Obama criticised for telling Christians to get off high horse over Islamic extremism

Scroll to see replies

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/obama-criticised-for-telling-christians-to-get-off-high-horse-over-islamic-extremism-10030790.html

So was Obama wrong to make this comment - or was he actually saying something that many of us are thinking?

Please do not use this thread for religious debate.

Brave for a US president to make a point that is anything but glowing piety towards the Christian god.

Maybe his words (and reasonable they were) will finally create an opening for some genuine debate on religion and faith in America, and it's role (if any) it should have in government.

Considering that on paper it's a secular state, but is possessed of a heavy Christian bias. "In God we trust" indeed.

Reply 81

T-the-Dreamer

I do think that Obama's comments were somewhat justified. Comparing the US to France (who's secularism is much more blatant), America is still pretty tied to its religious traditions. Some religious individuals then decide that they're going to call out an entire faith (in some cases) for the atrocities committed by a relatively small number of religious extremists because of their interpretation of a religious text. But here's the thing. There are plenty of groups and individuals in America who used the Bible to cast out and persecute certain groups of people. From justifying slavery and calling slaves 3/5 of a person in regards to how many seats a state would be awarded in congress, to the Jim Crow laws which effectively made it look like slavery had simply been replaced with a much more passive aggressive form of oppression (in terms of legal stature that is).

He's just saying that there hasn't been much done to make up or remedy the problems caused by their twisted interpretation of the Bible by said hypocrites and that they've figuratively swept it all under the rug. And then some of them dare make criticism which simply shows no regards for the fact that minorities are responsible for all this madness.

To this day, there remains states, or parts of states, where a member of a minority for example can't go there because someone has decided that they are of higher stature according to the Bible, because they manipulate the Bible to suit their bigotry. This isn't what comes to mind when one thinks of the intolerant, but the Tea Party for example is a good example of believers that don't necessarily respect people from all walks of life and yet carry on calling out everyone for being different. They certainly do not represent Christianity, and yet some of them are happy to provide an ignorant narrative to what's going on.

Reply 82

DorianGrayism

Original post by elhm1800

Clear enough for you?

Edit: that zipped you up :smile:

Posted from TSR Mobile

Again. I want a quote where I said it had NOTHING to do with Christianity

That says they were not motivated by Christianity.

That obviously isn't the same thing.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 83

JohnCrichton89

So while Christians are being persecuted, murdered and enslaved all over the middle East by Muslims, Obama tells them to stop whining........ it's despicable.

Backhanded apologetics suggestive of the idea that these innocents suffering are somehow at fault and deserving of these atrocities.

His second term cannot end soon enough. Perhaps he will tell African Americans to stop whining about slavery next because their ancestry were a party to it.

How horribly reprehensible.

Reply 84

T-the-Dreamer

Original post by JohnCrichton89

It sounds like you're trying to desperately make yourself (assuming you're Christian) the victim.

All he's saying is that extremism has manifested itself in most religions and that some Christians (especially in the US) make ignorant criticism towards Islam like nothing ever happened. It's a pretty neutral comment to make, one that doesn't antagonise anyone and simply says that we ought to accept the existence of problems so we can deal with them as a society.

Seriously, it seems like people of all sides are putting words in his mouth.

Reply 85

JohnCrichton89

Original post by T-the-Dreamer

Well you have done exactly the same thing. Interpreting what he said.

Criticising Christianity for past transgressions while Christians are being persecuted, enslaved and murdered by Muslims in sectarian attacks is not neutral.

It's backhanded apologetics aimed at inferring a sense of guilt towards the victims and stemming rightful outrage within Christian demographics the world over.
Obama refuses to mention that these problems have anything to do with Islam while attributing other, similar historical actions, with Christianity. Again, that is not a neutral statement.

I am trying to make, myself or, Christians look like victims?

What the hell type of statement is that to make. Christians are being persecuted, killed and enslaved by Muslims in the name of Islam all over the middle East and Africa.......... you must admit I don't have to do very much creative interpretation to turn it into 'propaganda'.

Reply 86

A5ko

How can you listen to a thing this guy says, where's his birth certificate!! HE'S DOESN'T EVEN GO TO THIS SCHOOL!

... I like him though.

Reply 87

Truths

What did he think he was going to achieve with this statement? Anyone with an ounce of intelligence can see through this mismatch conflation. He's just setting himself up for more ridicule at this point.

Reply 88

1732757

Original post by DorianGrayism

Again. I want a quote where I said it had NOTHING to do with Christianity

That says they were not motivated by Christianity.

That obviously isn't the same thing.

Umm lol you're obvs trolling. Imma going to drop this :wink:

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 89

T-the-Dreamer

Original post by JohnCrichton89

And yet you do the very thing you accuse me of doing. You took the remarks I made about some Christians in particular and applied them across the board so that I seemingly implied the oppressed were "whiny". What kind of precedent are you setting? Do we even need to discuss how vile and despicable the atrocities being committed are? My remark was aimed at those who still harbour the same sentiments that even their forefathers had - using a religion to fit their agenda. Do all Christians do this? No. Of course not. Some of the past transgressions you may think are now in the distant past are still viewed by a small minority as reasonable and even persist in this day and age. Not all areas are too welcoming of... well everyone. They simply are nowhere near as prevalent as they were. But it's still there. A cancer is only truly neutralised when it is gone for good. Does Islam have a problem of the sort at the moment? Yes, particularly thanks to the spread of cancerous doctrine. They both have.

Moreover, in no way can anyone draw a parallel between the action committed by one Christian with another if they both come from complete different places. And that is what you seem keen to affirm that I (somehow) even suggested or hinted. The actions of someone who shares similar beliefs to mine anywhere in the world are not representative of me or anyone else who has any common beliefs, especially if they come from totally social and cultural milieus. If we want to play this game, the actions of another human being reflect the kind of human being I am. I'm pretty sure that stereotypes arise in a similar fashion.

The actions of Columbus for example reflect what he and those that thought like him wanted to do in the new world, due the the belief that they should impose what they thought on the natives. I've never felt like going and forcing someone to accept my belief. Millions upon millions of Christians, Muslims and religious people don't do that. And yet the actions carried out by him and those like him represents their attitudes. It would in no way paint any accurate portrait of anyone Christian who live in peace while actually being respectful of all people. And it certainly does no paint an accurate picture of those fleeing oppression due to their faith or ethnic group who happen to live somewhere where radical extremists feel like going insane.

Reply 90

JohnCrichton89

Original post by T-the-Dreamer

snip.

This has turned into a discussion about Christianity, because of what Obama said. It should be a discussion about Islam, even our own discussion reflects this.

This is because of the subversive nature of what he said........ that only brings more criticisms about Christianity. Going to be honest, I didn't read your post. Not trying to insult you, if anything it make me look bad IMO.

The president needs to criticise Islam or STFU and stop addressing the problems of centuries dead Christians.

"It's OK Mr.President, we have the extremist Christian threat under control."

Reply 91

T-the-Dreamer

Original post by JohnCrichton89

I didn't read your post.

...

Had a feeling that you were annoyed at the lack of criticism of Islam. Not responding to that was something I wanted to confirm for sure (then again you wouldn't know as you never read the post. Sorry not sorry about saying this)

And that's how far I agree with what he said. Obama's a "lefty". The right always finds a way to single out Islam while he attempts to fight back what they say. Him being critical of Islam is their dream. So what does he do? The worst thing possible, by not debating Islam.

Reply 92

1732757

Original post by T-the-Dreamer

This

Posted from TSR Mobile

He's an idiot.

Original post by T-the-Dreamer

Your post doesn't make sense.

I wasn't annoyed at the lack of criticism, just that the criticism applied was disproportional to the state of affairs. And also gave a false narrative of past transgressions.

"Not responding to that was something I wanted to confirm for sure"
I have no idea what this means

How far do you agree with what he said?
Is his lack of criticism is what you agree with?

The worst thing possible is him not debating Islam?

This is why I didn't read your last post, it was as equally confusing and so much longer. My English isn't great, but this is......... well I can't understand it. Is English your first language?

Reply 95

T-the-Dreamer

Boy, haven't been asked that in a while... French is, though my writing is a lot better most of the time. I have the crappy tendency of forgetting to write some words entirely (Didn't notice anything too confusing about my last post though.)

What I meant to say was that I was going to ask if you were annoyed at his lack of criticism but decided to wait and see if you would openly answer my question without any prompt.

Any criticism of Islam on his or his party's behalf is always limited. America hasn't been too pleasant to Islam in recent years so that's him trying to stop sparking controversy. But he still did, this time offending Christians.

He's meant to be impartial, but clearly preferred not to talk about a burning issue. If he wants to talk about Christian doctrine, he should also talk about Islam's. That way he's fair and balanced. That's what I think. He probably knew he'd annoy Republicans as he said what he said.

To be honest though, this will play part in some Liberal, anti-God rhetoric that some on the left will love saying. Him saying anything was far worse than simply being quiet and no making any criticism.