No decision yet on Obama Golden Temple visit: White House
Hold onto your, er, hats.
Talk that U.S. President Barack Obama has canceled a visit to The Golden Temple in Amritsar because of a dispute over headgear may be premature, the White House said on Wednesday.
“We pick sites on foreign trips based on what the president wants to accomplish,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters traveling on Air Force One. Not, presumably, the outfit he might have to wear at a given site.
Obama had been expected to visit the Golden Temple in northern India, a pilgrimage site for Sikhs, during his tour of the country next month. But Indian media reports said Obama’s handlers balked at the idea of the U.S. president wearing a headscarf or skullcap while touring the site.
Obama faces persistent talk among some members of the U.S. public that he is a Muslim and, the reports said, aides said pictures of him wearing such headgear could fuel such rumors.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is a Sikh.
Gibbs said Obama’s final itinerary during his India trip had yet to be finalized, but he expected it would be in the course of the next week.
Poll shows Americans are confused on Obama’s religion
A year and a half into his presidency, Americans appear to be growing more uncertain about Barack Obama’s religion.
A Pew Research Center survey shows that nearly one in five Americans — 18 percent — believe Obama is a Muslim, up from 11 percent in March 2009. Meanwhile only about one third of Americans surveyed correctly describe Obama as a Christian, a sharp decrease from the 48 percent who said he was a Christian in 2009.
The survey was completed in early August, before Obama backed the controversial construction of a proposed mosque and Muslim cultural center near the site of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in New York.
Obama said last week he believed Muslims had the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in the country and supported their right to build the center in lower Manhattan – comments that could add more confusion about his religion.
The Pew poll said the view that Obama is a Muslim is more widespread among political opponents than his supporters. In addition, beliefs about Obama’s religion appear closely linked to his job approval rating.
Among those who say Obama is Muslim, 67 percent disapprove of his job performance while a majority of those who think he is Christian approve of the job he is doing.
The poll by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life was conducted July 21-Aug 5 among 3,003 respondents.
I could not care less what religion Obama is or if he is religious or not, I can’t see how it matters at all. We have a separation of church and state in our constitution for a reason.
Sarah Palin, the Bard of Wasilla
Washington’s Emma Ashburn had some thoughts today on Sarah Palin’s latest literary stylings:
Sarah Palin: former Alaska governor, ex-vice presidential candidate, bard.
The media-savvy Republican introduced a new term over the weekend, using the word “refudiate” on her Twitter feed at SarahPalinUSA when she opined on plans to build a mosque at the site of the 9/11 attacks in Manhattan. Later, she suggested she wasn’t doing anything William Shakespeare hadn’t done.
Her first tweet on Sunday read:
* Ground Zero Mosque supporters: doesn’t it stab you in the heart, as it does ours throughout the heartland? Peaceful Muslims, pls refudiate
She changed it within hours to:
* Peaceful New Yorkers, please refute the Ground Zero mosque plan if you believe catastrophic pain caused @ Twin Towers site is too raw, too real
It shows why it took “gun-slingging” mama-grizzly long to finish college. Just slow is realizing when you’re making a fool of yourselves. But wait a minute, “people like us”…”the real americans”….They do understand this new bard in the western hemisphire. They wouldn’t pay so much money for dinner if she were that baaaaad!..or would they? yah! they would, some level of interlectual consciousness.
The First Draft: Reviews flood in after Obama’s Cairo speech
He’s been preparing for this moment since long before he came to the White House, so President Barack Obama might wonder how his Cairo speech to the Muslim world went over. He wouldn’t have to wait long — within minutes after he ended his address, the reviews started flooding in.
The Washington Post said Obama did well, but basically, talk’s cheap: “Perhaps today’s words, from the son of a Muslim, will be viewed as a welcome olive branch. But it’s still just a speech. And even stirring words can’t paper over the seemingly intractable differences in the Mideast.”
The New York Post got a bit snarky: “If world peace is attained by complimenting those on the other side into submission, he made some serious progress. Obama really buttered them up in Cairo.”
The Drudge Report noted how long the speech was: the Web site showed a photo of Obama speaking, over the line “6,000 words”.
In Iran, there was a sort of pre-emptive review, issued even before Obama spoke: Iran’s supreme leader said United States was deeply hated in the Middle East, and warned Obama that “beautiful” speeches alone would not improve the U.S. image in the Muslim world.
More reviews are definitely expected to trickle in, since Obama’s speech was a multimedia event. If you missed the live broadcast, you could also see part or all of the speech online at Twitter, Facebook, MySpace and other social networking sites. The White House ran the speech live on its website, and the State Department streamed it as part of a live chat – and the chat continued long after the speech ended.
One comment found there sounded like a rave: “Barack Hussein Obama is definitely an ”Elevation” leader that makes one vibrate while listening to him!”
the americans have been isolating iran for decades and put them in lotsof truble ,even they have been engaged in activities that could harm iranian nations and helping irans enemies in the past.how come all of the sudden they try to be friendly with iran by congracualations to iran?this wont work for them. becuse its the fact that they still seeking for their own advntages, and i think today,americans should negotiate with iran over the neclure issue and be prepared to accepet the fact that iran is also entitel to have neclure power.also they should relaize that iran is still far a way from devaloping the wapen.
from FaithWorld:
Can the United States fix Durban II?
The United States has decided to participate in planning meetings for the United Nations Conference on Racism in April in order to influence its final declaration. The conference, a follow-up to the 2001 meeting in South Africa that the U.S. and Israel walked out on because the draft declaration called Israel racist (that language was later dropped). Israel and Canada have already announced they would boycott "Durban II," as the conference is being called, and the Bush administration was opposed to the conference. But the Obama administration has decided to wade into the debate in the hopes of getting a better result.
Apart from the expected criticism of Israel, this conference in Geneva is also due to be a showplace for a drive by the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) to have the U.N. condemn defamation of religion. The U.N. General Assembly voted for just such a condemnation last December, for the fourth year running. While the non-binding resolution urged member states to provide "adaquate protection against acts of hatred, discrumination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general," the only religion it mentioned by name was Islam. Western countries opposed that resolution as contrary to the basic rights of free expression and opinion.
In statements in December, the freedom of expression rapporteurs of the United Nations, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Organisation of American States (OAS) and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) have called on the United Nations not to issue any such resolution.
President Barack Obama wants to reach out to Muslims and foster better relations between Washington and the Muslim world. Should he show this by softening the U.S. stand on defamation of religions?
UPDATE: The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reports that "the U.S. State Department set off alarm bells Sunday in the Jewish community by announcing that it would be taking part in consultations this week ahead of the conference" and the administration held a conference call with Jewish leaders to discuss the issue. Read the full story here.
My question is, why are they only focusing on Islam? Why not Christianity too? This seems to be always the case and I am tired of hearing, how Islamics are always being discriminated against. Anytime you talk bad about Islam, they riot and protest. Christians are persecuted all the time and that is never mentioned in the media. I believe, that the government is going to sell us down the river and this will only be the beginning of the “Racisim” card being played.
from FaithWorld:
When it’s better to lead with the economy than with the innuendo
President-elect Barack Obama gave a wide-ranging interview to the Chicago Tribune , offering his hometown daily a scoop that forced other journalists to choose which angle to highlight in their reports on it. Reuters chose to lead with his comment that the most pressing problem right now was to "stabilize the patient" and save the U.S. economy from losing millions of jobs. I agree this is the key message he sent in this interview and deserved to take top billing. So I was surprised to see how many news organisations went with a different angle.
"Obama to take the oath of office using his middle name" ... "At inauguration, it will be Barack Hussein Obama: interview" ... "I, Barack Hussein Obama" -- several news organisations led off with the fact that Obama would be sworn in under his full name. What did they expect? That he would kowtow to his campaign critics who pointedly called him Barack Hussein Obama but didn't have the courage to say what they were hinting at, i.e. that this self-confessed Christian was a "covert Muslim" or "Muslim apostate" and therefore unreliable?
Given the context of the campaign, the fact that Obama has not been cowed is interesting. We mentioned it in the third paragraph, the Chicago Tribune in the second. But let's ask if making this the lead, putting it at the top of the whole story, gives the whispering campaign against him much more importance than it is due?
It would have been more of a story if Obama had decided he could not be sworn in under the full name he got from his father and without the middle name from his grandfather. Americans love to talk about their roots, so seeing him run away from his own heritage would have been something to write about. Should we be surprised that he has not done that and wants to be taken as he is?
There was a genuine Muslim angle in the interview -- that Obama plans to reach out to the Islamic world with a speech in a capital of a Muslim country. His aides had already indicated this was on the cards, but he confirmed it first to the Trib so they led with that. Our veteran Washington correspondent Steve Holland made that the second paragraph in his story, quoting him as saying he wanted to "reboot America's image around the world and also in the Muslim world in particular." In both cases, they reported this angle before mentioning Obama's middle name.
(Photo: Obama image in Jakarta, 25 Oct 2008/Dadang Tri)
from FaithWorld:
A new twist on the “Is Obama a Christian?” debate
The "Is Obama a Christian?" discussion is starting up again, this time not by people who suspect he's a Muslim but those who think he's a phony follower of Jesus Christ. The occasion for this is the posting on Beliefnet of an interview he gave to the Chicago Sun Times in 2004, while he was still an Illinois state senator. Conservative Christians have taken his religious views as proof he's not a real Christian, but there's support from a more liberal corner for his views.
That there is disagreement isn't really a surprise. Theologians have been debating who is a Christian almost since the dawn of the faith and still dispute where the dividing lines lie. What is more interesting is that critics are picking apart his views -- or purported views -- on theological issues that have no obvious importance for his job as president.
Bloggers Joe Carter and Rod Dreher read in Obama's interview a denial of the Nicene Creed since he called Jesus "a bridge between God and man" rather than clearly saying he is the Son of God (hat tip to Steve Waldman). "Unless Obama was being incredibly and uncharacteristically inarticulate, this is heterodox. You cannot be a Christian in any meaningful sense and deny the divinity of Jesus Christ. You just can't," Dreher writes. Has Obama denied the divinity of Jesus Christ here? That's not clear here. Another point that Carter notes is that he doesn't believe that people who have not embraced Jesus as their personal saviour will automatically go to hell. "I can’t imagine that my God would allow some little Hindu kid in India who never interacts with the Christian faith to somehow burn for all eternity. That’s just not part of my religious makeup," he said.
Elsewhere on its site, Beliefnet quotes a prominent Catholic theologian saying the same thing: "...Everything we believe about God, and everything we know about man, prevents us from accepting that beyond the limits of the Church there is no more salvation ... We are no longer ready and able to think that our neighbor, who is a decent and respectable man and in many ways better than we are, should be eternally damned simply because he is not a Catholic. We are no longer ready, no longer willing, to think that eternal corruption should be inflicted on people in Asia, in Africa, or wherever it may be, merely on account of their not having "Catholic" marked in their passport." This came from none other than a certain Joseph Ratzinger, aka Pope Benedict XVI. The quote is from 1964, from the young Ratzinger, and is not what he would say today. But even he said it back then and many theologians would agree with Obama's view today.
As Waldman points out, it's a view that George Bush would also agree with. And apparently with him many Christians as well:"millions and millions of people call themselves Christian, worship at Christian churches and believe that acceptance of Christ is not required for entry into heaven. In a recent Pew poll, 70% said 'many religions can lead to eternal life.' 66% of Protestants and 79% of Catholics said they agreed with that idea."
Over at the Episcopal Café blog The Lead, blogger JB Chilton reprints reprints Obama's answer about his suspicion of dogma and cautious turn towards faith and says: "Sounds like a good Episcopalian. The Episcopal Church welcomes you."
Do you think it's important to know exactly which Christian teachings the president-elect embraces and which ones he doesn't, even if they have no relevance to his performance in the White House?
To Brian in Middle River — the Nicene Creed is not only Roman Catholic. I don’t have a full list but a quick look at Wikipedia shows the following: “The Nicene Creed is an ecumenical Christian statement of faith accepted in the Eastern Orthodox Church, Assyrian Church of the East, Oriental Orthodox churches, the Roman Catholic Church, the Lutheran Church, the Anglican Communion, and almost all branches of Protestantism, including the Reformed churches, the Presbyterian Church, and the Methodist Church.”
from FaithWorld:
Muslims and the U.S. election — two sobering reminders
Two Reuters colleagues in the United States have written sobering accounts of the place of Muslims and Islam in the U.S. presidential election campaign.
"These are uneasy times for America's Muslims, caught in a backwash from a presidential election campaign where the false notion that Barack Obama is Muslim has been seized on by some who link Islam with terrorism," writes Chicago religion writer Mike Conlon in "Sour note for American Muslims in election campaign."
"Incidents during the U.S. presidential election campaign, now in its final sprint towards November 4, show that fear and suspicion of Muslims persist undiminished and are being used as a political weapon," writes Washington columnist Bernd Debusmann in "In U.S. elections, fear of Muslims."
Click on the hyperlinked titles for the rest of the story.
Both of them cite former Secretary of State Colin Powell asking the real question that the other politicians, including Barack Obama, have been avoiding: "Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer is no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion 'He (Obama) is a Muslim and might be associated with terrorists.' This is not the way we should be doing it in America."
Election campaigns can bring out some ugly emotions. Do you think this will calm down after Nov. 4? Or, especially if Obama wins, will the rumour campaign against Muslims continue?
To me, if you vote based on religion or race you are a bigot and un-american. You obviously also do not value the Constitution and the principles upon which this nation was created.
Religion issue hurting Obama with Indiana cafe patrons
SHELBYVILLE, Ind. – Barack Obama can talk about his childhood years in Kansas and upbringing by his white Midwestern grandparents, but if voters at one small-town Indiana cafe are any indication, he has a long way to go to convince them he represents heartland America.
“Obama has great ideas but his background scares me,” said Chris Leighton, 60, a secretary having lunch at the Chaperral Cafe in Shelbyville, in southeast Indiana. “Everyone talks about him being a Muslim and having ties to terrorism, but how do people really find out?”
The incorrect belief that the Illinois senator is a Muslim was shared by half a dozen others in the restaurant — a sign that dirty campaign tactics and Internet innuendo has taken root among some voters in Indiana, the next state to vote.
Construction worker Ron Debaun, 61, said he hadn’t yet decided whether he would support Obama or Hillary Clinton in Indiana’s May 6 primary, noting they both “have good ideas.” But he’s leaning toward Clinton.
What doesn’t he like about Obama?
“His Muslim ties,” said Debaun.
Why does he think Obama is a Muslim?
Senator Obama’s father was a muslim, he was raised a muslim. At some point in his life he shifted his faith to “Christian,” which isn’t Christian at all, it’s a liberation mentality rooted in Marxism. And if you think he’s lying, well he is. They all are. That’s what politician’s do. It’s impossible to be a Christian politician, whether Republican or Democrat, Obama or McCain, Clinton or Bush. It doesn’t matter. To be a successful politician you must at some point compromise your faith and go against what the Bible says. (Ex. Lying, deception, selfishness, bitterness, greed, etc.)Faith cannot be legislated, it is only by an experience with truth.
Being an Indian let me tell the American public one thing, it does not matter if he does not visit the temple, he can just skip the whole visit itself, visiting, looking into the structure makes no special impact on the relationship, chill, its perfectly okay, the president will not be mistaken or misunderstood, democrats or his citizens need not judge him on this, it has nothing to do with ‘looks like a Malaysian songkok’ the president lived in Indonesia, which was predominatly Muslim, it is obvious he is secular in all aspects.