As a Congregationalist, Obama belongs to one of the only decent branches of Christianity in the entire world. For example, they openly embrace gays and give them no hateful rhetoric. However, now Obama is touring the South and catering to those who think it would be fine to stone certain groups of people to death.
Barack, if you are actually about Jesus, which has next to nothing to do with Christianity, then you will be proud to have evangelicals as your enemy, as they are the enemy to all decent forms of mankind.
2007-10-22 04:28:26 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
do you think he even cares your alive?
he could care less
Jesus cares about you and hes God not a fake politician
2007-10-22 04:43:43 · answer #1 · answered by jesussaves 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
So you want Christians to "embrace" homosexuality, but then you turn and say to Obama to "be proud to have evangelicals as your enemy." Then you say that we "are the enemy to all decent forms of mankind." Sounds like as well as being a hypocrite, you are promoting hatred to the Christians. Peace.
2007-10-22 04:41:10 · answer #2 · answered by dooder 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its obvious the you have preconcieved notions about Christianity.
No branches of the faith should hate anyone, or even point the finger.
I always like to quote Jesus on this type of circumstances. When the woman was caught in adultery he didn't condemn her. But he said, "Go and sin no more." You cannot expect to be content with your faith if you are living a double life. Gays can have a relationship with God just as anyone, but not continuing to participate in sinful behavior.
A church should seek to heal the sinner of the sin, not to accept it as normal.
Unfortunately, churches are saying "it's okay to be_______" .......fill in the blank.
Church is for sinners that want to be healed, of which I am chief.
2007-10-22 04:44:41 · answer #3 · answered by bacha2_33461 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The generalization that all evangelicals hate gays and are enemies to all mankind is completely untrue. Just because some members of that denomination have spoken foolishly and misrepresented that religion doesn't mean it holds true for the rest of evangelicals.
2007-10-22 04:33:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Unfortunately, in your increasingly theocratic nation, unless a candidate at least pays lip service to the fervent desires of the evangelical Christians, he doesn't stand a chance of getting into office.
The entire process you guys use to pick your leader has become so screwy that anyone who is actually capable of winning the election should be automatically disqualified from being able to take office.
2007-10-22 04:34:09 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The truth is that Barack Obama doesn't understand a damn thing. He doesn't realize that by brown nosing only one group at a time he is alienating others who might have once voted for him. The only reason that Obama could ever win is because he's black.
2007-10-22 04:35:13 · answer #6 · answered by Aureus19 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Any one that is sleeping in bed with religion, politicians... will not have my vote. I've also noticed that religion is being bought up a awful lot when it comes down to the vote but what happens later? We have now found our selves on the brink of a world war.
2007-10-22 04:35:48 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That was an excellent statement. I would vote Republican for economic policies but the Religious Right has destroyed any credibility they have as a good choice for a secular government.
2007-10-22 04:34:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Even if he gets the nomination, he wont be getting my vote. He is still too wet behind the ears to be president. He needs a few more years out in the trenches
2007-10-22 04:37:49 · answer #9 · answered by tebone0315 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Obama is by far the least religious candidate that has an actual chance of getting the nomination.
2007-10-22 04:32:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Christians in the south want to "Stone people to death"?! Are you serious? Your ignorance is showing.
The problem is that you can't seem to distinguish between "hating someone" and "disagreeing" with what they do. They are not equivalent!
2007-10-22 04:31:09 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋