Why is a pastor hosting political candidates?? (65)
shipoker55: There was a discussion hosted by Rick Warren, a California pastor of a Super Church, on CNN. I feel this is against all that we Americans stand for. It further alienated me, from both candidates, because they are pandering to the religious right. They both should have declined the invitation, and said religion must not be involved in American politics.
Below is a portion of a commentary posted today in Al Jazeera:
The fact that McCain and Obama's first joint appearance (not debate) was coordinated and hosted by an influential religious preacher speaks volumes about the influence of organised religion on politics in the US.
Politics in a bubble
Such theological/political journalism is unthinkable anywhere in Europe or in so-called democracies around the world. Calling one's enemy or their ideology or religion evil is the language normally used by such groups as al-Qaeda, not constitutional democracies.
If religious interviews were done with such fanfare and influence in a Muslim country, democratic or otherwise, western and especially US media would have made mockery of such an imposition of religious fundamentalism on political process.
For most outsiders, the US is in denial over its own "evil doing" around the world. Obama and McCain could see evil in Darfur but would not admit that the invasion and occupation of Iraq on false premises or for oil is no less an evil act.
To his credit, Obama broke out of the delusional discourse of the US as the-city-on-a-hill to underline the need for humility when confronting evil so that the US does not perpetrate its own evils.
But for some people around the world, it may be a bit late for that.
Alas. So, other than the flack I am going to get for reading Al Jazeers, what do you think? Or does it even matter to you??
Below is a portion of a commentary posted today in Al Jazeera:
The fact that McCain and Obama's first joint appearance (not debate) was coordinated and hosted by an influential religious preacher speaks volumes about the influence of organised religion on politics in the US.
Politics in a bubble
Such theological/political journalism is unthinkable anywhere in Europe or in so-called democracies around the world. Calling one's enemy or their ideology or religion evil is the language normally used by such groups as al-Qaeda, not constitutional democracies.
If religious interviews were done with such fanfare and influence in a Muslim country, democratic or otherwise, western and especially US media would have made mockery of such an imposition of religious fundamentalism on political process.
For most outsiders, the US is in denial over its own "evil doing" around the world. Obama and McCain could see evil in Darfur but would not admit that the invasion and occupation of Iraq on false premises or for oil is no less an evil act.
To his credit, Obama broke out of the delusional discourse of the US as the-city-on-a-hill to underline the need for humility when confronting evil so that the US does not perpetrate its own evils.
But for some people around the world, it may be a bit late for that.
Alas. So, other than the flack I am going to get for reading Al Jazeers, what do you think? Or does it even matter to you??
Sorry bud, but that's the perception that the outside world holds of your political system, rightly or wrongly. 94% will vote for one side or the other as they always do so the battle is concentrated on the 6% who seem to be extremists pro life or pro choice and it is these extremists who will dictate future US foreign policy. We in Europe find that very frightening indeed!
------ This thread is Archived ------
Personally...I believe in church and state remaining separate....especially when countries such as the U.S. and Canada are full of so many different denominations and even non-religious people...the government is there to represent the entire country....not just a select few.....the view of any religious group running the country and it's politicians only serves to widen the gaps that already exist...
------ This thread is Archived ------
Godsgift: Sorry bud, but that's the perception that the outside world holds of your political system, rightly or wrongly. 94% will vote for one side or the other as they always do so the battle is concentrated on the 6% who seem to be extremists pro life or pro choice and it is these extremists who will dictate future US foreign policy. We in Europe find that very frightening indeed!
I think you missed the question, or I didn't word it right. I was asking what people thought of a pastor holding these talks...not about the Al Jazeera article.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Hugz_n_Kissez: Personally...I believe in church and state remaining separate....especially when countries such as the U.S. and Canada are full of so many different denominations and even non-religious people...the government is there to represent the entire country....not just a select few.....the view of any religious group running the country and it's politicians only serves to widen the gaps that already exist...
My feelings, exactly!!
------ This thread is Archived ------
shipoker55: I think you missed the question, or I didn't word it right. I was asking what people thought of a pastor holding these talks...not about the Al Jazeera article.
My point is that the 6% are the church goers and that's why you'll never seperate church and state! The politicians rely on them! I agree that this is not good for democracy.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Morning Ship,
I personally found the venue less important than what was being said. I liked this "conversation" format, and also felt both candidates made a pretty good showing for themselves.
I personally found the venue less important than what was being said. I liked this "conversation" format, and also felt both candidates made a pretty good showing for themselves.
------ This thread is Archived ------
shipoker55: [/
b]
I read three foreign papers almost every day to get different perspectives on the news
b]
I read three foreign papers almost every day to get different perspectives on the news
You're like me...I read on-line...the local paper....and the Toronto paper and somewhere in between lies the truth.....
------ This thread is Archived ------
I think that we live in republican democracy, Ship. That in such a republican democarcy there are many forums and stages for both
political commentaries and for religious statements. They inner mix.
Consider Rev. Wright use of the Trinity Church altar for a moment.
Political or religous? In my opinion, the vast majority of what he laid out there was political, not even close to a church, religous or Christian
doctrine. Yet the Federal and other governments did not come into
and take him away for his sermons.
It has been that way since the start of the country, even. The court house of a town was usually surrounded by several Churchs. The politics of the day was often spoken at during the Sunday sermon.
Think about the entire temperance movement for a time. Originated in the Churchs, spread to the streets and then into halls of Congress. Made men gringe and cry, to see it happen......but with a evangilical righteous mission, the women of America stepped from those pews......and put a stop to making alchol in America for a long time.
What I find of interest here, is AlJeezera by the way. Here they have
a very large number of Clerics around the Islamic world.....that are preaching hatred for America......a political message, yes?.......and they
are brothered by two American candidates that meet in a Christian
Church? With both American Presidential Canididate that admitting to being Christian? In a country that is predominately Christian?
The think that while Al-Jeezera might have been troubled by that.
During that entire Q&A of the two, I bet neither mentioned hatred or
anger to the Islamic world or to Moslems in general. But the amount that Moslem clerics incite there followers to violence, is hardly ever mentioned by Al-Jeezera.
political commentaries and for religious statements. They inner mix.
Consider Rev. Wright use of the Trinity Church altar for a moment.
Political or religous? In my opinion, the vast majority of what he laid out there was political, not even close to a church, religous or Christian
doctrine. Yet the Federal and other governments did not come into
and take him away for his sermons.
It has been that way since the start of the country, even. The court house of a town was usually surrounded by several Churchs. The politics of the day was often spoken at during the Sunday sermon.
Think about the entire temperance movement for a time. Originated in the Churchs, spread to the streets and then into halls of Congress. Made men gringe and cry, to see it happen......but with a evangilical righteous mission, the women of America stepped from those pews......and put a stop to making alchol in America for a long time.
What I find of interest here, is AlJeezera by the way. Here they have
a very large number of Clerics around the Islamic world.....that are preaching hatred for America......a political message, yes?.......and they
are brothered by two American candidates that meet in a Christian
Church? With both American Presidential Canididate that admitting to being Christian? In a country that is predominately Christian?
The think that while Al-Jeezera might have been troubled by that.
During that entire Q&A of the two, I bet neither mentioned hatred or
anger to the Islamic world or to Moslems in general. But the amount that Moslem clerics incite there followers to violence, is hardly ever mentioned by Al-Jeezera.
------ This thread is Archived ------
rwantin: Morning Ship,
I personally found the venue less important than what was being said. I liked this "conversation" format, and also felt both candidates made a pretty good showing for themselves.
I personally found the venue less important than what was being said. I liked this "conversation" format, and also felt both candidates made a pretty good showing for themselves.
I did think the format was much better than the debate style. I have read Rick Warrens book and think he is a bright man. I just think the venue sent the wrong message about church and state
BTW, I frequently disagree with articles in Al Jazeera, but I think this one was on the money
------ This thread is Archived ------
ttom500: I think that we live in republican democracy, Ship. That in such a republican democarcy there are many forums and stages for both
political commentaries and for religious statements. They inner mix.
Consider Rev. Wright use of the Trinity Church altar for a moment.
Political or religous? In my opinion, the vast majority of what he laid out there was political, not even close to a church, religous or Christian
doctrine. Yet the Federal and other governments did not come into
and take him away for his sermons.
It has been that way since the start of the country, even. The court house of a town was usually surrounded by several Churchs. The politics of the day was often spoken at during the Sunday sermon.
Think about the entire temperance movement for a time. Originated in the Churchs, spread to the streets and then into halls of Congress. Made men gringe and cry, to see it happen......but with a evangilical righteous mission, the women of America stepped from those pews......and put a stop to making alchol in America for a long time.
What I find of interest here, is AlJeezera by the way. Here they have
a very large number of Clerics around the Islamic world.....that are preaching hatred for America......a political message, yes?.......and they
are brothered by two American candidates that meet in a Christian
Church? With both American Presidential Canididate that admitting to being Christian? In a country that is predominately Christian?
The think that while Al-Jeezera might have been troubled by that.
During that entire Q&A of the two, I bet neither mentioned hatred or
anger to the Islamic world or to Moslems in general. But the amount that Moslem clerics incite there followers to violence, is hardly ever mentioned by Al-Jeezera.
political commentaries and for religious statements. They inner mix.
Consider Rev. Wright use of the Trinity Church altar for a moment.
Political or religous? In my opinion, the vast majority of what he laid out there was political, not even close to a church, religous or Christian
doctrine. Yet the Federal and other governments did not come into
and take him away for his sermons.
It has been that way since the start of the country, even. The court house of a town was usually surrounded by several Churchs. The politics of the day was often spoken at during the Sunday sermon.
Think about the entire temperance movement for a time. Originated in the Churchs, spread to the streets and then into halls of Congress. Made men gringe and cry, to see it happen......but with a evangilical righteous mission, the women of America stepped from those pews......and put a stop to making alchol in America for a long time.
What I find of interest here, is AlJeezera by the way. Here they have
a very large number of Clerics around the Islamic world.....that are preaching hatred for America......a political message, yes?.......and they
are brothered by two American candidates that meet in a Christian
Church? With both American Presidential Canididate that admitting to being Christian? In a country that is predominately Christian?
The think that while Al-Jeezera might have been troubled by that.
During that entire Q&A of the two, I bet neither mentioned hatred or
anger to the Islamic world or to Moslems in general. But the amount that Moslem clerics incite there followers to violence, is hardly ever mentioned by Al-Jeezera.
I'm sure it's always been the same way...BUT hows that been working?????
There may not have been church discussions taking place in that format...BUT the underlying message is the candidate who gets in will bow to the most backers....and that means changes in laws etc according to the churches wishes....it's not about what is...it's about what will be....at least what lies beneath the fact that the church is even bothering to get involved.....that doesn't work in multi-cultural countries who need a government who represents the interests of everyone in the country....not to mention there is still the old belief that America was founded on Christianity....when that's not sooooo....there were other denominations present as well....I see it as basicly just another domination thing and superiority thing....
------ This thread is Archived ------
***What I find of interest here, is AlJeezera by the way. Here they have
a very large number of Clerics around the Islamic world.....that are preaching hatred for America......a political message, yes?.......and they
are brothered by two American candidates that meet in a Christian
Church? With both American Presidential Canididate that admitting to being Christian? In a country that is predominately Christian?
The think that while Al-Jeezera might have been troubled by that.
During that entire Q&A of the two, I bet neither mentioned hatred or
anger to the Islamic world or to Moslems in general. But the amount that Moslem clerics incite there followers to violence, is hardly ever mentioned by Al-Jeezera.
Al-Jazeera, has no clerics. It is a news organization just as CNN and Fox is. I read this paper on a daily basis. They frequently blast Muslim extremist. I feel they have a obligation to point out that in a country that preaches seperation of church and state...the two candidates for office are bowing to presentations of the Christian far right.
a very large number of Clerics around the Islamic world.....that are preaching hatred for America......a political message, yes?.......and they
are brothered by two American candidates that meet in a Christian
Church? With both American Presidential Canididate that admitting to being Christian? In a country that is predominately Christian?
The think that while Al-Jeezera might have been troubled by that.
During that entire Q&A of the two, I bet neither mentioned hatred or
anger to the Islamic world or to Moslems in general. But the amount that Moslem clerics incite there followers to violence, is hardly ever mentioned by Al-Jeezera.
Al-Jazeera, has no clerics. It is a news organization just as CNN and Fox is. I read this paper on a daily basis. They frequently blast Muslim extremist. I feel they have a obligation to point out that in a country that preaches seperation of church and state...the two candidates for office are bowing to presentations of the Christian far right.
------ This thread is Archived ------
shipoker55: ***What I find of interest here, is AlJeezera by the way. Here they have
a very large number of Clerics around the Islamic world.....that are preaching hatred for America......a political message, yes?.......and they
are brothered by two American candidates that meet in a Christian
Church? With both American Presidential Canididate that admitting to being Christian? In a country that is predominately Christian?
The think that while Al-Jeezera might have been troubled by that.
During that entire Q&A of the two, I bet neither mentioned hatred or
anger to the Islamic world or to Moslems in general. But the amount that Moslem clerics incite there followers to violence, is hardly ever mentioned by Al-Jeezera.
Al-Jazeera, has no clerics. It is a news organization just as CNN and Fox is. I read this paper on a daily basis. They frequently blast Muslim extremist. I feel they have a obligation to point out that in a country that preaches seperation of church and state...the two candidates for office are bowing to presentations of the Christian far right.
a very large number of Clerics around the Islamic world.....that are preaching hatred for America......a political message, yes?.......and they
are brothered by two American candidates that meet in a Christian
Church? With both American Presidential Canididate that admitting to being Christian? In a country that is predominately Christian?
The think that while Al-Jeezera might have been troubled by that.
During that entire Q&A of the two, I bet neither mentioned hatred or
anger to the Islamic world or to Moslems in general. But the amount that Moslem clerics incite there followers to violence, is hardly ever mentioned by Al-Jeezera.
Al-Jazeera, has no clerics. It is a news organization just as CNN and Fox is. I read this paper on a daily basis. They frequently blast Muslim extremist. I feel they have a obligation to point out that in a country that preaches seperation of church and state...the two candidates for office are bowing to presentations of the Christian far right.
I should have stated it like this.
What I find of interest here, Al-Jeereza being a Islamic media outlet.
Has many Islamic Clerics to report on that preach hatred for America.....and that is a political message, yes?
I read Muslim websites on occassion, and have a not problem with you reading them as well.
But why the interest (of a Islamic media outlet) if two Christian politicians have a Christian church as a venue? Heck Ship, many of the Mosque have been used for weapons and explosive storage facilities around the Islamic world. That is even a step beyond being political into being militaristic and terroristic. How often does Al-Jeereza talk about that?
But the reason that Al-Jeezera does make comment is in this war of cultures and believes.....showing the US Political canididates to be political incorrect or not prescribing to a determined norm (separation of Church and State)...is a means to show hypocracy.
I say what it the big deal? Neither attacked Islam with their comment
made such rash statements that America would be total Christian country under their Administration or said that minority religions would not be tolerated by them.
So it get down to a strict inpretation of the Constitution. Neither as canididates are in office of President at this time. They have full rights as any other American to assemble in a house of worship and they have full rights of speech. Seems to me....that if you say.....you cannot meet and speak here.....you are treading into the freedom of speech right that they have.
But having clicked all that out. Another issue...is they went there to speak of their faith.....that was the central topic of the Q&A (which I did not see, but understand that it to be). What better place than a Church of a Christian faith? Also are not Christians a segment of our society and country and have right to Q&A canididate on the issue of
faith? The canididates have met with corporations, with unions, with VFW (Veterans groups), with the National Urban League (a ethnic Black group) with many other affliations and organizations......why should a Christian church be off limits?
Maybe our friends at Al-Jeezera did not like the idea that both Canididates had a Christian faith to testify of, that they would freely speak of it?
------ This thread is Archived ------
shipoker55: ***What I find of interest here, is AlJeezera by the way. Here they have
a very large number of Clerics around the Islamic world.....that are preaching hatred for America......a political message, yes?.......and they
are brothered by two American candidates that meet in a Christian
Church? With both American Presidential Canididate that admitting to being Christian? In a country that is predominately Christian?
The think that while Al-Jeezera might have been troubled by that.
During that entire Q&A of the two, I bet neither mentioned hatred or
anger to the Islamic world or to Moslems in general. But the amount that Moslem clerics incite there followers to violence, is hardly ever mentioned by Al-Jeezera.
Al-Jazeera, has no clerics. It is a news organization just as CNN and Fox is. I read this paper on a daily basis. They frequently blast Muslim extremist. I feel they have a obligation to point out that in a country that preaches seperation of church and state...the two candidates for office are bowing to presentations of the Christian far right.
According to Fox news there are 60 million christians in America.And Iam sure most vote,I think it was more about finding out just where they both should on issues,morally.I only heard one question that asked them what their personal relationship with Christ was.I noticed to that Obama would say I believe this,But.On several questions he had more than one answer.Since Warren was good friends with both and both got the same questions,I didnt see anything wrong with it.a very large number of Clerics around the Islamic world.....that are preaching hatred for America......a political message, yes?.......and they
are brothered by two American candidates that meet in a Christian
Church? With both American Presidential Canididate that admitting to being Christian? In a country that is predominately Christian?
The think that while Al-Jeezera might have been troubled by that.
During that entire Q&A of the two, I bet neither mentioned hatred or
anger to the Islamic world or to Moslems in general. But the amount that Moslem clerics incite there followers to violence, is hardly ever mentioned by Al-Jeezera.
Al-Jazeera, has no clerics. It is a news organization just as CNN and Fox is. I read this paper on a daily basis. They frequently blast Muslim extremist. I feel they have a obligation to point out that in a country that preaches seperation of church and state...the two candidates for office are bowing to presentations of the Christian far right.
------ This thread is Archived ------
I believe they should go to churches when invited, but to use a national news outlet to pander to the religious right, is just not acceptable. Also, I would have no problem
with a leader asking those questions. But a religious leader getting involved in political debate, reeks of destoying the wall of separation
Again, they have the right to do this, and I wouldn't want to deny them that right. But I also have the right to voice my opinion of it. And I think it is in poor taste and it scares me. When the religious right controls our government...how far are we from a kholmeini mindset (sp). The religious right are free peoples enemies. JMO, of course
with a leader asking those questions. But a religious leader getting involved in political debate, reeks of destoying the wall of separation
Again, they have the right to do this, and I wouldn't want to deny them that right. But I also have the right to voice my opinion of it. And I think it is in poor taste and it scares me. When the religious right controls our government...how far are we from a kholmeini mindset (sp). The religious right are free peoples enemies. JMO, of course
------ This thread is Archived ------
shipoker55: I believe they should go to churches when invited, but to use a national news outlet to pander to the religious right, is just not acceptable. Also, I would have no problem
with a leader asking those questions. But a religious leader getting involved in political debate, reeks of destoying the wall of separation
Again, they have the right to do this, and I wouldn't want to deny them that right. But I also have the right to voice my opinion of it. And I think it is in poor taste and it scares me. When the religious right controls our government...how far are we from a kholmeini mindset (sp). The religious right are free peoples enemies. JMO, of course
with a leader asking those questions. But a religious leader getting involved in political debate, reeks of destoying the wall of separation
Again, they have the right to do this, and I wouldn't want to deny them that right. But I also have the right to voice my opinion of it. And I think it is in poor taste and it scares me. When the religious right controls our government...how far are we from a kholmeini mindset (sp). The religious right are free peoples enemies. JMO, of course
I agree because what if that debate what put on by Islamists?????
Then would it be such a non-matter...or would people assume that suddenly the U.S. is going to be taken over by Islam and that Islamists were now going to control the government????
I don't see a difference....
------ This thread is Archived ------
Hugz_n_Kissez: I agree because what if that debate what put on by Islamists?????Then would it be such a non-matter...or would people assume that suddenly the U.S. is going to be taken over by Islam and that Islamists were now going to control the government????I don't see a difference....
*was...
------ This thread is Archived ------
shipoker55: I believe they should go to churches when invited, but to use a national news outlet to pander to the religious right, is just not acceptable. Also, I would have no problem
with a leader asking those questions. But a religious leader getting involved in political debate, reeks of destoying the wall of separation
Again, they have the right to do this, and I wouldn't want to deny them that right. But I also have the right to voice my opinion of it. And I think it is in poor taste and it scares me. When the religious right controls our government...how far are we from a kholmeini mindset (sp). The religious right are free peoples enemies. JMO, of course
with a leader asking those questions. But a religious leader getting involved in political debate, reeks of destoying the wall of separation
Again, they have the right to do this, and I wouldn't want to deny them that right. But I also have the right to voice my opinion of it. And I think it is in poor taste and it scares me. When the religious right controls our government...how far are we from a kholmeini mindset (sp). The religious right are free peoples enemies. JMO, of course
Ship this country is so fractured to its political positions and religous believes that any one group.....religious right or far left or mid road moderate...non of them are going to have majority to calim control or power. None of them are strong enough to consolidate the power and
control like Kholmeini did in Iran. They may have the appearance....and even great numbers...like the 60 million Christian voters mentioned in the earlier post.
But......those 60 million Christian voters are split between McCain and Obama ......so how could either canidate gain a advantage with a mere Q&A? Or how could the 60 million Christain voters ever honestly say to either canididate, 'we fully support you. now do our bidding'?
You have a right to state your opinions on the matter, Ship. I just don't see the danger and threat of a Q&A in a Church. Block voting and block representation by canidates......is there a big difference between that and representing your of the majority of constuients? Or having a majority of constuients support your positions?
------ This thread is Archived ------
Hugz_n_Kissez: Personally...I believe in church and state remaining separate....especially when countries such as the U.S. and Canada are full of so many different denominations and even non-religious people...the government is there to represent the entire country....not just a select few.....the view of any religious group running the country and it's politicians only serves to widen the gaps that already exist...
couldnt agree more.here also we have ppl of all religions n we have seen the dastardly consequences of mixin religion n politics........we r a secular country but alas! we need to understand the meanin of the word...no affilation of the state for any religion.------ This thread is Archived ------
Hugz_n_Kissez: No that's not what I am saying at all..I'm saying that a government needs to be all inclusive as you say...and represent everyone...There is no breach of the Constitution...in the debate...I am saying the mindset of America being Christianized and based on Christianity...is where the church gets the idea that is is superior and should have laws etc based on it's own faith...discounting every other faith...or non-faith which discounts a lot of people....government needs to be based on the best decisions for the country....not based on someone elses belief system....Freedom of speech is a great right to have...but I am saying the reality is...as seen with the Bush administration...when an administration is backed by any church group....they seem to be very influential in a lot of things that might benefit them but not the rest of the country!!!!!!!!Should one make decisions based on beliefs or based on sound logic...reasoning and data of how it will benefit the country and people as a whole?????
Hugs, we are a Christain country. Most of the elected officals in the country hold a Christian faith. They will reflect on a government decisions or vote with that faith. Some to a high degree and other to a lesser degree. It some ways, it is that simple.
Believes come into it more than you would like to know. I had submitted earlier a NASA proposal on a project. On the follow question from NASA....they asked if it was 'my belief' that this should be done.
It was a standard NASA form. Why do they put the question of 'belief' into it? Because they want to give grant funding to people that are
dedicated to the proposal and purpose that the fund are being approriated for. If they are going to fund you, they want to a degree your heart and soul into that project.
Belief touches and has impact on just about everything one serious does in life. Asking a politician to abate his/her believes while in office is like asking them to walk to the council room blind. What I hear you are really saying, Hugs....is that we can PC our government to the point where their decisions don't reflect thier beliefs or ours.
I would be asking the government for at least $12-14 million grant to do this NASA project. Do you want the government to grant to a person that is 'kind of committed' to his project? or to one that is 'fully committed' to it? The same for a person in office. Do you want elected official 'kind of committed' to holding the office. Or ones that are 'fully committed' to doing the work? Beliefs play a major role in the commitments we take on. And the intensitity, dedication and determination that we place to them.jmo
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
The Real Stormy Story
Trump on Trial
The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
See It All The Time
Say Anything Again
Who will be The Last Person To Post... VERSION FOUR
beauty of the heart
If Our Profiles Were Truly Honest
What happened to CS while i was away.. (Long time)
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Stats for this Thread
2,018 Views
64 Comments
Created: Aug 2008
Last Viewed: Apr 21
Last Commented: Aug 2008
0 Likes
Related Forums
- The Real Stormy Story
- Trump on Trial
- The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
- Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
- See It All The Time
- Say Anything Again
- Who will be The Last Person To Post... VERSION FOUR
- beauty of the heart
- If Our Profiles Were Truly Honest
- What happened to CS while i was away.. (Long time)
Below is a portion of a commentary posted today in Al Jazeera:
The fact that McCain and Obama's first joint appearance (not debate) was coordinated and hosted by an influential religious preacher speaks volumes about the influence of organised religion on politics in the US.
Politics in a bubble
Such theological/political journalism is unthinkable anywhere in Europe or in so-called democracies around the world. Calling one's enemy or their ideology or religion evil is the language normally used by such groups as al-Qaeda, not constitutional democracies.
If religious interviews were done with such fanfare and influence in a Muslim country, democratic or otherwise, western and especially US media would have made mockery of such an imposition of religious fundamentalism on political process.
For most outsiders, the US is in denial over its own "evil doing" around the world. Obama and McCain could see evil in Darfur but would not admit that the invasion and occupation of Iraq on false premises or for oil is no less an evil act.
To his credit, Obama broke out of the delusional discourse of the US as the-city-on-a-hill to underline the need for humility when confronting evil so that the US does not perpetrate its own evils.
But for some people around the world, it may be a bit late for that.
Alas.
So, other than the flack I am going to get for reading Al Jazeers, what do you think? Or does it even matter to you??