Difference between revisions of "Talk:Obama's Religion"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Quotation is irrelevant)
(Quotation is irrelevant)
Line 135: Line 135:
:::I don't believe Mr Schlafly has a single strong argument that Obama is Muslim, let alone three. Unless I'm very much mistaken, he's working on the old "throw enough mud" approach. --[[User:JohanZ|JohanZ]] 20:52, 3 January 2013 (EST)
:::I don't believe Mr Schlafly has a single strong argument that Obama is Muslim, let alone three. Unless I'm very much mistaken, he's working on the old "throw enough mud" approach. --[[User:JohanZ|JohanZ]] 20:52, 3 January 2013 (EST)
:::: I personally think that the quotation should be in the article as it is a good piece of evidence and does suggest the fact he is a muslim. [[User:Dvergne|Dvergne]] 21:08, 3 January 2013 (EST)
:::: I personally think that the quotation should be in the article as it is a good piece of evidence and does suggest the fact he is a muslim. [[User:Dvergne|Dvergne]] 21:08, 3 January 2013 (EST)
:::::It is evidence that Obama either has a muslim in the family, or has lived in a muslim majority country, both of which we know to be true.  It is not evidence of anything else.  --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 21:11, 3 January 2013 (EST)

Revision as of 21:11, 3 January 2013

Is it not necessary to delete this talkpage? R7 ~ Talk 16:06, 4 August 2011 (EDT)

Why do you say that? Jcw 16:13, 4 August 2011 (EDT)
Sorry for the late reaction, but this is an empty talkpage. Normally these things, without content, so far as I saw, are being deleted, or am I wrong? R7 15:44, 8 August 2011 (EDT)


Hey guys! I'm sure this has been discussed before but I can't seem to find the discussion... maybe someone here could point me in the right direction? This article shows pretty conclusively that Obama is a Muslim, I'm not arguing that but... why does it matter? Isn't he entitled to his freedom of religion just like the rest of us? I mean, I disagree totally with his policies bordering on socialistic but this is something I've never understood. (Unless of course he claims to be christian, that would be different). Thanks! Gregory S. Kroeger 13:43, 11 August 2011 (EDT)Greg

Hello all! Now I am not trying to disagree with this article but I just found a great Q&A from a trustworthy conservitive Christian website that seems to actually paint Obama as a Christian. What are your thoughts on the article? (The link is below)


Fewer than 1% muslims leave the faith applies globally, not in the usa

Fewer than 1% muslims leave the Muslims faith applies globally, not in the usa. In the USA people switch religions more frequently than in many places. Plus, what matters is the evidence for Obama in particular and the historical context of the evidence. For example, not many people rise from the dead in history, but the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ is very good. I do not know enough about Obama's history to know if he was ever a Muslim. If he was a Muslim, I would like to know at what age. It does seem odd that he attended Wright's church and had his daughter baptised if he was a Muslim. Plus, Obama eats pork and drinks alcohol. Conservative 15:29, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

Also, this sentence is too broad: "Obama's background, education, and outlook are Muslim." It clearly ignores his black liberation theology church attendance, his atheist mother, Columbia and Harvard education and his secular progressive like stances on social issues (homosexuality, etc.). Obama fits a heretical liberal Christianity outlook far more than a Muslim outlook. Historical evidence is weighed in context and not through cherry picking. Conservative 15:42, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

This article is more harmful than good for this project

The text clearly says that Barak may be the first Islamic president, there follows a list of mostly straw grasping and "synthesis" of assetions based on certain evidence. I am no fan of Obama, but the ecmaples is SO flawed I'm beginning to think it was started by a troll as a parody to debase the authority of this encyclopedia. I have only taken the comments below but the whole article, being based on the premise that Obam is Islamic, is on very unstable ground, in fact much of it seems an errand in silliness, but let's disucss it:

  • Obama declared in prepared remarks, "The United States has been enriched by Muslim Americans. Many other Americans have Muslims in their families or have lived in a Muslim-majority country - I know, because I am one of them
Synthesis: shows that he has a positive opinion of the input of muslims, and proves that he has either or both lived in muslim countries and had muslims in his family. Does not provide evidence of being Islamic
  • Obama's wife Michelle does not accompany him to Muslim nations because Sharia law would apply to her there; on a presidential trip she was with him until France, but then returned home.
Synthesis again – many men visiting muslim countries would be less than likely to want their wives there to be subject to their customs. If anything it maybe evidence counter to the point
  • Obama's background, education, and outlook are Muslim, and fewer than 1% of Muslims convert to Christianity
So? 1% do (if we assume the statistic is correct to start with in a western country which I doubt)
  • During the third and fourth grades, Obama learned about Islam for two hours each week in religion class, according to the LATimes.
I learned about it for three years as part of general Social and Religious Studies in High School. I am a Christian and not a muslim. If I had muslims in my family, I would perhaps be even more curious from an accademic point of view.
  • Obama's middle name (Hussein) references Husayn,
Hussein is an Arabic name. Changing a name on conversion is common in Islam but less common in christisanity so nothing can be inferred , especially as his father had that name so he is likely to retain it for family reasons
This one always amuses me. My father's family was from Germany, and my great-grandfather shared first names with Hitler. My father was named after his grandfather, and is about as far from a Nazi as can be. --SharonW 09:25, 12 September 2011 (EDT)
Indeed - my aunt was born a Christian, then married my Jewish uncle and converted. But she didn't change her name from Christina. And that's hardly a Jewish name. Of course, now she's divorced from my uncle and I don't know if she went back to Christianity or not, but she's still named Christina. And there's also a convert in my synagogue named "Christian". That's about as un-Jewish a name as you can get right there. For that matter, my grandmother made a big deal about how I had the same name as a former Pope, although given that she named one of her sons Mark, I'm guessing that's just because she was mad my parents didn't name me after her late husband. Gregkochuconn 08:27, 21 February 2012 (EST)
Out of context – past tense
  • He has said that "Islam can be compatible with the modern world."
Empathy and a positive opinion do not make you part of the club.
  • Obama said the Muslim call to prayer is "one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset," and recited "with a first-class Arabic accent" the opening lines: Allah is Supreme! ... I witness that there is no god but Allah ...."
See above
  • Obama stated that the autobiography of Malcolm X, a Nation of Islam leader who became a Muslim, inspired him in his youth
I was inspired and still am by Gandhi – he was not a Christian, I am.
  • Obama uses the Muslim Pakistani pronunciation for "Pakistan" rather than the common American one. Obama repeatedly pronounced "Pakistan" as "Pokiston" in the first presidential debate.
Dimplomatic lingusitc trait from someone with experience of a culture?
  • Obama was thoroughly exposed to Christianity as an adult in Chicago prior to attending law school, yet no one at law school saw him display any interest in converting.
Like lots of young people, it is often hard to get them interested.
  • Obama has chosen the Secret Service code name "Renegade". "Renegade" conventionally describes someone who goes against normal conventions of behavior, but its first usage was to describe someone who has turned from their religion. It is a word derived from the Spanish renegado, which originally meant "Christian turned Muslim."<
Golly it gets even more tenuous. Do we really always think of the derivations of words when we use them?

DavidMilton 14:08, 8 September 2011 (EDT)

Ok, then I will edit the article without deviating from its title. DavidMilton 09:13, 12 September 2011 (EDT)

"Prepared remarks"

Obama referenced Jesus as "a" Son of God in a speech given at a formal event. He reads his remarks from teleprompters at such events. This should be distinguished from an interview, where words are chosen less carefully.--Andy Schlafly 20:06, 7 April 2012 (EDT)

Blatant Slander

Conservapedia is going downhill. Virtually every piece of evidence on this page is either taken out of context or entirely irrelevant. Obama read a book written from a Muslim point of view. How does that prove he's a Muslim. Does reading the book of Exodus make me Jewish because it's from Moses's point of view?

Obama's been doing a poor job, but you can point that out pretty easily without having to resort to a smear campaign. Don't sink to the liberal level. You guys are better than that--Bdor24 20:34, 19 April 2012 (EDT)

Trimmed examples

I removed the following examples from the article because, even if they are true, they serve as little to no evidence that Obama is Muslim:

  • In prepared remarks in April 2012, Obama referred to Jesus as "a" Son of God rather than as "the" Son of God: "And for me, and I’m sure for some of you, it’s also a chance to remember the tremendous sacrifice that led up to that day, and all that Christ endured—not just as a Son of God, but as a human being."[1]
  • Obama's wife Michelle does not accompany him to Muslim nations because Sharia law would apply to her there; on a presidential trip she was with him until France, but then returned home.

Later on, I will be going through the lengthy list of arguments to trim and refine the page to the best arguments that can be made about this. GregG 23:53, 25 April 2012 (EDT)

Both are persuasive examples. Deletions of factual information are disfavored. Readers can decide whether something is persuasive.--Andy Schlafly 23:58, 25 April 2012 (EDT)
I respectfully disagree. I will discuss each example in turn.
  • The first example has many more plausible explanations than that Obama is Muslim. My interpretation of the quote is that Obama is contrasting the role of Jesus as Son of God and as a fully human being. He appears to be expounding the truth that Christ suffered great pain and ultimately death as a human being so that our sins may be forgiven (Isaiah 53:5, 1 Peter 2:21-25). Even if Obama meant to say "the" or nothing at all instead of "a", and even if the speech came in prepared remarks (which, incidentally, even if prepared, we don't know whether they are verbatim or merely an outline), anyone can have a slip of the tongue (ask Neil Armstrong!). But even if Obama meant to say a Son of God to expressly imply that God has more than one Son, this still would not demonstrate that he is a Muslim, because (as I understand it) Muslims believe that God has no incarnate son. Thus, this example cannot possibly demonstrate that Obama is Muslim. If it does provide any evidence at all contradicting his assertions that he is Christian, it still does nothing to support the alternative hypothesis that he is Muslim.
  • The second example can be attributed to cultural norms in Muslim countries. Where sharia law is practiced, women are marginalized. Thus, any man, Muslim, Christian, Jew, whoever, would take special considerations before bringing his wife to a country hostile to women. Under the same logic of this argument, my refusal to take friends into sketchy parts of the city where gangs reign would indicate that I am a gangster. Again, this argument is of little probative value.
The issue I have is that when you have several weak examples, they make the rest of the examples look less strong in comparison. I know that, as a lawyer, you want to not only cover all the potential arguments of a case but also focus on your strongest arguments. I would respectfully suggest the same approach here, and I am willing to help with this. GregG 00:18, 26 April 2012 (EDT)

Same-sex marriage

Do many Muslims support same-sex marriage? AcomaMagic 15:31, 18 August 2012 (EDT)

Better to seek permission

I'd like to go through this page and either rephrase or entirely remove a few of the more "sensationalist" accusations, to make this a more balanced look at the likely religion of the current-and-soon-to-be-former President. I think that many of the examples are valid, but at the same time multiple others are not. I have read the Quran, the Torah, and the Book of Mormon but I am not a Muslim, Jew, or Mormon myself; in the same vein, President Obama isn't necessarily a Muslim for taking inspiration from a Muslim-slanted work or an Islamic activist.

I'd appreciate it if someone could get back to me on this as soon as possible. :)

Regards, JGrant 14:27, 3 October 2012 (EDT)

I second that. To be honest most of this article just comes across as hysterical xenophobia. Cmurphynz 00:29, 7 October 2012 (EDT)

An idea.

A while ago a vandal replaced the text of this entry with 'Christian'. The change was reverted but I think that that might actually be the best approach to fixing the page. I just looked through the page, and it seems that almost everyone who has posted here has serious problems with the content. This includes senior members of the website (there was one bit written by conservative for instance). What I think should be done to actually make this article conform slightly to reality as the rest of the world sees it is to add at the beginning the proof that he is in fact Christian, and then state that there is still some controversy and present some of the less tenuous claims currently here so that the argument doesn't look too ridiculous. Any objections?Cmurphynz

None at all. In fact, I decided to review some of the claims, and not only were some of them heavily doubtful, some were outright untrue, and I found many sources to disprove or at least clarify some of the doubts, and I plan to check out the rest of the rest of the sources and see if I can't do the same. PatrickMarion 11:59, 3 January 2013 (EST)PatrickMarion
I just checked and seems the user I responded to was banned for lying, which is unfortunate, but the suggestion seems sensible enough. PatrickMarion 12:01, 3 January 2013 (EST)PatrickMarion
I think that the page in its current form detracts from the overall credibility of the website. Wschact 14:39, 3 January 2013 (EST)
I thought so as well. I already rewrote the introduction and added some references for some claims that needed them and added section about how some claims have rooms for doubt. In fact, I found out at least one or two of the claims were outright conspiracy nonsense/parody virtually every news post and blog I came across without a noticeable political/religious slant one way or the other outright rejected them. Still looking through the references for some of the claims, and many of them come from some obviously biased sources with anti-Obama agendas. I'm no fan of the guy as a President, but some of what I've read was such disgusting mudslinging and demonization, even from some purported conservatives, I felt like throwing up. Any help would be appreciated in helping clean up this page.
PatrickMarion 14:51, 3 January 2013 (EST)PatrickMarion
I'm currently cleaning up most of the allegations in this article, removing the slander and lies, and wow, there were a lot. First, one allegation was that the Defense Missile Agency logo was changed to a Islamic Star Crescent design by Obama, when it was actually designed three years prior to his taking office. The first source was a conspiracy nut ranting on a blog, and the second, more factual source refuted the first. Second, an article by FOX News (a publication I refuse to trust under any circumstance) took a line out of context to paint Obama as a Muslim, whn his next line makes it obvious they were quotemining. I even bolded the line they omitted in the revised version.This source is an obvious anti-Muslim shill blog, not a reputable news service, and its claims about Obama were obviously quote mined, the claim about taqiyya (an Islamic tradition allowing one to hide their Islamic identity if they are in danger) is unprovable, as the only one who would be in the greatest danger would be those facing criminal justice if they tried attacking him physically if he were Muslim, and the fact he he hasn't admitted to be a Muslim is not evidence he's lying, as absence of evidence is not evidence. One of the claims cited two articles from World News Daily, neither of which existed, and what I read on their site concerning Obama is such obvious extremist anti-liberal spin doctoring it's either a liberal parody of conservatives or just a horribly mean spirited hate rag I would give as little credence as I do Fox News. One was a youtube video of quotes stitched together by an obvious anti-Muslim bigot who hated Obama, and whose blog was a hideously racist and outright wrong "comparison of Nazism and Islam". One allegation was an obvious slip of the tongue in an interview turned into a lowbrow conspiracy by one source the corroborating one promptly exposed as a clear accident. A few of the cited references led to non existent pages and had no corroborating sources.
These is still a lot more to clean up, but as someone who believes in not bearing false witness, I had to remove quite a bit of it so far against a man I may not like as President, but who doesn't and will never deserve to be demonized by agenda wielding demagogues either.
PatrickMarion 16:01, 3 January 2013 (EST)PatrickMarion
Improvements to the entry are welcome, but what I saw in a quick review was numerous removals of information. This website lets the reader decide what to think; we don't try to decide for the reader.--Andy Schlafly 16:09, 3 January 2013 (EST)
Fair enough, Mr. Schlafly, I can understand that, but while I may have gone a little overboard trying to present evidence why some of the claims were doubtful, I politely ask you read the same sources I did for yourself and decided if some and their claims needs to remain. I may not like the President as a politician, and I do feel many of his public morals don't match up with his faith, but some of those sources were just biased, some were outright lies, and even Obama doesn't deserved to be lied about, or even taken out of context to appear as something he's not, especially not on a website that claims to be educational.
PatrickMarion 16:21, 3 January 2013 (EST)PatrickMarion
Pick your best three examples from the entry and let's discuss their accuracy.--Andy Schlafly 16:38, 3 January 2013 (EST)
Sure. My first example is the item about Obama's middle name (i.e - Obama's middle name (Hussein)). I checked the first two sources and they seemed to match up, but the third source seemed extremely, at best, casually related. Sure, the article subject is about a former Muslim who chose a Christian name upon conversion as part of that conversion, but that is not required by anyone with Muslim name under Muslim tradtion unless their name is sacrilegious to Islam, and according to this Muslim source, that is not required in Obama's case, as his name is in no way disrespectful to the Islamic faith, so even if he were Muslim, he would not be required to change his name for religious reasons.
Second, we have the youtube link cited in the item about Obama performing what looked like a stand up comedy routine mocking the Torah and the Bible. The youtube link is an obviously stitched together series of clips put together an obvious bigot who links back to a blog comparing the Qu'ran (or Koran) to Nazism, and as someone who has read both Mein Kampf and the Qu'ran out of scholarly interest, his interpretations are the most hateful thing I've ever read comparing the two, and they aren't even correct, and citing something by an obvious bigot is a bad thing for an educational website to do, especially a conservative one.
Finally, the introduction of this very article were written with apparent political ignorance concerning the oath of office (on top of asserting Obama was a Muslim before the reader had a chance to decide for themselves based on the rest of the article). For example:
Barack Hussein Obama is the first Muslim president of the United States, as illustrated by his many actions and comments both before and after taking the official (private) oath of office without using a Bible. - that is not even correct about the oath of office. Swearing on a Bible is not required, and for the first ceremony, Obama wanted to use the Lincoln Bible, but due to how the first ceremony was botched, there was a second ceremony. I could find no evidence of a Bible being used, but that is irrelevant to to the oath.
PatrickMarion 17:11, 3 January 2013 (EST)PatrickMarion
Mr Schlafly, what you are saying, in effect, is that anybody can put anything up here, true or false, and we'll just let "the reader decide what to think." Is that correct? Isn't it the responsibility of the contributors and editors here to do that vetting of information rather than to put that onus on the reader? BryanF 17:30, 3 January 2013 (EST)
There are two other bullets that are problematic. 1) "On the campaign trail, Obama was reading "The Post-American World" by Fareed Zakaria,[20] which is written by a Muslim author.[21]" -- Many non-Muslims read that book. There is nothing to suggest that reading that book would motivate someone to believe in Islam, or that reading that particular book would be a characteristic of being Muslim.
2) "Obama required that a religiously affiliated college take the extraordinary action of concealing with wood the monogram "IHS", which represents the name of Jesus, during a speech by Obama there" -- The only source is a dead link. I don't have any reason to believe that President Obama was personally involved in the stage design of the event. If this really happened, it would have drawn more media coverage. In any case, it is not connected to being a Muslim. Thanks, Wschact 17:38, 3 January 2013 (EST)
I'll start with the 3rd example by Patrick, and respond to Bryan and Wschact also:
Patrick wrote, "I could find no evidence of a Bible being used, but that is irrelevant to [sic] to the oath." In fact, the Bible wasn't used, as confirmed by a photographer at the event (the picture didn't show a Bible either). That lack of use of a Bible may be legally irrelevant to that oath, but the article is not about the oath. The article is about Obama's religion, and his decision not to use a Bible for his real oath obviously IS highly relevant to his religion.
In response to Bryan, this site is not Wikipedia, where censorship, downplaying, or dilution of information disliked for political reasons is routine. We have simple rules (Conservapedia Commandments), and widespread deletions of information is disfavored here.
Wschact said, "Many non-Muslims read that book." Perhaps so, just as many atheists have read the Bible. But a photograph of someone carrying a Bible is evidence suggesting that the person is a Christian. It doesn't prove it standing alone, but when combined with other, more compelling evidence, it is relevant.--Andy Schlafly 18:29, 3 January 2013 (EST)

I didn't mean to suggest that information be censored in any way. But removing things that are false or questionable or unsupported seems justified. BryanF 18:42, 3 January 2013 (EST)

But what's false in the entry? Much of what has been removed from the entry is plainly true.--Andy Schlafly 20:34, 3 January 2013 (EST)

Quotation is irrelevant

I removed the quotation "Obama declared in prepared remarks, 'The United States has been enriched by Muslim Americans. Many other Americans have Muslims in their families or have lived in a Muslim-majority country - I know, because I am one of them.'" not because it is not sourced, but because it is simply irrelevant. Because it is undisputed that Obama lived in Indonesia, which is a Muslim-majority country, the statement is true regardless of Obama's religion. Therefore, it cannot possibly demonstrate that Obama is Muslim. GregG 20:30, 3 January 2013 (EST)

The wording is odd, and suggests that Obama is a Muslim but felt he could not say so publicly (yet). When combined with other compelling evidence, it is relevant. It would be admissible under basic rules of evidence.--Andy Schlafly 20:32, 3 January 2013 (EST)
Frankly, I see no compelling evidence on the entire page. Perhaps, in a similar way as what you suggested above, you could identify your three strongest arguments that Obama is a Muslim, so that those could be discussed. Thanks, GregG 20:41, 3 January 2013 (EST)
I don't believe Mr Schlafly has a single strong argument that Obama is Muslim, let alone three. Unless I'm very much mistaken, he's working on the old "throw enough mud" approach. --JohanZ 20:52, 3 January 2013 (EST)
I personally think that the quotation should be in the article as it is a good piece of evidence and does suggest the fact he is a muslim. Dvergne 21:08, 3 January 2013 (EST)
It is evidence that Obama either has a muslim in the family, or has lived in a muslim majority country, both of which we know to be true. It is not evidence of anything else. --DamianJohn 21:11, 3 January 2013 (EST)