Religious Values

Mr. Moulim: Does it bother you that Obama supports the War Against Drugs which results in many poor people going to jail for nonviolent crimes? That he attended Trinity United Church of Christ (TUCC), a megachurch in Chicago exceeding 6000 for 20 years and claimed to not know about the racial/political views his pastor (Jeremiah Wright) held and when the news of this went public Obama disowned him?

Furthermore, does it also bother you that Obama (in addition to supporting the Patriot Act) supports the National Defense Authorization Act which gives the government the right to arrest and detain people without trial who are merely *suspected* of aiding terrorists?

As for the Romney comment--let's take it on face value. Watch the following video (after you suffer through the annoying five-second ad) and you will see that your comment was out of context.

I'm not a cheerleader for the Republicans, (and I have no plans to vote for Romney nor Obama) but your blind defense of Obama's values need to be held up to the light of the facts presented.

I guess I should have provided the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-oMPa...

Romney:
“I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I’ll fix it.

“I’m not concerned about the very rich, they’re doing just fine. I’m concerned about the very heart of the America, the 90, 95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling and I’ll continue to take that message across the nation.”

Soledad O'Brien:
“You just said 'I’m not concerned about the very poor because they have a safety net.' And I think there are lots of very poor Americans who are struggling who would say that sounds odd. Can you explain that?”

Romney:
“Well, you had to finish the sentence, Soledad. I said I’m not concerned about the very poor that have the safety net, but if it has holes in it, I will repair them…

"The – the challenge right now – we will hear from the Democrat Party, the plight of the poor, and – and there’s no question, it’s not good being poor and we have a safety net to help those that are very poor. But my campaign is focused on middle income Americans.

"My campaign – you can choose where to focus. You can focus on the rich. That’s not my focus. You can focus on the very poor. That’s not my focus. My focus is on middle income Americans, retirees living on social security, people who cannot find work, folks who have kids that are getting ready to go to college. That – these are the people who’ve been most badly hurt during the Obama years.”

Why is it so easy to look upon the faults of others and be critical? I do not believe we would need look too far down either political side to see flaws. Yet how often do we turn the scope upon ourselves for examination? Could it be that the true cause of the American problem lies not in politics, but within ourselves. We judge others of the very things we too are guilty of. All one has to do is look around Santa Barbara, or any other city for that matter, and you will see the hopeless, hurting, and destitute among us. What have you done to change this? Better still, what have I done? Maybe rather than relying upon the government to meet the needs of the people, we the people should step up and be "our brother's keeper."

To follow in the steps of Jesus means we must be willing to live sacrificially for the benefit of others.

Unfortunately Obama's path to Jesus was under the racist umbrella of liberation theology and the rantings of Jeremiah Wright. Go beyond the sound bites and listen to the body of toxic crap that spews from Wright's mouth and then imagine our President exposing his children to that venom.
As usual, anyone that claims to know "the path" or to be morally superiour, whether Dem or Repub or whatever, is a liar in my opinion.

@italiansurg: "Unfortunately Obama's path to Jesus was under the racist umbrella of liberation theology and the rantings of Jeremiah Wright."

You're very specific about the type of intolerance you find intolerable.

So the overtly oppressive theologies of Rick Warren and Paul Crouch are somehow superior to the anti-apartheid and pro-civil rights liberation theology?

Again, we've just learned a lot about you.

Jeremiah Wright is preferable to Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell, James Dobson or any of the other d-bags parading as "Christians" but doing the "devil's work." These are exactly the type of people Jesus rebelled against!

Did I mention either Crouch or Warren; both morons? Why not address the only name I mentioned, Jeremiah Wright and his blatant vitriol. After all, the article was about Obama and his faith and the Obama's sat in his pews for a couple of decades.
I have posted plenty of times about the abject lack of moral or religious values of the Right. But again, this article used Obama's supposed faith as the premise to dismiss another group of nitwits.
We learned your comprehension ability is zero or that you are so jaded that you your effective comprehension is zero. Oops, we already knew that.
Readers are also aware that your particular views and selective lapses in racial equality make you amenable to the tenets of liberation theology. I support your right to be a bigot.

KV-I seriously doubt that you have heard the actual words, in context, of Jeremiah Wright and his hate and STILL contend that he is somehow superior to Dobson, Falwell or Graham. Graham particularly galls me because he was a run of the mill nutty tent preacher that this country allowed to strangely have some legitimacy. I don't get it.
Wright is as bigoted as any conservative/white equivalent; any claim otherwise is intellectually dishonest or politically motivated.
Finally, spend some time reading up on the recent creation and evolution of liberation theology. Unlike some other nutty Christian sects with roots that go back hundreds or thousands of years, these idiots concocted their evil message in the past few decades.

@italiansurg: "Why not address the only name I mentioned, Jeremiah Wright and his blatant vitriol. After all, the article was about Obama and his faith and the Obama's sat in his pews for a couple of decades."

You seem to think that the pastor that Obama openly denounced is somehow relevant to his expressions of faith. I point out that there are plenty of right-wing religious leaders that support prejudicial ideologies - but they're somehow immune to your critique. It's only black liberation theology - as you wrongly define it - that deserves your outrage. Classy.

@italiansurg: "We learned your comprehension ability is zero or that you are so jaded that you your effective comprehension is zero. Oops, we already knew that."

Yeah. You have no knowledge of history or context of liberation theology - not the limits of your ignorance, I might add - so there's really nothing comprehensible in your views. You just spew out random thoughts and ideas and act as though those who call you on your BS are idiots. It's a great reflection of the anti-intellectualism that has infiltrated the right.

@italiansurg: "Readers are also aware that your particular views and selective lapses in racial equality make you amenable to the tenets of liberation theology. I support your right to be a bigot."

I think you underestimate the readers. I'm fairly certain they see through your race baiting and name calling and see that you actually have no clue what you are talking about...

yup, it took Obama 20 years to figure out Wright was worthy of denouncing; conveniently timed with running for President. If our Commander in Chief is that dense he's not qualified to be President, a claim I have never made. I don't even claim Obama is a racist, just that he sat for 2 decades listening to these sermons. Also, calling it black liberation theology is racist on face value; they do not speak to blacks, the tenets include all non-whites including brown, yellow etc. The roots are not exclusively with blacks but instead with all people of color. I'm brown by the way...

Just as fortuitous is the short history of liberation theology which means even you may be capable of understanding what it is about. This is rather unlike general Christianity which has more heads than Medussa and becomes a convenient way to obfuscate what is good an bad. You'll be embarrassed, at least internally, after claiming that liberation theology is anything but hate.

I think Bill Clausen has excellent points I'd like to add.
While I haven't followed Wright's sermons other than news editor selected snippets, he was pretty much a nobody until Hillary Clinton or John McCain or some political opponent (at the time) brought him to national prominence. Am I wrong on this point? I don't keep up with evangelicals of any stripe.

@italiansurg: "...they do not speak to blacks, the tenets include all non-whites including brown, yellow etc. The roots are not exclusively with blacks but instead with all people of color"

To claim that role of liberation theology in Latin America and the liberation theology of the civil rights and anti-apartheid movements (for example) are all directly connected - it's really not true.

@italiansurg: "You'll be embarrassed, at least internally, after claiming that liberation theology is anything but hate."

It's only hateful to those who oppose equality and justice for all.

@EatTheRich: The issue is not about Rick Warren or anybody else other than the man who runs the country. Had Obama said "I'm standing behind pastor Wright even if it means sacrificing my political career" I would have respected him for having backbone, but clearly he didn't do that and that was the point of my post.

Obama sold out his pastor, and if you think he wouldn't sell you out, then I think you are being overly optimistic. Politicians for the most part use people to get to the top, and while I understand your need to have a team to cheer for, (I've been there/done that) the reality of the situation is that whatever you think of Rick Warren, Billy Graham, or Jeremiah Wright, the person we should be concerned with is Obama, who does not have the strength of conviction. What I really want to say to you is that applying the same criticism toward those who share your political beliefs does not mean you are selling out to the other side, but rather that you are trying to make your side better.

Come on board with Ken, Italiansurg and myself and start self-critiquing and you'll find it very liberating. You'd rather be stuck with us on a desert island than being stuck with Obama--believe me.

Plenty of delusion to go around in reading these comments. How about values that require no religion whatsoever. Why is it so many people find it necessary to be ordered, compelled, and directed to do good only at the behest of and threats from imaginary deities?

I'm for civilized human values that inherently inform us that helping, not hindering, the greater individual and common welfare is a moral thing to do. So long as that greater welfare is not predicated upon the misery of others.

Arguing about fictional cloudborne overlords remains about as important as sending trapeze equipment to Mars.

I'm willing to bet that Obama is actually your basic American agnostic but realizes that it's not politically expedient to admit that that's in fact the case.

"sending trapeze equipment to Mars."
Draxor, please don't be giving Gingrich more campaign talking points.

Jeff Moualim has a point.

And you wonder why Karl Rove objected so strenuously to the Clint Eastwood / Chrysler commercial during the Superbowl?!

The last President that seems to not have trumped up his religiosity was Jimmy Carter; his faith and devotion to those tenets did not have to be reconstructed for an election. The fact that I feel he's totally nuts and wrong at this point is another issue...

It's totally weird to me that the U.S., by all reliable polls, is not willing to elect a President that is even an agnostic, much less an atheist.

To punctuate the last post the president is only the tip of the iceberg.

People seem to think the president can solve/cause all the problems and put all their energy into this though while ignoring the power of the congress and senate.

I love Jimmy Carter. And Italian is quite right, separation of church and state! All the paranoia about Obama the false rumor that Obama "is Muslim" struck me as decidedly antiAmerican itself.
But back to Mr. Carter. The earliest Presidential election I recall was the 1980 race in which Ted Kennedy (and maybe others) challenged Carter in the primaries. I thought this was normal! And it should be! What better way to keep a President honest and on the platform on which they ran if they knew that they risked getting usurped in the next election by someone from their own party as opposed to assuming the nomination was their's and acting accordingly.
Perhaps the President should be automatically renominated along with a contender from his/her own party as well as the other parties.

This was an opinion letter, voicing ones opinion and nothing else, sure they want to promote their ideas and views for other's to agree or not but all else aside, it's just their opinion...

politicians should be looked at with indignation, skepticism at best.