Comments about ‘Rick Santorum questions Obama's Christian values’

Obama is Christian...

now?

As, not even one year ago:

** 'Trump on Obama's Birth Certificate: 'Maybe It Says He's a Muslim' - Fox Nation - 03/30/11

All of the Right wing media was claiming Obama was a...Muslim:

** 'Nearly 1 in 5 Americans Thinks Obama Is Muslim, Survey Shows' - By Lauren Green - 08/19/10 - Fox News

And now Obama is not christian 'enough?'

Hard to take the Republican criticism of Obama seriously...

...when we don't know if that criticism, is even REAL.

** 'Obamas to attend church for Easter Sunday' - By Philip Elliott - AP - Published by DSNews - 04/11/09

And 'yes'.

That story WAS from three years ago.

If this quote doesn't make someone not only laugh, but see the ridiculousness of how political criticisms and the rest of our political animal fights have become, I don't know what ever could...

"Sometimes when you shoot from the hip, you end up shooting yourself in the foot," Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul said. "There is a pretty wide gulf between seeking money for post-9/11 security at the Olympics and seeking earmarks for polar bear exhibits at the Pittsburgh Zoo."

I would like to now extend kudos to Andrea Saul, for making such a simple, distinct, and absolutely hilarious and true statements in politics I've ever heard. This logic could apply to so many other criticisms given.

Thank you!

Pagan, I wouldn't say "all" the conservative media has supported the claim. Yes, a great deal, maybe even most though (sadly). I'm not really a fan of Obama. I think he's intelligent and capable so I have no malice. I simply disagree with certain principles. With that in mind, and with my being a conservative in mind- I can't STAND the idea that the 'Muslim' point even existed, let along LASTED as long as it has.

But wait? I thought his middle name was proof enough...? lol

I could elect a Muslim, a Jew, a Catholic, an Atheist... and yes Pagan, even a gay president. My conditions are not on their specific beliefs but their beliefs about freedom. I see Romney and yes, his being LDS means he likely agrees with many of the basic principles I do. I still do my research and vote accordingly. An atheist or gay president likely wouldn't agree with some of those principles (BUT certainly could) and I wouldn't mind, and could even be easily inclined to vote for them.

With all that in mind, I'd claim that the idea that religion 'isn't a big deal' is a lie. That "values" is the concern, is a lie. Why? Because in examining a candidates "values" all people seem to ever address are titles and associates... like 'the religion'. Last time I checked, the VALUE of not requiring religious tests still exists in our constitution. To me, that "value" supports freedom. I, a member of the LDS Church said this. I've known people from several faiths and irreligious who have agreed also. Shocking.

It's the United States of America, not the United States of Christianity. Yes, a Christian just said that. Again... shocking.

A voice of Reason - 11:38 a.m. Feb. 18, 2012,

I think that is hands down the most I have agreed with your post's! :)

Small detail, I cannot compare a persons orientation to their religion. I think we can agree you can choose your faith, at any time.

All studies to change orientation show a slim chance to change orientation (less than 1%) and only serve to raise suicide risk. I hope we can agree I can support this claim.

Everything else? Spot on!

This 'religious standard' for Presidency is foolish. Many think I have a 'anti-mormon' bias, but I have long claimed that John Huntsman was the best GOP candidate.

I would be fine with voting for a Woman, Muslim, Mormon even a follower of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster! :)

But these are all generalizations. Groups that we allow ourselves into, and use to help define a person.

But research, THAT'S where we get to the things that matter. Who, supports What? What would 'X' person vote on? How so? And why?

Religion has it's place in America. (I said it!) I just think it's not detailed enough to base policy on. And when we focus on the PERSON, we have a much better ability to make informed choices.

Santorum ... said that Obama's agenda is "not about you. It's not about your quality of life. It's not about your jobs. It's about some phony ideal. Some phony theology. Not a theology based on the Bible. A different theology."

When a politician uses our language to impose his hate upon others, it would be good if the politician could at least show one or two examples to support his hate.

Saintorum questions the "Christianity" of President Obama.

And CONS knowingly nod their approval.

Perfect.

Obama's not about jobs?

**'Obama to promote ways for veterans to find work' - By Ken Thomas - AP - Published by DSNews - 11/07/11

**âUS nets 200k more jobs in December, a better-than-expected performanceâ â By Jeff Thredgold â Deseret News â 01/13/12

*âEmployers add 200,000 jobs, jobless rate falls to 8.5%â â Msnbc â 01/06/12

I, would disagree.

On the other side of the isle...

*âSenate Republicans likely to kill Obama jobs billâ â By Andrew Taylor â AP â Published by DSNews â 10/11/11

*'GOP trying to use tax law to limit abortions' - By Stephen Ohlemacher - AP - Published by DSNews - 03/31/11

When have you ever heard of a candidate for the Presidency of the United States, regardless of party affiliation, offensively question a sitting president's Christian values?

Voice of Reason,

Good post. And I agree with most of it.

So, per your post and your obvious concern about values,

Who would you vote for between Gingrich and Obama?

Thanks,

How much of that 1.5 billion$$$ in federal money was after 9/11? Pathetic that the Romney spokesperson would use that tragedy as an excuse for his hypocrisy. If anything, 9/11 let him exploit a tragedy to secure more money from the taxpayers for his cronies.

Pagan,

I thought we'd agree on those points, lol.

"I cannot compare a persons orientation to their religion." I don't think this point translated very well. They are compatible and I think you'll agree, but only in HOW they function for this point- A Mormon candidate likely appeals to Mormon voters (based SOLELY on their clearly sharing some very important beliefs with each other). A gay candidate would likely appeal to most gay voters. Why? This is the same mentality, which is that the candidates appeal will have a more likely chance of their representing that voter base. I only meant to compare that while I still investigate who a candidate is- the only REAL value in looking at candidates who 'match your religion/orientation' is that they have a higher potential of representing your desired political agenda. Whether they do in the end or not aside (as I'd still investigate them), but there is SOME usefulness in looking at religion/orientation for a voter. Other than this, the simple 'label-based-voting' where one refuses to vote Muslim/Mormon/Gay SOLELY Based on that criteria, without real examination- this is still a clear problem, which most 'religious test' related media articles are guilty of doing.

Whew!

Honestly, 'changing orientation' has never really appealed to me. My concern is for moral principles, like whether something is just, moral, conducive to happiness, etc. To each their own.

It is indeed foolish, and I don't care for Huntsman - the nuclear waste bit and his trying to convince the LDS Church to take a different stance were my gripes (not cause his being LDS, but Tony Blair asked the Catholic Church to reconsider their position on 'gay being a sin'. That's one thing, but to ask a religion believing in revelation- it seems inappropriate (not rude, just.... not logical?)

Seriously, I think I may quote the Flying Spaghetti Monster point. Awesome.

Research not so much for me. I often spout about inductive reason and my issues with it. I LIKE research, but only as a tool- not as something defining principles. Another argument, another day.

Great conclusion, especially on the 'person' bit.

There shall be NO religious test for ANY office.

Christian "values" are NOT a requirement for the Office of President of the USA.

JoeBlow,

I was so caught up replying to Pagan again, I almost missed your post. I'm very curious for your reaction. If you read this, I'd love a reply.

Between the two I would vote for Obama. Obama believes in some principles that I do and some that I don't. About 50% of his in-office decisions or statements I am VERY dissatisfied with. The rest I'm fairly pleased with, and in that a couple things he's done that I've been very happy with.

I'd choose Romney over Obama. While I disagree with him on some very crucial principles, and I agree with most of how his beliefs translate politically- my main support is his politically-related financial experience. I don't think he's a financial savior, and some people will always find problems with how anyone spends, but he's capable of making very wise financial decisions for strengthening us in this weak time.

Gingrich on paper is great. I like a lot of things he's... said. He sure knows how to please a crowd and for that he has appeal. However, while I typically 'stay out of personal issues' like with Bill Clinton- in Gingrich's case I can't ignore it. Multiple affairs, divorcing for a younger wife, denying why, then doing it again? He says he believes in certain values he doesn't live. I don't need a 'perfect marriage' president. I need one that I actually know what they value. A man who repeatedly has lied to two of the supposedly 'most important' persons in his life...? Yeah, BIG red flag to me.

I lied to my first wife.... oh yeah, and the second one... but America, I won't lie to you! :) Really?

Santoruums statement is either dumb or naive, or just nuts.

Voice,

Quite refreshing point of view.

I too vote R and D depending on the candidate. And I often disagree with decisions that politicians make. And I criticize them.

I never understood how so many people on the right and the left seem to agree with and defend absolutely EVERYTHING that their side does. How is it possible to be that closely aligned?

As far as Gingrich, I could never vote for him.

Romney? I am on the fence.

I am not concerned with his awkwardness. I like his business sense. I believe he is a solid moderate and would govern that way. It is sad to see him move to the right and pander to the base but I understand that is how politics works.

My biggest concern about Romney is that I think he will further exacerbate the movement of wealth to the top, and that is not good for our country.

I think Obama is a good person. I agree with some and disagree with some.

My vote is still up in the air (if it comes to Obama vs Romney). Santorum or Gingrich, I will definitely vote Obama.

I am going to one up Pagan.

Santorum is a crackpot; All you have to do is read Charles Blow's Op-ed in the 2/17/2012 NY Times.