Is "The One" jealous he's not everyone's god?

Post Reply New Topic

The White House requests all religious elements be covered before Obama visits and speaks at Georgetown Univ:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/16/georgetown-university-hid-religious-symbols-white-house-request/

What kind of megalomanic is this guy?? He wants the hall all to himself. He doesn't want to look around the room, and be reminded during his speech that many people have other gods besides him. Will Georgetown obey Obama's first Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me"?

At the very least, the guy is for suppression of religion. Unless you happen to be thoroughly beholden to him, that is.

didnt you know? hes the anti-christ! foxnews

wow, did you know there are OTHER news sites BESIDES fox news?

More dishonesty on the part of conservatives. The fact that the symbol of the university contained the letters IHS in reference to Christ is not why they asked to have it covered up:

Did they cover up the large mosaics that were clearly religious?? Not at all - Here's an interesting video from a total moron - if you look at the pictures he presents from the speech, it is clear that the religious iconography were not covered up - just the seal of the university.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZGVaxLDqww[/youtube]


Here's a link to a picture of the stage - a back-drop was put over the the triangular podium and lower walls. Big deal ... if the Jesuits that run the school thought it was sacrilegious, they would have said no to the request.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/polit ... 0Hall.html


Good thing that bearing false witness is not a mortal sin. Ohh....wait... it is.

Of course. There are many other honest news media, like the Drudge Report and townhall.com.

More knee-jerk liberal defenses of the indefensible...

Not at all - and your accusations are against the Catholics at Georgetown University as much as the current administration. The university is the one that did the covering.

Obama isn't God!! !! !!

I wouldn't count on that issue to really make such assumption or even to seriously consider that to be actually the case, in my opinion, it begins to sound more like a conspiracy theory than something really substantial, or to say it better, an oportunity to use something against Obama, and well, as monty points out, not all religious elements seem to have been covered, and being the decision come from the University and not Obama, and well, wether this is from foxnews or any other news provider, it is an opinion and presonal perspective from an individual who happened to write it to that site, so that doesn't provide proof, and should always be questionable, as it is always the possibility of events being misleading to go according to an agenda.


well, using that to discredit Obama or accusing him of disrespecting religion is too much, and well, it can easily be used to support an agenda, especially if you dislike Obama or ideologically and politically you reject whatever he represents, and well, what the article says isn't enough to really make that a convincing and substantial case, so yes, this can be seen as conservative dishonesty.


That begs the question of wether Obama actually made that as his first comandment.

You're confusing megalomania with counter-megalomania, my friend. Let's ignore the blatant ad hominem/strawman combo accusing Obama of considering himself to be a God and therefore covering up religious symbols because he's afraid of the competition. You know as well as I do how ridiculous and unfounded that is.

The real issue at hand is not blatantly suppressing religion, but in fact the complete opposite; preventing religious overtones from overshadowing an event that rightfully should have nothing to do with religion at all. Your complaint is not that Obama is trying to repress religion, but that he's not allowing religion to repress him, essentially. You think that religion should be allowed to overshadow political matters, and in this case you are mistaken. Leaving the religious symbolism up would be succumbing to the pressure from religious zealots who think that it's their God given right to push their religion on absolutely everything because they believe it wholeheartedly (and circularly) to be right and actually influential to everything.

I'm not even an Obama fan, but in this case he did the right thing; I respect him for not giving in to religious pressures and sticking with the White House policy even though he likely knew how his request would be deliberately misinterpreted through various media channels. Can you imagine how bad it would look if he made a presidential speech with overt religious symbolism sitting right above his head? *That* seems to be sacrilegious to me, as if he's comparing himself to whatever abstraction you choose to define as God. At the very least, you have to consider what the wizards of political and media spin would do with that. Take a look at how out of proportion and context they took covering it up to be... You have to realize that it goes both ways. Leaving it there would be considered to be an indirect or even direct endorsement of Catholicism, and the rodeo resulting from that would be just as bad if not worse. Consistency and impartiality should be maintained, and as far as I'm concerned, offending a few self-righteous bible thumpers is more than worth avoiding the implications of linking presidential policy with any religious connotations.

At any rate, here's a better question: Do you think Obama would have still made the speech if the University had refused to follow the White House's request? If not, now *that* would be a fun rodeo.

A question in dispute.

He did raise the Dead:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090417/ap_ ... ead_return

When the president speaks, there should be no religious iconography visible anywhere, lest that be taken for an official endorsement of whatever religion's icon is displayed...

umm, have you ever heard of the serpration of church and state? Guess not. Obama makes no claims of being god, idk about the past admistration but the current one lacks the ego to do so.

Indeed. And it just looks better on camera.

Obama doesn't claim himself to be a god, but then again, the Daily Show doesn't claim to be a legitimate news source...

I agree with the separation of church and state arguments, though... Render unto Caesar...