Worthy News: Obama Tells Dems to Get Religion - ABC News

[George]

Democrats need to get religion and mean it, according to Sen. Barack Obama.

http://www.worthynews.com/news/abcnews-go-...int-id-2132963/

[Marnie]

Read Ann Coulter's latest book, Godless. A real eye-opener.

[Arthur Durnan]

Howie Dean's UltraLibDems wouldn't know religion if it dropped out of paradise en toto! Rodham Clinton for President?! Good grief & hallelujah! Give me Ann Coulter a million to one over the radical fem from Illinois-Arkansas!! PLEASE, mercy, PLEASE!

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

[O'Dannyboy]

The election season we will all have to very diligent in researching the voting record of all those running for office. The lines have been very blurred lately and to claim republican or conservative should no longer be enough. There are many elected officials, like our president, that have, as I call it, "crawfished" and voted the opposite of their constuency and have even protested certain investigations by switching their votes at the last minute, to stir things up. We now need to look harder at the loyalty and character of those we are electing. There are too many platforms for the candidates to harp on for us to trust the word of any of them. We need our leaders to do more than talk the talk, they need to walk the walk.

[anti-hillbilly]

What he is really saying is that Democrats need to figure a way of fooling religious conservatives into thinking their party is not the anti-God party it has become. Actions speak louder than words. If they don't walk the walk, nobody will believe them, though they claim to be religious.

Well I guess he saw how well it's been working out for the other side and thought it might work for them too. I have to say that imo the most sincere Christians are ones who don't advertize it or use it for political gain. Unfortunately I think talking the talk is more important to politically motivated Christians these days than walking the walk. The bible mentions people preferring to have their ears "tickled".

It angers me to see politicans "use" religion but I have to say it's extremely gratifiying, and entertaining, when one of these fakers gets caught on tape. Check this out and you'll see what I mean, give it a few seconds to load, you'll be glad you did:

[link]

[O'Dannyboy]

I didn't find anything about the video funny except in inserting of laughing into the background. The congressman is right that our government buildings and courthouses are two places that NEED to have the ten commandments posted inside them. Our leaders, at the beginning, had a healthy respect for God and it was reflected in the laws they passed and the documents they wrote. I don't think there are many of us now that wouldn't wish our leaders would emulate some of our founding fathers. It should prove interesting to watch the democrats trying to fake religion when they have put so much effort into pushing it out of the political sphere. The difference I see here is between those that diferenciate between morality and faith. Some of us think they are directly related, while others (democrats) don't.

[anti-hillbilly]

I didn't find anything about the video funny except in inserting of laughing into the background. The congressman is right that our government buildings and courthouses are two places that NEED to have the ten commandments posted inside them. Our leaders, at the beginning, had a healthy respect for God and it was reflected in the laws they passed and the documents they wrote. I don't think there are many of us now that wouldn't wish our leaders would emulate some of our founding fathers. It should prove interesting to watch the democrats trying to fake religion when they have put so much effort into pushing it out of the political sphere. The difference I see here is between those that diferenciate between morality and faith. Some of us think they are directly related, while others (democrats) don't.

I bet you would have laughed if that congressman was a democrat. Forcing religion down people's throats in violation of our traditional govt laws is not morality it's politicial pandering. It's also extremely dangerous but I somehow suspect you won't understand why.

The laws our founding fathers passed kept church and state separate; they reflected neutrality toward religion. Yes they had a healthy respect for God but keep in mind a healthy respect for God doesn't necessarily equate to a healthy respect toward religion. Many of our founding fathers actually expressed outright disdain for Chrisitianity and this IS refected in many of their writings. We should be grateful that they rose above their disdain and maintained a neutral position so that those who do embace Christianity are not hindered.

Now back to the video; that republican congressman demonstrated that he didn't have a clue what the 10 commandments were and yet he was sponsoring a bill to put them in judicial buildings. It's obvious he was doing that for political reasons and not because he thought we'd lose some sense of direction without them as he said on the video (how could he lose some sense of direction when he didn't even know what they were).

As for the building part evidently you didn't get it at all. What better building could a person put the 10 commandments in?

Answer: Why a CHURCH building of course!

[O'Dannyboy]

I didn't find anything about the video funny except in inserting of laughing into the background. The congressman is right that our government buildings and courthouses are two places that NEED to have the ten commandments posted inside them. Our leaders, at the beginning, had a healthy respect for God and it was reflected in the laws they passed and the documents they wrote. I don't think there are many of us now that wouldn't wish our leaders would emulate some of our founding fathers. It should prove interesting to watch the democrats trying to fake religion when they have put so much effort into pushing it out of the political sphere. The difference I see here is between those that diferenciate between morality and faith. Some of us think they are directly related, while others (democrats) don't.

I bet you would have laughed if that congressman was a democrat. Forcing religion down people's throats in violation of our traditional govt laws is not morality it's politicial pandering. It's also extremely dangerous but I somehow suspect you won't understand why.

The laws our founding fathers passed kept church and state separate; they reflected neutrality toward religion. Yes they had a healthy respect for God but keep in mind a healthy respect for God doesn't necessarily equate to a healthy respect toward religion. Many of our founding fathers actually expressed outright disdain for Chrisitianity and this IS refected in many of their writings. We should be grateful that they rose above their disdain and maintained a neutral position so that those who do embace Christianity are not hindered.

Now back to the video; that republican congressman demonstrated that he didn't have a clue what the 10 commandments were and yet he was sponsoring a bill to put them in judicial buildings. It's obvious he was doing that for political reasons and not because he thought we'd lose some sense of direction without them as he said on the video (how could he lose some sense of direction when he didn't even know what they were).

As for the building part evidently you didn't get it at all. What better building could a person put the 10 commandments in?

Answer: Why a CHURCH building of course!

Noone is forcing religion down anyones throat. I suppose if someone offered to give you a bible you would view it as trying to force it down your throat. This is only a guess, but you aren't a Christian are you? I think, if you were, you would understand why we would be concerned to see our government so willing to throw out the core beliefs upon which this nation was founded. Our founding fathers did not write the laws you refer to, to keep church and state separate, but to protect religion from the influence of the secular powers (state). The laws were not meant to keep our government free of fundamental principles like honor, justice or truth, but to protect the people from the government diminishing religious influence. I, unlike some, believe that Christianity is the moral foundation of our nation. When we begin to remove it and its influence from government, we remove morality itself from government. The "many" forefathers you speak of were not in the majority and, as you said, their disdain managed to become visible in their writtings regardless. You are right, in that, the congressmans lack of knowlege of the ten commandments indicates that his motives are more than likely politically motivated. Nonetheless, I still believe in what he was trying to achieve, whether or not he did. I do not believe the best place for the ten commandments is the church, as you allude. Thats like saying, the best place for a woman is in the kitchen. Originally thats were women were normally found and they seemed to have a knack for the workings of a kitchen. Just because you would be able to find the ten commandments rather easily in a church does not mean thats the ONLY place they should be displayed. The way I see it is the ten commandments are both TRUE and WISE. The primary argument from people like yourself is that, since the ten commandments come from "religion", they, for some reason, do not belong in a government building. Yes, lets take " you shouldn't steal, or "you shouldn't kill", or "you shouldn't lie" and the other fundamental principles (laws) right out of our government since they have outlived their usefullness. Lets fool ourselves into thinking that all men are born good and morality is somehow built into our genetic code, and see where that gets us 50 years from now. Your disdain for religion is even more aparant than that of the forefathers whose writing you so happily use to justify your own position.

[anti-hillbilly]

Noone is forcing religion down anyones throat.

Yes they are; that's why they're trying to put the 10 commandments into judicial buildings.

I suppose if someone offered to give you a bible you would view it as trying to force it down your throat.

I'd accept it but I have several already so it'd be better to give it to someone who didn't have one.

This is only a guess, but you aren't a Christian are you?

Guess again; I am a Christian.

I think, if you were, you would understand why we would be concerned to see our government so willing to throw out the core beliefs upon which this nation was founded.

No, you think that because I'm a Christian I'm suppose to think like the evangelical types; like the religious right..... I don't! This nation was founded upon Roman Law and liberty (attempts at it at least, the southern founders refused to give african slaves freedom so we fought a bloody civil war 80 yrs later and a civil rights movement 100 yrs after that......in the bible-belt of all places.. to get it for them).

The laws were not meant to keep our government free of fundamental principles like honor, justice or truth, but to protect the people from the government diminishing religious influence.

Our laws don't do that now. The laws were put in place to keep the majority from mistreating and bullying over the minority. Getting "religion" of any persuasion doesn't guarantee that a person will be honorable, value justice or be truthful; just look at all the politicians who are "claiming Jesus" today and getting caught in one scandal after another. Go back and look at that video again.

The "many" forefathers you speak of were not in the majority and, as you said, their disdain managed to become visible in their writtings regardless.

While they didn't like christianity they did take a neutral position toward it in the law and that's good. Even the christian founders had no problem with neutrality toward religion; but then, the European inquisitions and protestant witch burnings were probably still fresh in their minds as well as what happened at Salem Massachuettes. While our founding fathers were able to separate their personal feelings about religion from the laws they set to paper I can guarantee you that the christian evangelical leaders of today are not able or willing to do that; they cannot rise above their personal feelings and beliefs. God help us all if they are able to override the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

When we begin to remove it and its influence from government, we remove morality itself from government

Writing "God" and the OT 10 commandments on buildings is not going to make people moral. Only 3% of the population identifies itself as atheist yet in our religiously saturated environment there's plenty of crimes committed; prisons are full of people who probably went to Sunday school. -- Our govt is suppose to take a neutral position and not show favoritism toward any one religion or denomination; that is the just and moral position to take.

Nonetheless, I still believe in what he was trying to achieve, whether or not he did.

What he was trying to achieve was political in nature and he was "using" other people's belief system to achieve it; so I do NOT believe in what he was trying to achieve. He was trying to "fool" Christians (the way Butero referred to it earlier), I think it was shameful and insulting and I'm glad he got caught. I'm sick to death of hearing politicians TALK about family values and God. Stop talking about it and start doing good things to help people instead.

I do not believe the best place for the ten commandments is the church, as you allude. Thats like saying, the best place for a woman is in the kitchen.

I've never seen the 10 commandments posted in any church I've ever attended. Kinda dumb to demand they be posted in public buildings if the churches won't even post them on their property?? -- I think the inside of a church is a good place to post them, then maybe put them on a big sign outside the church so every car that passes by can see them. It'd be legal, provide lots of exposure and you wouldn't have to waste money attempting to violate and weaken our nation's laws by forcing their display inside judicial buildings. If that succeeded what's next, a "Hail Mary" inside courtrooms and courthouses? Then the Muslims will want their stuff in there, then the wiccans etc. etc. Do you see the bad prescedent that could be set here? -- There's a place for everything and our govt provides us the freedom to exhibit and advertise our beliefs on our own turf which is quite public already! Personally I think the govt bends over backward to accommodate religion since they don't make churches pay taxes and they don't audit them to see how they spend or steal the money. I wish I could be so persecuted.

The way I see it is the ten commandments are both TRUE and WISE. The primary argument from people like yourself is that, since the ten commandments come from "religion", they, for some reason, do not belong in a government building.

That's your perogative. I don't honor the sabbath and keep it holy; do you? I gave you my primary argument already but once again the 10 commandments do come from a specific religion and it is against the first amendment for the govt to endorse or outlaw any particular religion; they're suppose to be neutral. Jesus' death on the cross is suppose to be a "Free gift" not something to be forced on people.

Your disdain for religion is even more aparant than that of the forefathers whose writing you so happily use to justify your own position.

My disdain is for religious bullies and hypocrits who would do better to practice what they preach and clean up their own act; religious bullies who want to make law based on their own personal interpretations and narrow beliefs.... but do not want to follow the laws that have served this country well for 230 yrs.

Lets fool ourselves into thinking that all men are born good and morality is somehow built into our genetic code, and see where that gets us 50 years from now.

And a theocracy 50 yrs from now will get us right where those Muslim countries are today; just with a different diety and different leaders speaking on behalf of the diety and playing the "enforcer".

I'm sorry we disagree on this and I hope I haven't made an enemy. In recent years I've noticed that voicing opinions in opposition to the voices coming out of Colorado Springs or Lynchberg Va. is an instant way to make enemies out of brothers and sisters in Christ; most unfortunate but somebody's got to do it. It might as well be me.

[O'Dannyboy]

At this point I believe both of us are disagreeing for the sake of it. I tend to speak to quickly and give more importance to my views than to those of others. I guess we should all understand that our opinions have little to no importance unless we are first asked for them. I tend to volunteer my opinion more often than I should. While I believe the ten commandments to be very important in the history of all men, I do not feel personally responsible for all of humanities salvation. When it is my time to fulfill Gods purpose for me, I have no doubt he will let me know when, what to do and say, it is not yet that time.