Render unto God…somewhere away from the political arena
By Thoreau
Remember the rumors that Obama was a Muslim? Then remember how his actual Achilles heel turned out to be a fairly radical black Christian minister? Then remember how the Muslim rumors resurfaced? Well, now he’s in trouble for asking a white conservative Christian minister to pray at the inauguration.
I’ll leave it to others to explain why the Rick Warren invite is or isn’t something to get upset about, and why it is or isn’t as big of a deal as the Rev. Jeremiah Wright situation, and why the Wright situation was or wasn’t a big deal. Instead, I’ll just observe that Obama can’t catch a break on religion, and this is a fine argument for not mixing religion and Presidential business. It just comes to no good.
Granted, inviting ANY pastor (black, white, liberal, conservative, Muslim, Christian, whatever) to give a prayer isn’t as bad as saying that God wants you to invade Iraq but IOKIYAR. For Obama, there are no breaks to be had on religion. Granted, even lack of religion will get him in trouble, but keeping religion out of his speeches and official events would at least be consistent with the spirit of the First Amendment. (Yes, I’m well aware that the occasional religious display at the White House probably doesn’t violate the letter of the First Amendment, but that’s why I said spirit, not letter.)
Comment by TGGP —
December 26, 2008 @ 12:51 pm
Every good materialist knows there’s no such thing as “spirit”, and any attempt to use that nonsensical concept with reference to legislation is a red-flag indicating that some bullshitter wants to undermine the rule of law.
Comment by Thoreau —
December 26, 2008 @ 1:12 pm
The spirit of the first amendment may not be a useful concept for court rulings, but it’s a useful guideline for presidents trying to decide “Just how much crap do I want to take for mixing religion with my politics?”
Comment by KipEsquire —
December 26, 2008 @ 1:27 pm
Here you go.
Comment by Jon Hendry —
December 26, 2008 @ 10:23 pm
Obama should have messed with everybody’s minds, and screwed up the preconceived narratives, by inviting Thich Nhat Hanh to do the invocation. (Nhat Hanh is a Vietnamese Zen monk whom MLK Jr nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.)
Barring that, maybe Richard Dawkins.
Comment by Joshua Holmes —
December 27, 2008 @ 3:02 am
The Muslim thing was straight up goofy, but it also didn’t hurt him. Rev. Wright was a problem because 95% of white America is offended by his sermons, and because Obama showed zero interest in religion until it could help him win black votes. Rev. Warren is a problem because he’s a right-wing douchebag only invited for crassest political purposes.
What’s missing from all of these? Genuine religious belief. Obama’s not going to catch a break on religion until he shows actual belief, not politics. (My guess is that he probably believes in God, but one that doesn’t do a whole lot or take much interest in human affairs.)
Comment by VikingMoose —
December 27, 2008 @ 11:53 am
dubyah bought his ranch to be more electable, didn’t he?
he also pandered to the religion. they all do it. one’s tolerance for it depends on the already-formed opinion.
it doesn’t matter what Obama does on religion or other things. The GOPers, the NotNativeBorn Truefers (sic), the slightly racist (but won’t admit it!) types will go after him, no matter what.
the past 8 years is a frightening example of religion in politics. if that’s what christianity is, they challenge their own views about Islam being violent. mein gott.
keep it out of politics. it’s a vehicle for hatred. quite the opposite of their version of the flying spaghetti monster, Christus’s preachings. they’re about the hate.
Doktor T: I’m also insulted about having that assclown warren there.
and thanks for the new abbreviation, “IOKIYAR” cool!!
Comment by Thoreau —
December 27, 2008 @ 1:12 pm
I can’t take credit for IOKIYAR.
Comment by Nameless Cynic —
December 27, 2008 @ 2:17 pm
We can’t get the religion out of politics, because the truly wackjob theocrats believe that it is their calling to “save our souls.” They believe that God doesn’t just want them to do this, He demands it. So they just keep insinuating themselves in, ignoring that pesky little “church/state” thing. And to make matters worse, a majority of Americans are Christian to a lesser degree, so very few of them are motivated to do something about it. They might be uncomfortable if the theocrats took over and the .Thought Police started arresting them for “Impious Behavior,” but they believe that the odd prayer now and again is healthy.
Comment by VM —
December 27, 2008 @ 4:13 pm
still, Doktor T, for an evil fiziks type, you’re okay
Nameless – it’s not because of the wackjob theocrats, it’s because everybody else doesn’t have the balls to oppose it. Or they don’t mind…
but +1
Comment by SadButTrue, size 9½ —
December 27, 2008 @ 4:28 pm
TGGP @1 said that, “any good materialist knows there is no such thing as spirit.”
Anyone with a good knowledge of languages knows that in Latin spiritus means breath – from whence words like respiration, inspiration. In Greek the word is pneumos. The real problem arises when so-called literal interpreters of the bible choose to take something that is mundane and material, and turn it into something that is mystical. Take away this mis-translation of well-known Latin and Greek nouns and it becomes nearly impossible to find any mention in the bible of the elusive ’soul’ that religion is supposedly trying to save. I have no real beef with religion until they assume the God-given ‘right’ to inject their fuzzymindedness into my life as well.
Comment by feckless —
December 27, 2008 @ 6:20 pm
Josh Holmes, I think you miss the point.
How do you “show actual belief, not politics”?
Missionary work? Give every cent you have to the poor? Develop Stigmata?
The Muslim thing hurt him, because the Media distorted all perception of Reverend Wright; decorated veteran from a time of Jim Crow, 30 year servant of his poverty stricken community.
TV’s fascistic caricature of a great american gave a socially acceptable cover story for everyone who suspected that it was now wrong to publicly state that you wouldn’t vote for a black man.
(If the media had said he was a Kangaroo the fundamentalists would have beeen screaming about his hidden pouch.)
The total lack of TV coverage (at least no multiweek 24hr cable feeding frenzy)of Robertson and other major evangenlicals blaming 9/11 and hurricanes on gays, or calling for the assasination of foreign leaders demonstrates that this is at least an anti-democratic party bias, if not straight racism.
Our electronic media, and as a result our political process, have been brought to heel by religious zealots who dictate not only on what terms religion will be discussed in the public forum, but general broadcast content itself.
A weak media combined with demagogic sectarian politicians has pushed this country dangerously close to theocracy in a way it never was when the only religious discussion was between protestant and catholics.
By reaching out to Rick (dangerously subtle fundamentalist) Warren, Obama’s response to this religious bigotry I think “shows actual belief” AND IS GOOD POLITICS.
In the gospels a repeat complaint against Jesus was that he hung around with tax collectors and prostitutes. Like JC Obama is going in amongst them, as he did at the saddleback farce, so they can’t say that he hasn’t reached out his hand, so they can’t say that he hasn’t been a good humble christian with an open mind. He needs to disarm these people ideologically so that he doesn’t have to do it physically.
The people who he is trying to reach are the ones for whom “goofy” is dangerously real – all homicidal domestic terrorism has been rooted in fundamentalist christianity.
The question is what does Obama do when he has these people’s ears and how does he carry through on legislation and governance.
My hope is that Obama uses Mr. Warren, and the gay backlash against him, to justify to the fundamentalists that he is not a creature of the homosexual lobby. Yes thats crass politics, but the man is a politician, not a saint.
Comment by Idi Amin's Last Meal —
December 27, 2008 @ 10:04 pm
The total lack of TV coverage (at least no multiweek 24hr cable feeding frenzy) of Robertson and other major evangelicals blaming 9/11 and hurricanes on gays, or calling for the assassination of foreign leaders demonstrates that this is at least an anti-democratic party bias, if not straight racism.
You took the words right of my mouth. Chuck D’s as well. (Of Prof. Griff, I would only be able to say the same if you had included several extraneous “Peckerwoods”, “Money-grubbing Jews”, & “Slant-eyed Shopkeepers.)
But, yes, how is “God-damn America” any different from Falwell crediting our willingness to allow homosexuals to live openly with the events of 11th Sept?
Comment by Joshua Holmes —
December 28, 2008 @ 2:57 am
How do you “show actual belief, not politics�
You would have to do something about religion which isn’t base politics. You wouldn’t join a church just to get political influence. You wouldn’t throw that same church under the bus after 20 years to get elected president.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not offended that Obama uses religion so callously. I’m not a believer. But if you want to know why he catches a ton of flak about it, the answer is that he doesn’t take it seriously in a country that does.
TV’s fascistic caricature of a great american gave a socially acceptable cover story for everyone who suspected that it was now wrong to publicly state that you wouldn’t vote for a black man.
I read a couple of Rev. Wright’s sermons. If most other whites had sat down and read them, they would have hated him even more.
As for Falwell, there were a hundred different lunatic theories about why God smote New Orleans. Some said teh ghey, some said lack of support for Israel, some said gambling, etc. The problem here is that Falwell was just one of many assholes running their mouths about God’s judgment.
Comment by Hyperion —
December 28, 2008 @ 12:23 pm
for me obama’s faith is his least attractive characteristic. i hope he invokes it infrequently. i would prefer that it be a private matter.
Comment by Bob —
December 28, 2008 @ 9:34 pm
All should acknowledge that the White House is the personal residence of the President and his family and they certainly should feel comfortable expressing their religion there just as any of us do in our homes.
Comment by joe from Lowell —
December 28, 2008 @ 11:40 pm
But, yes, how is “God-damn America†any different from Falwell crediting our willingness to allow homosexuals to live openly with the events of 11th Sept?
What Wright criticized America for in the “God and Government” sermon – slavery, segregation, killing civilians, supporting death squads.
What Falwell criticized America for in his post-Katrina sermon – homosexuality, feminism, consensual sex.
No, I’m not going to pretend those are equivalent. Sorry.
Comment by Doug T —
December 29, 2008 @ 11:21 am
This discussion makes me wonderr what the reaction would be if a president today dared to say something like:
“It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. ‘Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh.’ If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman’s two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said ‘the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether’.”
Thart damn Lincoln, just another member of the blame the Union first crowd! Not to mention being a crazy theocrat trying to shove his religion down our throats.