Is there necessarily hatred involved? I don’t think so.

In the dogmatic conceptualization embraced by one hell of a lot of Christian faiths, the wages of sin is death and we are judged as nations as well as individuals. So when someone indicates that America is not living up to their conceptualization of Biblical standards, and their conceptualization also entails damnation for those who sin against God, then this actually is a religious criticism. “Love the Sinner, Hate the Sin,” takes on a whole different meaning when the concept of collective sin (such as an ungodly democracy) is introduced. It’s the same underlying concept behind those bumper stickers that read “America, Bless God!” Is the message so different just because one exhorts us to act differently and the other decries how we currently act (again, under the conceptualization of Biblical standards of conduct as held by the speaker)? I would argue that, in this sense, Wright’s position is actually more theologically coherent.

In any event, Obama has distanced himself from these remarks, so I’m engaging in this discussion merely to point out the wisdom of excluding religious tests for public office, and the inherent hypocrisies that occur when we try to use religious associative guilt in politics.

There’s a huge difference between religously inspired critcism and religously inspired hatred for America. As flawed as this country is, it is a safe and mostly tolerant country. That in it itself, in my opinion, makes America a holy place, despite its gaping moral and other flaws. If the preacher had merely critcized America, I would agree with your dismissive rational. However, this hatred is uncalled for and Obama should distance himself from this.

However, you point is well taken…

Just a little suggestion about tactics in your ongoing verbal fusillade with msnbcbser: “Never try to teach a pig to sing – it wastes your time and annoys the pig.”

You must be Karl Rove in disguise!

The ‘wrong headed’ phrase was Obama’s aimed against Geraldine’s statement after she had a conversation about the Clinton campaign remarked about his ‘advantaged blackness’, spoken freely, which was obviously not well thought out, and which was then taken out of context for all to see.

It had nothing to do with religion.

Personally, I see your destructive remarks aimed toward divisiveness as a Democratic Party issue powered by the soured relationship between Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy which escalates more than any currently existing on the bases of ‘woman/man’ and/or ‘black/white’.

Forget Republicans.

Perhaps our leaders in the Democratic Party, including Al Gore, should step up before June.

The McCain religious supporters that concern you are practicing the age old right to call another man’s religion wrong headed.

The Obama religious supporter that is all over the news tonight hates America and more importantly hates whites. Hating our country is permissable but stupid, and hating whites is just plain old RACISM.

By the way, Rev. Wright is still an OBAMA CAMPAIGN religious leader. When is Obama going to tell him to get out of his campaign and even more importantly, WHY did Obama bring his kids to church to listen to this lunatic preach his hate? WHY didn’t Obama walk out the first Sunday 20 years ago?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xqNbZKIQUs

btw, I was in school with Carly, Carlton, as she was know then
- before she became a big deal and before she was taken down at HP.
She looks great!

You may have your opinions, but you don’t show any sign of being opinionated much less of being a blowhard!

On the contrary, you are one of the posters here whose posts I always try to read and always enjoy. Intelligent, nuanced and perceptive.

I do wish Gore would run again however.

…as an occasional campaign body-man, I’ve seen more church services and seen a wider variety of preachers than most. And I can say with some certainty that every one of them has said something I disagreed with, or made a statement I found intemperate or ill-founded, or declared the Bible to say something I’m pretty sure wasn’t in there, or called another religion and its adherents (often including me) something pretty damn stupid.

The problem with associating campaigns with faith leaders is that just about everyone in the world has a different conception of faith. And like every other person on earth, they all have some flaw in their logic and reasoning at some point. So while we can score points against a candidate by citing their faith supporters–the late Jerry Falwell, Jeremiah Wright, John Hagee, Al Sharpton, Pat Robertson, Donnie McClurkin, etc.–it’s really no different than the guilt by association that comes when people criticize candidates for having the support of Barbara Streisand or Sean Penn. It’s a sideshow, and it’s little more than an entertaining distraction for the guys who have 24 hours of cable time to fill.

Okay, thus spake the opinionated blowhard.

Well, surprise, I see there were about 25 direct lines on McCain’s association with Rev. Hagee and only about 6 direct lines on Obama’s association with Rev. Wright.

Shouldn’t this have a different title?