You bashing someone for smug arrogance is the height of motherfucking irony.
Don’t we have five thousand other “I hate Dio” threads to do this in?
Fine, fine. I’ll go fix lunch.
Living in a Muslim country, as I did, had no effect on my religious development. All of my religious development came from home. The implication is that Obama’s mere living in a Muslim society had some sort of effect on his personal religious beliefs. Based upon my nearly identical upbringing during those years, I say that those who believe it does are profoundly ignorant. I am not saying that they are stupid or idiots, just that they lack the experience to answer the question authoritatively and they jump to conclusions based on their own experiences.
Except that Obama’s home contained a step-father who was Muslim, and with whom he occasionally attended Muslim prayer services. I doubt your experience was “near identical”.
There is fodder in Obama’s background that most of us don’t have in ours and that seems to feed the rumor machine. Especially among people predisposed to dislike him.
As opposed to the sneaky and sinister way he’s pretending to be a Christian…at least according to his pro-atheist defenders on this board?
From this thread I see three possibilities: either Obama’s indeed a Christian who believes in and prays to God (popularly known as a “sky fairy” hereabouts) and regularly seeks religious counseling; or he’s a sneaky and sinister atheist merely pretending to be a Christian; or he’s a secret Muslim and being sneaky and sinister in covering that up.
So he’s either a believer in sky fairies, or he’s a sneaky and sinister liar whose intent is cover up his true beliefs in order to dishonestly manipulate voter sympathies.
I’ll leave it to the board to choose (or defend) that which they prefer. 
Consistent, but far from automatic, Obama-appreciater here.
Between your two choices, I’ll go with “liar” – just a WAG.
I’m not too happy about it, but I recognize that you gotta do certain things to get ahead politically in this country at this time in hisory, and that’s just one of those things. Because it does no one any real harm, I’m basically cool with it. At worst, it’s an opportunity lost (an opportunity to give the country another positive agnostic/atheist role model), but I understand the calculation made and even support the action because of that. (And, anyway, as an already “suspect” (in the Heartland) son of an anthropologist, etc., etc., his power as an atheist/agnostic role model would be marginal…We’ve yet to have our Rock Hudson moment.)
Frankly, I think this idea that Obama is a “secret non-believer” is about as nutty as that he’s a “secret Muslim”. In fact, there is more evidence of him being a Muslim than him being a pretend-Christian.
Remember when the right wing was yammering about Obama attending Wright’s church for, what, 20 years or so? That’s a Christian church. He didn’t need to attend church in order to prop up his Community Organizer image.
Oh, well, I suppose you may be right (but I strongly disagree about your calculation of the relative probabilities.)
Perhaps just my wishful thinking.
Others have pointed out the irony in this. Anyway, remember when Obama replied that he missed out on attending the “worst” of Wright’s sermons, like the “Damn America” one?
Well, all those missed sermons tip the scales just a bit in the “secret atheist/agnostic” direction, do they not? 
Maybe it’s nutty, but for every ten people I know who were raised religious then later became secular humanists, I know zero people who were raised by secular humanists then found Jesus. That plus the de facto requirement for presidency that one love Jesus H. Christ make me doubtful. Maybe it’s just wishful thinking on my part as well. I’d also like to point out, in fairness to Obama, that I question the Christianity of a lot of politicians. $25 says at least 1/4 of Congress does not believe in gods at all. We’ll never know, so there’s no way to collect on my bet, but my cynicism goes way beyond our current Pres.
Plus, every South Side Chicagoan knows that church is where you meet the hottest babes. 
I think the whole problem here is that the lefties on this board have been railing for so long against conservatives for believing they have “an invisible friend in the sky” and making fun of them accordingly, that they are now left with no alternative but to claim against all evidence that Obama is really an atheist. To do otherwise and accept his Christianity would completely undercut their dismissal of conservatives for believing the same thing themselves, and make them look like the über-hypocrites they are in the process.
No wonder they prefer to think he’s just a liar.
Obama was raised as much by his grandparents as his mother. Were they “secular humanists”? Also, Obama’s history of religiosity long predates his political career. Perhaps the idea that he is a secret atheist is more akin to the birther beliefs. There would have to be this long standing conspiracy to plant false clues about his religious beliefs decades before he hit the national scene.
No it didn’t. Obama’s stepfather was an atheist.
He spent three years in a Catholic school saying Catholic prayers, vs. one in an Indonesian public school. Shouldn’t he be a secret Catholic? His Dad, who was not a strong figure in Obama’s life, was Muslim by birth but was not in any way devout or even a regular practitioner.
This has not happened on this board.
There is a bit of truth to what Starving Artist said, I’m sure. But I think it’s much more that non-believers such as myself have trouble parsing ANYONE’s religiosity. We just don’t care much about it all, which is why John Mace’s comparing it to the birthers is so very off-base. And we aren’t as hypocritical about it as you guys think we are. In fact, we’re thrilled when someone – left or right – refuses to “wear it on their sleeve”*, to quote the original wording of the White House press release of a few days ago. And, as others have pointed out, we only get perturbed if: 1. Believing politicians (or anyone) try to tell others how to think, or 2. Believing politicians let their religiosity specifically guide major policy decisions, or 3. Believing politicians (or anyone) let the emotional reactiveness primed by their beliefs cloud their opinions on a matter such as the formerly-known-as-Cordoba-House issue.
(*BTW, did anyone else notice how they changed the wording after less than an hour, to something less earthy? At least that’s how it came out on CNN.)
The truthfulness of a statement does not depend on how much the person making the statement cares about it. And I’m a non-believer who has no trouble parsing other people’s religiosity. They’re all over the place. There are millions of very intelligent, highly educated people who are religious. Lots of them post on this MB.
It’s the inability to accept facts laid out in front of you that makes the analogy to birther movement apt. Whether you are passionate in your belief or not is of no matter. Obama found religion as a young adult. There is nothing out of the ordinary about that. He was baptized in and became an active member of a particular church for something like 20 years. If you wan to believe he just faked it all those years, you’re not much different from people who think he or his relatives faked his birth certificate.
Also, Starving Artist, what you said here could only be true if we somehow thought Obama were perfect in every way. Well, speaking for myself, he isn’t, and we know he isn’t. So we have no reason to dance around his imperfections.
You seem to know a bit more about his past than I do, so I concede the point that his probability of being a “believer” is greater than I had thought it was. Thanks for setting me straight. (Actually, I had already half-conceded this – MeanOldLady did, too – when I wrote that it could very well be wishful thinking on my part that he’s a non-bleiever.) Okay, I’ll move that over to the minus column in my Obama ledger, happy now?