Obama's speech on faith and politics is both genuine and brilliant.

[Perky]

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/faith/

This is a "must hear" for all who say that faith ought to be checked at the door of the public square.

[Perky]

1. Never asked this before but K&Rs to get this to the greatest page please?

[GeorgeGist]

2. When one defines faith...

as religion, I lose interest.

[Perky]

3. Listen to what the man has to say.

Boredom is jut a small step removed from intellectual laziness

[Ino]

4. This is your 2nd thread celebrating Obama's faith-based politics

You're turning me off of the man! Putting you on ignore.

[rebel with a cause]

5. Just curious

Do you feel the same about the Gore and Edwards threads that fill the blog today? Because I get turned off quite often by over posting on candidates, and it is not based on the subject that relates to them. Well, not usually and definately not by two.

[Perky]

6. thanks

[cooolandrew]

7. Obama's candidacy is exciting me more than Gore, he's fresh ...

and exciting. Firstly all of Africa would love america for it a lot of nations would see it as america repairing it's image after katrina and I am sure he will consult Gore on all environment matters. Obama means massive change for America.

[dysfunctional press]

9. the last thing we need is another inexperienced president...

look what the last one got us.

[dysfunctional press]

8. candidates who talk about religious faith repulse me...

well, actually, any deluded fool who talks about their adherence to mythological beliefs repulse me.

[trotsky]

10. Ah, you didn't get the memo.

You see, Christians are so terribly persecuted in this country, what with them being in charge of both major parties and the government, it is obvious that Obama's display of faith takes bravery and courage to stand up to the 10% of the country that isn't religious and wields no political power whatsoever. Because as we all know, a theocracy is A-OK as long as it's a liberal one!

[rebel with a cause]

11. Glad to know just how repulsed you are.

First of all, I do not believe in organized religion. Neither do I accept any one teaching as the right one, nor do I push any religion or lack of one on others. With that said, I do believe that it is okay for someone to state their beliefs as long as they don't push them on me or anyone else. This is called testifying in religious circles and does not mean they are preaching or trying to recruit others.

You see one of the many things I do not like about the religious right wing is their intolerance. That is the same thing I don't like about people who say things like you have. Whether you like it or not, the constitution says freedom of religion, and that means you can believe in nothing and your neighbor can believe in a god, several idols, or even a devil. As long as they do nothing to harm others, then you have no right to deny them their rights or even to show prejudice against them. So you may think them a fool, and you may feel superior, but you have no right to call them a fool and tell them that you are superior. No more right than they have to do it to you. Freedom means just that. Freedom. So you don't like Obama. You have made that clear. That is your right, but should you come on a thread where someone does like him and does have a religion and attack both? I don't like you doing it any more than I would like someone attacking you because you have no faith. JMHO on how we should treat our fellow human beings.

[dysfunctional press]

13. the constitution also allows me to be repulsed, and say so.

just as you have the right to be intolerant of my views...and say so.

what a country!

(except for utah)

[rebel with a cause]

16. Actually, I am very tolerant of your views

as I am of most of those held by others. Just not your methods of expressing them. I believe in live and let live, and I try not to judge people by what they say but how they say it and by what they do about what they say. Example: if someone says they are a Christian, that is fine, but they better live a life that is true to being a follower of the teaching of Jesus. If someone says they are a humanitarian, then fine, but then they had better care about their fellow humans. And so on. I try not to judge but when I do, I judge harshly. My true short coming.

[dysfunctional press]

19. you said that i have no right to call anyone a fool...

and i say that's pretty foolish.

you may not like that i do, but i certainly do have the right to call a deluded fool a deluded fool.

[rebel with a cause]

20. What ever you say.

You are looking for a fight, but life is too short for me to get into one with you. Call me what you will. I am many things to many people. Live long and prosper.

[ComerPerro]

12. Yeah, and look what its done for him

he is getting attacked for not being Christian enough, and is being protrayed by media outlets and pundits as pandering to the religious.

[Perky]

14. You are welcomed to be repulsed... but did you listen to the whole speech

or as you as intellectally lazy as your comments suggest?

[Solon]

15. "Reconciling Faith and Politics"

You know, the closer faith and politics work together, it becomes more likely that my rights, and the rights of other non-Christians, are trampled upon, forgive me for not thinking this is a good thing.

[trotsky]

17. Yes, that is my fear as well.

What I usually hear in response to this concern is, "Oh, don't worry, we're the GOOD Christians and will always tolerate your non-belief. You can trust us, unlike every other group of Christians that has wielded political power." Pardon me for not feeling reassured.

[Solon]

18. Exactly, not only that though...

The fact of the matter is this, I don't feel comfortable with ANY religion being used to justify any political positions, like increased funding for welfare. I don't care if the politician is Christian or not, it just rubs me the wrong way.

I can use myself as an example, I'm a Wiccan, and I just can't fathom getting up in front of a group of Wiccans and saying the Goddess compels me to believe that Single Payer Healthcare is the answer while running for office. Using religion in this way, when it should be private, seems to demean the faith, and, in addition, displays callousness towards those who aren't of your religion.

[Perky]

23. but the Christian Left has never done that,

[Solon]

24. For the Christian on the street, that may be true...

But for the politicians, its a completely different story. Generally, the Christian that acts without words is the one who seems the least pretentious about their religion. Yet, we hear, day in and day out, how "Christian" these candidates are, how they uphold "Christian Values" or, "Family Values". I really see no difference between the politician who says gay marriage is wrong because the Bible says so, and the politician who says that we need to take care of the poor because the Bible says so.

I may agree with a political position, mostly because I believe its the RIGHT thing to do, rather than the "Christian" thing to do. Dressing up any political position in religious language diminishes the religion and makes a mockery of faith.

[Perky]

26. So is the problem the Poltician or the faith?

[Solon]

29. The politician, by and large...

Though the Faith's position on something as basic as proselytizing may also be a factor.

The problem is this, placing EMPHASIS on religious language, without changing your basic positions on certain issues, like Choice or School Prayer, isn't going to win you brownie points with conservative Christians, you already have the Liberal Christians, and, to be honest, I don't see where the gain is in using such divisive language at all.

The point being that politicians should be voted in based on their issues, what they will solve in the material world, not what they believe, or even IF they believe, in the spiritual world, its not relevant to politics.

I would love to see a politician, who, when asked about their religion, they would simply say: "None of your business, and I don't think its relevant to my being an elected official."

[Perky]

30. But what if your faith does inform your basic position on certain issues?

For most american faith inform positions and posture and conduct to some degree. It is a significant influencer though not necessarily the only one. The issue is the degree of influence on what issues.. The same faith that drive Operation Rescuers to protest might influence other to feed the homeless or oppose the war, or become a freedom rider in the 1960s or build houses for Habitat or oppose Apartheid, or slavery or genocide in Darfur or Global warming or same sex marriage or gratuitous sex and violence in media. That same faith can bring enemies together at Camp David.


My problem with the Religious Right is that their politics tend to inform their faith far more than the other way around or they use the religion to justify their politics. That is far more offensive to God and very very theologically unsound.

The right wing seems interested in three things: raising money; maintaining cultural relevance and obtaining raw naked political power. None of which has anything to do Jesus Christ or His Gospel of hope and mercy and selflessness.

Is the bathwater the baby is sitting in dirty....yes, But Christians on the left and in the center have the right to be heard as well and can be a profoundly strong ally to the secularists in wrestling with he problems that face the nation. I find that the way the right attenpts o influence the debate to be unsound to the point of heresy. Are the positions they teke actually wrong (probably a mized bag)But we live in a pluralistic and free society which means they have a right to say waht they say and to have infuence in the publc square however mucheitgher of us may disgree witht hem.

But my faith undgirds a theology which reuires me to influence them on theological grounds in a in solely religious contezts and attempt to inclunce the public square usinfas well. I donot demand that politicians be religious or Christian. But I do still wantthem to be influenced by their faith. Not because faith should dominate public policy but because a lack or reliance on God when you are at the helm of a nation can lead very quickly towards arrocgance, avarice and dspotisim.

Our leaders must be servants committed to the public good. To the extent that faith in God supports and strengthens and even motivates or sustains that type of leadership it is a good thing. SHould leaders be allowed to to talks about how their faith influence their publc service? Doe the voter have a right to know? Sure.

[Solon]

33. This brings up a point about faith and politics that isn't covered that much...

Does a politician's personal faith infuence some of their positions? Yes and no. It depends on the politician, of course, but everyone, regardless of faith or lack thereof, from the President on down to the guy screaming Bible verses on the street corner, picks and chooses what positions support what beliefs and vice versa. Both Democrats and Republicans do this, though in different ways.

For Christians, this is evident in how they interpret the Bible, to give an example of Kerry, a Catholic, according to his Church, he should be what they call Pro-Life, or Anti-Choice, and while his personal conviction probably leans in this direction, his political position is to be pro-choice. This would be an example of a politician who is religious who holds a position as a public officer that isn't the same as the church he is a member of. People like Kerry basically believe that in cases like this, their religion shouldn't influence public policy, because he recognizes that others believe differently, and its a case of privacy rights for women.

Yet, at the same time, he may have a religious, personal position of helping the poor, and uses his political power to let's say increase funding for AFDC or another program that's related to it. There is little conflict in having these positions, because he also weighs the public good above even his religion.

This is true of anybody who is in public office, a balancing act takes place, on one end there is the public interest, on the other is ideology, religious or not. When the balance is level, or leans towards the public interest, then, generally, the public official is acting in the best interest of ALL people, but when the balance shifts to ideology and weighs in more than the public interest, then tyranny and oppression take place.

[Perky]

22. But that is precisely what the speech is about.

He suggest that while faith ought to inform our positions we should not used religious doctrine to drive policy. He suggest that the Christian left and right ought to be using universal language rather than religious.

[Solon]

25. And yet, he uses religious language to convey that he shouldn't?

Isn't there a word for "Do what I say, not what I do"?

[Perky]

27. have you listen to the speech?

First of all it is not overly evangelical or pushy or dogmatic. And the religious language while apparent has to understood in the context of his audience which is a church crowd. He show profound deference to secularists, he slaps the right wing for the over the top emphasis on religion and aske to be heard by both sides as a devout man wanting to be heard by both groups.

[DeepModem Mom]

21. K&R!

[Jonathan50]

28. Is there a transcript? That speech is 49 minutes long.

And I can read about ten times faster than Tweety can talk.

My connection isn't fast enough to view that video without a lot of stops and starts.

Jimmy Carter is my ideal religious politician. Very little talk of his faith, but a great deal of positive action based on it.

I was greatly impressed when he admitted lust in his heart, showed he was at his core an honest man.

[Perky]

31. The thoughts are summarized in the Audacity of Hope.

Though the speech is far better.

[Odin2005]

32. I'm an atheist and I have no problem with religion in the public square.

I don't even have a problem with religious beliefs influencing the politics of individual politicians. What I don't like is FAVORITISM towards a religion, or religion in general. This attitude that all religion in the public sphere is bad is very misguided.