1. Comment #279719 by The Soilworker on November 6, 2008 at 10:05 am

This is great. A president who will stand up to religious ineptitude. Or at least he'll try. That's why I liked Biden since the beginning. He knows that his Catholicism belongs on the back back back burner.

Other Comments by The Soilworker

2. Comment #279720 by c_mullark on November 6, 2008 at 10:08 am

Very impressive, there would be much less discord in the religion debate and on social issues in general if people were this sensible.

Other Comments by c_mullark

3. Comment #279723 by AdamMil on November 6, 2008 at 10:19 am

I've seen this video before. It sounds nice, but he's clearly speaking to an audience that shares the viewpoint he's espousing.

Given that politicians almost always try to please the audience by telling them what they want to hear, I think it's premature to get your hopes up.

He probably won't say that God told him to go to war, but it seems very unlikely that he's going to do anything to challenge the religious status quo. He wants to get reelected, after all.

Other Comments by AdamMil

4. Comment #279725 by GarrickW on November 6, 2008 at 10:20 am

Reassuring to know the future President has said such things; this is precisely the attitude towards religion that, in my opinion, a politician in this day and age should maintain. Particularly in the United States, where the alternative was frankly frightening.

Other Comments by GarrickW

5. Comment #279729 by Geysser on November 6, 2008 at 10:28 am

At last!!!!

Other Comments by Geysser

6. Comment #279734 by Sifl on November 6, 2008 at 10:34 am

In Comment #279723, AdamMil wrote:

I've seen this video before. It sounds nice, but he's clearly speaking to an audience that shares the viewpoint he's espousing.

Given that politicians almost always try to please the audience by telling them what they want to hear, I think it's premature to get your hopes up.

But these videos have been available on Obama's campaign website for a *very long time*. Therefore his audience is---and has been and will be---the *entire world*.

Besides, these days it's totally unreasonable for any politician to expect to get away with being two-faced in the way that you suggest: one has to assume, when speaking to any crowd, that there are people there recording video and/or audio---if not with dedicated recording devices then with cell phones; further one must assume that said people have YouTube accounts.

And that's a beautiful thing.

Other Comments by Sifl

7. Comment #279738 by Elli on November 6, 2008 at 10:41 am

Whilst there is no doubt that Obama (like most other politicians) will pander to some extent to whatever interest group is in front of them, the mere fact that he has thought lucidly on this topic and come to these conclusions - at the very least for purposes of pandering, although I privately hold the conviction these are much closer to his real thoughts on the subject then his pandering to the religious - and more importantly, the mere fact that he is willing to publicly state these thoughts and conclusions, suggests that his mind is rational and his governance will be one from a position of reason, not faith. The content of this speech would simply never be uttered by a politician who didn't at some level hold these conclusions as valid - no matter what the incentive may be for pandering. Bush could never have uttered such words (even if, by some sublime irony, he privately held such views). McCain likewise. In fact, it is hard to imagine any contemporary American politicians ever making such statements in public. He may (as will be pointed out manifold times in this thread, no doubt) say disturbingly pro-faith comments to faith-head audiences - but these views he expresses here are nonetheless encouraging to the extreme - and I honestly do contend that they could only have been uttered publicly by someone who has thought very critically on the subject matter and actually come to these conclusions as a matter of intellect. Furthermore, I am not sure of the audience at this speech, but the venue was a church... which means it was less likely to just be empty words that he spoke - adding some evidence to the conclusion that these are in fact ideas in which he believes strongly.

just my not so humble opinion. :-)

Other Comments by Elli

8. Comment #279752 by NormanDoering on November 6, 2008 at 10:59 am

c_mullark wrote:

... there would be much less discord in the religion debate and on social issues in general if people were this sensible.

Alas, many of our opponents seem to be too stupid to argue with:
http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/11/can-you-hear-me-now.html

Other Comments by NormanDoering

9. Comment #279763 by IanRobinson on November 6, 2008 at 11:15 am

In Comment #279723, AdamMil wrote:

Given that politicians almost always try to please the audience by telling them what they want to hear, I think it's premature to get your hopes up.

Obama outlines the same position in his book "The Audacity of Hope". That book was for a general audience. Well worth reading BTW.

Other Comments by IanRobinson

10. Comment #279764 by Border Collie on November 6, 2008 at 11:17 am

It could be much worse ... Wolf-Shootin' Barbie could have been elected.

Other Comments by Border Collie

11. Comment #279766 by JAMCAM87 on November 6, 2008 at 11:24 am

Comment #279738 by Elli

"conviction these are much closer to his real thoughts on the subject then his pandering to the religious"

I have heard many times that Obama doesn't even believe in God. Is there any evidence for this' It is also my gut reaction that he is an atheist in disguise for two, maybe unconvincing, reasons:

1)He is educated.
2)He is a secularist and in most cases atheism is a pre-requisite for secularism.

Other Comments by JAMCAM87

12. Comment #279768 by javb222 on November 6, 2008 at 11:33 am

JAMCAM87:

I have heard many times that Obama doesn't even believe in God.

Obama:

Nothing is more transparent than inauthentic expressions of faith. As Jim has mentioned, some politicians come and clap -- off rhythm -- to the choir. We don't need that.

Is this a clever and well told lie then?

Other Comments by javb222

13. Comment #279769 by javb222 on November 6, 2008 at 11:35 am

It's a bit of wish thinking that Obama is an atheist. Maybe he's more of a deist or pantheist but not an atheist.

Other Comments by javb222

14. Comment #279776 by Galactor on November 6, 2008 at 11:51 am

If you read the preamble on the Obama campaign website, you come across

In June of 2006, Senator Obama delivered what was called the most important speech on religion and politics in 40 years. Speaking before an evangelical audience, Senator Obama candidly discussed his own religious conversion and doubts, and the need for a deeper, more substantive discussion about the role of faith in American life

I think Obama is possibly a closet atheist. He clearly understands how the religious right and its antipathy does so much harm to the nation and I am optimistic about his intentions to uphold the first amendment and even go further.

Other Comments by Galactor

15. Comment #279777 by reductionist on November 6, 2008 at 11:55 am

wow, I daresay this made me feel a little patriotic ;)

Other Comments by reductionist

16. Comment #279784 by dochmbi on November 6, 2008 at 12:08 pm

@ javb222: Anything but theism is great, but in addition to that he needs to be anti-bigotry and pro-freedom of thought, which he seems to be so far.

Other Comments by dochmbi

17. Comment #279787 by Bonzai on November 6, 2008 at 12:12 pm

It's a bit of wish thinking that Obama is an atheis

I don't know why we should care. As long as his politics is secular, it is none of our business to inquire into his private beliefs. From what he said about the role of religion in politics (which is nil) I am completely happy.

The political justification for the atheist "movement" is that religion rudely intrudes into secular life. Now the U.S. President elected says in uncertain terms that political and moral positions must be justified in secular terms, accessible to citizens of all faiths and no faith, what more can we ask for?

Other Comments by Bonzai

18. Comment #279790 by dochmbi on November 6, 2008 at 12:20 pm

@ Bonzai: Exactly.
Our beef is not with peoples personal beliefs. People can privately believe whatever they want, as long as they don't try to force other people to conform to their beliefs or use their belief in a supernatural power as a justification for political acts.

Other Comments by dochmbi

19. Comment #279802 by mdowe on November 6, 2008 at 12:32 pm

Re: 13 Comment #279769 by javb222

I couldn't care less about his religious beliefs -- the important thing is that he is a secularist. It is nice that he seems thoughtful and intelligent as well.

Just imagine -- Sarah Palin really could have ended up president of the USA instead of Obama (McCain is old man ... he could have died in office). How scary is that? Even the most ardent left-winger would be out screaming for '4 more years' of Bush to prevent such a disaster.

Other Comments by mdowe

20. Comment #279804 by HandyGeek on November 6, 2008 at 12:35 pm

This speech was one of the reasons I say he's going to be every bit as capable as Kennedy was to lead the US.

Other Comments by HandyGeek

21. Comment #279811 by Frankus1122 on November 6, 2008 at 12:44 pm

Bonzai,

I was just thinking on this matter after re-viewing the video. I went away, did some other work and was about to make a post as to what I thought.
Then I read your post.
It looks like you beat me to it.

I don't know if he is a closet atheist or not. In some ways it does not matter as long as what he said in this video is true.

Pierre Trudeau said the State has no business in the bedrooms of the nation.

Similarly, Religion should have no sway in the business of the State. There may be principles that you personally derive from religion but if you cannot justify them on rational grounds then you really have no business foisting them on others -especially a whole nation or part thereof.

I may double thread post this because it relates to Porp.8 in California.

Other Comments by Frankus1122

22. Comment #279820 by Bonzai on November 6, 2008 at 12:49 pm

Frankus

Pierre Trudeau said the State has no business in the bedrooms of the nation.

Believe it or not, Lenin said that almost 60 years before Trudeau.

Gay sex was a crime under the Tsar. Lenin abolished the law after the revolution for exactly the reason that "the revolutionary government has no role in the bedrooms of the citizens". It was recriminalized only after Stalin came to power.

But don't broadcast this, or the rightwingers would say, told you so, all you liberals are commies. :)

Other Comments by Bonzai

23. Comment #279822 by AdamMil on November 6, 2008 at 12:50 pm

I too think the video is closer to Obama's true beliefs, and doubt he'll act with any overtly religious agenda. But I also doubt that he'll take any kind of active stance against or "stand up to" religion and its influence in politics.

I agree that his expression of these opinions at all probably bodes well for his policy-making in general, but having watched plenty of politicians, I guess I've become cynical. :-) I'll believe that he'll make much change for the better when I see it.

I certainly don't expect the restricted "free speech zones", DHS security theater, domestic surveillance, excessive invocation of terrorists as bogeymen, extraordinary rendition, the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, or aggressive military campaigns -- essentially the biggest evils I associate with the Bush administration -- to disappear anytime soon...

Other Comments by AdamMil

24. Comment #279828 by Enlightenme.. on November 6, 2008 at 12:55 pm

6. Comment #279734 by Sifl

Besides, these days it's totally unreasonable for any politician to expect to get away with being two-faced in the way that you suggest: one has to assume, when speaking to any crowd, that there are people there recording video and/or audio---if not with dedicated recording devices then with cell phones; further one must assume that said people have YouTube accounts.

And that's a beautiful thing.

Hmm..

Or are we already in an era of retreat to monotonous sequences of vacuous platitudes and lip-service?
:(
Another ten years, and we'll all be subject to such constraints because everybody we interact with will have 24-7 sound & video recording to take to their lawyer.
:( :(
This happens now.
London traffic wardens.

I asked for call-recording 3 hours ago to try to get a legal instrument to enact surrender of a policy at the offer due to expire in 4 days (Refused - I have to drive 20 miles in the morning and sign stuff rather than rely on their post-room stamp and my ability to make a correct actionable letter (or make in-time apppointments for professional help))

Other Comments by Enlightenme..

25. Comment #279857 by Bonzai on November 6, 2008 at 1:33 pm

What's with the people who insist that there is something dishonest about his position? There is no "pandering" (either to the religious crowds or the atheists) Many Christians do accept that government should be secular. Atheism is not a prerequisite to secularism.

Obama cannot be clearer on where he stands: faith is private and should remain there.

This is no "platitude" in the U.S.A. Atheists or no, he is definitely a secularist and that is all that should matter.

Other Comments by Bonzai

26. Comment #279865 by crazyivan498 on November 6, 2008 at 1:53 pm

If Obama is truly a secularist then he should stick is money where is mouth is and get rid of faith based initiatives

Other Comments by crazyivan498

27. Comment #279866 by 8teist on November 6, 2008 at 1:56 pm

"Folks have`nt been reading their bibles" Lol, no shit?

Other Comments by 8teist

28. Comment #279873 by javb222 on November 6, 2008 at 2:14 pm

Bonzai

I don't know why we should care. As long as his politics is secular, it is none of our business to inquire into his private beliefs. From what he said about the role of religion in politics (which is nil) I am completely happy.

I agree with you in principle, but if someone really is religious I can't see how you could reconcile the numerous clashes of religion and reason. But I think Obama is very reasonable and was brave to say what he did. I liked:

substantially more people in America believe in angels than they do in evolution

My mother...grew up with a healthy skepticism of organized religion herself. As a consequence, so did I.

...I do not believe that religious people have a monopoly on morality, I would rather have someone who is grounded in morality and ethics, and who is also secular, affirm their morality and ethics and values without pretending that they're something they're not. They don't need to do that. None of us need to do that.

EDIT: I said he was brave to say what he did, but maybe I'm overestimating the religiosity of the US?

Other Comments by javb222

29. Comment #279874 by debaser71 on November 6, 2008 at 2:14 pm

If this is the same speech. Sorry but I am not impressed with Obama in regards to secularism. Not at all.

"Finally, any reconciliation between faith and democratic pluralism requires some sense of proportion.

This goes for both sides.

...

But a sense of proportion should also guide those who police the boundaries between church and state. Not every mention of God in public is a breach to the wall of separation - context matters. It is doubtful that children reciting the Pledge of Allegiance feel oppressed or brainwashed as a consequence of muttering the phrase "under God." I didn't. Having voluntary student prayer groups use school property to meet should not be a threat, any more than its use by the High School Republicans should threaten Democrats. And one can envision certain faith-based programs - targeting ex-offenders or substance abusers - that offer a uniquely powerful way of solving problems. "

It says more. Sorry but Obama is repeating right wing talking points here and demoniszing valid church state separation concerns. He also paints secularist wrongly in that he uses 'public' and 'student prayer' as if these are on anyone's agenda to stop. Ick.

Other Comments by debaser71

30. Comment #279896 by DrCogSci on November 6, 2008 at 2:55 pm

In viewing the longer speech, it's clear that a lot of the comments *are* in fact over-reaching in describing Obama's personal religious beliefs (at least from the evidence presented here).

I didn't see anything which suggested that he's anything other than a left leaning centrist who supports a fundamental secularism in deciding on policy, I don't know about you, but that's more than good enough for me, for now!

Other Comments by DrCogSci

31. Comment #279900 by HourglassMemory on November 6, 2008 at 3:12 pm

According to Wikiquote, he went to the Western Wall, in Jerusalem, and the note he left there was picked up and then leaked it to the Israeli press:

"Lord — Protect my family and me. Forgive me my sins, and help me guard against pride and despair. Give me the wisdom to do what is right and just. And make me an instrument of your will."

He's a politician, I think that if he was pandering, he wouldn't go as far as faking this note.
I'm really don't look too much into the last sentence of the note. You could still say that, being a believer, and not really mean it literally, as if you were going to listen to voices in your head, like Bush did.
Obama really doesn't look like that type of person.

I've seen this video once or twice and it's very nice to hear, yes, but it's nothing compared to the stuff he's said about religion on the positive side. I understand that a bit of it might be pandering to the religious right, but he's still a typical beleiver.

He certainly IS a HUGE improvement though.
The speech he gives there is RARE. And he certainly does come across as being more intelligent and better informed than the usual politician.
I love his face when he tells the listeners about people beleiving more in angels than in Evolution. He raises his eyebrows and nods slightly, as if saying "Oh yes, believe it or not, that's true."
The speech is actually very telling of the religious mind. He talks about people needing a "narrative arc" in their lives. The fact that they feel the need to have a "vessel for their beliefs". He also talks of, even though he worked with churches, he became aware of finding him to be detatched and removed. I have no doubt that this gave him the errouneous conviction that he "lacked something". It's not surprising though, if you do surround yourself with people who were themselves surrounded and educated to believe that, you start considering their propositions. You can almost see the reliigous people reaching out, all innocently well intentioned, taking this intelligent man away from realising that you really don't have a hole in you if you don't follow a religion, if you don't have a vessel.
I'm curious....does this mean that before he started having these feelings, he wasn't really a believer?
After all, he does say that people saw him as just an observer.
However, he's evidence that a person could have the same values and not follow a religion.
I wonder how he would be today if he had worked with Humanist organizations instead.

The fact hat he accepts Evolution and dismisses ID as not being science, I'm glad he's that rational, or at least has people close to him who could voice this stance on the issue.

Other Comments by HourglassMemory

32. Comment #279906 by Border Collie on November 6, 2008 at 3:25 pm

I couldn't find a link yet, but probably within a day there will be a link to a news story about the Terrell (Texas) Tribune which DID NOT, yes, did not, report that Barack Obama had won the presidential election. Gotta love those old east Texas attitudes. Maybe the story will be posted on www.wfaa.com ...

Other Comments by Border Collie

33. Comment #279915 by DarwinsPitbull on November 6, 2008 at 3:40 pm

If Obama is truly a secularist then he should stick is money where is mouth is and get rid of faith based initiatives

I guess you weren't watching all his speeches because he has said that he plans on expanding faith based initiatives.

Other Comments by DarwinsPitbull

34. Comment #279919 by Zzyx1170 on November 6, 2008 at 3:46 pm

The entire 40 minute speech can be downloaded from:
http://obama.senate.gov/podcast/060628-call_to_renewal_1/

Other Comments by Zzyx1170

35. Comment #279923 by righton on November 6, 2008 at 3:55 pm

"I guess you weren't watching all his speeches because he has said that he plans on expanding faith based initiatives."





Maybe he just wanted to get some religious votes. Now that he is in, it might be a different story.


McPalin lost. :)

Other Comments by righton

36. Comment #279946 by Rawhard Dickins on November 6, 2008 at 4:59 pm

I'm beginning to like Obama more and more

But seriously, he may be the best person to unite a (brown) world.

Other Comments by Rawhard Dickins

37. Comment #279960 by ADePSP on November 6, 2008 at 5:25 pm

I just hope he lives up to all this...

Other Comments by ADePSP

38. Comment #279987 by aegis on November 6, 2008 at 5:53 pm

"He probably won't say God told him to go to war, but it seems very unlikely that he's going to do anything to challenge the religious status quo."

At this point, i'd be pretty happy with an administration that didn't try to promote it.

Other Comments by aegis

39. Comment #280007 by A on November 6, 2008 at 6:08 pm

This gives me so much hope.

Other Comments by A

40. Comment #280025 by Fouad Boussetta on November 6, 2008 at 6:18 pm

Obama is great.

Other Comments by Fouad Boussetta

41. Comment #280035 by prolibertas on November 6, 2008 at 6:33 pm

I don't really think he's just pandering. He included 'non-believers' more than once, and remember that this is something that he absolutely doesn't have to do to get re-elected. Remember Bush Senior's little comment: 'I don't know that atheists should even be considered citizens'. This in no way hurt his chances of being elected, not in America.

So I hope I'm not unreasonable to think that the fact that Obama does acknowledge us, when he doesn't have to, suggests sincerity in this speech.

I'm also going to have to get used to this strange, alien feeling of actually liking the U.S. President...

Other Comments by prolibertas

42. Comment #280040 by Steve Zara on November 6, 2008 at 6:54 pm

This was a fascinating speech. It seemed to me to be about acknowledging the dominant presence of religious faith in American society, and attempting use connections with religious groups to help change views.

I think I noticed some careful "confusion" of language, with "secularist" being used in place of "atheist". (Such as in many comparisons between "believer" and "secularist").

He is using very delicate language, saying that religious people need not stop bringing their religious concerns into public discussions, but that these concerns have to be translated into language that allows for argument and reason.

I really don't think this could have been any clearer. He is not trying to distance religious people, but he insists that they must accept that their arguments will be subjected to analysis using reason.

He also included a very important phrase indeed:

"I do not believe religious people have a monopoly on morality"

I felt joy as I heard that! It represents phenomenal progress.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

43. Comment #280043 by notsobad on November 6, 2008 at 6:56 pm

So I hope I'm not unreasonable to think that the fact that Obama does acknowledge us, when he doesn't have to, suggests sincerity in this speech.

His mum was atheist/agnostic so it would be really lame not to acknowledge it.

Other Comments by notsobad

44. Comment #280052 by HappyPrimate on November 6, 2008 at 7:25 pm

In 2004 I first heard Obama speak at the DNC. I was painting my hallway at the time while listening to the TV. As I listened to him I had to stop and go sit down to watch and listen more closely. I was so impressed with that speech that I found a piece of paper, wrote his name on it and posted it on the fridge. I knew *that one* had a future. I would have voted for him right then. I was even more impressed when I learned that he had written the speech himself. He is not a phony. He is probably one of the most intelligent people in this country. He exhibits such control and even temperment. I have no doubt he will be good for this country and ultimately the world.

Other Comments by HappyPrimate

45. Comment #280073 by Wosret on November 6, 2008 at 8:55 pm

I couldn't be happier. Obama is elevated in my book. I knew that he was a smart and thoughtful guy, but I think that he shows a cleverness, and a pragmatic, realistic, nuanced awareness of society at large, and what is reasonably possible to be accomplished.

I agree with Bonzai that if what he says is true, then we shouldn't care what he personally believes, but, for the record -- I see a humanist that is far more interested in practical achievable humanistic goals than either promoting or stifling religion.

If it was all just astonishingly clever pandering, then I feel sufficiently pandered to.

Other Comments by Wosret

46. Comment #280075 by Enlightenme.. on November 6, 2008 at 9:01 pm

#25 Bonzai:

Sorry, I wasn't clear.

I was talking in general terms technophobically about a distopian vision of tight-lipped human interactions.

It's very sad, but even he is gonna make slips and literalists are gonna jump all over it - just another thing we have to ready ourselves for.
Ain't gonna be nice.

--------------------

Bonnie Greer on Question time described him as 'slick'

She's from Chicago herself and was in the Clinton camp, but is 'converted' so to speak.

Slick fits for me to do the near-impossible task of common ground we hope for.

(Operator is the normal word appended to slick but not here)
Lawyer's ok isn't it for a neutral arbitrater?

Hitch's criticism was he's not used to the position of Decider.

We're sort of hoping for a type of NOMA here aren't we? In the context of his position.

Reckon we can assume he'll be leaving his faith outside the door of the oval office.
My instinct says a lawyers well trained for the cognitive dissonance required.

Other Comments by Enlightenme..

47. Comment #280081 by madame_zora on November 6, 2008 at 10:09 pm

A few things- first, this is the speech that won me over for certain. If I remember correctly, this speech was given at Ebenezer Baptist Church, Martin Luther King Jr.'s church. He gave this most compelling speech in front of conservative Baptists, shaming them for not embracing their gay brothers and sisters, and championing the rights of non-believers. That takes cajones, and he's apparently got plenty.

Now, as for supporting faith based initiatives, you haven't read the fine print (and I'm glad the religious haven't either). Yes, he's planning to expand them, but it comes with a caveat- any church that accepts federal money must make their services available to everyone on a non-discriminatory basis. If they don't, they can lose their funding, and their tax-exempt status can come under question. It's a way to secularise churches! Calm down people, this is a very smart man.

I believe he IS a believer, but belief is not only fundamental- many, many christians maintain a more ethereal form of belief where the stories are allegorical, and you're supposed to be smart enough to take the "main idea" from the story. No doubt he believes jesus is real and and prays, but probably maintains some sort of deference to the possibility that he might be wrong. He'll probably turn to his faith for comfort after his grandmother died, but this is not a fundamentalist, nor is he convinced his is the only truth.

Thanks to my fellow Americans for doing the right thing for once, I didn't think we had it in us.

Other Comments by madame_zora

48. Comment #280085 by Roy_H on November 6, 2008 at 10:34 pm

This is so refreshing.But let's not kid ourselves, if he is indeed a closet atheist, he would not have got where he is today had he been wearing a T shirt with a big red A on it!

Comment #279719 by The Soilworker on November 6, 2008 at 10:05 am "That's why I liked Biden since the beginning" Well isn't he the guy who thinks President Roosevelt made a speech on televison in 1929 during the stock market crash?

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0Jf17Yo7hBM

Other Comments by Roy_H

49. Comment #280087 by debaser71 on November 6, 2008 at 10:45 pm

Hmmm so no one else is concerned about some of the comments Obama has made in regards to secularists?

Anyway I'll continue to pressure my elected officials to do the right thing regarding secularism and the Constitution. Just because it's Obama doesn't mean he's gonna get a free pass.

Other Comments by debaser71

50. Comment #280089 by somersetsimon on November 6, 2008 at 11:06 pm

I don't really think he's just pandering. He included 'non-believers' more than once, and remember that this is something that he absolutely doesn't have to do to get re-elected. Remember Bush Senior's little comment: 'I don't know that atheists should even be considered citizens'. This in no way hurt his chances of being elected, not in America.

So I hope I'm not unreasonable to think that the fact that Obama does acknowledge us, when he doesn't have to, suggests sincerity in this speech.

I'm also going to have to get used to this strange, alien feeling of actually liking the U.S. President...

It's a shame that he didn't include "believers and non-believers" in his otherwise brilliant acceptance speech.

Other Comments by somersetsimon