we really don't need to be on that high horse.
 
Hi MMC!!! As always a pleasure.

Although I hear what you are saying, we should also recognize that although there was a reformation, there are still people who profess to be Christians killing people in the name of God. Recall Jim Jones. I'm telling you that everyone of us needs to be very careful about using religion for our on selfish ends. There is quite a bit of it in the world today. That is a big problem and sometimes it is very difficult to see it. I have personally seen some very intelligent people make very big mistakes in this way. Again, we don't need to be jumping on that high horse. Jesus could do that, but he could also tolerate being crucified and feeling no malice toward the perpetrators. Are we that qualified? If not, we really don't need to be on that high horse.

Presidents are forever asking gods blessings on our troops. If I put together a a tape end to end of presidents proclaiming "god bless our troops" as they are sent into battle, you would be listening for a very long time!!! There's little difference in the blessings of Allah proclaimed upon the "enemies" we've been fighting.
 
Presidents are forever asking gods blessings on our troops. If I put together a a tape end to end of presidents proclaiming "god bless our troops" as they are sent into battle, you would be listening for a very long time!!! There's little difference in the blessings of Allah proclaimed upon the "enemies" we've been fighting.

I think it's one thing to say God bless our troops. But when you start talking about killing people and saying that God told you to do it, or that he have the right to do it because we are one nation under God, that is a very, very big problem.
 
I think it's one thing to say God bless our troops. But when you start talking about killing people and saying that God told you to do it, or that he have the right to do it because we are one nation under God, that is a very, very big problem.

In fact, George Bush declared that god directed his foreign policy. Can I say hypocrisy!!!
 
Because it's a contextually shallow narrative.

Christianity's use in the Crusades was not significantly different than some of its contemporaries, nor were the actions of the Crusades markedly outside of the cultural norms of what would be considered the developed world at that time. While that in no way excuses the violence that occured or the attrocities committed, the reality is that one must look at it at least in part within the context of the time it occured.

This is not the case with regards to ISIS. Their methods and actions are significantly outside the cultural norms of the developed world. Their aggressive attempts to conquerer areas of land and claim them for their own, specifically in the name of their religion, is not in line with rather common actions of other nations/groups in this age.

While it's accurate to suggest violence has occured in the name of other religions in the past, attempting to equate radical islam of today to christanity of the crusades as a means of suggesting people should not criticize it by getting on their "high horse", without any defference given to the contextual realities between the two situations, is ridiculous.
Obama wasn't lambasting Christians, nor was he calling them hypocrites. What Obama was saying is we should not allow certain people or groups to "[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif]hijack religion for their own murderous ends". Obama's point is very clearly that the actions of ISIS do NOT represent the religion of Islam, no more than the actions of the Ku Klux Klan represent the religion of Christianity. Obama's point is that people have done evil acts in the name of religion all throughout history, and no religion can claim to be free of such associations.

Honestly, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here, nor did I miss the fact you only talked about the Crusades and ignored his comment regarding slavery and racism, likely because it didn't really make sense in the context of what you were trying to say, which I don't feel really addressed what Obama said.
[/FONT]
Funny how they were fighting Muslims that decided to take over someone else's stuff then too. Seems to be a recurring issue..
Who was, the Ku Klux Klan? Segregation laws was fighting Muslims who decided to take over someone else's stuff?
 
You really don't see the problem with excusing what is going on today with ISIS, to that of events of 500 and 800 years ago? Really?

He's not excusing it at all. He is pointing out that this isn't the first time in history that people have used religion as a shield to justify their violence. It doesn't mean that he is saying that what ISIS is doing is ok....exactly the opposite. Doh!
 
Back
Top Bottom