Welcome to the forum Bennu!
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Who are you addressing?
Nonsense. Lebanon, Turkey, Yemen and Iraq are all examples of democratic states within the Middle-East, and there are many more (such as Iran and Bahrain) which incorporate democratic tendencies into their governing structure.
Representative democracy is certainly less prevalent then in, say, Latin America, but it is also certainly not the case that every country in the region bar Israel is uniformly autocratic. To pretend otherwise is to indulge in simplified inaccuracies.
It really doesn't matter what views Obama's pastor has. Here in america we have people who hold all kinds of views, and we like them, often, anyway. I love my mother, for example, but I disagree with her views on many things. Yet I see no reason that I should need to go around "disavowing" things that she says. And I would take offense at anyone who suggested to me that I should.
My position on this is not focusing on Reverent Wright's views. As a supporter of Romney's former campaign, I am sensitive to questioning one's religious beliefs. What bothers me is Obama denying he knew of Wright's statements. They had a close relationship for 20 years. Wright's comments were very public and, yes, noisy. How could Obama have not been aware of them? This is why I'm questioning his honesty. He is now vehemently denouncing Wright's statements. If they are so objectionable to Obama NOW, then why weren't they objectionable before?
Wright was let go from serving in the campaign just a day or two ago. It looks like Obama is trying to cover up or make excuses for something he had to have been aware of long ago.
Again, it's not the Reverend's views, it's Obama denying he knew about them.
I don't believe it's the views themselves that are really the issue, here. I think it's the incemniary way in which the pastor voices them. I am disappointed in Barrack Obama now "disavowing" his pastor's speeches. It was sufficient for him to simply state that he does not agree with everything his pastor believes, and to leave it at that. We all know this is just a political attempt at smearing a candidate, so none of us would think any less of Barrack, and in fact I would have thought more of him, if he'd simply cut this nonsense off right at the beginning and then refused to be drawn into it again. The more he tries to "explain" what does not need to be explained, the more this nonsense will not go away.My position on this is not focusing on Reverent Wright's views. As a supporter of Romney's former campaign, I am sensitive to questioning one's religious beliefs. What bothers me is Obama denying he knew of Wright's statements. They had a close relationship for 20 years. Wright's comments were very public and, yes, noisy. How could Obama have not been aware of them? This is why I'm questioning his honesty. He is now vehemently denouncing Wright's statements. If they are so objectionable to Obama NOW, then why weren't they objectionable before?
Wright was let go from serving in the campaign just a day or two ago. It looks like Obama is trying to cover up or make excuses for something he had to have been aware of long ago.
Again, it's not the Reverend's views, it's Obama denying he knew about them.
No one is 100% certain, but a common theory is that humans first contracted the virus in Africa, from eating the meat of a monkey infected with SIV (Simian Immunodeficiency Virus), which acts in monkeys the way HIV acts in humans.
It's not a matter of 'disavowing', there's an implication that if Obama has been attending this church for twenty years (almost his ENTIRE adult life), then he needs DOES need to distance himself from it (which he has DONE, Rev. Wright resigned from the campaign, and Obama did "disavow" the things he said). The fact is, this is a church with very radical views (which doesn't make them bad). These views cannot help but reflect on Obama's politics.It really doesn't matter what views Obama's pastor has. Here in america we have people who hold all kinds of views, and we like them, often, anyway. I love my mother, for example, but I disagree with her views on many things. Yet I see no reason that I should need to go around "disavowing" things that she says. And I would take offense at anyone who suggested to me that I should.
He doesn't need to do any such thing. If we want to know what Barrack Obama thinks about any issue, all we have to do is ask him. We can also look at the books he's written, and the history of his behavior. His pastor's speeches have nothing to do with anything. This is just a stupid attempt to smear him by association.It's not a matter of 'disavowing', there's an implication that if Obama has been attending this church for twenty years (almost his ENTIRE adult life), then he needs DOES need to distance himself from it (which he has DONE, Rev. Wright resigned from the campaign, and Obama did "disavow" the things he said). The fact is, this is a church with very radical views (which doesn't make them bad). These views cannot help but reflect on Obama's politics.
He doesn't need to do any such thing. If we want to know what Barrack Obama thinks about any issue, all we have to do is ask him. We can also look at the books he's written, and the history of his behavior. His pastor's speeches have nothing to do with anything. This is just a stupid attempt to smear him by association.
If John McCain attended an extreme church that preached bigotry against homosexuals and blacks, we'd certainly hear about it.He doesn't need to do any such thing. If we want to know what Barrack Obama thinks about any issue, all we have to do is ask him. We can also look at the books he's written, and the history of his behavior. His pastor's speeches have nothing to do with anything. This is just a stupid attempt to smear him by association.
We hear about all sorts of nonsense. Especially during political campaigns. The important thing is to use our heads, and to see who is saying what and why they're saying it.If John McCain attended an extreme church that preached bigotry against homosexuals and blacks, we'd certainly hear about it.
I agree. I think what's most important that people are saying right now is HOW Obama is responding to this situation. I think the things that he is saying are most telling.We hear about all sorts of nonsense. Especially during political campaigns. The important thing is to use our heads, and to see who is saying what and why they're saying it.
. Did we see the real Mrs. Obama in her recent controversial comment, or not?
We have a right to examine this before choosing a president.
And McCain is any better?
Honestly, you throw the mud at someone but refuse to throw it at your politician of choice.
He is full of anger, not bigotry. And black men of his generation have plenty of reasons to be so angry. What is particularly upsetting about this is that it's being used as a way to play the "race card". There are plenty of white racists out there who are just looking for an excuse to dismiss Obama as a 'black crusader' like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton, and so also dismiss him as a legitimate candidate for president. By tying those angry words of his pastor to him, somehow, they will have what they need to do exactly that.Since Obama is relatively new on the scene, compared to the other candidates, we are just getting to know who he is. Part of the process is to look at what has influenced him.
He says the two most influential people in his life are his wife and his pastor. Did we see the real Mrs. Obama in her recent controversial comment, or not? If Reverend Wright is such a big influence--how could one not be concerned? He is full of bigotry towards whites and America.
We have a right to examine this before choosing a president.