Well, who knows? Who can say? It seems the standards of the fundie zealots for gauging Mr. Obama are so purist-based that they'd accept nothing from him short of his teleporting himself across the country then transporting himself to the Moon and back, verified (partially) by Hubble Telescope observations. Even then, they'd probably write it off as "Satan's work" or some such malarkey. But this brings up exactly what they require for a man to prove himself to them. We know they accept nothing from atheists, who reject any form or propitiations to any deity and that includes to Jesus Christ - acknowledging him as a special human being and nothing more.
Anyway, my point is that evidently on Tuesday, Mr. Obama (according to our local rag): "oozed his love and respect for Jesus at his second annual Easter prayer breakfast Tuesday at the White House".
The editorial, in The Colorado Springs Gazette, went on to quote Obama as saying:
“As busy as we are, as many tasks as pile up, during this season, we are reminded that there is something about the resurrection ... of Our Savior Jesus Christ that puts everything else in perspective,”
Not that I personally agree with any of this codswallop, and the prez is certainly entitled to his own phantasms and delusions, but what I want to know is whether the radical fundagelical Right will now cut him some slack? Will they at least concede he is a "saved" Christian as he professes love and acknowledgement of his "Savior" or will they continue to direct a ferocious, uncompromising hatred toward him....dismissing anything he says as invalid. And, if they do that, then what is their take on atheists who pronounce that Obama is totally deluded? Both forms of condemnation can't be justified! If they come down against us for being "anti-salvation" they can't do the same for Obama, who has not only gone on the record as per his devotion, but has it in print.
And if these zealots insist Obama is "playing at Christianity" and is "really a Muslim", then what exactly would they require of him to demonstrate his sincerity? A public baptism by Rev. Billy Graham? Inquiring minds really want to know!
According to the editorial, Obama "also recounted Christ’s march to Calvary, the crucifixion and the resurrection. He spoke of an “unfathomable grace” on the part of Jesus, for assuming the sins of the world." It’s a grace, he said, that “calls me to reflect, and it calls me to pray.” He also credited his wife and children for helping him to maintain perspective but said Scripture guides him even more.
Get that, heartless anti-Obama fanatics? Scripture, i.e. the BIBLE, guides him even more! Never mind that we (nonbelievers) feel sorry for the guy, we want to know what the radical Right fundies perceive. Or, maybe they will want to check which Bible he uses, and - if not the holier-than-anything KJV- he gets no marks. He isn't "good enough", or "holy enough" because he still isn't doing it their way, or following their explicit path.
Can't anyone see or perceive that this sort of recalcitrance is exactly the argument as to religion's basic deficiency and divisiveness, which ought to have persuaded the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals that the Freedom From Religion Foundation had a legitimate case and NOT a "nuisance lawsuit"? The court wrote that Obama’s Day of Prayer “does not require any private person to do anything — or for that matter to take any action in response to what the President proclaims.”
Maybe. But the fact remains it is divisive because in this god-addicted, and saturated society (at least), one of the litmus tests used to judge character will be investment in god-ism, sanctimony and prayer. And so long as a majority comply like sheep, whether for political or genuine religious reasons, the minority will be held in contempt - even if that isn't openly conveyed. So, rather than respect the individual's choice not to participate (which is what "freedom from religion" really means) we will find that idiotic hacks like the Gazette's editors will insist there's "no freedom from religion".
The irony is that Obama's evidently passionate and sincere embrace of his Savior will be looked on by other religious antagonists as mere posturing or pretense, and hence yet another instance of religious discord will be manifest. Maybe we ought to just bear these simple words of Thomas Jefferson in mind:
""I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct its exercises, its discipline, or its doctrines; nor of the religious societies, that the General Government should be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among them."
- Letter to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:429
No comments:
Post a Comment