Obama spokesman: "Being religious is never un-American. Being religious is quintessentially American."

Then the members of Al Qaeda would make fine Americans.

Columbia University is at it again.

Write a comment to the link below shooting holes into this disgusting editorial.

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2011/03/06/zionism-speak#comment-161838938

"No community can be expected to meet a challenge as complex as this alone. No community can be expected to become experts in terrorist organizations..."

Excuse me, Mr. McDonough, but the counter-jihad "community" of which we here are members has been doing precisely that for over 10 years with precious little help from the likes of you and now with outright opposition from your boss, who gives every evidence of being pro-Islam. It is because we have taken the time and trouble to learn the intricacies of Islam that we know that his assertions of being "Christian" dovetail nicely with Muslim claims that Islam "abrogates" and absorbs the previous biblical religions. That's not something you are likely to be educating "interfaith forums" about, is it, Mr. McDonough?

Now, I know that "being religious is never un-American", being non-religious is considered un-American by many politicians, including former president GHW Bush, who asserted that atheists such as myself are not American citizens. But since Islam is hailed as "one of the world's great religions" it is given a free pass simply because it is a religion. I'm held in greater contempt and suspicion than the "religious" Muslims who want to put our nation under Islamic Sharia law. That's adding insult to injury. If the Islamic organizations in America such as CAIR, MSA, ISNA and the rest were the overtly political German-American Bund of the 1930s, which they closely resemble, perhaps they would not be cut quite so much slack.

If those elusive beings, the "moderate Muslims", wish to stand up and confirm that they are Americans first and slaves to a totalitarian religious ideology a distant second, they will always be welcome as long as they are ready to prove their sincerity. With actions, not taqiyya.

Islam really isn't a religion, not in the conventional sense. It is more of a strict social order.

"Being religious is never un-American. Being religious is quintessentially American,"

Let's not forget the 'quintessentially American' Westboro Baptist Church.

These are the same people who sigh and swoon when they hear Islam calls on believers to surrender to the will of what is purportedly a compassionate and merciful deity. These are the people who insist that all religions are basically the same.

But -- pardon the pun -- the devil is in the details.

While you're surrendering to someone's will, it's worth asking what it is they will for you to do. Where are the "brass tacks" -- the tenets of the religion you can no longer ignore when you get serious about your faith, even if other people ignore them freely and without a second thought?

That is, the things where "it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you?" (Qur'an 2:216)

And if you don't know the rest of that verse, please do click the link. It is verses like that which, particularly in the broader context of the Qur'an, demonstrate that just "being religious" need not imply that being so inclined automatically leads to the good of society.

"Being religious is never un-American. Being religious is quintessentially American," McDonough said....

Unless that "religion" vows to "fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world)." Qur'an - 8:39

Right from the Qur'an, folks. Time for the Administration to wake up and drop the PC.

Here’s one of the more significant religions ever to have been practiced in the Americas.

The Incas were probably one of the most religious cultures in history. Nearly every single aspect of their lives involved the worship of some sort of idol. They worshiped through prayers, dances, and sacrifices. Sacrifices were the most important form of worship. The Incas sacrificed a wide variety of things, ranging from objects they created, to crops they grew, to livestock, to their own children. The type of sacrifice they made depended on the importance of the god the gift was for and the seriousness of the situation they were involved in. Human sacrifice was only done for very special occasions and in crisis situations.

See if the following bears some similarity with Islam.

The guidelines for sacrifice were very specific had to be followed exactly. To change the order of a ceremony would mean that the gods would not be pleased and would bring more problems. Sacrifices would be accompanied by prayers as well. Like the sacrifices, prayers had to be recited in a specific manor, and only by priests. There were many prayers for many situations.

All these sacrifices and prayers were offered to the most important things in the Inca culture, their deities. Incas were incredibly idolatrous, they idolized a wide variety of things, from dirt to the Sun. The Incas did have a hierarchy of gods, the top being Viracocha, or sometimes called Pachayachachic, or "Creator of the World." Viracocha was the supreme being that created all the other gods. Viracocha also created the light and the dark, the earth and the sea, land and water, and all the things that are of the earth. This is a prayer to Viracocha for the health and general well being of the people!

The CAPACOCHA ceremony was an important part of the Inca civilization. The ceremony celebrated key events such as the death of an emperor, the birth of a royal son, a great victory in battle or an annual or biennial event in the Incan calendar. It also was conducted to stop droughts, earthquakes and epidemics.

When a capacocha ceremony was to be held, the Inca sent out to the provinces a demand for tribute payment of gold, silver, shell, cloth, feathers, and llamas and alpacas. They also demanded tribute payment of boys and girls between the ages of 4 and 10, selected for physical perfection.

Capacocha ceremonies lasted several days, including feasting and ritual events. Offerings would be made at many appropriate huacas (shrines), and at the major shrine, a boy and girl were sacrificed and interred together as a couple. The children were reportedly suffocated, killed with a blow to the head or buried alive after ritual inebriation.

What was that again about all cultures being equal?

"Being religious is never un-American. Being religious is quintessentially American."

The Obama spokesman is right. The only thing un-American by definition is atheism, and its political expression in Marxism. Following the tenets of some religions may be criminal, but it is never ever un-American.

The statement is completely in line with what President Eisenhower once said: "Our government makes no sense unless it is founded in a deeply felt religious faith, and I don't care what that faith is."

Eisenhower was instrumental in the addition of the words "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954 saying: "In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war."

Eisenhower was also instrumental in the 1956 adoption of "In God We Trust" as the motto of the United States, and its 1957 introduction on paper currency.

The original 1892 pledge reads:

"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

The Catholics strongly supported the addition of "under God" to the pledge.

Many objections have been raised since the addition of the phrase "under God" to the Pledge in 1954. Critics contend that a government requiring or promoting this phrase violates protections against the establishment of religion guaranteed in the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

In 2004, linguist Geoffrey Nunberg criticized the addition of "under God" for a different reason. The original supporters of the addition thought that they were simply quoting Lincoln's Gettysburg Address. However, Nunberg said that to Lincoln and his contemporaries, "under God" meant "God willing" and they would have found its use in the Pledge of Allegiance grammatically incorrect.

A bill, H.R. 2389, was introduced in Congress in 2005 which, if enacted into law, would have stripped the Supreme Court and most federal courts of the power to consider any legal challenges to government requiring or promoting of the Pledge of Allegiance. H.R. 2389 was passed by the House of Representatives in July 2006, but failed due to the Senate's not taking it up.

This action is viewed in general as court stripping by Congress over the Judiciary. Even if a similar bill is enacted, its practical effect may not be clear: proponents of the bill have argued that it is a valid exercise of Congress's power to regulate the jurisdiction of the federal courts under Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution, but opponents question whether Congress has the authority to prevent the Supreme Court from hearing claims based on the Bill of Rights (since amendments postdate the original text of the Constitution and may thus implicitly limit the scope of Article III, Section 2).

Judges and legal analysts have voiced concerns that Congress can strip or remove from the judicial branch the ability to determine if legislation is constitutional.

None of the many court cases about the pledge reached the US Supreme Court so nobody can say whether it is constitutional or not. Today about half the states encourage schools to recite the pledge.

How can Ike's statement, that "democracy cannot exist without religion" be true when no religion in fact demand democracy in their teachings?

Different religions are of course more or less compatible with an democratic order, but that is something else. The Protestant version of Christianity seems to me to be easily compatible, and Islam not compatible at all with the values and principles of democracy.

The goal of a wall between religion and politics seems impossible to achieve especially in America, probably the most Christian nation on earth.

So instead of a secular democracy America developed a Republic with a "civil religion":

“In the United States, “Tocqueville said, “religion … is mingled with all the habits of the nation and all the feelings of patriotism, whence it derives a peculiar force.” The mingling of religion and patriotism is evident in America's civil religion. Writing in the 1960s, Robert Bellah defined civil religion, “at its best” as a “genuine apprehension of universal and transcendent religious reality as seen in or, one could almost say, as revealed through the experience of the American people.”

Civil religion enables Americans to bring together their secular politics and their religious society, to marry God and country, so as to give religious sanctity to their patriotism and nationalist legitimacy to their religious beliefs, and thus to merge what could be conflicting loyalties into loyalty to a religiously endowed country.

America's civil religion provides a religious blessing to what Americans feel they have in common. It is perfectly compatible with each American belonging to his or her own denomination, believing in a Christian or non-Christian god, or being Deist, as were several of the Founding Fathers. It is not compatible, however, with being atheist, for it is a religion, invoking a transcendental Being apart from the terrestrial human world.

The American civil religion encompasses four major elements.

First, central to it is the proposition that the American system of government rests on a religious base. It presupposes a Supreme Being. The views of the framers of the Constitution that the republican government they were creating could survive only among a people imbued with religion and morality have been endorsed and repeated by subsequent generations of American leaders. Our institutions “presuppose a Supreme Being”, as Justice William O. Douglas put it, and President Eisenhower similarly declared that “Recognition of the Supreme Being is the first, the most basic expression of Americanism. Without God there could be no American form of government, nor an American way of life.” To deny God is to challenge the fundamental principle underlying American society and government.

A second core element of the civil religion is the belief that Americans are God's “chosen” or, in Lincoln's phrase, “almost chosen” people, that America is the “new Israel” with a divinely sanctioned mission to do good in the world. The core of the civil religion, as Conrad Cherry has said, is “the sense of America's special destiny under God.” Two of the three Latin phrases the Founding Fathers chose for the republic they were creating sum up this sense of mission: “Annuit Coeptis” (God smiles on our undertakings), and “Novus Ordo Seclorum” (New order for the ages). The third was “E pluribus unum” (From many one).

A third element of Americas civil religion is the prevalence of religious allusions and symbols in American public rhetoric, rituals, and ceremonies. Presidents have always taken their oath of office on a Bible and, with other officials, formally assume their offices when, at the conclusion of their oaths, they utter the words, “So help me God.” Except for George Washington in his two paragraph second inaugural remarks, all presidents have invoked God in their inaugural addresses and in most other major addresses as well. The speeches of some presidents, most notably Lincoln, are filled with religious resonance and biblical references. Eight words, and only eight words, appear on every peace of American currency, bills and coins: “United States of America” and “In God We Trust.” Americans pledge allegiance to “one Nation under God.” Major public ceremonies begin with an invocation by a clergyman from one denomination and end with a benediction by a clergyman of a different denomination. The military services have a substantial corps of chaplains, and the daily sessions of Congress open with prayer.

Fourth, national ceremonies and activities themselves take on a religious aura and perform religious functions. Historically, as Lloyd Warner argues, celebration of Memorial Day was “an American sacred ceremony.” So also in the celebration of Thanksgiving, as well as presidential inaugurations and funerals. The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Gettysburg Address, Lincoln's second inaugural, Kennedy's inaugural, Martin Luther King's “I have a dream” speech have all become sacred texts defining American identity.

The marriage of religion and politics in America's civil religion is well caught in Peter Steinfels's account of the inauguration of Bill Clinton in 1993:

“At its core (was) the solemn administration of an oath on the Bible, preceded and followed by prayers and accompanied by hymns as well as patriotic music. …
The week was rich with religious gestures alongside moments when the religious overtones , though not explicit, were unmistakable. The inaugural week began with a nationwide ringing of church bells. At Howard University, Bill Clinton invoked the memory of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., echoing his lessons and quoting the verse from Scripture that would also close the Inaugural Address. …
The President was surrounded throughout the day by an array of religious leaders.”

This was not the ceremony of a secular, much less atheistic, society or polity. As the British scholar D. W. Brogan pointed out, in the past when children recited daily the “American Creed” (*) in schools, they performed a religious exercise as truly as if they began their day by saying, “I believe in God the Father Almighty” or “There is no God but God.” Civil religion converts Americans from religious people of many denominations into a nation with the soul of a church.

(*) “I believe in the United States of America as a Government of the people, by the people, for the people; whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed; a democracy in a republic; a sovereign Nation of many sovereign States; a perfect union, one and inseparable; established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice, and humanity for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes. I therefore believe it is my duty to my country to love it; to support its Constitution; to obey its laws; to respect its flag, and to defend it against all enemies.”).

But, apart from its being American, what is that church? It is a church that has included Protestants, Catholics, Jews, other non-Christians, and even agnostics. It is, however, a church that is profoundly Christian in its origins, symbolism, spirit, accoutrements, and, most importantly, its basic assumptions about the nature of man, history, right and wrong. The Christian Bible, Christian references, biblical allusions and metaphors, permeate expressions of the civil religion. “Behind the civil religion at every point lie Biblical archetypes”, Bellah has said: “Exodus, Chosen People, Promised Land, New Jerusalem, Scarified Death and Rebirth.” Washington becomes Moses, Lincoln becomes Christ. “The deepest source of the symbols, beliefs and rituals of the (civil) religion”, Conrad Cherry agrees, “lies in the Old and New Testaments.” America's civil religion is a nondenominational, national religion and, in its articulated form, not expressly a Christian religion. Yet it is thoroughly Christian in its origin, content, assumptions, and tone. The God in whom their currency says Americans trust is implicitly the Christian God. Two words, nonetheless, do not appear in civil religion statements and ceremonies. They are “Jesus Christ”. While the American Creed is Protestantism without God, the American civil religion is Christianity without Christ.

The violation of the “two word”-prohibition by the Reverend Franklin Graham at the inauguration of President George W. Bush provoked much criticism. Bush explicitly proclaimed his faith in Christ during his presidential campaign. Perhaps in response to the criticism of Graham, he quite consciously did not do this in his many expressions of faith as president."

So says Samuel P. Huntington in his last book: “Who Are We” (2004), from which I have quoted the chapter about American “civilian religion”. It makes good sense to me, and explains why religion and politics are mixed up and inseperable in a way practically unknown in any other secular democracy in the world.

Religion plays a much smaller role in Europe, even in democratic countries with a state religion, and references to God is never made by officials when addressing the public. The only official persons allowed to make religious references are the (non-political) monarchs. In Denmark the monarch finish her traditional speeches to the people with a “God save Denmark.”

“God's help, the love of the people, Denmark's strength” is the official motto chosen by the Queen herself.
Islamic countries also invoke God in their national motto’s. Typically “Allahu Akbar” (God is Great(est) used by both Iran and Iraq.

Indeed, “Politics is the art of the possible; creativity is the art of the impossible", said Ben Okri the Nigerian author who uses magic realism to convey the social and political chaos in his country. Civil religion is what was possible in America to create the unity needed to keep the nation together as a creative and prosperous nation - under God. ;-)

"He also promised further outreach to Islamic communities in the United States, as well as efforts to dispel "misperceptions about our fellow Americans who are Muslim."..."

and Islamic communities continue their outreach programs...terror plots, terror attacks, subversive jihad, stealth jihad, creeping Shar'ia, honor killings, forced conversions, financial jihad, judicial jihad, polygmy, educational jihad, deceit jihad....and kumbayah....

Obama spokesman: "Being religious is never un-American. Being religious is quintessentially American."
..............................

What absolute crap.

I think I'll sacrifice the neighbor's virgin children on my backyard Aztec temple, or my burn my firstborn to death out in the incinerator in the name of Baal. Would this be "quintessentially American", as well?

This is a prime example of a fundamentally decent urge—that of regarding people of other faiths with respect—that becomes utterly grotesque if unexamined in its particulars.

It seems our own president is trying to further undercut Rep. King's already emasculated hearings on Muslim "radicalization".

When *Multiculturalism in canada was enshrined in or Constitution, nobody expected that canada would see Islamists wanting to sneak in Shariah law as a Human Right from their Culture,nor did the good-intention expect Muslim Honour-Killings now being hidden by CAIR-Canada as a "Domestic-Violence" issue with no link to islam of Muslims.

Canada is now reviewing the Immigration Policy and ready to give New-comers a small Package to inform them (or potential) of the Human-Rights and Values in canada.
This should help many Pro Shariah-Law thugs or abused females from making a choice to come to canada and live among us filthy Infidels that don't want a Caliphate on oUR soil.
There are lots of Islamic hell-holes on Earth where those Thugs can go and be very happy to have THEIR daughter raped or married-off to some 55 years old loser with yellow teeth and bad-breath.
The Quran is very clear that Muslims are superior as the Perfect Race to take over for Global Domination and a giant caliphate and Killing machine, with 5'500'000'000 non-muslims on Earth it will take years to kill us off for Allah's cause.

Know Islam - No Peace
No Islam - Know Peace

interfaith dialog

Just what exactly in the holy hell does this term mean? The notion behind it is so wrong that even Geraldo used it when licking Imam Rauf's toes during his interview of that GZM humanitarian at yesterday's demo.

The Founding Fathers created a form of government designed to protect religious liberty. Thomas Jefferson explained that whether his neighbor worships one god, many gods, or no god, that neither picks his pocket nor breaks his leg.

The trouble with Islam is that when practiced as Muhammad intended, my Muslim neighbor picks my pocket, breaks my leg, and beheads me and rapes and enslaves my wife and daughters.

It is ridiculous to assert that the Founders extended Constitutional protections to an ideology which requires its own destruction. And neither Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, nor any of the rest intended to protect the free expression of "kill the pagans wherever you find them" (Qur'an 9:5).

The Constitution and its Bill of Rights are not a suicide pact.

interesting post ole harting, a little long and you probably hate mt name and my religion but still it was interesting...

Giving another term for Obama,the inscription on the back of US paper currency will read: " IN ALLAH WE TRUST "!!

So, why do supporters of Mr. Obama, and even hiss own administration, vilify us Evangelicals?

Seriously, you ought to join us on Thanksgiving to try live-stewed liberated lesbian. They're really tasty.

And I bet you thought the paragraph above was in earnest rather than sarcastically commenting on the stereotype the MSM would honestly like to promulgate.

every religion invites other religions to the churches and that is not a problem, Moslems say they are open to recieve all religious people to the mosques, perhaps we all should start doing just that. Especially the women Uncovered and crawl with the men Perhaps there could be a designated day for such a movement in both Canada and the USA. Anybody up for the challenge!!!!

"Being religious is never un-American. Being religious is quintessentially American,".

Religion has never saved anyone. The only thing that has saving grace is our Lord Jesus Christ. Christianity is the way, the truth and the life. America please wake up.

Yes, we "are all Americans." That means we are all - even women, even Muslims - expected to be reasonable, responsible, and U.S. law-abiding citizens and guaranteed inalienable rights and freedoms. Equality under the (U.S.) law is HOW we get along in this country, wherein no one person or group is above the law. The point is that Islam guarantees Muslims supremacy and privilege over and plunder of non-Muslims, which is enforced by Sharia law. It is un-American to (officially or unofficially) enforce Sharia law.