The Obama Presidency

[Andrew]

and our current president is also a Christian.

Is he, though? I mean, he never really mentions his faith, and on the rare occasion that he does (i.e., Saddleback), it sounds carefully scripted and impersonal. It's no secret that he chose his church in Chicago to gain political points, and not for matters of personal faith (given who was speaking at the church, that's most likely a good thing). Since becoming president, he has yet to go to church unless it's a funeral or political events. All indications are that Obama is atheist or agnostic.

And there's nothing wrong with that. Hell, Reagan never went to church, and it's no secret how I feel about him. I just wish he would be honest, or (since it IS a personal matter) refuse to answer.

As for the rally? I haven't followed it too closely, but it looks like a bunch of Americans exercising their First Amendment rights. Also, it seems to be the same sort of left wing hyperventilation we saw with the tea parties last year. Which leads me to wonder: in what manner are citizens allowed to protest the policies of our current president and Congress? Is there a right way? Every time I give the lefty talking heads a listen, the message seems to be less about what the people are protesting, but the "real reason" (wink wink) that they bothered to show up.

So what is the correct way?


(Not directed at you, Mr-K.)

[Yoshi]

nazies

calling it now

Nazies

What the fuck are nazies?

[Opaque]

Did Nazies invent Fanta?

Yes

[icarusfall]

Like lazies, but black.

[Yoshi]

Too easy.

[Diff-chan]

[/QUOTE]

Blah blah blah. This whole "well I don't care BUT BUT BUT" is a thinly disguised attack.

The real question is who cares? I think Bush was a phony but it's his right to be a phony, and the fact that he got all the rubes on board is all the better for him. Nowadays we have a de facto religion test for candidates, which is something the founding fathers explicitly did not want. In a theoretical "will you vote for this" poll, gay hermaphrodites poll better than atheists. It's embarrassing for a country founded on reason and enlightenment.

[Andrew]

In a theoretical "will you vote for this" poll, gay hermaphrodites poll better than atheists. It's embarrassing for a country founded on reason and enlightenment.

You seem upset by this. Do you have a problem with homosexuals or hermaphrodites?

[Diff-chan]

No, I have a problem with the idea of "atheism" being an absolute dealbreaker in an election. There's no reason for it, but I do think there are atheists in politics, which means a lot of people are straight up lying about their faith.

[Andrew]

That's all I was saying. Although to be fair, it's not a strictly wingnut problem--most of them aren't voting for anything with a "D" at the end anyways. And yet it's a safe bet that some Democrats (as well as Republicans) feel the need to cover up their atheism or agnosticism.

So it must be that the religion bias is so widespread that nobody is safe.

[Opaque]

Keep in mind separation of church and state only means that the church cannot run the state.

You would be foolish to think that we are anything but a country where religion dictates law and elected officials. You want to be President? You better believe in the one true God, our Lord and savior who is also the Christ.