Some of you really need to read this speech by Obama

[incapsulated]

To understand what he is trying to do when he speaks about faith and poltics. It's really not what you fear.

I can't repost the whole thing, although it is well worth reading in it's entirety. If only to appreciate the thoughtfulness of the man, his views on this issue aside.

It was because of these newfound understandings that I was finally able to walk down the aisle of Trinity United Church of Christ on 95th Street in the Southside of Chicago one day and affirm my Christian faith....

That's a path that has been shared by millions upon millions of Americans - evangelicals, Catholics, Protestants, Jews and Muslims alike; some since birth, others at certain turning points in their lives. It is not something they set apart from the rest of their beliefs and values. In fact, it is often what drives their beliefs and their values.

And that is why that, if we truly hope to speak to people where they're at - to communicate our hopes and values in a way that's relevant to their own - then as progressives, we cannot abandon the field of religious discourse.

Because when we ignore the debate about what it means to be a good Christian or Muslim or Jew; when we discuss religion only in the negative sense of where or how it should not be practiced, rather than in the positive sense of what it tells us about our obligations towards one another; when we shy away from religious venues and religious broadcasts because we assume that we will be unwelcome - others will fill the vacuum, those with the most insular views of faith, or those who cynically use religion to justify partisan ends.

In other words, if we don't reach out to evangelical Christians and other religious Americans and tell them what we stand for, then the Jerry Falwells and Pat Robertsons and Alan Keyeses will continue to hold sway.

More fundamentally, the discomfort of some progressives with any hint of religion has often prevented us from effectively addressing issues in moral terms. Some of the problem here is rhetorical - if we scrub language of all religious content, we forfeit the imagery and terminology through which millions of Americans understand both their personal morality and social justice.

Imagine Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address without reference to "the judgments of the Lord." Or King's I Have a Dream speech without references to "all of God's children." Their summoning of a higher truth helped inspire what had seemed impossible, and move the nation to embrace a common destiny.

http://obama.senate.gov/speech/060628-call_to_renewal/

[SaveElmer]

1. On this issue Obama is correct...

And is being unfairly attacked...

[Colobo]

14. Obama/Elmer 08?

:)

[redqueen]

2. Thanks for posting this... it's needed.

I don't know that it'll get the attention of those who it's aimed at... but worth a shot!

[incapsulated]

3. It's always worth a shot, I guess, heh

I really do understand the discomfort some have with all this. Those who aren't opposed under any circumstance, who will never, ever accept this, I doubt they will care. But those merely concerned or troubled, they really shouldn't be.

Honestly, Obama was the first politician I can remember who addressed "non believers" in a major speech, as part of the whole that makes up this country.

[sandnsea]

4. And this CBN interview

"My intention was to contrast the heated partisan rhetoric of a distinct minority of Christian leaders with the vast majority of Evangelical Christians - conservatives included - who believe that hate has no place in our politics. When you have pastors and television pundits who appear to explicitly coordinate with one political party; when you're implying that your fellow Americans are traitors, terrorist sympathizers or akin to the devil himself; then I think you're attempting to hijack the faith of those who follow you for your own personal or political ends."

http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/204017.aspx

[Goblinmonger]

5. Hate to be "that guy" but....

isn't he basically saying that morality comes from religion only? Isn't that pretty shitty? Makes me want to tell him to fuck off.

[incapsulated]

6. No

He is saying that for millions of Americans, their sense of morality and social justice is tied to their faith. And to ignore this is to give the mic to the extremists who will use that kind of rhetoric to divide and harm.

If instead the majority of Americans was made up of atheists who form their values from their sense of logic and reason, would it be equally unacceptable to use their language? Especially if there was a loud and popular group of crazy atheists using it to cause harm to the country?

[Goblinmonger]

7. A couple things

1. he is not talking about religious in this sentence. He is talking about the country. He says that without religion, we cannot address moral terms. That seems clear to me.

More fundamentally, the discomfort of some progressives with any hint of religion has often prevented us from effectively addressing issues in moral terms.

2. When has anyone ever advocated scrubbing language of all religious content. Obama is building strawmen of angry atheists that just don't exist.

if we scrub language of all religious content, we forfeit the imagery and terminology through which millions of Americans understand both their personal morality and social justice.

The more I look at this quotation, the less I like it.

[incapsulated]

8. Uh...

"When has anyone ever advocated scrubbing language of all religious content"

For politicians? Campaigns? On DU, every day.

Edit to add, he means for those who ARE religious and find their morality stemming from their faith, at least in part, not that everyone does or should. Should they be left out of the discussion? Should Obama not talk to them, in ways that they understand? Especially when they are the majority in this country?

[Goblinmonger]

9. He's not talking exclusively about polticians and campaigns

as is evidenced by his choice of MLK as an example. He is talking in general. And, to me, it smacks of the "religion is the source of morals" canard.

[Odin2005]

10. Methinks you are being way, way, oversensitive, here.

And are putting intentions in Obama's head he doesn't actually have. All he's saying that for many Americans their moral beleifs are tied to their faith and to ignore or demean them because of that is stupid and only drives them towards the Christo-fascists.

[Goblinmonger]

13. But that's no the words he's using

the only thing I have to judge what he is thinking is the words he chooses to use (and do be so obtuse to think he isn't choosing his words very carefully because he is way too good of a speech writer for that). And the words he is using, as shown above, indicate what I am saying.

[incapsulated]

11. MLK *was* a poltical figure

Unless the leader of the most important civil rights movement in the United States was Joe Anybody.

[Goblinmonger]

12. He was Joe Anybody

He was not elected. He was not bound by the Constitution in regard to the 1st Amendment. He was political but not governmental.