WASHINGTON – Two of the nation’s most prominent family values organizations lambasted rising Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama as “extremely” liberal and “no friend” to values voters during an analysis this week of the New Hampshire primary.
Obama, who won the Iowa caucuses and came in second in the primary, was denounced as a “fundamentalist left-winger” on social issues by Focus on the Family’s (FOTF) Tom Minnery.
Minnery, FOTF’s vice president of public policy, pointed out that Obama is against the federal marriage amendment that would define marriage as between a man and a woman; is against the abstinence program in sex education and for the distribution of condoms; supports a strong civil union law that would give all benefits to gay partners; supports embryonic stem cell research; and is in favor of permitting minors to cross state borders for abortion.
“This man is no friend to anything that we hold dear,” Minnery declared during the FOTF Citizenlink special.
“Without question,” chimed in Tony Perkins, president of the influential Washington-based Family Research Council.
Both Christian conservative leaders noted that Obama has built his campaign on the image of being the moderate voice and as the consensus candidate.
“He likes to say, ‘I bring people together across the aisle,’” Perkins said. “I don’t know what for, maybe for coffee or something, but it is certainly not for the past policies that are favorable for the family.”
Obama has only been in the U.S. Senate for three years, but his Illinois record is extremely liberal, according to Perkins, who was a former Louisiana state legislator. The FRC head further contended that the Illinois senator is so liberal that he challenges the establishment of the Democratic Party.
“He is to the left of Hillary Clinton, that is maybe why he isn’t talking about the issues,” Perkins noted.
Besides Obama and Clinton, the FOTF analysis also criticized New Hampshire Republican winner Sen. John McCain for being difficult to work with. Although McCain was praised for being “pretty good” on the pro-life issue, he was criticized for opposing President Bush’s policy that restricted embryonic stem cell research.
The family values leaders also did not like McCain’s stance on the federal marriage amendment, which they said has been their top issue for the past several years. McCain supports giving states the right to define marriage rather than a constitutional amendment that would set the definition of marriage as the union between a man and a woman in all 50 states.
Meanwhile, the pro-family leaders praised Republicans Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney for sharing the same social values.
During the broadcast, Minnery highlighted that Obama received a score of “absolutely zero” on a recent Family Research Council (FRC) Action/Focus on the Family (FOTF) Action voter’s guide that rated all congressional members on their voting record on pro-family legislations. Clinton also scored zero on the scorecard.
Still, Obama has resonated with many African American religious leaders who created a committee last month in support of the Democratic contender. Faith leaders of the committee believe that Obama is living out his faith and values in his public life.
“As a lifelong advocate for the less fortunate and the forgotten, Senator Obama lives his faith everyday. He continues to talk about a faith that works to unite and not divide people," African American Religious Committee Co-chair the Rev. Otis Moss, Jr., has said.
Unconvinced of Obama living out his faith, Perkins advised values voters to look at all the candidates’ records and past performance rather than allow 30-second commercials to “tug at your emotions, your heart strings.”
Evangelicals across America are tired of empty promises, he said. They are looking for a president that will take the values voters’ agenda to the president’s office and “get something done.”
“Even if they don’t succeed they are willing to fight for the values that you and I believe in,” the FRC president added. “That is the candidate that we are looking for.”
Comments
“Does your favorite candidate promote biblical values? Does the candidate endorse scriptural teachings on marriage, prayer, and the VALUE OF LIFE AT CONCEPTION— or deny the validity of the same? What does he or she say about Jesus? If a candidate does not believe JESUS IS THE ONLY WAY TO HEAVEN, he or she simply cannot be a Christian.
A candidate can talk till blue in the face about his or her Christianity, but if that candidate doesn’t believe what the Bible says about our Savior, he or she is in essence an unbeliever. Candidates would be wise to learn about the Savior before claiming to be a member of the Body of Christ. Meanwhile, Christian voters would be wise to make sure they are supporting true believers.” From “Finding Soul Brothers” http://findingsoulbrothers.com
SheQuon, I know for a fact that Focus on the Family does indeed consider a family headed by a single parent a 'real family', and they do minister to such families. I have heard and seen much evidence of this.
SheQuon, does the Word of God define 'marriage' as a legal bind between people of the same sex, and does it define 'family' as a group of people with same-sex couples as 'parents'?
"This man is no friend to anything that we hold dear," Minnery declared...
That's Focus-on-the-Familyspeak for "This man is TOO MUCH of a friend to the people we hate!"
Of course they only "focus" on traditional families, and not families that have a gay person in them or a single parent--it's all over for them.
"NO they wont work, why because they don't say slavery is good, they don't say beating a slave is good. "
the NT doesn't imply the principle act of slavery as wrong either. In fact, the passages can be infered that if you're master to just treat your slave ethically b/c big brother is watching and not to abolish the act of slavery as it is an abomination on hummanity. that much can be seen and in this regard it condones slavery.
"So if I am an atheist and I hate slavery, I can say, "I hate slavery" but if I am an atheist and I love slavery I can say, "I love slavery" "
Well, the same can be said of all those christians in the south (and all those before them) that loved slavery as they were the masters. They had no reason to not like the act of slavery! Slavery seems ok from the masters perspective as they are in control, and treat their slaves like property, so it's not a theism/atheism issue.
"Nowhere in the definition of illogical does it refer to over rationalizing, rather it is a statement that is not logically coherent"
over rationalizing something is illogical as it means you'er disregarding all the contradictory evidence for why you believe a proposition. you make believe your wife loves you, but the evidence that she's cheating on you would say otherwise. only by over rationalizing this confounding evidence could you claim that she is faithfull.
"you went from calling me illogical because I used Adam and Eve as an example of the way things are,"
So i guess you literally belive in the account of adam and eve then? and their sin and the 6000 year old earth and universe then?
Or, like most appologetics, do you view this creation story as one of symbolic and metaphorical meaning only? If you only view it as symbolic then your earlier statement of using adam and eve as the basis for your point against slavery is most certaintly illogical.
I ask this b/c this is critical as it would determine if jesus' own sacrifice made sense at all as well. If adam and eve are just symbolic, then christ killed himself for no sin at all and your premise of god not creating slaves in the beginning is also moot if the creation account is one of symbolic and metaphorical meaning.
"Will these work?
Luke12:42-48 parable on slave beating
Esphesians 6:5-6 slaves and masters, know your role if you're a slave
Titus 2:9-10 Be submissive if you're slave. good article to refer to if you're the master.
1 Peter 2:18-19 slaves, be subjugated by your masters."
NO they wont work, why because they don't say slavery is good, they don't say beating a slave is good. They are addressing what to do if you are in that situation. They are speaking to Christians, and not to people in general. You have proved nothing, but keep trying, maybe eventually you will find the verse you are looking for.
1 Corinthians 7:21-23
"21Were you a slave when you were called? Don't let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so. 22For he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord's freedman; similarly, he who was a free man when he was called is Christ's slave. 23You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men."
(Completely supports everything I said, this is not pro-slavery in anyway, rather it upholds the dignity of every human being, and says that slavery (to a human) is to be avoided if possible, if not then don’t let it consume you.)
Ephesians 6:9
“And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.”
(This supports my view that God sees slave and master as equal. There is no favoritism. If you didn’t understand that, God does not see slave and master, He only sees humans.)
1 Corinthians 12:13
For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.
(This supports my view that God sees slave and master as equal.)
1 Corinthians 9:19
Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible.
(Here Paul is saying that even though he is “free” he still serves everyone, this is how a Christian is supposed to act.)
Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
(We are all equal in God’s eyes.)
Do you need more? Agentorange, I am not going to respond to anything you or others say about the OT, I have dealt with that already. There is nothing you can say that Christianity supports slavery, and that the Bible viewed from a Christian perspective is pro-slavery.
Agentorange, you said:
"It’s quite clear that in your eyes, somehow atheism affirms that slavery is ok. When I asked for where it’s implied, you couldn’t muster a response."
NO I AM NOT SAYING THAT. Can you read? I said it is nowhere implied. Why did you say this? do you like repeating? From now on I am only going to copy what I say if you make this position any longer. Atheism does not assert that slavery is good. But athesim cannot assert anything. So if I am an atheist and I hate slavery, I can say, "I hate slavery" but if I am an atheist and I love slavery I can say, "I love slavery" But in neither case is slavery good or bad, it is only what the atheist defines it to be for himself. Thus it is just a battle over who is stronger, not over which one is right. You then say that Christianity implies that slavery is "good"? or at the least "condoned" I think you are playing with words here just to try to say something. It is safe to say that you cannot make the case that the Bible views slavery as good. You could make the case that the Bible (specifically the OT) condones slavery, but the Bible condones many things that are not necessarily good, but are unavoidable due to the nature of humans and the way things have become.
As far as the OT goes, this is the OT, the laws given there were setup for a covenant that was made with the Jewish people. The NT is how Christians live and interpret the OT and NT combined. I don't want to debate every single passage in the OT, rather I want to debate what a Christian perspective is. Slavery itself is not considered inherently "wrong" in the Bible, however neither is it considered inherently "right". You have failed to prove that.
Agentorange,
Nowhere in the definition of illogical does it refer to over rationalizing, rather it is a statement that is not logically coherent. Over rationalizing is just that. But I don't think I am guilty of this so I don't see how it makes any difference.
"Jesus also proclaimed that he was sent to confirm the prophets and uphold laws of the OT and not change them. So, in that respect much of the OT that affirms slavery is as valid as ever."
Yes, that is true, but OT law requires many sacrifices each time of the year. We do not see any Christians doing this, ever since the start of Christianity. Jesus also said that He fulfilled the prophecies and laws of the OT. I doubt you can understand this (not because you are not smart enough to, but because you are irreconciabliy obstinate) but it means that when Christ died on the Cross He took upon Himself all of the hardness and sin that caused the laws to be necessary. What He left was freedom and a relationship with God.
"Nope, I am certainly saying both you, the OT and NT with regards to slavery and not emphatically denouncing slavery are all equally illogical. You can deny it all you want, but it’s in your book for all to read it for themselves and draw their own conclusions of its horror. "
You dodged the issue here, you went from calling me illogical because I used Adam and Eve as an example of the way things are, then (after I proved you to be utterly wrong) you imputed that statement to the general argument. This is just poor debating. It also goes without mentioning my entire argument that you don't seem to be dealing with.
ifeelfine,
What I am trying to get across is, why do Christians attack Christianity more than non-Christians? Christ Himself said that not all who called Him Lord would go to heaven. I am not trying to accuse you of not being a Christian, or anybody else for that matter, I am just trying to let you see something that you don't seem to be getting.
I think using the word literal is a little misleading. I do not believe that every single word of the Bible means exactly what it says, without looking at the context, or the type of writing that it is. NOBODY does this, despite how much you want to label fundamentalists as doing this. Rather I mean that every word in the Bible has truth in it, and actually conveys the meaning that it is supposed to get across. Thus if the Bible says that God sees slave and master as equal, then I do not believe that this is just some practically worthless metaphysical statement, rather I believe it means that in God's eyes there is neither slave nor master. You are asking me for a verse where the Bible outright says, "Thus saith the Lord: Slavery is evil" This is misleading. I never made the case that the Bible was outright against slavery. Rather I made the case that it can easily be inferred that Christianity upholds the dignity of every single human being. When I interpret the Bible, I do so from a Christian perspective, not from an OT Jewish perspective, or a postmodern scholar's liberal interpretation. Nonetheless, the NT does tell us what we are to do if we are in the position of a slave. It does not deny the reality of slavery, but rather tells people how to behave no matter what position they are in. You need to keep in mind though, that the Bible was not written to solve all of mankinds problems on earth, rather it was written to give people hope in the Truth, and show them how to live within the problems. If you tell me where the Bible says that God views slavery as good, then I will show you where it says that God says it is evil. Remember, even satan used scripture.
I still cannot understand why you are trying to force this view though, if you are a Christian, then I want you to prove me wrong and show me that you have real faith. Your comment that I criticize every one that doesn't agree with me is valueless. For instance, lets say I was in a chess club, and then somebody decided to join, but started playing checkers, and refused to play chess. Then this person paraded himself as a great chess player. (This illustration is not exact, but hopefully it shows something to the effect that you cannot just call me mean because I don't accept every view of the Bible.)
theotrek: I agree with every word you said. I don't want people to get the sense that in any way, I believe slavery in any form is ok. The real reason I am pushing that is because I know a number of folks on this site are fundamentalists and its not possible to be a true "literal, Bible believin' Christian" and not take a post modern view of slavery.
The Bible does indeed condone slavery, but some distinction must be made as to what slavery was 2000 years back, vs. what we know in the recent past in the Americas. Slavery was at times a means to pay a debt as an indentured servant of more recent history. Slavery was also used in the aftermath of war. While it was demeaning and spoke of subjection, it was not quite the same as the "loftier modern" usage of POW camps. A slave had the opportunity to rise from his status in a different manner than our more recent past. Slavery was also not as racially oriented as our modern counterpart.
On the other hand, we still have slavery today. We abuse developing nations, turning their populace into economic slaves. Our immigrant workforce in the US is often treated as slave labor, as well. Lincoln's proclamation did not do away with slavery any more than other proclamations throughout the Americas and Europe.
The Bible does give a basis for understanding God's love and value for all humanity on an equal basis, regardless of issues of this kind. This is emerging Biblical doctrine in one sense, but it is there sufficiently to have helped us understand that slavery is not truly acceptable. Would that all our forms of slavery had been abolished.
Chris333,
“ifeelfine, show me one single verse where God said, "Slavery is good" or right or anything of that nature.”
Will these work?
Luke12:42-48 parable on slave beating
Esphesians 6:5-6 slaves and masters, know your role if you're a slave
Titus 2:9-10 Be submissive if you're slave. good article to refer to if you're the master.
1 Peter 2:18-19 slaves, be subjugated by your masters.
Chris333, you earlier said that:
“the Bible says that slave and master alike are both seen as equal in God's eyes, and that if you just so happen to be a master, that you better treat your slave rightly, lest you be judged harshly in the next life”
So, in other words even the NT doesn’t say or even imply that THE VERY ACT OF SLAVERY IS WRONG. Rather, if you just ‘happen to be a master’ as you put it, that you’re supposed to treat your slave with ethics. Right, why can’t one find that very likely to happen? Talk about special pleading.
Excuse me, but isn’t that the height of illogical reasoning, as the very act of being involved in slavery as a master, regardless of how ethically you treat the slave, is still in principle the issue at hand and still wrong? (Obviously it is) The conditions of slavery was what was opposed and not how marginally ethical the masters were to their slaves. By removing the operations of slavery you remove the byproduct conditions of having to treat a slave ethically altogether, sadly even Moses and Jesus didn’t acknowledge this.
You’re attempting to imply that the act of slavery is gravy so long as the slave is treated ethically, however the very ordeal of slavery is dehumanizing alone, regardless if the slave isn’t beaten daily like a mule, or worked to death. By referring to how the slave is to be ethically treated, you’re attempting an apologetic stance that rationalizes that act of slavery and try to have it appear less hostile than it really was.
Chris333,
“You are probably right citsonga, and it is unfortunate that they abused the Bible as they did.”
Abused? Are you serious? These people were following the express commandments handed down at the time of Moses by god himself. The very same commandments that expressly called for witches and wizards to be killed and never defines slavery as an abomination. In fact, certain OT passages infer that jews could own a slave so long as they weren’t their brothers (fellow jews). When read in this context, many of the other laws also only applied to ‘other jews’, this would explain why although god commands ‘not to kill’, you would be hard pressed to find a single book that doesn’t involve unjust killing. Joshua is a great example of this.
Is it any wonder that witch trials and the inquisitions occurred at all? No, it’s not. This is what happens when a non rationale person adopts a literalist view of holy texts, in which they can rationalize any sort of behavior. This is why we have Muslims that feel its ok to fly planes into buildings. It’s not immoral if your very own bible declares it as so Chris333, that much you will concede.