Didn’t see the speech, but I’ve read the transcript. In terms of reference to the almighty (I counted five, including references to the “Author of Liberty” and “the maker of heaven and earth”), Bush is actually below his personal average. And as far as I can tell, he’s not trying to speak for God as much as he did in his first inaugural address. In fact part of this speech (“Not because we consider ourselves a chosen nation; God moves and chooses as He wills.”) were refreshing in their display of Christian humilty.
So I have to say this speech was a step in the right direction, given Bush’s history.
I agree. We have a couple people in this thread stating that Bush should keep his religion private and out of the public eye. If I were to suggest that someone keep their sexuality private and out of the public eye, I’d be verbally lynched. I believe there’s a word for such behavior. Begins with an “H”. Ends with “ypocrisy”.
Care to name a SINGLE politician in the history of man that would maintain his or her constituent base if he or she suddenly started acting in stark contrast to his or her previously established behavior?
I could care less about Bush invoking God at every opportunity; he’s done it all the time, and only does it so he doesn’t have to obey every single wacky notion the Conservative Christian Coalition comes up with.
Me, I object to his notion of exporting freedom throughout the world. Heard that, and immediately thought of the French guys from Quest for the Holy Grail:
Then you misapprehend. The objection is not that he displays his faith in public, but that it influences political action in a hamfisted, narrow and intolerant way. Someone’s personal sexuality, and mention or display thereof, aren’t official public policy or laws. Bad analogy
Hey for me it’s like he thinks we’re 100% Christian or something. I’d like to see the president be a bit more neutral on these things. While I’ll respect anyones faith in whatever gets them out of bed, I find for someone as high profile as Bush, he should STFU.
Huh-yup, huh-yup! We Merkins shore are lucky that our natchural resources include things like aerospace plants and medical devices and machine tools and computers ‘n stuff or we’d be in real trouble, bein’ so dumb 'n all.
Perhaps you missed the dependant clause of mine where I mentioned the complaints come from the way he uses his religion in a hamfisted (“faith-based charity”), narrow (“Jeezus”) and intolerant (“anti-gay amendmentment”) way. So yeah. You didn’t see folks complaining about other politicians who are religious when they don’t use it as a hammer against others.
Wow…I quote several posters who are INDEED complaining about PUBLIC pronouncements of faith (irrespective of public policy, they think …rightly or wrongly, that faith expressions should be a PRIVATE matter) and you still think that no one is complaining about public pronouncements of faith…not specifically linked to public policy?
The mind boggles.
I’ve seen plenty of posts in other threads from folks complaining about Clinton and others having public displays of faith…irrespective of public policy.
Indeed…"GaWd: “If said public official is working in an official capacity at the time, I would like him to keep his faith to his owndamnself.”
If Christians think their faith is being used as a cynical political ploy, and they’re cool with that, what’s it to me? It’s their religion they’re letting get turning into a cheap political stroke, not mine.
Presidents have always taken the Bill O’Reily approach to faith: go unapologetically for the cheap exploit to stroke the crowd. Bush is no better or worse than most (well, I didn’t much appreciate his dis of non-christian presidents, but then I don’t much appreciate lying sacks of shit a lot more), and at least he’s been willing to unequivocally state that non-religious people are Americans too: something that even past Democrats have been unwilling to stand up for. Only Nixon could go to China, and only Bush could get conservatives to sing his praises as he drives the stake through the heart of small-government conservatism, international realism, and virtually every other principle the conservative revolution was supposed to be about achieving.
It wasn’t so much Bush’s speech as it was the entire program. It was like a church service. But no big deal to me.
Two things stood out. One was the minister who mentioned twice in his prayer that the founding fathers had given us “one nation, under God, with liberty and justice for all.” I wondered if he was aware of when that particular phrase came to be as it is – in the mid-1950’s.
The other, and more important thing, was that everytime Bush mentioned freedom, I shuddered with the irony. If he wants an end to tyranny, let him start with Guantanamo.
He has swore to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. And that Constitution requires due process under the law for all persons.
I don’t care what religious faith he proclaims on his big day. What does concern me is the seeming lack of grasp of any real moral and ethical code of justice and decency.
Of course they keep talking about God, to give a moral facade to the completely immoral and evil actions of this putrid adminstration. There are people so stupid in this country they will vote for Satan if he’s waving a bible.
Perhaps some would like to deride George Washington, who added the words “so help me God” to the sworn oath of office. He even had the unbridled temerity to show his affection for the Bible by publicly kissing it. :eek: Congress hadn’t made considered a Bible for the swearing in, and had to borrow one from a Masonic Lodge.
