Changes

Andy I also fear we are not doing our site any favors in this area.  If Obama is a Muslim, he is certainly keeping that under wraps.  There is no indication that he would suddenly take the oath of office on a Koran.  Such a turnabout that he lied about his Christianity would destroy his ability to govern.  It is more likely, if he is a Muslim, that he would support Muslim causes without making a profession of his own faith.  We should also realize, based upon his policies, that if he does have Islamic ties that they would be akin to the type of ties that John Kerry has to Catholicism, very poor.  His views on abortion alone would be considered extreme Western decadence within the greater Islamic world view. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 04:54, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Andy I also fear we are not doing our site any favors in this area.  If Obama is a Muslim, he is certainly keeping that under wraps.  There is no indication that he would suddenly take the oath of office on a Koran.  Such a turnabout that he lied about his Christianity would destroy his ability to govern.  It is more likely, if he is a Muslim, that he would support Muslim causes without making a profession of his own faith.  We should also realize, based upon his policies, that if he does have Islamic ties that they would be akin to the type of ties that John Kerry has to Catholicism, very poor.  His views on abortion alone would be considered extreme Western decadence within the greater Islamic world view. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 04:54, 18 November 2008 (EST)

:::::Bugler, I purposely chose Andy's words that "perhaps one can quibble that the probability is 20%".  Therefore, if Andy is correct about the 20% issue then the statement that Obama should be removed from the article. I am just following the Andy's statement where the logic leads if it is true and no knuckling under is necessary.  I do think it is fair to say that people come to an encyclopedia to read facts and not speculation.  Speculation weighs down an encyclopedia and erodes its credibility.  [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 08:03, 18 November 2008 (EST)

:::::Bugler, I purposely chose Andy's words that "perhaps one can quibble that the probability is 20%".  Therefore, if Andy is correct about the 20% issue then the statement that Obama should be removed from the article. I am just following the Andy's statement where the logic leads if it is true and no knuckling under is necessary.  I do think it is fair to say that people come to an encyclopedia to read facts and not speculation.  Speculation weighs down an encyclopedia by eroding its credibility.  [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 08:03, 18 November 2008 (EST)

::::::Saying "One could argue that X is 20%" doesn't in any way mean accepting that that X '''is''' 20%. It merely allows the existence of theoretically possible grounds of debate. If I said there were grounds for arguing that the planet Jupiter was made of cheese, likewise it doesn't mean that I think it is reasonably possible that such is the case. Andy is (in my interpretation of his words) admitting grounds for debate; it does not mean that he (or anyone else who takes a rational view of the issue) accepts only a 20% likelihood. The whole point of the point at issue is that it disproves the blinkered dogmatism and naivety of Liberals who say "Oh, Obama has said he's a Christian so he '''can't possibly''' be a Moslem." Liberals cling to dogma like an unweaned child to its blanket; we conservatives prefer debate, rational discourse, and seeking truth from facts, not from wish-fulfillment fantasies. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 09:14, 18 November 2008 (EST)

::::::Saying "One could argue that X is 20%" doesn't in any way mean accepting that that X '''is''' 20%. It merely allows the existence of theoretically possible grounds of debate. If I said there were grounds for arguing that the planet Jupiter was made of cheese, likewise it doesn't mean that I think it is reasonably possible that such is the case. Andy is (in my interpretation of his words) admitting grounds for debate; it does not mean that he (or anyone else who takes a rational view of the issue) accepts only a 20% likelihood. The whole point of the point at issue is that it disproves the blinkered dogmatism and naivety of Liberals who say "Oh, Obama has said he's a Christian so he '''can't possibly''' be a Moslem." Liberals cling to dogma like an unweaned child to its blanket; we conservatives prefer debate, rational discourse, and seeking truth from facts, not from wish-fulfillment fantasies. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 09:14, 18 November 2008 (EST)