ryansutter.net

I was teary eyed.

Thanks for sharing that clip.

Oh, and as far as the video, that's awesome. I especially liked the comment about the Defense Department not surviving the application of The Sermon on The Mount and the whole Abraham thing. "The best thing we can do is act in accordance with those things we all see..."

Gave me goose bumps and my wife looked teary eyed.

Feel free to redefine words as you see fit, but "Bigot" includes religion. But let's say it doesn't. Let's take on a new definition that doesn't include "optional belief systems".

Is Christianity an "optional belief system"? For a person who defines themselves by their religion, it may be, but that doesn't represent the majority of people. How many times do you hear people list "Christian" when they are asked to describe themselves? I personally know the spouse's names, hobbies, interests, colleges, etc. etc. ad infinitum, ad nauseam, of all my co-workers, but only the religious beliefs of two - because I asked. It's not a subject of interest to many and they never question it. So why would they ever think to change? Why should they see an option - it's a non-issue, a family thing, a universal understanding (for them). (And before you question their intelligence, I'll remind you that I don't work at Menard's any more - hehheh.)

The majority of people follow the religions of their parents. It's not that they aren't questioning, thinking people - it's that they are allowed to hold the religions of their parents and still be whoever they want. You and I were not afforded that, but we are the minority.

And you may think, "Well, people like that aren't truly believers," but they are. They just weren't raised as JW's where it mattered so much that even when you decide not to believe, you'd darn better be sure you're RIGHT.

Next, you may say that you agree that Bigotry covers religion, but nothing you said was bigoted.

"There are intelligent, kind, good, honest, hard-working, and amazing people in equal amounts in every race as well as equal amounts of ignorant, evil and lazy ones. People are people, old, young, black, brown, white, etc. You don’t know what they think or how they think without hearing from them. Believers, on the other hand, are a different animal..."

That's bigoted.

You said, "'Hey, even though this guy belongs to a religion that condemns me to burn to death forever and thinks I should have no place in society, I still support him' I have a hard time seeing how you can call that a bigoted statement."

That reminds me of the time JIK said, "She's pretty cute for a black chick." He honestly didn't think it was a racist statement - "What, I said she was hot."

Seriously, it is individuals who "condemn [you] to burn to death forever..." The majority of Christians do not think this way. Even if it were the majority, there are certainly some who do not - you may know a few. This means that you have to "hear from them" before you can "know what they think or how they think" - that's right, Christians too.

But let me be clear about something. I do not think of you as Bigoted. Some of the things you've said here have that sort of ring to them, but I've read your blog for a while now and I know you are fair minded. The definition over at dictionary.com says "utterly intolerant of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own." This does not define Ryan Sutter.

I don't agree with some of your word choice, but I do agree with what you are saying. The type of Christian that we've had running things and the type of Christian that makes up a large voting block in this country is not the type of Christian I would like to see at the helm of this country. They are a type that taps into their beliefs and religion to inform their decisions. Obama is not that type of Christian. Thank God. :P

I am so madly in love with Obama after watching this video :-)

Inflammatory accusations of bigotry aside...

I feel strongly about this message. I don't think it can be easily summarized or paraphrased. Apparently, it can't even be recommended without causing polarization. But Obama delivers it brilliantly and makes it understandable. Rather than trying to please the largest denomination, Obama acknowledges everyone's beliefs but still emphasizes the need for a secular basis for government. I think his message is perfectly concordant with the spirit of the founding fathers, and illustrates that the spirit this country was founded on is still relevant. He's taking a bold stand, but delivering it in such a way that most conservative Christians would be hard-pressed to disagree with him.

If Obama doesn't win this election, America's an idiot.

I mean, when a whole religion condemns those who don't agree with them to either hell or death at Armageddon and the majority of the adherents to that belief system believe that atheists should have no place in our society, one has the right to say, "Hey, even though this guy belongs to a religion that condemns me to burn to death forever and thinks I should have no place in society, I still support him" I have a hard time seeing how you can call that a bigoted statement.

Non-Christian leaders?

How about most of the Founding Fathers. They were almost entirely deists.

Look, I don't care what religion somebody is, as long as they don't use it as an excuse to persecute other people or destroy our secular government. I don't care that Obama's a Christian because he won't do that.

I'll even go further. If he was an atheist like I am but wanted to step on the religious freedoms of others or use his atheism as an excuse to do something irrational or unconstitutional then I would say "I don't care that Obama's an atheist, I'm not supporting him". The whole point of this post was to highlight that he's an example of a Christian politician that a secular person can completely support. That's a rarity these days.

"Despite the fact that Christian leaders have nearly destroyed our country over the last 8 years..."

...after having built it over the previous 200. And please, remind us of the very SHORT list of non-Christian leaders this country has had.

One more thing because you really touched a nerve...

Christianity is an optional belief system, not a biological reality. Skin color is something you are born with and it does not give any indication about how you think or what kind of decisions you are likely to make. There are intelligent, kind, good, honest, hard-working, and amazing people in equal amounts in every race as well as equal amounts of ignorant, evil and lazy ones. People are people, old, young, black, brown, white, etc. You don't know what they think or how they think without hearing from them.

Believers, on the other hand, are a different animal. A believer must act, on some level, in harmony with their beliefs or they are no believer at all. Christian reconstructionists and neo-conservatives and born-again evangelicals all make irrational decisions that are rational within the framework of what they believe. Is it irrational to intentionally destroy the environment? To me, absolutely, but to somebody who believes that Jesus won't come until the last tree falls, it would be irrational to try to preserve the environment. Many Christians believe this crap. What's more, many Christian politicians believe that there is no place for non-Christians in this country.

As a believer in pluralism and openness and acceptance, it is Christianity that has been barring the door to progress for most of my adult life, Christianity that has destroyed my family bonds, not the people, the belief system. A belief system based on a fictional mythology and the irrational premise that Jesus is going to save us so we don't have to try to save ourselves. If Obama were that kind of Christian, the divisive, ignorant, xenophobic, "waitin' on Jesus" kind of Christian, he would be a dangerous president, just like Bush is.

The speech he gives here, however, proves that he's not that kind of Christian. Obama is the kind who is more concerned with the religion OF Jesus than the religion ABOUT Jesus. It's more important to act as he acted, to be pluralistic, to love our neighbors, to turn the other cheek, than it is to obsess over whether he's coming back to save us or whether he favors our country. That is a kind of Christianity that I can not only live with but can truly support, but it's a fairly rare type of Christianity in this day and age. I love Obama. I'm thrilled to have him in the race. I will vote for him and I encourage everybody else to do the same. I've donated to his campaign, and I encourage others to do the same. He is what a Christian ought to be and hopefully will be able to undo the damage that the Christians in office have wrought.

How about this:

Despite the fact that Christian leaders have nearly destroyed our country over the last 8 years and despite the fact that belief in the supernatural is generally irrational and we need rationality from our leaders and despite the fact that I'm an atheist who believes in a secular government, it doesn't bother me that Obama is a professing Christian because he is a reasonable, intelligent, non-fundamentalist, believer in the secular role of government in a pluralistic society.

That's a bit long to fit on the subject line but I think you'd have to be a bit dense to not understand that if you have any knowledge of my positions on this blog. Damn man. Bigoted? No. Cautious about the very real role that Christian fundamentalism has played in driving this country into the ground for the better part of the last decade? Hell yeah.

Bigoted much? Maybe you can do a follow-up post: "It doesn't bother me that Obama is black, and here's why..."