Is that really what Christians mean when they say this sort of thing? I’m not convinced. I mean, there’s a perfectly good word, “constituents,” that his non-brothers are, and constituents – not brothers – are what he was elected to serve, right?
Racist.
Jesse Ventura came pretty close. It wasn’t in his inaugural, but he did say, “religion is for weak-minded people who need strength in numbers,” which is about as frontal a statement against religion as I’ve ever heard from a politician elected to significant office.
Yes, that’s what I mean. We therefore have no expectation that our elected officials think of us, every last one, as brethren, do we? Well, it depends on what the words mean to you, obviously–there could be a secular patriotic conception of American “brotherhood.”
But at least for now I’m open to the interpretation that this governor, in this context, saw his remarks as being a statement of an expanded, not restricted, circle of fellowship.
Oh, I gotcha. I wasn’t getting your meaning, at first. Apologies.
Not just *white *Christians, but *black *Christians as well. It reminds me of Blues Brothers: “We play both kinds of music, country and western”.
A) No, he didn’t.
B) He was speaking at church as a private citizen, not as the Governor.
C) What the fuck does that have to do with whether there are any crazy politicians up North?
[QUOTE=sh1bu1]
Sorry, you are right. I forgot about Alaska.
[/QUOTE]
And Illinois, New Jersey, Delaware …
Are we to assume, then, that anything Rev. White said in church can’t be held against Obama, especially since Obama didn’t say it?
Of course, and we always have been able to assume that.
Sheesh. Try setting the bar a little higher for the Obama-bashers, willya?
Considering European history between 1517 and 1648, it’s not exactly the type of family I’d wish to be embraced by.
Absolutely.
I cannot believe that we actually have to have a conversation about whether or not it’s acceptable for an elected official to say, even as a private citizen, even in a non-public venue, that basically the only people he personally considers important are fellow Christians.
The supposed parallel between Rev. Wright and this guy…isn’t. Rev. Wright is not an elected official.
He didn’t say that. He said that they were not his brothers and sisters, but he wishes they were. It’s pretty much dogma in his religion. Is he not entitled to express that?
Look, I’m a hardcore atheist who has no fucking use whatsoever for fundamentalist Christians. But given their premises, what he said necessarily follows. It’s a core belief.
I realize it’s a core belief. I realize he was saying it as a private citizen. I’m saying that it’s not acceptable, regardless of whether or not it’s his core belief.
We don’t live in a theocracy. It’s time to tell people that it’s NOT OKAY to say out loud that you consider some people second-class citizens because they don’t follow your personal belief system.
So, yes, I’m saying that in my opinion, as an elected official of the people of Alabama, some of whom are not Christian, I don’t believe that he should make that statement out loud in public. Is he entitled? Obviously, based on the First Amendment. Is it acceptable? Absolutely not.
When did he say that he considered anyone a second-class citizen?
Regards,
Shodan
Um… yes. Precisely. Rev. Wright wasn’t elected, but Obama was hounded for the things Rev. Wright said.
I just find it amusing that the same people who thought that Wright’s statements in church reflected poorly on Obama now think that the Governor’s actual words in church aren’t that big a deal.
Ah, my mistake. We agree then.
I’ll second Shodan’s question, and add that every time God is invoked by a politician, including President Obama, I am insulted. Should they be constrained from doing so? If not, why not? I’m not a believer. Why should their god have any traction at all in my government?
He’s entitled to say it, he’s allowed to say it, it’s protected for him to say it, but it makes him an asshole when he does say it.
I am entitled to say that people who like NASCAR more than F1 are not my brothers and sisters, but would be divisive and a poor choice of words.
I am entitled to give a speech at a wedding saying that I caught herpes from the bride but decorum suggests that I don’t.
My personal opinion is that yes, they should refrain from mentioning God. Should they be legally contrained? No, again because of the First Amendment. But they should at some point recognize that it’s not necessary or appropriate to mention a deity in the course of their duties as an elected public official.
And we should call them out on that shit when they do it, and continuously communicate that it’s NOT OKAY when you’re an elected official to admit publicly that you consider people with differing beliefs second-class citizens.