I got a call from the Obama people yesterday

It's the first call (I think) I've received from a campaign. I was happy to take the call, and it gave me a chance to voice one of my main concerns about Obama - namely, my worry that he uses religious phraseology too much, and that I don't think he would be committed to a separation of church and state (or church and politics) or keeping prayer out of the public schools. I also said I don't want my money going to the so-called faith-based initiatives.

The caller told me that the majority of Americans disagreed with me (I don't actually believe this) but I pointed out to him that he was calling and asking for MY support.

I did, however, tell the caller that I would of course support Obama if he were the nominee and that he is by no means my last choice. And I realize that they all, unfortunately, often end speeches with the annoying "God Bless America" kind of lingo. But I was glad that I finally had someone to talk to about this, particularly on the heels of the most recent Supreme Court decision.

Just my two cents. If another candidate's representative calls, I'll ask the same question.

I'm in Iowa. It was the local Obama campaign people asking who I support and if I would volunteer. No hard sell or anything. I don't even think they asked for $$$.

You made it a two-way street :thumbsup:

Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago, so I think he's quite aware of the separation of church and state.

He's never achieved the prestigious position of Law Professor.

I guess your scholarly skills are in question..but your loyalty to disclosure, as a treat to people enjoying the Truth, have no bounds.

I enjoy hitting the bullseye for accuracy in posting.

Otherwise, your not only fooling the people reading your posts, but fooling yourself.

I don't need to tell you what your inference is in posting the impressions of faux accolades attributed to Obama.

your 'mo' falls under the category of "faux outrage"...so pedantic, and so disingenuous.

Looks like Tellurian misread what you wrote and then refused to admit it when confronted. Quite a sad display.

...In your response to this post you said "your not only fooling the people". If you are going to try to argue points 'intelligently' then please make sure you are grammatically correct in your responses so you can be taken SERIOUSLY. Yes, I am a teacher.

Senator Obama has done quite well here.

I don't know if my fears are unfounded. I've noticed quite a religious tone to some of his speeches.

after all, that is the majority of the population. He actually speaks very eloquently about the importance of drawing the line between faith and politics. That tolerance is something we should embrace, and that while he is a man of faith, faith by definition is abstract and not something that can logically or should be used to make policy decisions.

I'm agnostic and I think his message is right on. :hi:

and for the record, I am a liberal Catholic and basically no one represents my views at the moment, including the Catholic church.

Why should faith even be a part of the discourse? We have our faith, we are private about it, we don't want it part of the national tapestry. How do you alienate someone if you just wisely leave all conversation about faith at the side of the road, where it belongs?

I think he is trying to walk a fine line between trying to reach a base of supporters who are religious and trying to not be associated with RW fundies.

and they will use it as a tool to defeat democrats over and over again.

Religion can do as much good as it can do harm. By refusing to speak about it, despite the fact that most people in this nation subscribe to some form of religious faith, we cede faith to the other side- and as we've seen, they have no qualms about exploiting it to be divisive.

Someone needs to get the conversation back on track- charity, humanity, tolerance...the tenets that the other side have conveniently forgotten.

That doesn't mean religion should influence politics, but it does mean that any responsible leader won't altogether ignore that it exists, especially if that leader is to be given the opportunity to lead at all. That is the dichotomy we're dealing with. I don't like it, either, but it's there and I don't think it's going away any time soon.

by RW radicals? I am agnostic but support Obama. He may be a "man of faith" but I think he understands the role it should have in a progressive, secular society.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21961484-2703,00.html


He was criticized fairly heavily by the right, which I take as a good sign.

But he went a long way to assuage my fears when he called out the RW evangelicals.

are more concerned about hard economic policy than school prayers.

charlatans, who Obama has spoken out against.

If we do not learn to pull people who are religious we will not win another election. We need to pull dems, inds as well as repugs to win general.

That's exactly my point.

I agree with Ethel too.

I don't get too worked up about a candidate appealing to a majority of Americans as long as he isn't proposing actual policies that violate that separation. I think that describes Obama.