Obama draws some fire by acknowledging nonbelievers

[Associate Justice PiT]

     It's about time that the future leaders of the country get their due recognition.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

How dare he think that they are citizens. We should have elected George HW Bush.

[ottermax]

Clearly there isn't much to criticize Obama for at the moment, so we discuss a word he said in a speech.

[Stranger in a strange land]

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus, and nonbelievers."

Buddhists should be the ones shooting the fire!!  Obama must have known they'd be all too peaceful to protest.

It's not just that: it's further proof of Obama's anti-Scientology agenda.

Talking about a group of people that might sue...

What about Bahais, Sikhs, and Zoroastrians

[Verily]

So let me get this right.  Obama name-checks Muslims, Jews and Hindus (collective share of US population: 2.7%) and nobody bats an eye (and nor should they), but mentioning non-believers (16.1%) is a TRAVESTY.

I'm almost inclined to ask why certain people are manufacturing an issue out of this, but I learned not to bother a long time ago.

If you read down the article, you will also find that the pastor interviewed opposes abortion because abortion is "a genocide on black folks."

It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Both the extreme religious right lunatics and the militant atheists should shut the hell up. Nothing you can do to avoid some group attacking you.

Define "militant atheist."

[Lief 🗽]

These people should be locked away. They're the worst of America.

[justfollowingtheelections]

Both the extreme religious right lunatics and the militant atheists should shut the hell up. Nothing you can do to avoid some group attacking you.

Define "militant atheist."

I second that request.

[Franzl]

Both the extreme religious right lunatics and the militant atheists should shut the hell up. Nothing you can do to avoid some group attacking you.

Define "militant atheist."

I define it as people that are so actively opposed to any public mention of religion....that they, for example, protest when Obama decided to mention "so help me God" at the end of his oath of office.

In other words, people that really have nothing better to do than complain about pointless stuff that doesn't really have anything to do with them.

(It's a different matter if they don't want politicians praying in their name....but everything can be taken too far.)

Naturally, I personally hold a relatively secular view of government (even though I'm a catholic)....and I like to see as little mixture of church and state as possible....but as stated above...atheists can be just as annoying and pathetic as the religious extremists.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Do you view someone who wants to take God out of the pledge of allegiance and "In God We Trust" of our money as militant?

[Middle-aged Europe]

Obama had Rick Warren at his inauguration, which pissed off the gay community.
Obama mentioned "nonbelievers" in his inauguration speech, which pissed off the Religious Right.

It seems by trying to include everybody, you always piss somebody off who doesn't want everybody included.

Anyway, Barack Obama is not the president of people who believe in god. He is the President of the United States.

[opebo]

I followed that link, and voted in that poll embedded in the story.  Can you believe only 11% are not dumbs?

[k-onmmunist]

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus, and nonbelievers."

Buddhists should be the ones shooting the fire!!  Obama must have known they'd be all too peaceful to protest.

It's not just that: it's further proof of Obama's anti-Scientology agenda.

Talking about a group of people that might sue...

What about Bahais, Sikhs, and Zoroastrians

and Jain!

[k-onmmunist]

Do you view someone who wants to take God out of the pledge of allegiance and "In God We Trust" of our money as militant?

America cannot progress further until it takes these actions.

[Franzl]

Do you view someone who wants to take God out of the pledge of allegiance and "In God We Trust" of our money as militant?

To an extent, yes.

Although I understand the sentiment, and theoretically, I'd support such action, it seems to me that it's so unimportant that there's not really a reason to put up a fight.

[Verily]

Do you view someone who wants to take God out of the pledge of allegiance and "In God We Trust" of our money as militant?

To an extent, yes.

Although I understand the sentiment, and theoretically, I'd support such action, it seems to me that it's so unimportant that there's not really a reason to put up a fight.

The psychological importance in terms of mainstreaming religious belief over nonbelief is what's important. Sure, it's not the most important issue facing the country, but there are plenty of obscure issues it's okay to feel strongly about.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

I wonder if people offended are sincerely offended or if they are stupid or if they just sincerely want to be aggressive.

That said, Obama should have add to religions he mentioned something like "and people who follow all over religions, spiritualities and ways of life", in order to not be exclusive and to show that every way of life which respects other ones is respectable.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Do you view someone who wants to take God out of the pledge of allegiance and "In God We Trust" of our money as militant?

To an extent, yes.

Although I understand the sentiment, and theoretically, I'd support such action, it seems to me that it's so unimportant that there's not really a reason to put up a fight.

I think that's incredibly unfair. It's a perfectly logical idea and completely in line with the original intent of the country. I don't like being called a 'militant atheist' simply because I support getting God and religion out of the public discourse or at least getting public support for God and religion eliminated.