Obama: Sermon on Mount Justifies Same-Sex Unions
Posted on March 3, 2008
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) told a crowd at Hocking College in Nelsonville, Ohio, Sunday that he believes the Sermon on the Mount justifies his support for legal recognition of same-sex unions. He also told the crowd that his position in favor of legalized abortion does not make him “less Christian.”
“I don’t think it [a same-sex union] should be called marriage, but I think that it is a legal right that they should have that is recognized by the state,” said Obama. “If people find that controversial then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans.” ((Hear audio from WTAP-TV)) St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans condemns homosexual acts as unnatural and sinful.
Obama’s mention of the Sermon on the Mount in justifying legal recognition of same-sex unions may have been a reference to the Golden Rule: “Do to others what you would have them do to you.” Or it may have been a reference to another famous line: “Do not judge, or you too will be judged.”
A little more irony:
The passage from St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, which Obama dismissed as “obscure,” discusses people who knew God but turned against him.
“They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator–who is forever praised,” wrote St. Paul. “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.”
Read the whole thing. He later talks on how abortion doesn’t violate the Christian faith either. As Dan Collins says:
Right. Because of the part in the Sermon where he talks about how blessed the abortionists are, for protecting the least of these.
Yet the point here is that Obama shows a woeful lack of both tact and judgement even for the suggestion that that the Bible would condone even the civil union of same sex individuals. Perhaps we instead should watch out for “false prophets†is a better watchword. I am often reminded that the Devil is a better theologian than most but he is still the Devil.
Michelle Malkin has a great roundup on reactions to the soul-fixer Obama’s latest radical utterings.
» Filed Under 1st Amendment, ACLU, Abortion, Church And State, Elections, Homosexual Agenda, News, Politics As Usual, Revisionism, Stupidity
Trackback URL
Comments
6 Responses to “Obama: Sermon on Mount Justifies Same-Sex Unions”
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
Isnt there a verse somewhere about not criticizing the Obamessiah?
Isn’t that the essence of modern Christianity? There are a ton of passages that society has written off already and there are a ton more that are on their way out.
Pandora’s box was opened the day people began to realize that it wasn’t all literally true. Once you reinterpret part of it, you can reinterpret all of it. We did the same thing to the Constitution.
This is what I don’t like about you Jeff. Lets excuse this guy because other people do the same thing. Anyone that claims the Bible is the word of God on one hand, and then twists the words beyond the obvious to mean something totally opposite the morals taught throughout the book is dishonest, untrustworthy, and a scoundral.
Most Fundamentalists are completely unaware of the historical context of the bible. They are just told what to believe, mostly by people who prey on them and have no theological training. Every theologian agrees on the importance of reading and understanding the Bible in its historical and cultural context. When considered in this way, the life of Jesus and everyone in the old testament is unimaginable in modern times, though the teaching of Jesus are beneficial when understood in our time in history. I am a convinced Christian and I don’t agree (call me conservative) with all of the fundamentalists that promote murder, polygamy, torture, incest, and idol worship. If you want to be a Fundamentalist and disregard the historicity of the Bible, then you agree with all that is in it and thus know that many sanctioned people of God in the Old Testament had several wives, had sex with their children, and killed their relatives (the poor kids that did not obey their parents). Oh wait, you probably don’t agree with that. It is convenient to use the historical argument for that, but not for the issue of homosexuality. Please worship God and follow Jesus out of love and devotion, rather than what is convenient for you.
Jos76
http://www.jos76.wordpress.com
No, I’m saying you shouldn’t judge this guy becuase you probably do the same thing. You’re not a literalist, are you? So who are you to say his interpretations are more or less “true”? At this moment in time, your interpretations may be more popular, but you both agree that such things are fluid, even if you don’t want to admit it.
Only in Obama-land is Romans “obscure.”