99
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 105:
Line 105: + + + + +
→An idea.: The examples you requested, Mr. Schlafly, with the evidence to support them
:::::Pick your best three examples from the entry and let's discuss their accuracy.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:38, 3 January 2013 (EST)
:::::Pick your best three examples from the entry and let's discuss their accuracy.--[[User:Aschlafly|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 [http://zawaj.com/articles/do-muslim-converts-have-to-change-their-names.html 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 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnmS_vULPxw 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 [http://www.inaugural.senate.gov/swearing-in/event/john-quincy-adams-1825 is not required], and for the first ceremony, Obama wanted to use the [http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2009/01/why_doesnt_every_president_use_the_lincoln_bible.html Lincoln] [http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/2008-12-23-inauguration-obama_N.htm 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.
:::::[[User:PatrickMarion|PatrickMarion]] 17:11, 3 January 2013 (EST)PatrickMarion