I don’t generally nitpick and judge people in regards to their private faith. However, when a person boasts that not only are they a Christian, but a devout Christian, they open their personal faith up to public scrutiny. Let’s see what Obama said about his faith, and compare it to what the bible says, and what Obama does.

In terms of my faith, you know, there has been so much confusion that has been deliberately perpetrated through emails and so forth. So, just here are the simple facts. I am a Christian. I am a devout Christian. I have been a member of the same church for 20 years. Pray to Jesus every night, and try to go to church as much as I can when they are not working me. Used to go quite often. These days, we haven’t been at the home church, I haven’t been home on Sunday, for several months now. So, my faith is important to me. It is not something that I try to push on other people. But it is something that helps to guide my life and my values.

-Barack Obama

Perhaps as a “devout Christian,” Obama should consider these doctrines:

(in regards to his recent regret of trying to save Terri Schiavo’s life from death by dehydration)

For I was hungry, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee hungry, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
(Matthew 25:42-45)

In regards to his choice of church, which has a pastor which exalts racist Loius Farrakhan:

Acts 17:24-26 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; (25) Neither is worshiped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; (26) And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

Acts 10:34-35  Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:  (35)  But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

In regard’s to his fervent support of abortion and his killing of “Born Alive” in Illinois (you could even put his stance on Terri here too)

Proverbs 6:16-19 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: (17) A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, (1 A heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, (19) A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

How he figured out that Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount condones Homosexuality.(see verses here) is beyond me.

Barack’s recent escalated trumpeting of Christ’s name seems merely an attempt to counter the circulating rumors and Farrakhan(Nation of Islam) connection that seem to align Obama more closely with Allah than Jehovah. Perhaps a form of Islamic Christianity? (I mean, Farrakhan would not endorse an infidel)

They surely are Infidels who say, “God is the third of three:” for there
is no God but one God: and if they refrain not from what they say, a grievous
chastisement shall light on such of them as are Infidels.

(The Qur’an (Rodwell tr), Sura   5 - The Table).

When ye encounter the infidels, strike off their heads till ye have made
a great slaughter among them, and of the rest make fast the fetters.

And afterwards let there either be free dismissals or ransomings, till
the war hath laid down its burdens. Thus do. Were such the pleasures of God,
he could himself take vengeance upon them: but He would rather prove the one of
you by the other. And whoso fight for the cause of God, their works he will
not suffer to miscarry

(The Qur’an (Rodwell tr), Sura  47 - Muhammad)

How Obama can claim to be a devout Christian when he promotes the slaughter of the innocent and other abominations is completely beyond me. There can be no doubt this is a political ploy attempting however vainly to present himself as a moderate friendly to Christian values.

Be not deceived. This man is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Barack defended his religion by saying that he prays to Jesus every night and that we’d feel comfortable in his home church, Trinity United Church of Christ. This church’s pastor and magazine have extolled the goodness of Louis Farrakhan. That alone would make me feel uncomfortable in that church. To sit under the teaching and preaching of a pastor who is close to a racist islamist is unthinkable. No man of God with any knowledge of scripture would endorse a racist.

Barack believe America owes the LGBT community, but what does America owe it? The “right” to marry? Marriage is nowhere guaranteed in the constitution. Further marriage by any major dictionary is a union between a man and a woman. They want to fundamentally rewrite the language of the nation to accommodate their lifestyle. They want sexual orientation, cross dressing, and transgenderism to be protected classes, privy to the same protections as women and ethnic minorities. If this happens, it will be the first time a non-physical changeable condition will be protected under federal discrimination law. The advocacy of this makes a mockery of the whole civil rights movement and criminalizes the thought and actions and beliefs of Christianity which are based on the Bible.

Gay City News Endorsement (From Barack Obama’s official campaign website)
(Bold words were highlighted by me)

In a presidential inaugural address that inspired a teenager from Hope, Arkansas named Bill Clinton, John F. Kennedy famously urged Americans to focus not on what the country could do for them, but on what contributions they could make to the nation.

Mind you, we in the LGBT community are not yet nearly at the point where this nation has made good on the contributions it owes to our lives, our families, our well-being, even our equal citizenship. Faced with the choice of two progressive Democrats who have spoken at length and with conviction about the challenges facing our lives, we still don’t have the luxury of picking a candidate who will advocate for our right to marry. We must yet take it on faith that the next president will have the fortitude to insist that Congress - including too many stragglers within the Democratic Party - open up the nation’s military to out gay and lesbian patriots. It is far from certain that the next time the Democratic Congress takes up an employment nondiscrimination measure it will include transgendered Americans as well as gay men and lesbians among those protected.

But after seven years of George W. Bush, and compared against the prospect of either John McCain or Mitt Romney, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama truly offer hope to LGBT Americans that help is on the way.

Given that the two Democratic contenders share a similar, generally friendly and supportive posture toward LGBT Americans, we ought to think about the message our choice sends about a fundamental question - what our politics should be all about. We are finding our place here and there at the table, but we have also spent much of our life on the outside. The nation needs to hear our views on how American politics can accommodate new voices in the mix.

Judged by that measure and taking full stock of how the Democratic nomination contest has unfolded, we believe the choice is clear.

Gay City New endorses Barack Obama.

Because the government does not have  a special recognition of 2 people’s relationship does not mean they are unequal citizens. I would rather America remove any and all financial, tax, and social benefits of Marriage than to have the meaning of the word redefined so a certain segment of the population can feel better about itself and how the government endorses its relationships.

As we near the end of Black History Month, let us consider the famous words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr:

That is the dream, whereby man would look beyond the surface and judge men by their values, beliefs and standards. Much progress has been made in that direction in America.

We have gone from a time where the legal system looked another way when a black man whistled at a white woman. Racism has been evicted from America’s public square. By and large it only finds refuge in the hearts of men (and women) who’s hearts are hardened, who’s minds are narrow, who’s only claim to self worth is the putting down of another based on the color of their skin.

Today, however, skin color has again returned to America’s public square. As we race towards the 2008 presidential elections, change has become the buzz word. In many circles the prospect of a Black or woman president has trumped all other issues.

McCain, Bush, the Clintons are painted as stogy old white establishment types. Relative youth and skin color are trumpeted as the best assets of a candidate this year, in 2008.
The truth of the matter is this: once you peel off the surface, there is no substantial difference in the agendas that will be pursued by a President Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.

There is a song that has been co-opted in some areas as a sort of theme song for this years election season: Matchbox 20’s “How far we’ve come.” The music video to this song seems to attempt a historical chronology of the women’s and civil rights movements, cumulating in cheering images of Barack Obama’s and Hillary’s supporters.

There is no doubt that the Civil Rights Movement and certain aspects of the women’s movement have legitimately leveled the social and economic playing fields. However, the problem comes when the cumulation of these efforts is presented as Hillary and Obama. The Euphoria over the potential of a “first” black/woman candidate has completely hijacked democrats and would be social progressives. Any attack that would be directed at Obama’s policies or values can, and sometimes is, twisted into racism. Gender and skin tone becomes a defense in liu of answers.

Barack Obama himself says he is gaging racism by whether or not whites vote for him.

This is audacious in every sense of the word. Ignoring the issues and diving straight for the cover all. I would vote for the President regardless of his or her color, that stands closest to what is best for America.

Barack Obama’s massive spending/taxing plans, advocacy for homosexuality, blanket amnesty for illegal immigrants, abortion views to the left of NARAL and NOW, coolness towards Israel, and his flippant attitude towards drugs will send this nation on a crash course with economic recession and moral decline. Ultimately the other 2 candidates, Hillary and McCain, are watered down versions of Obama’s radicalism (though in Hillary’s case only very slightly so).

It will send the message: Skin matters more than issues.

It sure seemed like we’ve come along way since Dr King’s famous speech. However, here we are as a nation still judging people by the color of their skin.

It will only be a matter of time before we are all judged for our actions this year. This election has the potential to change the heart and soul of a nation.

If you LOVE America, if you sincerely want the best for this country look behind the smooth talking, the glitzy publicity war, the buzz words and rock concert style slogans and chantings.

Look at the issues. Pray. We’re not voting for the next American Idol here. Image and stage presence are not going to save us all.

King was murdered for his bold position, that all men are equal. If you love civil rights, if you support on any level the legacy he has handed us down through the civil rights movement, then reject the politics of “famous firsts.” Focus on the issues. Focus on America.

Let’s live the dream.

For our economy, our safety, and our workers, we have to rebuild America. I’m proposing a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank that will invest $60 billion over ten years. This investment will multiply into almost half a trillion dollars of additional infrastructure spending…

And where’s that additional 500 billion dollars going to come from?

My energy plan will invest $150 billion over ten years to establish a green energy sector that will create up to 5 million new jobs over the next two decades - jobs that pay well and can’t be outsourced. We’ll also provide funding to help manufacturers convert to green technology

From what programs will this money be transferred, or better to ask, how much will taxes be raised to cover this economic spending? Those 5 million people aren’t going to work for free. Massive state companies were set up in China, and only survive by subsidy, in fact they are even selling some of them off.

I’ve paid for every element of this economic agenda - by ending a war that’s costing us billions, closing tax loopholes for corporations, putting a price on carbon pollution, and ending George Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans.

By the way, those corporations are NOT going to absorb that added tax burden, it will be passed along to john doe consumer. Carbon pollution? Now that’s nice and vague. What are you going to do, add a carbon tax to power plants and other factories? It may sound nice to revoke those tax cuts for the “wealthiest 2%” but when you have a so-called “progressive” income tax those in the top brackets are paying the largest percentage of their incomes.

I’ve proposed a fund that would provide direct relief to victims of mortgage fraud.

Hmm, I smell more taxes

I won’t wait another ten years to raise the minimum wage - I’ll guarantee that it keeps pace with inflation every single year so that it’s not just a minimum wage, but a living wage.

Sound’s like a recipe for spiraling inflation. Whenever it becomes more expensive to produce a product, that cost is passed on the consumer, or the company finds a way to make the product more efficienty (RE: Fewer workers)

In addition to cutting costs for working families, we also need to help them save more - especially for retirement. That’s why we’ll require employers to enroll every worker in a direct deposit retirement account that places a small percentage of each paycheck into savings.

So, in addition to the necessary tax increases to fund federal social and economic spending, the government is going to be telling you what to do with YOUR money. Very nice to say a “small percentage” when for the poorest, every small percent helps!

..ban [credit card] rate changes to debt that’s already incurred; and ban interest on late fees.

Again, this sounds like a nice way to “stick it to the credit cards” however, it will only reduce credit available. As a [likely] unintentional side affect, this reduction could actually be good in the long run if it forces people to live more within their means.

Every American would be able to get the same kind of health care that members of Congress get for themselves, and we’d ban insurance companies from denying you coverage because of a pre-existing condition.

Here’s where we get into the real meat-and-potatoes of tax mania, the Universal Health Care cure-all. The thing about the government providing the health care that Obama seems to be ignorant of here, is that there would likely be little if any private market left for health insurance, hence insurance companies would cease offering health insurance, in large part to the high cost of pre-existing conditions. Example: Person needs high cost surgery, buys health insurance, gets the surgery and drops the insurance. The companies will just cease the coverage rather than see the complete draining of their monies.

And the main difference between my plan and Senator Clinton’s plan is that she’d require the government to force you to buy health insurance and she said she’d ‘go after’ your wages if you don’t. Well I believe the reason people don’t have health care isn’t because no one’s forced them to buy it, it’s because no one’s made it affordable - and that’s what we’ll do when I am President.

Presumably, Hillary would offer the same kind of “affordable” health insurance. You dodge the issue of whether or not you’d force it by merely addressing that you’d make it “affordable.” But if your going for so-called “universal health care” you are going to have to opt people into the system. Thanks but no thanks

Source for Obama Speech Quotes: barackobama.com

Wanna Buy Insurance? “NO?” Ok, We’ll Sign You Up! -Hillary

Presidential Hopeful Hillary wants universal health care, and she wants everyone in the system. She said,

“What we’ve got to do is have shared responsibility. Everybody has to pay something, but obviously on a sliding scale,” Clinton said. “I think you can automatically enroll people, and you will then say, ‘You’ve got to be part of this.’”

“If you don’t start with universal health care, if you don’t say everybody’s going to be in the system, we’ll never get there,” she added.

The money will be taken from you, even if you don’t want it (but only if you could afford to pay for it). She does on to say it will only be a small percentage of your income. Great, another slice of our income going into a bloated government program that will cost so much more than it is worth.

I wonder how much of this money would be used to pay for illegal immigrants and pork barrel spending.

Viva Socialism!

Why is this socialism? It comes from the euphemism “Equitable redistribution of wealth” which basically means, if you have more money than we(the government) think you should, we are going to take from you and use it in ways we feel might benefit society, and the more you make, the larger percentage of it we will take from you. It sort of follows lenin’s old saying “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”