RSS
The Inauguration's Biggest Losers
They would be the professional atheists like Michael Newdow and our own Margaret Downey who sued to prevent public officials from invoking the name of God during the big event.
Evangelical pastor Rick Warren really shoved it down their throats.
He not only mentioned God but Yaweh and Jesus Christ himself, ending with the Lord's Prayer, "Our Father who art in heaven..."
How oppressed and humilated Mikey and Maggie must feel.
Evangelical pastor Rick Warren really shoved it down their throats.
He not only mentioned God but Yaweh and Jesus Christ himself, ending with the Lord's Prayer, "Our Father who art in heaven..."
How oppressed and humilated Mikey and Maggie must feel.
posted by Spencerblog at
1:28 PM
21 Comments:
Rick Warren was great - no doubt about it. Great selection - glad Obama didn't falter on this one.
Nice try, but if you bothered to listen to (and understand) Obama's speech, Obama specifically reached out to several faiths and to non-believers as well as calling for a restoration of science (not the Bible or Creationism) in determining policy.
Spencer, the losers are you and the other cynics that have been standing in the way of progress. Enjoy the ride to the dustbin of history.
And where, specifically, did Obama reach out to "non-believers?"
Or did he do that "behind the scenes" as well.
All American presidents have reached out to people of different faiths, it's nothing new.
What was new was a Democrat allowing an evangelical Christian to rub God in the faces of a small claque of sue-happy atheists.
That was cool and a form of "progress" for the Democratic Party.
BTW, mentioning "non-believers" is not the same thing as reaching out to them.
And there is a difference between "non-believers" and aggressive atheists who would have the courts ban any mention of God by office holders.
Obama clearly doesn't agree with them.
Gil:
The mere fact that Obama had Warren give the invocation shows, in Diano's warped mind, that he was also reaching out to atheists. and you are right about one thing, atheists are sue happy!
C. Scott Shields, Esquire
www.cscottshields.com
Obama did mention non-believers when he mentioned religions. I guesss I most remembered it because a co-worker whispered to me "Where's the Mormons?" - Obama left them out.
Is Obama's faith still "giving you pause," Diano?
Gil - Why would you gloat about Warrens exclusion of agnostics and athiests? Is that someting to be proud of? Does it matter? Will it change anyones beliefs? "Really shoved it down their throats" Feel better Gil? I was more impressed with Obama shoving it down the throats of Bush and his supporters when he said "As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." and "we are ready to lead once more."
Spencer-
You worry about the minority of atheists that want to remove all mention of God, and the majority religious nuts that want to inject God into government. The government is supposed to tolerate different religions, not endorse one over the others.
Pro-UnChristian-Behavior-
Actually it wasn't so much reaching out to them. It was even stronger than that. It was fully equating them with the believers.
The reason for picking Warren was tactical. It provides Obama political cover with the religious conservatives that he at least listened to their point of view (before he goes off and takes a secular approach).
Steve, he listed the majority groups: "We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers."
There are FAR more atheists than Mormons.
Then he covered them all with: "We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth"
Bob:
What does that statement mean? Could it mean that we should be less safe and more idealistic, and that we should eschew Clinton era wiretapping in exchange for group hugs? Please explain.
C. Scott Shields, Esquire
www.cscottshields.com
Bob,
It wasn't just Warren, it was Obama who invoked the name of God. Obama did it at least 5 times, by my count.
And it's not non-believers who deserved to be dissed, it's, as I wrote, professional atheists, who actually sued to have any mention of God removed from the proceedings.
That was lame and disrespectful, not only of tradition but of the free expression rights of others.
Again, Diano explains Obama's motivations for picking Warren. They were purely "tactical."
He makes Obama sound kind of cynical, actually. Even deceitful. Maybe he is, we'll find out soon enough.
Carter - I think it was pretty obvious. It was about Gitmo, torture, imprisonment without due process.
Gil - Why are you so pleased with what Warren had to say? What he said was insignificant. He said things to make a lot of people feel real good about their beliefs, but in reality will have no real affect on anything. It's the same with Obama. Yea, he mentioned god numerous times. So what. He also mentioned non-believers. As far as I know, that was a first. So will Warrens words to god afford the Obama family some form of magical protection? Will it help us win wars, fix our economy, stop abortion? Did god help Obama beat McCain? What does that say about McCain? Did god help the Cardinals beat the Eagles? Yea. If your a Cardinals fan. Was god on Carters side when he ran for a judges seat? Nah. He was on my side!
Bob,
You're being obtuse. Read the original post again. And if you don't get it, I can't help you.
umm, I wasn't really concerned by the non-mormon nod.
Gil - I understand the point you were trying to make. But you saying "Rick Warren really shoved it down their throats."
is like stepping on an ant, and then declaring "We kicked ass". Its silly.
A rare moment when I agree with Spencer, Rick Warren was shoving it down peoples throats, and don't think its just the atheists. All the references to god/religion were unnecessary. Don't give the religous fanatics in the middle east a reason to make it about god and us vs them, christian vs non. Better yet don't have a religious fanatic (Warren) involved. I'm catholic and it still annoyed the crap out of me to have all these references to god in there and the our father. It has no place in the inauguration.
Amen Dingo. Amen
Dingo and Bob:
There is a very long history of God being present at the time of the founding of this nation and at each inauguration. Additionally, there are thousands of references to God on many buildings (government owned) in Washington D.C. and throughtout our country. So what is the problem?
Lastly, in case you didn't know, Western Civilization exists because of Christianity, and when the enemy of Christianity unleashes its fury, it will be (hopefully) the United States that stands on our Christian principles to defeat our known enemy.
Pay attention.
C. Scott Shields, Esquire
www.cscottshields.com
Carter - If given a choice, would you prefer the United States to be a democracy or a christian based theocracy?
Carter-
There's no history of "God" being anywhere. Though, there is history of people referring to fictional deities.
In case you didn't know (since you apparently don't), Western Civilization actually exists because of Muslims keeping books, records and continuing science while Europe was stuck in the Dark Ages. When the Renaissance came around, European scholars were glad to find so much preserved. BTW, 123456789 are called Arabic numerals. :-)
Gil - Funny how people see things differently. AOL just posted a story this morning saying that the big winners were the non-believers. First time they have been acknowledged in the address. Some believers feel that Obama shoved it down their throats.
Post a Comment
<< Home