LF: Obama Rips Bible, Praises Koran

This is historically and philosophically illiterate. Historically speaking, the Crusades were a response to Islamic aggression in Europe and the Middle East; the Inquisition, as Jonah Goldberg points out while quoting historian Thomas Madden, director of the Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies at Saint Louis University, was designed to regularize executions rather than leaving them to the will of the masses. Christians undoubtedly pursued horrible brutalities against people, including innocent Jews. However, as Goldberg points out, “Christianity, even in its most terrible days, even under the most corrupt popes, even during the most unjustifiable wars, was indisputably a force for the improvement of man.”

Nowhere is that clearer than in Obama’s second example, slavery. Virtually all of the most ardent abolitionists were deeply religious Christians. Hundreds of thousands of American men marched to their deaths singing “The Battle Hymn of the Republic”: “In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea / With a glory in His bosom that transfigures you and me / As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free / While God is marching on.” That was 150 years ago. It’s not exactly the modern Islamic slogan, “Death to the Jews.” Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., was, as his name suggests, a reverend. He quoted old black Christian spirituals and the Biblical story of the exodus from Egypt. Christians obliterated slavery. Christians obliterated Jim Crow. Modern slavery is largely perpetrated by Muslims. Modern Jim Crow is certainly perpetrated by Muslims under shariah law.

There is a larger point, here, too: President Obama’s foolish argument suggests that because Christians were brutal a millennium ago, they should shut up about brutalities today. This is somewhat like saying that because someone’s great-great-grandfather held slaves in rural Alabama, that person should shut up about human trafficking in 2015. It’s asinine.

He then concluded that religious leaders should not speak out against publicly-funded contraception or gay marriage.

We can get into President Obama’s pathetic Biblical commentary here – his interpretation of Leviticus on slavery is incorrect, Jews still avoid shellfish, the Talmud explains that no child has ever been stoned for rebelliousness, and the Sermon on the Mount is not a pacifist document. Obama’s not Biblically literate – he’s the same fellow who says, “I think the good book says don’t throw stones in glass houses.”

He said in The Audacity of Hope that he would define Biblical values however he chose, stating that he is not willing “to accept a reading of the Bible that considers an obscure line in Romans to be more defining of Christianity than the Sermon on the Mount.” Both are, in fact, parts of the Bible. Citing the Sermon on the Mount to justify civil unions for homosexuals, as Obama has done, is not in fact Biblical.

But more importantly, Obama’s scorn for the old-fashioned Bible is obvious. That became more obvious in 2008, when Obama told some of his buddies in San Francisco that unemployed idiots “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

The Obama administration has routinely attacked religious organizations and people who violate Obama’s personal political predilections. They’ve attacked all trappings of Christianity as well. Whether they’re using Obamacare to force religious individuals to pay for others’ contraception or toning down the National Day of Prayer instead of holding a public ceremony, whether they’re covering a monogram of Jesus at Georgetown University during a presidential speech or objecting to adding FDR’s D-Day prayer to the WWII memorial, the Obama administration clearly isn’t fond of Christianity.

This contrasts strongly with President Obama’s romantic vision of Islam. He famously called the Muslim call to prayer “the sweetest sound I know.” He said in his first presidential interview, with Al-Arabiya, that his job was “to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives.” Weeks later, he said in Turkey, “We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape the world — including in my own country.” A few months later, in a speech in Cairo to which he invited the Muslim Brotherhood, Obama said:

He added that Islam has a “proud tradition of tolerance,” explained, ‘Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace,” and said, “America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.” He said in his Ramadan message in 2009 that Islam has played a key “role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.”

ISIS, Obama has said over and over again, is not Islamic. His administration maintains that America is not at war with radical Islam. He stated before the United Nations in 2012, just weeks after the murder of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya at the hands of Muslim terrorists, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” Hillary Clinton allegedly promised Charles Woods, father of one of the slain in Benghazi, that the administration would achieve the arrest of the YouTube filmmaker behind The Innocence of Muslims. The State Department issued taxpayer-funded commercials denouncing that YouTube video. President Obama variously called the video “crude and disgusting” and stated that “its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity.” At the UN in 2014, Obama lauded a Muslim cleric who backs Hamas. And, of course, Obama uses Islamic theology to promote his vision of world peace:

All three religions do have access to holy sites now, in Jewish-run Jerusalem. They did not when Muslims ruled Jerusalem. But facts have no bearing in the fantasy world of the president.

Perhaps one final contrast tells the tale. In 2012, according to the Washington Post. “U.S. troops tried to burn about 500 copies of the Koran as part of a badly bungled security sweep at an Afghan prison in February.” Two American soldiers were shot in the aftermath. This prompted President Obama to apologize profusely to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, writing him a letter stating, “We will take the appropriate steps to avoid any recurrence, including holding accountable those responsible.”

Three years earlier, members of the military burned Bibles printed in Pashto and Dari. CNN reported that they had been discarded “amid concern they would be used to try to convert Afghans.” The Bibles were burned rather than sent back to their source organization because the military worried they might be re-sent to another outlet in Afghanistan. There was no apology to the church that printed the Bibles, or to Christians more broadly.

Sure, radical Muslims around the world, supported by millions of their compatriots and friendly governments, are murdering innocents. But it’s Christian aggression that forces Muslims to burn other Muslims alive in Muslim countries. (1 image)

The only finger Gatlin is pointing is his middle finger. To EVERY poster and lurker here who knows the truth of the matter, and the carnival games Gatlin plays in defense of Islam which are in defense of the Great Pretender's warring words.

Sir William Blackstone, (born July 10, 1723, London, England—died February 14, 1780, Wallingford, Oxfordshire), English jurist, whose Commentaries on the Laws of England, 4 vol. (1765–69), is the best-known description of the doctrines of English law. The work became the basis of university legal education in England and North America. He was knighted in 1770.

“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org

Too bad Gatlin wasn't there; He have run those leaflets all over DC in his all-weather golf cart. "Neither snow nor rain..."

I'd have fun answering those questions, but I'd be butting on a conversation between you and GarySpFc.

I have been reading some of the many threads Gatlin has posted upon. Wasn't his original monicker "tater?" Why in the world would anyone choose that monicker?

“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org

Feel free pal; I have a few hours this evening to watch and learn from you. I caution you to be careful, though. You could become bruised by my retorts.

Yup. The Gatlin is the very best!! If the ACLU/SPLC is paying him by the cut & paste (or laffs), they're getting their money's worth.

For one thing, I wasn't MAKING an argument in my last post. Just posting an observation. Perhaps it will help if I label what I am doing at each step, so that it will be clear.

(RETORT, CONTAINING A SUBTLE AD HOMINEM) You made a statement about the bulk of the American people that was quite harsh. I replied with a statement about the motivation of some of them that was more generous as to their motives and reasoning.

(THEORETICAL MUSING) And I acknowledge that maybe they're right. Our political system is extraordinarily corrupt, and has produced terrible results over and over again. Apathy might be a better approach to it than the one I have followed. I keep having hope in its reform, but in that respect I may be a fool.

(ANSWER TO ACCUSATION, CONTAINING A MIXTURE OF FACT AND LIGHT SARCASM.) In the real world I am not a scoundrel. I am a man, not a fish. I change my mind when I am persuaded of facts, but I form my beliefs on facts and don't change my mind without a good reason.

(SARCASTIC CLOSING STATEMENT) There is not, in fact, an "argument" in this post.

“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org

With forty years of defending Christianity (based on your posts this evening) you are all of a sudden tired? How is that? What happened to your "divine" inspiration to spread the good word?

You muist realize, when you profess credentials (earlier up the thread) and can not support your own work by thoughts, words, deeds and actions you look like a fool to the viewing audience besides myself.

For whatever rea$on, Major Tater has not only become a spam-baiting propagandist of anti-Christian propaganda at LF, but a proponent of subversive socialist-statist-Muslim causes.

Jesse, this may be hard for you to understand, but I have Parkinson's disease, and typing is very difficult for me.

“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org

If Williams was conducting it, he'd also have covered for America's First Mooselum President, but alas was beaten to the punch by former Klintoon Operative, and now Dem Operative at NBC, George Stephanopolous. Cranky has probably already answered this...

You have become too defensive already and I still have a few hours remaing to undertand what you actually are trying to say.

No way of knowing, but considering Team 0bolo has been at war with the USA for 6 years, the number -- anecdotally speaking -- must be astronomical. Add to that number, the number of known radical Mooslimbs, AND Messican gang members and MS-13.

That would be left-wing/anti-America "logic" from Destro's/Gatlin's alternative universe. (IOW, get ready for a spin in the red-zone.)

I don't want you to be or feel unconfortable. I wish you no pain or suffering at all.

But you must change your suggested credentials from your stated background; I take you at your word. You really have no legs to stand on and you know the same.

No, the quesion was yours, namely "Can you find anything incorrect in the articles?"

Yes, its premise of pretense of moral relevancy. Anyone can spin facts or selectively cherry pick facts to support an argument. But that does not give weight or validity to the agrument in the overall context of reality.

The Crusades, Inquisition, the institution and justification of slavery in the name of Christ occured hunreds of years ago - in other words in the distant PAST. What is occurring in the name of Isalm around the glode (ISIS, Boko Haram, etc.) is happening NOW. People, societies, civilizations grow and mature, many to the point where the acknowledge and condemn past actions within their ranks and no longer tolerate it. Where is the KKK and its ilk these days? Christian America roundly and publically rejected these groups and told them you can't live with us and to get out of Dodge - or else.

What is occurring in the name if Isalm is in real time, not hundreds of years ago BUT it isn't much different what was done in the name of Islam hundreds of years ago. One critical difference, if not the singular most important one, is that Muslims around the glode, en masse, clearly and loudly, not even Jordan yet, has told ISIS and its ilk to go away, you can't live with us, get out of Mecca - or else.

Gatlin means to say, his liberal/left-wing sources of revisionist history don't much like the truth of the matter.

It also underscores the fact that Islam has now been engaging in ("provocation" -- HA! Is that how he characterized it?) invasion, murder, and convertion by the sword for almost a thousand years and counting.

Nice cut & paste spam. Can you whiddle that Alpo/red herring down to a teaspoon?

You make sense, SOSO. Now, what do you really intend by stating within your tagline, "потому что Бог хочет это тот путь"

Tater, 0bama is watering don the world wide issues of thousands of years of enmity between the Christians and Muslims.

If it is to accepted that those who committed heinous barbaric acts deemed themselves to be “Christians” but were not really “Christians”….can it not also be said that those who deem themselves to be “Muslims” and commit violent acts are not “Muslims?”

That be the case, then why do so many have so much trouble with Obama’s regime refusing to use the term or categorize the radical extremists: “Islamic Terrorists?”

Again, total BS. Christianity cleaned up it act hundreds of years age. With Islam it is still the same old same old from hundreds of years ago.

Modern day Christianty is not committing savage and barbaric acts in the name of its God, and hasn't for hundreds of years. Modern day Islam is still committing savage and barbaric acts in the name of its God just the same as Islma did hudreds of years ago.

Christianity did something to clean itself up. Christians not only acknowledged the wrongs of the past in Christ's name but put an end to it with no degree of uncertainity. The same cannot be said for Islam as it still is tolerating savagery, cruelty, slavery, murder, barbaric acts againt children , etc., etc., etc. in the name of Allah, especially if such acts are committed on infidels.

Jordan's response proves this to be true. It was just fine to behead infidels, no venegance required here. But harm a Jordanian Muslim in a brutal manner? Well, there shite hits the fan and venegance is theirs (so they say). Jordan's response is a pure act of revenge demanded by the tribe of the murdered pilotr not a moral act of rejection of ISIS and for all that it stands.

If you and pericles still do not understand this then you are being willfully ignorant and/or intellectually dishonest.

I wouldn't give a feather's worth of weight to Gatlin-the-Lightweight's argument. Only the Left and carnival barkers are willing to wade into this kind of absurdity.

Who, Where, When, Why, How and What:
Obama was not the person to say this.
Where he said it was not the right place.
When he said it was not appropriate.
Why he said it is because he believes it.
How he said it and what he said has not been challenged.
All you have done so far is spew forth snarky comments.
You have yet to show where Obama lied.
Why can’t you do that?

Obama riles right with accurate remarks at Prayer Breakfast

By now, you’ve probably seen the headlines and the emails from your wacky uncle who watches Fox News all day. President Obama, as he’s done every year, spoke at the National Prayer Breakfast yesterday, enraging his conservative critics for reasons that don’t make a lot of sense.

The president made the case that while we see faith communities around the world “inspiring people to lift up one another,” we also see “faith being twisted and distorted, used as a wedge – or, worse, sometimes used as a weapon.” After noting horrific acts of terror, sectarian violence, and religious division – “sectarian war in Syria, the murder of Muslims and Christians in Nigeria, religious war in the Central African Republic, a rising tide of anti-Semitism and hate crimes in Europe” – the president added:

“So how do we, as people of faith, reconcile these realities – the profound good, the strength, the tenacity, the compassion and love that can flow from all of our faiths, operating alongside those who seek to hijack religious for their own murderous ends?

“Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ…. So this is not unique to one group or one religion. There is a tendency in us, a sinful tendency that can pervert and distort our faith.”

All of this happens to be 100% true. No faith tradition has a monopoly on virtue or peace; none of the world’s major religions can look back in history and not find chapters they now regret.

So why in the world is the right claiming to be outraged?

Conservative media lashed out at President Obama for mentioning the Crusades and Inquisition at the National Prayer Breakfast after condemning the Islamic State (ISIS or ISIL) as a “death cult” that distorts Islam.

Republicans are apparently a little hysterical, with one Fox News host claiming that “essentially” the president argued “Christians were just as bad as ISIS.” Former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore (R), desperately trying to get attention as a presidential candidate, called Obama’s remarks “the most offensive I’ve ever heard a president make in my lifetime.”

I’m going to assume that the president’s critics aren’t really outraged, but instead are playing a cynical little game in the name of partisan theater. It must be the latest in an endless series of manufactured outrages, because the alternative – that the right is genuinely disgusted – is literally hard to believe.

The portion of Obama’s remarks that has drawn so much scrutiny isn’t ambiguous – while people have used religion to advance righteousness and justice, horrible acts have been made in God’s name, no one group should be too quick to condemn another while wrestling with their own misdeeds. Is this accurate? Of course it is. Is it offensive? Only to theists who believe their faith tradition has always been without flaw (or perhaps those who’ve convinced themselves the Crusades and the Inquisition were noble causes, worthy of defense.)

It prompted Ta-Nehisi Coates to note the “foolish” and “historically illiterate” responses from the right to the president’s remarks.

It’s worth pausing to appreciate that conservative whining about Obama and the National Prayer Breakfast is annoyingly common. In 2013, the president said that as a Christian, his approach to government “coincides with Jesus’s teaching that ‘for unto whom much is given, much shall be required.’” Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) condemned the speech on the Senate floor and then-Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.) stormed out of the breakfast in protest.

One assumes that the right will once again be reaching for the fainting couch this time next year, whatever it is Obama happens to say at the time. There’s no reason for the rest of us, however, to take such hollow complaints seriously.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/obama-riles- right-accurate-remarks-prayer-breakfast.

I hear your cry for help, but I don't want your Muslim house negroes, thank you. You're not a "cracka" unless you have cotton pickin' field nigaz.

If POTUS is the Great Orator of the US Constitution, why is he bringing religious values into a debatable position while denying current events?

I only asked that you show where Obama lied and where anything I have posted on this thread is a lie.

Agian, total BS. Obama is total BS, a total fraud. Wake up. Obama played the useful idiots by telling them what they wanted to hear. He knew that he could not get elected on a pro-life and anti-gay marriage message. In the meantime time he has done evertything he can to misdirect attention from the true agenda of Islam and ignoring modern day Islamic terrorism and brutality. He goes out of his way to avoid using the term Islamic terrorism, he can't even same Islamic extreism. I can understand why he goes so far up his ass to portect his agenda. I can't understand why you do.

On Thursday, at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C., President Obama blithely informed his audience that Christians ought not get on their “high horse” about the problem of radical Islam:

The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party