Religious belief is not a black and white deal, no matter how much either side would like to see it. Few people ever fully articulate their beliefs, and their beliefs may be fluid, serving different needs at different times. We are all familiar with the lackadaisical worshiper who suddenly gets really into praying when something goes wrong. And why not?
I’d argue that it’s possible to be an atheist and a Christian at the same time- especially if you are looking at this from an atheist viewpoint. Obama clearly has some fellowship with a Christian church. He is a part of it’s body of worship and recognizes its governing body. I’d be surprised if he didn’t firmly believe in the basic set of values his church focuses on. He probably does get a great deal fo spiritual value from Christianity. He may not believe in the literality of the Bible, but if we assume that the bible isn’t actually literally true, that’s not such a big deal, is it? I think most Christians have parts they are uncomfortable with or don’t spell out to themselves. In the end, there is no single test that makes you a part of a religion or not. It’s a complex thing.
I think there are a lot fewer Christian Muslims, although I bet there are indeed a few to be found.
Anyway, I think it’s pretty silly to pretend like these complex, fluid identities are clearcut.
I have strong doubts if Obama or many nominal Christians really believe in God. Yes, there is a lot of pressure to make Christian noises, but I think that is as far a great many go. I question if Reverend Wright really preaches the Bible.
I don’t think someone with as much introspection, pragmatism and early experience with different cultures as Obama has could be anything but agnostic. At a very early age he was exposed to many different cultures, what any developing human being would realize very quickly is many intangible beings have the same certainty of being true.
By the bye, how do you think an Atheist is raised to treat people?
I never made any such claim, but ok, I see your point. Still though, charges and evidence should stand based on their merits alone, not which side made them. Why should Obama supporters care if a particular Obama supporter is called out as being an imagined hypocrite.
Perhaps there is a scoreboard somewhere that needs looking after so I’m not sure where to move the marker.
Dawkins irritates me occasionally.
This is one of those times.
It is as if he is saying “Yea! The POTUS is one of us! Go team!”
Kind of demeaning.
Just as an aside: “…no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” Article VI, paragraph 3 of the US Constitution.
Personally, I don’t give a rat’s behind. His policies are what matter, not whether he believes some set of myths and superstitions. Maybe it would be better if he were Muslim so the USA could see that it can be a relatively benevolent belief system (at least compared to fundamental Christianity). That would shake people up, wouldn’t it? heh heh heh
The Blaze quotes the Times of India, and conveniently links to it.
The Times of India covered a colloquium where Dawkins spoke. The author of the piece paraphrases a question put to the scientist, then quotes his answer:
Today’s secular democracies do make a distinction between the Church and the State, but politics and religion still provide sustenance to each other, even in the US. When will we see the first atheist President of the US? “I suspect we have already seen several atheist US presidents, they just didn’t admit it,” responded Dawkins. “I suspect Lincoln was an atheist, probably so was Kennedy. Obama is an intelligent man, so I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s a closet atheist”. Does that make them all hypocrites? “You can’t be an American politician without being a hypocrite,” signed off the renowned biologist and ardent Darwinian. Dawkins didn’t even say that Obama was an atheist: he just said that such a revelation wouldn’t surprise him. Very different from the loons who insist that Obama is a Muslim. Thanks to the OP for providing a forum where we could confirm that supposition.
When Right-wing assholes accuse Obama of being a “Secret Muslim”, what they mean is “Secret muslim (terrorist?)”. That’s why they get mocked. Also because they don’t tend to hold that belief in isolation, and believe tons of other nonsense as well.
This. It’s one thing to say that Obama is sitting in a pew, not really believing, but playing along out of force of habit, sense of community or political ambition. He’s not, but it’s not an outrageous thing to think. It’s entirely different from saying Obama’s in the pew thinking "C’mon Rev wind it up. It’s almost time for me to pray to Mecca.
For a second, I thought you were quoting Bo on Patriots fans.
But then again, there exists such a thing as a liberal Christian (or Muslim, Jew or Hindu) who recognizes and respects diversity of beliefs. And there do exist liberal Christian (or Muslim or Jewish or Hindu) intellectuals. Unless we’re going to go into True Scotsman territory, it’s just as probable.
Also IMO in our society there’s a huge segment of people who’re nominally believers in a generic sense but just in the most lackadaisiacal, indifferent manner and never show up at a house of worship. In any case if someone does not want to pull the atheist card outright one can always join a UU congregation and not have to pretend to believe a specific doctrine.
Some “fundies” claim there’s no real atheists, just God-haters. Now if someone’s intelligent and educated he can’t possibly be a believer, he MUST be just faking it to “pass”? :dubious:
I was under the impression that it wqas against the law to hire anyone based on their religious or any beliefs. So why should anyone who is running for president have to prove their religious beliefs? There have been religious people who were not good Christians by some peoples standards, so who cares?
We do have separation of Church and State as part of our Constitution, and that has served us well. It protects religion and the State. A president should be the president for all the people, not just Christians.
I think some people just want to have a reason to dislike Obama and so they like to Brain wash their fellow believers to have a reason to hate him.It started as soon as he was elected and it seems they decided not to go with any of his programs regardless of weither they were good or bad!
One of my great annoyances - the idea that surely this intelligent person couldn’t possible disagree with my own perfectly formed ideas. Even as a Christian, I recognize that people of good will and towering intellect will disagree with me about all kinds of things until the day I die, and probably a long time after. You know, some of the things I think may even be…gasp…WRONG!!! shocking!
Either you don’t know what “categorically” means, or you are deliberately lying.
Cranks and racists say that Obama is secretly a Muslim, and wants to establish Sharia law in the US. Dawkins is saying that Obama is smarter than he pretends to be. The difference is not subtle.
And I weep for a country whose electorate thinks that believing in Iron Age myths is a requirement to be President.
Well, let’s see. Dawkins and various atheists are asserting that Obama is an atheist, an assertion for which there is not even one tiny piece of evidence. Obama has stated openly and repeatedly that he is a Christian. Everyone close to Obama concurs that he is a Christian.
On the other hand, we have the bare assertion by somebody with an axe to grind.
A while back, Czarcasm started a thread about blind faith, that contradicts facts. I said atheists had that kind of faith. This is an example of what I meant.