Get E-Mail Updates

Obama's Health-Care Speech: Hope Over Fear

In his speech last evening, President Barack Obama made the commitments that a broad coalition in the faith community had asked for -- reform as a moral issue, affordable coverage for all, and no federal funding of abortion.

Related Reading

Take Action on This Issue

Tell the Senate: Don't Cut International Aid

Please join us in telling the Senate: Protect foreign aid programs that help the poor and the needy. 

First, the faith community has asked the president to make "the moral case" for health-care reform, not just the policy arguments -- and he couldn't have been more clear about the moral imperative for fixing a broken system. He quoted a letter from Ted Kennedy, written last spring but delivered to the president after Kennedy's death, stating that health care "is above all a moral issue; that at stake are not just the details of policy, but fundamental principles of social justice and the character of our country."

Second, we have told the White House that the faith community will accept nothing less than accessible, affordable, and secure coverage for everyone. The president said that "if you're one of the tens of millions of Americans who don't currently have health insurance, the second part of this plan will finally offer you quality, affordable choices." And while there may be various means of achieving that goal, "I will not back down on the basic principle that if Americans can't find affordable coverage, we will provide you with a choice." He rejected the incremental approaches that will again postpone bringing everyone into America's health-care system and making sure it is working for all of us -- and so will we.

Third, we have told the president that we needed to hear a clear commitment on prohibiting federal funding of abortion as well as maintaining a strong conscience protection. He gave that public commitment: "Under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place." As the president said, "there remain some significant details to be ironed out," but his commitment to these principles means we can now work together to make sure that they are consistently and diligently applied to any final health-care legislation. The practical application of that principle should mean that no person should be forced to pay for someone else's abortion, and that public funds cannot be used to pay for elective abortions.

Now it is the job of the faith community and every concerned American to make sure the final bill reflects these moral principles. And the faith community will continue to be vigilant to ensure that each one is followed throughout the process of achieving health-care legislation. The president has set the stage for finally achieving real solutions to health-care reform by defining the deeper moral issues at stake and clarifying the policy debate. We will now be calling on our members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, many of them members of our congregations, to support these moral commitments and to make sure, as they "iron out the details," that each one is firmly upheld.

At the beginning of the speech, after noting the continuing economic crisis, President Obama said, "[W]e did not come here just to clean up crises. We came to build a future." That future indeed involves a significant social transformation, and like most such change, it invokes strong reactions. We in the faith community have a special role in that process of change -- to help the nation make the spiritual choice of hope rather than fear, and to believe that the way for all of us to move forward as a society is to make that choice.

To learn more about health-care reform, click here to visit Sojourners' Health-Care Resources Web page.

Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

by: Ashleigh101

09-18-2009 @ 6:46am

He apologized to Obama. His outburst was directed towards Obama. He apologized to the person he offended. He did not need to apologize to anyone else.

The Democrats were simply sending the message that they will not "allow" naysayers or critics. Do you really think they would've been up in arms like they were had it been a Democrat who yelled "you lie" to Bush? I highly doubt it.

by: Ashleigh101

09-18-2009 @ 6:43am

He shouted lies?? No, he shouted "You lie." He was making an accusation, not speaking about a topic.

His concern over illegal aliens is a legitimate concern. You are judging his heart by saying that he doesn't want to help them. He is concerned about the implications of covering them.

I wonder... how is it that you think it's okay to judge people's hearts, motives, and minds the way that you do here?

You look at this health care debate with emotion only. I have yet to see anything youve written in which you've faced the realities of this... things like the cost, the probable doctor shortages, and other problematic areas of the proposals.

But I guess until you read the bill and/or stop getting all your info from liberal media, you will just continue to slam anyone in opposition of it as uncaring, unloving, selfish, blah, blah.

by: JusTryinMyBest

09-17-2009 @ 6:36pm

I don't wish to be a pest, so feel free to either ignore me or tell
me to leave you alone...(!) But because I believe you have an honest
interest in how to best provide for healthcare here in the U.S., I am
forwarding the following URL. It is a review by Abigail Zuger, M.D.
in The Times of T.R. Reid's book, "The Healing of America." (The
sidebar link: "Questions for T.R. Reid" is quite interesting also).

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/15/health/15book...

Peace, and be well.

"War does not determine who is right - only who is left."
- Bertrand Russell

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-10-2009 @ 4:39pm

Sorry, but that speech was a huge mistake. It'll just take a little while to unravel, that's all.

Too many facts got mangled, too much energy was put into defending a program that too many Americans have no faith in. Too little time was spent broadening a coalition.

Brace yourselves, this could be messy. But the Lord works in mysterious ways. Perhaps he led us to elect this man so that the nation would finally have a chance to vomit out the poison of Alinsky leftism in which Obama himself is deeply marinaded.

That's my sincere hope. It should be yours too Jim. It's the best chance you have for the return of a humane and genuinely Christian left.

LV

by: letjusticerolldown

09-10-2009 @ 5:11pm

I did not hear the speech. I did not read the Wallis post. Nor the first comment. I have some other things to do right now. I am going to let my excitement build as to whether Wallis liked the Obama speech.

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:28pm

I found Obama's willingness to snuggle up to those who profit from the suffering of others (i.e., the insurance peddlers) and call them, one and all, "good people" disturbing. Since when is profiting from the suffering of others "good". Call it for what it is, whyncha? I mean, hideous vultures picking the skin off people not yet dead!

by: lbscholz

09-10-2009 @ 5:31pm

I think it's presumptive to assume that lack of funding for abortions is a moral imperative for everyone in this broadly defined "faith community." To me, social justice means all women having the choice about family planning and when and how they want to bring a child into this world. It seems impossible to define what is a moral imperative for such a large group of people with a disparate group of people.

I do, however, applaud you for tackling heath care as a faith-based issue.

by: romoro914

09-10-2009 @ 5:33pm

I trust that you agree that Congressman Wilson's outburst during the President speech was rude and disrespectful. It showed the world not just Americans how uncivilized we as a country are becoming. We can not even have differences of opinion without resorting to childish tantrums! Furthermore, it would behoove all of us (regardless of party affiliation or religious beliefs) to do some fact checking before regurgitating incorrect, and often hateful statements as if they were truths! Please join the effort to censure Representative Wilson.

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:38pm

LV:

"Too many facts got mangled,"

which facts?

"too much energy was put into defending a program that too many Americans have no faith in..."

Um, would that be the so-called "public option" - of the whole speech, maybe 4 minutes? Too much time? I guess if you listen to O'Reilly et al., "too many Americans have no faith in a public option..." OTOH, other pundits count the noses differently.

"Too little time was spent broadening a coalition."

What coalition? Did you see those fat cats sitting there, their jaw muscles twitching? Did you hear one of them lose his cool and call the President a liar? Seek a coalition with such ilk, liars and thieves, vultures, folks who believe it right and proper to profit from the suffering of others? Talk about bedding down with the devil!

And you want a "humane and genuinely Christian Left?" I dare say Jesus style justice won't be seen as "humane" ... and maybe not even "Christian" upon his return.

by: judithod

09-10-2009 @ 5:39pm

My initial reaction to Jim Wallis's comment is that the goal of health-care reform should not be to appease the goals of anyone's faith community but to confront and solve the problems and inequities in the current system (both government-run and private) so that quality, efficient, and affordable health care is available to all American citizens who desire it.

by: WitnessforPeace

09-10-2009 @ 5:40pm

I find insurance companies as frustrating as anyone else, but fireman profit from the suffering of others as well. Are they vultures? Health care primarily deals with treatment. Are doctors vultures?
Sadly, Jim's comments are only slightly less offensive than the above post by mackharrell. Jim opens the familiar loophole: "elective abortions"
ALL abortions are elective. Your baby has no choice. All you need is for the abortionist himself to declare that you will suffer "mental health" problems, and a defenseless human is gone. Obama's pro-abortion supporters like this plan; how could it possibly be anything but a framework on which to hang public funding ASAP? Jim, you are bearing false witness. I'm sorry.
For Peace, Shalom, and the lives of the innocent,

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:42pm

Look Romoro:

Sometimes it isn't a matter of a "difference of opinion."

Sometimes it's a matter of the vultures picking the skin off dying babies and profiting withal.

Sometimes it's a matter to be dealt with Chicago-land style, with Thompson sub-machine guns in a back alley garage.

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:47pm

Nice try about first responders... only not on point. The first responders
are trying to help people. Insurance blood suckers are not seeking to help
the sick and dying. They are interested only in lining their pockets with
cash.

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:49pm

Nice try with the example of first responders, medical personnel and the like. Only no cigar. Not on point. Thre is one point of difference between a first responder and an insurance vulture. The first responder is trying to help someone else. The insurance vulture sees his own profit as the sole legitimate concern. Call them for what they are: vultures and worse.

by: WitnessforPeace

09-10-2009 @ 5:54pm

I see a lot of hurt and anger in your assaults on insurance companies and (indirectly) the many ordinary Americans who own stock in them. I pray for God's peace and healing and forgiveness for your bitterness.
Shalom, Witness for Peace

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 6:05pm

Thank you for your prayers. You'd do better to pray for the stock holders
in insurance companies since they're trying to line their pockets with cash
trading on the suffering of old folks like myself.

Of course I'm angry. Hell! I'm outraged! My question to you is: what
would it take to get you angry too? Do you think God is not ANGRY WITH THE
WICKED EVERY DAY?!

by: nuclearferret

09-10-2009 @ 6:13pm

Then don't buy insurance and put profit in their pockets. If you want to defend the "first responders" fine, but they do rely on suffering for their jobs as well. Insurance is the attempt to share and spread risk, pure and simple. Should there be profit in that effort? Why not? Just as there should be no assurance for their losses, but it was government that decided the AIG's and others shouldn't be allowed to fail.

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-10-2009 @ 4:39pm

Sorry, but that speech was a huge mistake. It'll just take a little while to unravel, that's all.

Too many facts got mangled, too much energy was put into defending a program that too many Americans have no faith in. Too little time was spent broadening a coalition.

Brace yourselves, this could be messy. But the Lord works in mysterious ways. Perhaps he led us to elect this man so that the nation would finally have a chance to vomit out the poison of Alinsky leftism in which Obama himself is deeply marinaded.

That's my sincere hope. It should be yours too Jim. It's the best chance you have for the return of a humane and genuinely Christian left.

LV

by: WitnessforPeace

09-10-2009 @ 6:29pm

There is too much sin in the world for me to focus much anger on insurance companies. Better to start with our own sin. G.K.Chesterton, responding to a newspaper solicitation on the question. "What is wrong with the world?"
replied simply: "I am"
Blessings,
Witness for Peace

by: letjusticerolldown

09-10-2009 @ 5:11pm

I did not hear the speech. I did not read the Wallis post. Nor the first comment. I have some other things to do right now. I am going to let my excitement build as to whether Wallis liked the Obama speech.

by: letjusticerolldown

09-10-2009 @ 7:43pm

Wallis lays out three fundamentals: "reform as a moral issue, affordable coverage for all, and no federal funding of abortion."

Do you agree with these. Could a broader coalition be built on these? If not these, then what?

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:28pm

I found Obama's willingness to snuggle up to those who profit from the suffering of others (i.e., the insurance peddlers) and call them, one and all, "good people" disturbing. Since when is profiting from the suffering of others "good". Call it for what it is, whyncha? I mean, hideous vultures picking the skin off people not yet dead!

by: lbscholz

09-10-2009 @ 5:31pm

I think it's presumptive to assume that lack of funding for abortions is a moral imperative for everyone in this broadly defined "faith community." To me, social justice means all women having the choice about family planning and when and how they want to bring a child into this world. It seems impossible to define what is a moral imperative for such a large group of people with a disparate group of people.

I do, however, applaud you for tackling heath care as a faith-based issue.

by: romoro914

09-10-2009 @ 5:33pm

I trust that you agree that Congressman Wilson's outburst during the President speech was rude and disrespectful. It showed the world not just Americans how uncivilized we as a country are becoming. We can not even have differences of opinion without resorting to childish tantrums! Furthermore, it would behoove all of us (regardless of party affiliation or religious beliefs) to do some fact checking before regurgitating incorrect, and often hateful statements as if they were truths! Please join the effort to censure Representative Wilson.

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-10-2009 @ 8:35pm

Is reform a moral issue? At the risk of making people's head explode, I'll say no -- at least not in any way that matters to building a coalition. Remember, Obama doesn't just have a moral aspiration, he has a specific plan with health care exchanges and some sort of public option. Close to half of the American public is uneasy with the public option. If he wants to build a coalition that will pass a specific bill, he'll need to drop the public option. I'd go so far as to say that dropping the public option is in itself a moral issue.

Affordable coverage for all is a worthy goal. Perfection is seldom attainable and that still leaves us to figure out just how universal coverage is to be achieved.

I disagree with the President on abortion, not because I think it should be covered, but because I don't think he's being entirely forthcoming on just how it will be handled. Barack Obama has a huge credibility gap here, as well as on financing, on the prospects for future rationing, and on illegal immigrants. He did nothing to close the gaps on any of these.

That's one for three, a great batting average in baseball, not so good for big legislative battles.

LV

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:38pm

LV:

"Too many facts got mangled,"

which facts?

"too much energy was put into defending a program that too many Americans have no faith in..."

Um, would that be the so-called "public option" - of the whole speech, maybe 4 minutes? Too much time? I guess if you listen to O'Reilly et al., "too many Americans have no faith in a public option..." OTOH, other pundits count the noses differently.

"Too little time was spent broadening a coalition."

What coalition? Did you see those fat cats sitting there, their jaw muscles twitching? Did you hear one of them lose his cool and call the President a liar? Seek a coalition with such ilk, liars and thieves, vultures, folks who believe it right and proper to profit from the suffering of others? Talk about bedding down with the devil!

And you want a "humane and genuinely Christian Left?" I dare say Jesus style justice won't be seen as "humane" ... and maybe not even "Christian" upon his return.

by: judithod

09-10-2009 @ 5:39pm

My initial reaction to Jim Wallis's comment is that the goal of health-care reform should not be to appease the goals of anyone's faith community but to confront and solve the problems and inequities in the current system (both government-run and private) so that quality, efficient, and affordable health care is available to all American citizens who desire it.

by: WitnessforPeace

09-10-2009 @ 5:40pm

I find insurance companies as frustrating as anyone else, but fireman profit from the suffering of others as well. Are they vultures? Health care primarily deals with treatment. Are doctors vultures?
Sadly, Jim's comments are only slightly less offensive than the above post by mackharrell. Jim opens the familiar loophole: "elective abortions"
ALL abortions are elective. Your baby has no choice. All you need is for the abortionist himself to declare that you will suffer "mental health" problems, and a defenseless human is gone. Obama's pro-abortion supporters like this plan; how could it possibly be anything but a framework on which to hang public funding ASAP? Jim, you are bearing false witness. I'm sorry.
For Peace, Shalom, and the lives of the innocent,

by: SisterMarie

09-10-2009 @ 10:32pm

"But the Lord works in mysterious ways."

I agree that the Lord does indeed work in mysterious ways. But I would not attribute any of the venom in your post to the Lord that I know. On the other hand, if you were merely referring to the first name that you go by here...

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:42pm

Look Romoro:

Sometimes it isn't a matter of a "difference of opinion."

Sometimes it's a matter of the vultures picking the skin off dying babies and profiting withal.

Sometimes it's a matter to be dealt with Chicago-land style, with Thompson sub-machine guns in a back alley garage.

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:47pm

Nice try about first responders... only not on point. The first responders
are trying to help people. Insurance blood suckers are not seeking to help
the sick and dying. They are interested only in lining their pockets with
cash.

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:49pm

Nice try with the example of first responders, medical personnel and the like. Only no cigar. Not on point. Thre is one point of difference between a first responder and an insurance vulture. The first responder is trying to help someone else. The insurance vulture sees his own profit as the sole legitimate concern. Call them for what they are: vultures and worse.

by: WitnessforPeace

09-10-2009 @ 5:54pm

I see a lot of hurt and anger in your assaults on insurance companies and (indirectly) the many ordinary Americans who own stock in them. I pray for God's peace and healing and forgiveness for your bitterness.
Shalom, Witness for Peace

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 6:05pm

Thank you for your prayers. You'd do better to pray for the stock holders
in insurance companies since they're trying to line their pockets with cash
trading on the suffering of old folks like myself.

Of course I'm angry. Hell! I'm outraged! My question to you is: what
would it take to get you angry too? Do you think God is not ANGRY WITH THE
WICKED EVERY DAY?!

by: nuclearferret

09-10-2009 @ 6:13pm

Then don't buy insurance and put profit in their pockets. If you want to defend the "first responders" fine, but they do rely on suffering for their jobs as well. Insurance is the attempt to share and spread risk, pure and simple. Should there be profit in that effort? Why not? Just as there should be no assurance for their losses, but it was government that decided the AIG's and others shouldn't be allowed to fail.

by: letjusticerolldown

09-11-2009 @ 2:40am

You seem opposed to establishing any shared moral commitment with someone that might end up advocating a different policy expression of the moral commitment. How do we analyze, synthesize, and reformulate competing policy solutions to the greatest moral end if we are unwilling to establish a common moral ground? The purpose of a moral claim isn't to bolster one's policy ideals is it??????

by: WitnessforPeace

09-10-2009 @ 6:29pm

There is too much sin in the world for me to focus much anger on insurance companies. Better to start with our own sin. G.K.Chesterton, responding to a newspaper solicitation on the question. "What is wrong with the world?"
replied simply: "I am"
Blessings,
Witness for Peace

by: Ashleigh101

09-11-2009 @ 6:06am

I had no problem whatsoever with the man who called out "You lie." That is, plain and simple, DEMOCRACY at its finest. Right? We do live in a democracy, you know. Where the government is supposed to serve US, not us serving the govt. Where people are allowed to disagree with elected officials, including the President.

Come on! If it had been George Bush, there would've been NO media outcry whatsoever. Heck, when Bush had a shoe thrown at him, the media practically cheered... they all analyzed how he brought it on himself. Bush was also booed and heckled by Congress. No media outcry then.

There is this HUGE double standard, and Democrats don't "allow" the type of treatment they will treat others with. For the past month, they have insulted and dismissed citizens who spoke out at townhalls... calling them nazis, astroturf, even retards. Heck, that Van Jones guy, who just resigned (one of Obama's MANY unvetted czars) called Republicans "a**holes." Where was the outcry then?? Why didn't Obama address "civility" when Dems were insulting townhall citizens or Van Jones' outburst?

How is it that you, and Mr. Wallis, don't see the hypocrisy of Obama and the "left?" How is it that you just blindly believe every word out of his mouth?? It truly amazes me. As Christians, we are urged by Jesus and the apostles, in the Bible, to be DISCERNING, to be wise, to not be naive and foolish.

So, here is Obama, making all these promises... and it truly amazes me that you, and Mr. Wallis, and others, really believe everything he says. And you treat him just like the Left does... never questioning his words, never having any concern for his motives... just blindly following this man and almost even exalting him, as you insult those who disagree with or criticize him.

I personally think you will be in for such a huge, huge disappointment when this health care does pass (heaven forbid) and you find that so much of it isn't at all what Obama promised.

I also have a VERY hard time understanding how Christians can be so blind and so adoring of Obama and his policies, as well as his view that government should take care of society and intrude as much as he is trying to do. It truly baffles me and I simply do not understand. And actually, it sometimes even makes me sick to my stomach.

And a note to Jim Wallis: I will NOT be joining you in calling the White House to urge passage of this horrible bill. I will be calling to express my disgust, outrage, and opposition to it. Joining me will be about 52% of the population accoring to polls. I do NOT want government to have this much control in our lives, and it seriously astounds me that you are in such denial of the fact that this health care plan WILL result in MASSIVE government intrustion and control of American citizens. ASTOUNDS me.

And, IF this bill passes, I will make sure to come back here to say "I told you so" when abortion is indeed covered by this bill, because unless Obama backs down from pressure from the public, it WILL be in the bill.

Obama is not against abortion. Look at his voting record. Look at the things he said to Planned Parenthood while campaigning. Look at legislations he's already overturned or passed since being in office (e.g. Mexico Policy).

He is a hypocrite, and his motives are not pure. His motives are mainly control by the government. GM takeover, bank takeover, stimulus package with all its strings, cap and trade, health care. How is it that you cannot see what his motives are??????? I DON'T GET IT!!!! I don't get these people who are so blind or in denial, esp. the ones who call themselves Christians and treat this guy as if he's some sort of perfect man who would never lie or who has only pure motives. I think it's really sad.

by: Ashleigh101

09-11-2009 @ 6:33am

I agree that he puts too much energy into defending this program. He's acting like a campaigner and a salesman. I mean, the speech last night was one of MANY he's given where he's basically said the same thing, although last night he also gave a stern scolding to all those out there (talk show hosts, Sarah Palin, townhall dissenters, Republicans, etc) who criticize him or his plan. And to me... well, it makes me feel like this is Cuba or something. I mean, it's just ridiculous and hypocritical. Can you imagine George Bush scolding the nation the way Obama does?! Isn't America all about FREE SPEECH and speaking out, even against leaders????

I did not actually watch the speech, but saw bits and pieces from Youtube videos, read exerpts, and read news coverage. I simply cannot stomach Obama. When I see his face and that stern "you-better-not-mess-with-me-or-cross-me" look he gets... and when I hear him speak in that self-righteous, arrogant sounding voice... my stomach literally turns and it's like hearing nails on a chalkboard.

I personally do not think the Left will ever be humane or "Christian." The Left is now comprised of people who are very radical... who are pro-choice, pro-homosexuality, and for the most part, anti-Christianity. In fact, I'd bet that everyone who calls themself an athiest or agnostic aligns themselves with the "Left." And more and more, most Christians align themselves now with the Republican party.

It used to not be so black and white, but it's becoming that way more and more, mainly I think because of social issues but also because the Left is so big on government control of individual lives. I personally can't understand how anyone can call themselves a Christian and align themselves with the "Left." I truly don't get it. I'm not judging them, but I just don't understand. And I see no humane or Christ-like behavior and attitudes from the "Left." In word, they claim to be compassionate and care about others. But in actions, nope. They insult, they mock, they harrass (Sarah Palin, Joe Plumber, Carrie Prejean... all victims of the Left's harrassment), they delight in ridicule and mockery... they are also very manipulative and deceitful.

Just look at the liberal media. They didn't even cover Van Jones, until after he resigned, at which point they conveniently failed to mention that he called himself a communist only a few short years ago. But, then you've got this guy who calls Obama a liar, and they are on it so fast and furious. How any Christian doesn't see through all this and just buys into all this is truly beyond me and I find it pitiful. How any Christian can join with them (be "yoked" with them basically) is truly, in my opinion, disturbing.

Of course, I'm not talking moderate Dems (although a lot of them are very liberal) but I'm talking the far Left, which Obama clearly is very far Left.

by: Ashleigh101

09-11-2009 @ 6:38am

Very well said. It's good to see a Christian who is being discerning and not just being a mindless follower of someone just because he's the President. More Christians need to be discerning and also need to think more, rather than just blindly buy into the liberal media and their spin on things, or just believe every word out of Obama's mouth.

Like you said, Obama has a big credibility problem. His voting record alone (on abortion) is enough to make one question whether it'll be covered in his health bill. His partnership with Planned Parenthood and the promises he made them while campaigning, his overturning (rescinding?) of the Mexico Policy, etc... all are part of the reason he's got this credibility gap.

I think when it comes to illegal immigrants, eventually, they will be covered because they will no longer be illegal. I mean, honestly, no hospital is going to turn them away... now that would be a moral issue. So what's going to happen when they use the emergency room once Obamacare is in effect? If they are not covered, then will they be denied that care? Seems to me they'd be better off with the way things are now where they are not denied care.

by: letjusticerolldown

09-10-2009 @ 7:43pm

Wallis lays out three fundamentals: "reform as a moral issue, affordable coverage for all, and no federal funding of abortion."

Do you agree with these. Could a broader coalition be built on these? If not these, then what?

by: kansasmennonite

09-11-2009 @ 10:08am

Sarah Palin has constantly lived on lying and fear. Death panels-remember. All of her campaign speaches were about degrading the "other" side. That's what so turned me off from the republican convention. I found out the hypocracy from a religious right person (cousin and neighbor) that I left the church, joined another and have a much more meaningful religious life that includes a lot of left leaning members.

Joe the plumber. If I was a republican (I'm not a democrat either) I wouldn't bring him up. What a joke. Poor guy was manipulated, got over his head and said some really unintelligent things.

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-10-2009 @ 8:35pm

Is reform a moral issue? At the risk of making people's head explode, I'll say no -- at least not in any way that matters to building a coalition. Remember, Obama doesn't just have a moral aspiration, he has a specific plan with health care exchanges and some sort of public option. Close to half of the American public is uneasy with the public option. If he wants to build a coalition that will pass a specific bill, he'll need to drop the public option. I'd go so far as to say that dropping the public option is in itself a moral issue.

Affordable coverage for all is a worthy goal. Perfection is seldom attainable and that still leaves us to figure out just how universal coverage is to be achieved.

I disagree with the President on abortion, not because I think it should be covered, but because I don't think he's being entirely forthcoming on just how it will be handled. Barack Obama has a huge credibility gap here, as well as on financing, on the prospects for future rationing, and on illegal immigrants. He did nothing to close the gaps on any of these.

That's one for three, a great batting average in baseball, not so good for big legislative battles.

LV

by: WitnessforPeace

09-11-2009 @ 10:56am

Jim doesn't speak for the faith community. He might have a credible claim to speak for the majority of his subscribers, but that's it. He's making EXACTLY the same mistake he chastises the Religious Right for. And if the President is telling the truth about abortion, why not make it an explicit amendment to the bill? But that's been rejected. Social justice demands truth, and that's in short supply these days. In the 1980's, Sojourners had a cover story "Ronald Reagan is Lying about Central America" Reagan was indeed lying, but now Jim's telling Obama's lies for him! For free! Very sad to see you sink this far, Jim.....

by: SisterMarie

09-10-2009 @ 10:32pm

"But the Lord works in mysterious ways."

I agree that the Lord does indeed work in mysterious ways. But I would not attribute any of the venom in your post to the Lord that I know. On the other hand, if you were merely referring to the first name that you go by here...

by: letjusticerolldown

09-11-2009 @ 2:40am

You seem opposed to establishing any shared moral commitment with someone that might end up advocating a different policy expression of the moral commitment. How do we analyze, synthesize, and reformulate competing policy solutions to the greatest moral end if we are unwilling to establish a common moral ground? The purpose of a moral claim isn't to bolster one's policy ideals is it??????

by: Ashleigh101

09-11-2009 @ 6:06am

I had no problem whatsoever with the man who called out "You lie." That is, plain and simple, DEMOCRACY at its finest. Right? We do live in a democracy, you know. Where the government is supposed to serve US, not us serving the govt. Where people are allowed to disagree with elected officials, including the President.

Come on! If it had been George Bush, there would've been NO media outcry whatsoever. Heck, when Bush had a shoe thrown at him, the media practically cheered... they all analyzed how he brought it on himself. Bush was also booed and heckled by Congress. No media outcry then.

There is this HUGE double standard, and Democrats don't "allow" the type of treatment they will treat others with. For the past month, they have insulted and dismissed citizens who spoke out at townhalls... calling them nazis, astroturf, even retards. Heck, that Van Jones guy, who just resigned (one of Obama's MANY unvetted czars) called Republicans "a**holes." Where was the outcry then?? Why didn't Obama address "civility" when Dems were insulting townhall citizens or Van Jones' outburst?

How is it that you, and Mr. Wallis, don't see the hypocrisy of Obama and the "left?" How is it that you just blindly believe every word out of his mouth?? It truly amazes me. As Christians, we are urged by Jesus and the apostles, in the Bible, to be DISCERNING, to be wise, to not be naive and foolish.

So, here is Obama, making all these promises... and it truly amazes me that you, and Mr. Wallis, and others, really believe everything he says. And you treat him just like the Left does... never questioning his words, never having any concern for his motives... just blindly following this man and almost even exalting him, as you insult those who disagree with or criticize him.

I personally think you will be in for such a huge, huge disappointment when this health care does pass (heaven forbid) and you find that so much of it isn't at all what Obama promised.

I also have a VERY hard time understanding how Christians can be so blind and so adoring of Obama and his policies, as well as his view that government should take care of society and intrude as much as he is trying to do. It truly baffles me and I simply do not understand. And actually, it sometimes even makes me sick to my stomach.

And a note to Jim Wallis: I will NOT be joining you in calling the White House to urge passage of this horrible bill. I will be calling to express my disgust, outrage, and opposition to it. Joining me will be about 52% of the population accoring to polls. I do NOT want government to have this much control in our lives, and it seriously astounds me that you are in such denial of the fact that this health care plan WILL result in MASSIVE government intrustion and control of American citizens. ASTOUNDS me.

And, IF this bill passes, I will make sure to come back here to say "I told you so" when abortion is indeed covered by this bill, because unless Obama backs down from pressure from the public, it WILL be in the bill.

Obama is not against abortion. Look at his voting record. Look at the things he said to Planned Parenthood while campaigning. Look at legislations he's already overturned or passed since being in office (e.g. Mexico Policy).

He is a hypocrite, and his motives are not pure. His motives are mainly control by the government. GM takeover, bank takeover, stimulus package with all its strings, cap and trade, health care. How is it that you cannot see what his motives are??????? I DON'T GET IT!!!! I don't get these people who are so blind or in denial, esp. the ones who call themselves Christians and treat this guy as if he's some sort of perfect man who would never lie or who has only pure motives. I think it's really sad.

by: lumens

09-11-2009 @ 3:55pm

"You seem opposed to establishing any shared moral commitment with someone that might end up advocating a different policy expression of the moral commitment."

Well, if the moral commitment is a bill that will not fund abortions, and the policy expression of that moral commitment is a bill that will fund abortions, isn't his opposition reasonable? If Wallis continues to support a Democratic health plan (which is a foregone conclusion) that funds abortion, isn't it reasonable to conclude that we do not, in reality, share moral ground?

by: Ashleigh101

09-11-2009 @ 6:33am

I agree that he puts too much energy into defending this program. He's acting like a campaigner and a salesman. I mean, the speech last night was one of MANY he's given where he's basically said the same thing, although last night he also gave a stern scolding to all those out there (talk show hosts, Sarah Palin, townhall dissenters, Republicans, etc) who criticize him or his plan. And to me... well, it makes me feel like this is Cuba or something. I mean, it's just ridiculous and hypocritical. Can you imagine George Bush scolding the nation the way Obama does?! Isn't America all about FREE SPEECH and speaking out, even against leaders????

I did not actually watch the speech, but saw bits and pieces from Youtube videos, read exerpts, and read news coverage. I simply cannot stomach Obama. When I see his face and that stern "you-better-not-mess-with-me-or-cross-me" look he gets... and when I hear him speak in that self-righteous, arrogant sounding voice... my stomach literally turns and it's like hearing nails on a chalkboard.

I personally do not think the Left will ever be humane or "Christian." The Left is now comprised of people who are very radical... who are pro-choice, pro-homosexuality, and for the most part, anti-Christianity. In fact, I'd bet that everyone who calls themself an athiest or agnostic aligns themselves with the "Left." And more and more, most Christians align themselves now with the Republican party.

It used to not be so black and white, but it's becoming that way more and more, mainly I think because of social issues but also because the Left is so big on government control of individual lives. I personally can't understand how anyone can call themselves a Christian and align themselves with the "Left." I truly don't get it. I'm not judging them, but I just don't understand. And I see no humane or Christ-like behavior and attitudes from the "Left." In word, they claim to be compassionate and care about others. But in actions, nope. They insult, they mock, they harrass (Sarah Palin, Joe Plumber, Carrie Prejean... all victims of the Left's harrassment), they delight in ridicule and mockery... they are also very manipulative and deceitful.

Just look at the liberal media. They didn't even cover Van Jones, until after he resigned, at which point they conveniently failed to mention that he called himself a communist only a few short years ago. But, then you've got this guy who calls Obama a liar, and they are on it so fast and furious. How any Christian doesn't see through all this and just buys into all this is truly beyond me and I find it pitiful. How any Christian can join with them (be "yoked" with them basically) is truly, in my opinion, disturbing.

Of course, I'm not talking moderate Dems (although a lot of them are very liberal) but I'm talking the far Left, which Obama clearly is very far Left.

by: Ashleigh101

09-11-2009 @ 6:38am

Very well said. It's good to see a Christian who is being discerning and not just being a mindless follower of someone just because he's the President. More Christians need to be discerning and also need to think more, rather than just blindly buy into the liberal media and their spin on things, or just believe every word out of Obama's mouth.

Like you said, Obama has a big credibility problem. His voting record alone (on abortion) is enough to make one question whether it'll be covered in his health bill. His partnership with Planned Parenthood and the promises he made them while campaigning, his overturning (rescinding?) of the Mexico Policy, etc... all are part of the reason he's got this credibility gap.

I think when it comes to illegal immigrants, eventually, they will be covered because they will no longer be illegal. I mean, honestly, no hospital is going to turn them away... now that would be a moral issue. So what's going to happen when they use the emergency room once Obamacare is in effect? If they are not covered, then will they be denied that care? Seems to me they'd be better off with the way things are now where they are not denied care.

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-10-2009 @ 4:39pm

Sorry, but that speech was a huge mistake. It'll just take a little while to unravel, that's all.

Too many facts got mangled, too much energy was put into defending a program that too many Americans have no faith in. Too little time was spent broadening a coalition.

Brace yourselves, this could be messy. But the Lord works in mysterious ways. Perhaps he led us to elect this man so that the nation would finally have a chance to vomit out the poison of Alinsky leftism in which Obama himself is deeply marinaded.

That's my sincere hope. It should be yours too Jim. It's the best chance you have for the return of a humane and genuinely Christian left.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-10-2009 @ 4:39pm

Sorry, but that speech was a huge mistake. It'll just take a little while to unravel, that's all.

Too many facts got mangled, too much energy was put into defending a program that too many Americans have no faith in. Too little time was spent broadening a coalition.

Brace yourselves, this could be messy. But the Lord works in mysterious ways. Perhaps he led us to elect this man so that the nation would finally have a chance to vomit out the poison of Alinsky leftism in which Obama himself is deeply marinaded.

That's my sincere hope. It should be yours too Jim. It's the best chance you have for the return of a humane and genuinely Christian left.

LV

by: letjusticerolldown

09-10-2009 @ 5:11pm

I did not hear the speech. I did not read the Wallis post. Nor the first comment. I have some other things to do right now. I am going to let my excitement build as to whether Wallis liked the Obama speech.

by: letjusticerolldown

09-10-2009 @ 5:11pm

I did not hear the speech. I did not read the Wallis post. Nor the first comment. I have some other things to do right now. I am going to let my excitement build as to whether Wallis liked the Obama speech.

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:28pm

I found Obama's willingness to snuggle up to those who profit from the suffering of others (i.e., the insurance peddlers) and call them, one and all, "good people" disturbing. Since when is profiting from the suffering of others "good". Call it for what it is, whyncha? I mean, hideous vultures picking the skin off people not yet dead!

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:28pm

I found Obama's willingness to snuggle up to those who profit from the suffering of others (i.e., the insurance peddlers) and call them, one and all, "good people" disturbing. Since when is profiting from the suffering of others "good". Call it for what it is, whyncha? I mean, hideous vultures picking the skin off people not yet dead!

by: lbscholz

09-10-2009 @ 5:31pm

I think it's presumptive to assume that lack of funding for abortions is a moral imperative for everyone in this broadly defined "faith community." To me, social justice means all women having the choice about family planning and when and how they want to bring a child into this world. It seems impossible to define what is a moral imperative for such a large group of people with a disparate group of people.

I do, however, applaud you for tackling heath care as a faith-based issue.

by: lbscholz

09-10-2009 @ 5:31pm

I think it's presumptive to assume that lack of funding for abortions is a moral imperative for everyone in this broadly defined "faith community." To me, social justice means all women having the choice about family planning and when and how they want to bring a child into this world. It seems impossible to define what is a moral imperative for such a large group of people with a disparate group of people.

I do, however, applaud you for tackling heath care as a faith-based issue.

by: romoro914

09-10-2009 @ 5:33pm

I trust that you agree that Congressman Wilson's outburst during the President speech was rude and disrespectful. It showed the world not just Americans how uncivilized we as a country are becoming. We can not even have differences of opinion without resorting to childish tantrums! Furthermore, it would behoove all of us (regardless of party affiliation or religious beliefs) to do some fact checking before regurgitating incorrect, and often hateful statements as if they were truths! Please join the effort to censure Representative Wilson.

by: romoro914

09-10-2009 @ 5:33pm

I trust that you agree that Congressman Wilson's outburst during the President speech was rude and disrespectful. It showed the world not just Americans how uncivilized we as a country are becoming. We can not even have differences of opinion without resorting to childish tantrums! Furthermore, it would behoove all of us (regardless of party affiliation or religious beliefs) to do some fact checking before regurgitating incorrect, and often hateful statements as if they were truths! Please join the effort to censure Representative Wilson.

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:38pm

LV:

"Too many facts got mangled,"

which facts?

"too much energy was put into defending a program that too many Americans have no faith in..."

Um, would that be the so-called "public option" - of the whole speech, maybe 4 minutes? Too much time? I guess if you listen to O'Reilly et al., "too many Americans have no faith in a public option..." OTOH, other pundits count the noses differently.

"Too little time was spent broadening a coalition."

What coalition? Did you see those fat cats sitting there, their jaw muscles twitching? Did you hear one of them lose his cool and call the President a liar? Seek a coalition with such ilk, liars and thieves, vultures, folks who believe it right and proper to profit from the suffering of others? Talk about bedding down with the devil!

And you want a "humane and genuinely Christian Left?" I dare say Jesus style justice won't be seen as "humane" ... and maybe not even "Christian" upon his return.

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:38pm

LV:

"Too many facts got mangled,"

which facts?

"too much energy was put into defending a program that too many Americans have no faith in..."

Um, would that be the so-called "public option" - of the whole speech, maybe 4 minutes? Too much time? I guess if you listen to O'Reilly et al., "too many Americans have no faith in a public option..." OTOH, other pundits count the noses differently.

"Too little time was spent broadening a coalition."

What coalition? Did you see those fat cats sitting there, their jaw muscles twitching? Did you hear one of them lose his cool and call the President a liar? Seek a coalition with such ilk, liars and thieves, vultures, folks who believe it right and proper to profit from the suffering of others? Talk about bedding down with the devil!

And you want a "humane and genuinely Christian Left?" I dare say Jesus style justice won't be seen as "humane" ... and maybe not even "Christian" upon his return.

by: judithod

09-10-2009 @ 5:39pm

My initial reaction to Jim Wallis's comment is that the goal of health-care reform should not be to appease the goals of anyone's faith community but to confront and solve the problems and inequities in the current system (both government-run and private) so that quality, efficient, and affordable health care is available to all American citizens who desire it.

by: judithod

09-10-2009 @ 5:39pm

My initial reaction to Jim Wallis's comment is that the goal of health-care reform should not be to appease the goals of anyone's faith community but to confront and solve the problems and inequities in the current system (both government-run and private) so that quality, efficient, and affordable health care is available to all American citizens who desire it.

by: WitnessforPeace

09-10-2009 @ 5:40pm

I find insurance companies as frustrating as anyone else, but fireman profit from the suffering of others as well. Are they vultures? Health care primarily deals with treatment. Are doctors vultures?
Sadly, Jim's comments are only slightly less offensive than the above post by mackharrell. Jim opens the familiar loophole: "elective abortions"
ALL abortions are elective. Your baby has no choice. All you need is for the abortionist himself to declare that you will suffer "mental health" problems, and a defenseless human is gone. Obama's pro-abortion supporters like this plan; how could it possibly be anything but a framework on which to hang public funding ASAP? Jim, you are bearing false witness. I'm sorry.
For Peace, Shalom, and the lives of the innocent,

by: WitnessforPeace

09-10-2009 @ 5:40pm

I find insurance companies as frustrating as anyone else, but fireman profit from the suffering of others as well. Are they vultures? Health care primarily deals with treatment. Are doctors vultures?
Sadly, Jim's comments are only slightly less offensive than the above post by mackharrell. Jim opens the familiar loophole: "elective abortions"
ALL abortions are elective. Your baby has no choice. All you need is for the abortionist himself to declare that you will suffer "mental health" problems, and a defenseless human is gone. Obama's pro-abortion supporters like this plan; how could it possibly be anything but a framework on which to hang public funding ASAP? Jim, you are bearing false witness. I'm sorry.
For Peace, Shalom, and the lives of the innocent,

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:42pm

Look Romoro:

Sometimes it isn't a matter of a "difference of opinion."

Sometimes it's a matter of the vultures picking the skin off dying babies and profiting withal.

Sometimes it's a matter to be dealt with Chicago-land style, with Thompson sub-machine guns in a back alley garage.

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:42pm

Look Romoro:

Sometimes it isn't a matter of a "difference of opinion."

Sometimes it's a matter of the vultures picking the skin off dying babies and profiting withal.

Sometimes it's a matter to be dealt with Chicago-land style, with Thompson sub-machine guns in a back alley garage.

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:47pm

Nice try about first responders... only not on point. The first responders
are trying to help people. Insurance blood suckers are not seeking to help
the sick and dying. They are interested only in lining their pockets with
cash.

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:47pm

Nice try about first responders... only not on point. The first responders
are trying to help people. Insurance blood suckers are not seeking to help
the sick and dying. They are interested only in lining their pockets with
cash.

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:49pm

Nice try with the example of first responders, medical personnel and the like. Only no cigar. Not on point. Thre is one point of difference between a first responder and an insurance vulture. The first responder is trying to help someone else. The insurance vulture sees his own profit as the sole legitimate concern. Call them for what they are: vultures and worse.

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 5:49pm

Nice try with the example of first responders, medical personnel and the like. Only no cigar. Not on point. Thre is one point of difference between a first responder and an insurance vulture. The first responder is trying to help someone else. The insurance vulture sees his own profit as the sole legitimate concern. Call them for what they are: vultures and worse.

by: WitnessforPeace

09-10-2009 @ 5:54pm

I see a lot of hurt and anger in your assaults on insurance companies and (indirectly) the many ordinary Americans who own stock in them. I pray for God's peace and healing and forgiveness for your bitterness.
Shalom, Witness for Peace

by: WitnessforPeace

09-10-2009 @ 5:54pm

I see a lot of hurt and anger in your assaults on insurance companies and (indirectly) the many ordinary Americans who own stock in them. I pray for God's peace and healing and forgiveness for your bitterness.
Shalom, Witness for Peace

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 6:05pm

Thank you for your prayers. You'd do better to pray for the stock holders
in insurance companies since they're trying to line their pockets with cash
trading on the suffering of old folks like myself.

Of course I'm angry. Hell! I'm outraged! My question to you is: what
would it take to get you angry too? Do you think God is not ANGRY WITH THE
WICKED EVERY DAY?!

by: mackharrell

09-10-2009 @ 6:05pm

Thank you for your prayers. You'd do better to pray for the stock holders
in insurance companies since they're trying to line their pockets with cash
trading on the suffering of old folks like myself.

Of course I'm angry. Hell! I'm outraged! My question to you is: what
would it take to get you angry too? Do you think God is not ANGRY WITH THE
WICKED EVERY DAY?!

by: nuclearferret

09-10-2009 @ 6:13pm

Then don't buy insurance and put profit in their pockets. If you want to defend the "first responders" fine, but they do rely on suffering for their jobs as well. Insurance is the attempt to share and spread risk, pure and simple. Should there be profit in that effort? Why not? Just as there should be no assurance for their losses, but it was government that decided the AIG's and others shouldn't be allowed to fail.

by: nuclearferret

09-10-2009 @ 6:13pm

Then don't buy insurance and put profit in their pockets. If you want to defend the "first responders" fine, but they do rely on suffering for their jobs as well. Insurance is the attempt to share and spread risk, pure and simple. Should there be profit in that effort? Why not? Just as there should be no assurance for their losses, but it was government that decided the AIG's and others shouldn't be allowed to fail.

by: WitnessforPeace

09-10-2009 @ 6:29pm

There is too much sin in the world for me to focus much anger on insurance companies. Better to start with our own sin. G.K.Chesterton, responding to a newspaper solicitation on the question. "What is wrong with the world?"
replied simply: "I am"
Blessings,
Witness for Peace

by: WitnessforPeace

09-10-2009 @ 6:29pm

There is too much sin in the world for me to focus much anger on insurance companies. Better to start with our own sin. G.K.Chesterton, responding to a newspaper solicitation on the question. "What is wrong with the world?"
replied simply: "I am"
Blessings,
Witness for Peace

by: letjusticerolldown

09-10-2009 @ 7:43pm

Wallis lays out three fundamentals: "reform as a moral issue, affordable coverage for all, and no federal funding of abortion."

Do you agree with these. Could a broader coalition be built on these? If not these, then what?

by: letjusticerolldown

09-10-2009 @ 7:43pm

Wallis lays out three fundamentals: "reform as a moral issue, affordable coverage for all, and no federal funding of abortion."

Do you agree with these. Could a broader coalition be built on these? If not these, then what?

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-10-2009 @ 8:35pm

Is reform a moral issue? At the risk of making people's head explode, I'll say no -- at least not in any way that matters to building a coalition. Remember, Obama doesn't just have a moral aspiration, he has a specific plan with health care exchanges and some sort of public option. Close to half of the American public is uneasy with the public option. If he wants to build a coalition that will pass a specific bill, he'll need to drop the public option. I'd go so far as to say that dropping the public option is in itself a moral issue.

Affordable coverage for all is a worthy goal. Perfection is seldom attainable and that still leaves us to figure out just how universal coverage is to be achieved.

I disagree with the President on abortion, not because I think it should be covered, but because I don't think he's being entirely forthcoming on just how it will be handled. Barack Obama has a huge credibility gap here, as well as on financing, on the prospects for future rationing, and on illegal immigrants. He did nothing to close the gaps on any of these.

That's one for three, a great batting average in baseball, not so good for big legislative battles.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-10-2009 @ 8:35pm

Is reform a moral issue? At the risk of making people's head explode, I'll say no -- at least not in any way that matters to building a coalition. Remember, Obama doesn't just have a moral aspiration, he has a specific plan with health care exchanges and some sort of public option. Close to half of the American public is uneasy with the public option. If he wants to build a coalition that will pass a specific bill, he'll need to drop the public option. I'd go so far as to say that dropping the public option is in itself a moral issue.

Affordable coverage for all is a worthy goal. Perfection is seldom attainable and that still leaves us to figure out just how universal coverage is to be achieved.

I disagree with the President on abortion, not because I think it should be covered, but because I don't think he's being entirely forthcoming on just how it will be handled. Barack Obama has a huge credibility gap here, as well as on financing, on the prospects for future rationing, and on illegal immigrants. He did nothing to close the gaps on any of these.

That's one for three, a great batting average in baseball, not so good for big legislative battles.

LV

by: SisterMarie

09-10-2009 @ 10:32pm

"But the Lord works in mysterious ways."

I agree that the Lord does indeed work in mysterious ways. But I would not attribute any of the venom in your post to the Lord that I know. On the other hand, if you were merely referring to the first name that you go by here...

by: SisterMarie

09-10-2009 @ 10:32pm

"But the Lord works in mysterious ways."

I agree that the Lord does indeed work in mysterious ways. But I would not attribute any of the venom in your post to the Lord that I know. On the other hand, if you were merely referring to the first name that you go by here...

by: letjusticerolldown

09-11-2009 @ 2:40am

You seem opposed to establishing any shared moral commitment with someone that might end up advocating a different policy expression of the moral commitment. How do we analyze, synthesize, and reformulate competing policy solutions to the greatest moral end if we are unwilling to establish a common moral ground? The purpose of a moral claim isn't to bolster one's policy ideals is it??????

by: letjusticerolldown

09-11-2009 @ 2:40am

You seem opposed to establishing any shared moral commitment with someone that might end up advocating a different policy expression of the moral commitment. How do we analyze, synthesize, and reformulate competing policy solutions to the greatest moral end if we are unwilling to establish a common moral ground? The purpose of a moral claim isn't to bolster one's policy ideals is it??????

by: Ashleigh101

09-11-2009 @ 6:06am

I had no problem whatsoever with the man who called out "You lie." That is, plain and simple, DEMOCRACY at its finest. Right? We do live in a democracy, you know. Where the government is supposed to serve US, not us serving the govt. Where people are allowed to disagree with elected officials, including the President.

Come on! If it had been George Bush, there would've been NO media outcry whatsoever. Heck, when Bush had a shoe thrown at him, the media practically cheered... they all analyzed how he brought it on himself. Bush was also booed and heckled by Congress. No media outcry then.

There is this HUGE double standard, and Democrats don't "allow" the type of treatment they will treat others with. For the past month, they have insulted and dismissed citizens who spoke out at townhalls... calling them nazis, astroturf, even retards. Heck, that Van Jones guy, who just resigned (one of Obama's MANY unvetted czars) called Republicans "a**holes." Where was the outcry then?? Why didn't Obama address "civility" when Dems were insulting townhall citizens or Van Jones' outburst?

How is it that you, and Mr. Wallis, don't see the hypocrisy of Obama and the "left?" How is it that you just blindly believe every word out of his mouth?? It truly amazes me. As Christians, we are urged by Jesus and the apostles, in the Bible, to be DISCERNING, to be wise, to not be naive and foolish.

So, here is Obama, making all these promises... and it truly amazes me that you, and Mr. Wallis, and others, really believe everything he says. And you treat him just like the Left does... never questioning his words, never having any concern for his motives... just blindly following this man and almost even exalting him, as you insult those who disagree with or criticize him.

I personally think you will be in for such a huge, huge disappointment when this health care does pass (heaven forbid) and you find that so much of it isn't at all what Obama promised.

I also have a VERY hard time understanding how Christians can be so blind and so adoring of Obama and his policies, as well as his view that government should take care of society and intrude as much as he is trying to do. It truly baffles me and I simply do not understand. And actually, it sometimes even makes me sick to my stomach.

And a note to Jim Wallis: I will NOT be joining you in calling the White House to urge passage of this horrible bill. I will be calling to express my disgust, outrage, and opposition to it. Joining me will be about 52% of the population accoring to polls. I do NOT want government to have this much control in our lives, and it seriously astounds me that you are in such denial of the fact that this health care plan WILL result in MASSIVE government intrustion and control of American citizens. ASTOUNDS me.

And, IF this bill passes, I will make sure to come back here to say "I told you so" when abortion is indeed covered by this bill, because unless Obama backs down from pressure from the public, it WILL be in the bill.

Obama is not against abortion. Look at his voting record. Look at the things he said to Planned Parenthood while campaigning. Look at legislations he's already overturned or passed since being in office (e.g. Mexico Policy).

He is a hypocrite, and his motives are not pure. His motives are mainly control by the government. GM takeover, bank takeover, stimulus package with all its strings, cap and trade, health care. How is it that you cannot see what his motives are??????? I DON'T GET IT!!!! I don't get these people who are so blind or in denial, esp. the ones who call themselves Christians and treat this guy as if he's some sort of perfect man who would never lie or who has only pure motives. I think it's really sad.

by: Ashleigh101

09-11-2009 @ 6:06am

I had no problem whatsoever with the man who called out "You lie." That is, plain and simple, DEMOCRACY at its finest. Right? We do live in a democracy, you know. Where the government is supposed to serve US, not us serving the govt. Where people are allowed to disagree with elected officials, including the President.

Come on! If it had been George Bush, there would've been NO media outcry whatsoever. Heck, when Bush had a shoe thrown at him, the media practically cheered... they all analyzed how he brought it on himself. Bush was also booed and heckled by Congress. No media outcry then.

There is this HUGE double standard, and Democrats don't "allow" the type of treatment they will treat others with. For the past month, they have insulted and dismissed citizens who spoke out at townhalls... calling them nazis, astroturf, even retards. Heck, that Van Jones guy, who just resigned (one of Obama's MANY unvetted czars) called Republicans "a**holes." Where was the outcry then?? Why didn't Obama address "civility" when Dems were insulting townhall citizens or Van Jones' outburst?

How is it that you, and Mr. Wallis, don't see the hypocrisy of Obama and the "left?" How is it that you just blindly believe every word out of his mouth?? It truly amazes me. As Christians, we are urged by Jesus and the apostles, in the Bible, to be DISCERNING, to be wise, to not be naive and foolish.

So, here is Obama, making all these promises... and it truly amazes me that you, and Mr. Wallis, and others, really believe everything he says. And you treat him just like the Left does... never questioning his words, never having any concern for his motives... just blindly following this man and almost even exalting him, as you insult those who disagree with or criticize him.

I personally think you will be in for such a huge, huge disappointment when this health care does pass (heaven forbid) and you find that so much of it isn't at all what Obama promised.

I also have a VERY hard time understanding how Christians can be so blind and so adoring of Obama and his policies, as well as his view that government should take care of society and intrude as much as he is trying to do. It truly baffles me and I simply do not understand. And actually, it sometimes even makes me sick to my stomach.

And a note to Jim Wallis: I will NOT be joining you in calling the White House to urge passage of this horrible bill. I will be calling to express my disgust, outrage, and opposition to it. Joining me will be about 52% of the population accoring to polls. I do NOT want government to have this much control in our lives, and it seriously astounds me that you are in such denial of the fact that this health care plan WILL result in MASSIVE government intrustion and control of American citizens. ASTOUNDS me.

And, IF this bill passes, I will make sure to come back here to say "I told you so" when abortion is indeed covered by this bill, because unless Obama backs down from pressure from the public, it WILL be in the bill.

Obama is not against abortion. Look at his voting record. Look at the things he said to Planned Parenthood while campaigning. Look at legislations he's already overturned or passed since being in office (e.g. Mexico Policy).

He is a hypocrite, and his motives are not pure. His motives are mainly control by the government. GM takeover, bank takeover, stimulus package with all its strings, cap and trade, health care. How is it that you cannot see what his motives are??????? I DON'T GET IT!!!! I don't get these people who are so blind or in denial, esp. the ones who call themselves Christians and treat this guy as if he's some sort of perfect man who would never lie or who has only pure motives. I think it's really sad.

by: Ashleigh101

09-11-2009 @ 6:33am

I agree that he puts too much energy into defending this program. He's acting like a campaigner and a salesman. I mean, the speech last night was one of MANY he's given where he's basically said the same thing, although last night he also gave a stern scolding to all those out there (talk show hosts, Sarah Palin, townhall dissenters, Republicans, etc) who criticize him or his plan. And to me... well, it makes me feel like this is Cuba or something. I mean, it's just ridiculous and hypocritical. Can you imagine George Bush scolding the nation the way Obama does?! Isn't America all about FREE SPEECH and speaking out, even against leaders????

I did not actually watch the speech, but saw bits and pieces from Youtube videos, read exerpts, and read news coverage. I simply cannot stomach Obama. When I see his face and that stern "you-better-not-mess-with-me-or-cross-me" look he gets... and when I hear him speak in that self-righteous, arrogant sounding voice... my stomach literally turns and it's like hearing nails on a chalkboard.

I personally do not think the Left will ever be humane or "Christian." The Left is now comprised of people who are very radical... who are pro-choice, pro-homosexuality, and for the most part, anti-Christianity. In fact, I'd bet that everyone who calls themself an athiest or agnostic aligns themselves with the "Left." And more and more, most Christians align themselves now with the Republican party.

It used to not be so black and white, but it's becoming that way more and more, mainly I think because of social issues but also because the Left is so big on government control of individual lives. I personally can't understand how anyone can call themselves a Christian and align themselves with the "Left." I truly don't get it. I'm not judging them, but I just don't understand. And I see no humane or Christ-like behavior and attitudes from the "Left." In word, they claim to be compassionate and care about others. But in actions, nope. They insult, they mock, they harrass (Sarah Palin, Joe Plumber, Carrie Prejean... all victims of the Left's harrassment), they delight in ridicule and mockery... they are also very manipulative and deceitful.

Just look at the liberal media. They didn't even cover Van Jones, until after he resigned, at which point they conveniently failed to mention that he called himself a communist only a few short years ago. But, then you've got this guy who calls Obama a liar, and they are on it so fast and furious. How any Christian doesn't see through all this and just buys into all this is truly beyond me and I find it pitiful. How any Christian can join with them (be "yoked" with them basically) is truly, in my opinion, disturbing.

Of course, I'm not talking moderate Dems (although a lot of them are very liberal) but I'm talking the far Left, which Obama clearly is very far Left.

by: Ashleigh101

09-11-2009 @ 6:33am

I agree that he puts too much energy into defending this program. He's acting like a campaigner and a salesman. I mean, the speech last night was one of MANY he's given where he's basically said the same thing, although last night he also gave a stern scolding to all those out there (talk show hosts, Sarah Palin, townhall dissenters, Republicans, etc) who criticize him or his plan. And to me... well, it makes me feel like this is Cuba or something. I mean, it's just ridiculous and hypocritical. Can you imagine George Bush scolding the nation the way Obama does?! Isn't America all about FREE SPEECH and speaking out, even against leaders????

I did not actually watch the speech, but saw bits and pieces from Youtube videos, read exerpts, and read news coverage. I simply cannot stomach Obama. When I see his face and that stern "you-better-not-mess-with-me-or-cross-me" look he gets... and when I hear him speak in that self-righteous, arrogant sounding voice... my stomach literally turns and it's like hearing nails on a chalkboard.

I personally do not think the Left will ever be humane or "Christian." The Left is now comprised of people who are very radical... who are pro-choice, pro-homosexuality, and for the most part, anti-Christianity. In fact, I'd bet that everyone who calls themself an athiest or agnostic aligns themselves with the "Left." And more and more, most Christians align themselves now with the Republican party.

It used to not be so black and white, but it's becoming that way more and more, mainly I think because of social issues but also because the Left is so big on government control of individual lives. I personally can't understand how anyone can call themselves a Christian and align themselves with the "Left." I truly don't get it. I'm not judging them, but I just don't understand. And I see no humane or Christ-like behavior and attitudes from the "Left." In word, they claim to be compassionate and care about others. But in actions, nope. They insult, they mock, they harrass (Sarah Palin, Joe Plumber, Carrie Prejean... all victims of the Left's harrassment), they delight in ridicule and mockery... they are also very manipulative and deceitful.

Just look at the liberal media. They didn't even cover Van Jones, until after he resigned, at which point they conveniently failed to mention that he called himself a communist only a few short years ago. But, then you've got this guy who calls Obama a liar, and they are on it so fast and furious. How any Christian doesn't see through all this and just buys into all this is truly beyond me and I find it pitiful. How any Christian can join with them (be "yoked" with them basically) is truly, in my opinion, disturbing.

Of course, I'm not talking moderate Dems (although a lot of them are very liberal) but I'm talking the far Left, which Obama clearly is very far Left.

by: Ashleigh101

09-11-2009 @ 6:38am

Very well said. It's good to see a Christian who is being discerning and not just being a mindless follower of someone just because he's the President. More Christians need to be discerning and also need to think more, rather than just blindly buy into the liberal media and their spin on things, or just believe every word out of Obama's mouth.

Like you said, Obama has a big credibility problem. His voting record alone (on abortion) is enough to make one question whether it'll be covered in his health bill. His partnership with Planned Parenthood and the promises he made them while campaigning, his overturning (rescinding?) of the Mexico Policy, etc... all are part of the reason he's got this credibility gap.

I think when it comes to illegal immigrants, eventually, they will be covered because they will no longer be illegal. I mean, honestly, no hospital is going to turn them away... now that would be a moral issue. So what's going to happen when they use the emergency room once Obamacare is in effect? If they are not covered, then will they be denied that care? Seems to me they'd be better off with the way things are now where they are not denied care.

by: Ashleigh101

09-11-2009 @ 6:38am

Very well said. It's good to see a Christian who is being discerning and not just being a mindless follower of someone just because he's the President. More Christians need to be discerning and also need to think more, rather than just blindly buy into the liberal media and their spin on things, or just believe every word out of Obama's mouth.

Like you said, Obama has a big credibility problem. His voting record alone (on abortion) is enough to make one question whether it'll be covered in his health bill. His partnership with Planned Parenthood and the promises he made them while campaigning, his overturning (rescinding?) of the Mexico Policy, etc... all are part of the reason he's got this credibility gap.

I think when it comes to illegal immigrants, eventually, they will be covered because they will no longer be illegal. I mean, honestly, no hospital is going to turn them away... now that would be a moral issue. So what's going to happen when they use the emergency room once Obamacare is in effect? If they are not covered, then will they be denied that care? Seems to me they'd be better off with the way things are now where they are not denied care.

by: kansasmennonite

09-11-2009 @ 10:08am

Sarah Palin has constantly lived on lying and fear. Death panels-remember. All of her campaign speaches were about degrading the "other" side. That's what so turned me off from the republican convention. I found out the hypocracy from a religious right person (cousin and neighbor) that I left the church, joined another and have a much more meaningful religious life that includes a lot of left leaning members.

Joe the plumber. If I was a republican (I'm not a democrat either) I wouldn't bring him up. What a joke. Poor guy was manipulated, got over his head and said some really unintelligent things.

by: kansasmennonite

09-11-2009 @ 10:08am

Sarah Palin has constantly lived on lying and fear. Death panels-remember. All of her campaign speaches were about degrading the "other" side. That's what so turned me off from the republican convention. I found out the hypocracy from a religious right person (cousin and neighbor) that I left the church, joined another and have a much more meaningful religious life that includes a lot of left leaning members.

Joe the plumber. If I was a republican (I'm not a democrat either) I wouldn't bring him up. What a joke. Poor guy was manipulated, got over his head and said some really unintelligent things.

by: WitnessforPeace

09-11-2009 @ 10:56am

Jim doesn't speak for the faith community. He might have a credible claim to speak for the majority of his subscribers, but that's it. He's making EXACTLY the same mistake he chastises the Religious Right for. And if the President is telling the truth about abortion, why not make it an explicit amendment to the bill? But that's been rejected. Social justice demands truth, and that's in short supply these days. In the 1980's, Sojourners had a cover story "Ronald Reagan is Lying about Central America" Reagan was indeed lying, but now Jim's telling Obama's lies for him! For free! Very sad to see you sink this far, Jim.....

by: WitnessforPeace

09-11-2009 @ 10:56am

Jim doesn't speak for the faith community. He might have a credible claim to speak for the majority of his subscribers, but that's it. He's making EXACTLY the same mistake he chastises the Religious Right for. And if the President is telling the truth about abortion, why not make it an explicit amendment to the bill? But that's been rejected. Social justice demands truth, and that's in short supply these days. In the 1980's, Sojourners had a cover story "Ronald Reagan is Lying about Central America" Reagan was indeed lying, but now Jim's telling Obama's lies for him! For free! Very sad to see you sink this far, Jim.....

by: lumens

09-11-2009 @ 3:55pm

"You seem opposed to establishing any shared moral commitment with someone that might end up advocating a different policy expression of the moral commitment."

Well, if the moral commitment is a bill that will not fund abortions, and the policy expression of that moral commitment is a bill that will fund abortions, isn't his opposition reasonable? If Wallis continues to support a Democratic health plan (which is a foregone conclusion) that funds abortion, isn't it reasonable to conclude that we do not, in reality, share moral ground?

by: lumens

09-11-2009 @ 3:55pm

"You seem opposed to establishing any shared moral commitment with someone that might end up advocating a different policy expression of the moral commitment."

Well, if the moral commitment is a bill that will not fund abortions, and the policy expression of that moral commitment is a bill that will fund abortions, isn't his opposition reasonable? If Wallis continues to support a Democratic health plan (which is a foregone conclusion) that funds abortion, isn't it reasonable to conclude that we do not, in reality, share moral ground?