Obama Attempts Leftist Moral Equivalency at Prayer Breakfast

He, unshockingly, has a big problem in naming Islamic terrorism and extremism, but does trot out the leftist trope about those evil Christians

(AP) President Barack Obama condemned those who seek to use religion as a rationale for carrying out violence around the world, declaring Thursday that “no god condones terror.”

“We are summoned to push back against those who would distort our religion for their nihilistic ends,” Obama said during remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast. He singled out the Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria, calling the militants a “death cult,” as well as those responsible for last month’s terror attacks in Paris and deadly assault on a school in Pakistan.

Lest you misread that “our religion” as him stating he is Muslim, he is referring to Christians

(Breitbart) At the National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama reminded attendees that violence rooted in religion isn’t exclusive to Islam, but has been carried out by Christians as well.

Obama said that even though religion is a source for good around the world, there will always be people willing to “hijack religion for their own murderous ends.”

“Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” Obama said. “In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”

Yes, things that happened hundreds and thousands of years ago. Christianity his primarily moved on. With Islam, there is an ever growing movement to regress back to the 7th and 8th century roots. Obama has gone to great lengths to refuse to link groups like ISIS (you know, they one whose name starts with “Islamic State”) to Islam, even going as far as proclaiming that he knows better than the Islamic State that the Islamic State isn’t Islamic.

This is standard boilerplate for Leftists, refusing to condemn radical Islam, creating strawman arguments to protect radical Islam, crying “Islamophobia!”, and then, in the next breath, slam Christianity for events that mostly occurred far in the past, and for which those on the Right will also condemn. And for those small incidents that occur during modern times based specifically on religion, we’ll condemn them, too.

Take for instance the talking point about Christians killing witches in Africa. Lefties want to blame the entire Christian religion for the actions of a bunch of regressive 3rd Worlders in 3rd world sh*tholes who misinterpreted the Bible on witches (“thou shall not suffer a witch to live”. The original meaning was “poisoner”, not witch, and was changed in the King James version). Lefties will blame the entire religion. Yet, they, along with Obama, can’t find it within themselves to even chide Islam for their ever-growing group of extremists, who stand in direct opposition, interestingly, to virtually everything Lefties stand for.

Let the deflections and strawmen begin.

PS: I missed the part where Obama specifically said “horrible things in Mohammed’s name”.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

22 Responses to “Obama Attempts Leftist Moral Equivalency at Prayer Breakfast”

  1. Jeffery says:

    So it’s OK to condemn Islam for the actions of a few but not OK to condemn Christianity for the actions of a few?

    The point progressives hope to make (in vain it seems) is that it is no more reasonable to condemn all Christians than it is to condemn all Muslims.

    We bring up the murderous past of Christianity (some violence was only decades ago) not to condemn the religion but to illustrate by example the right wing’s warped hatred of Islam.

    Did the Presidents and the media refer to abortion clinic bombings and murders as Christian terrorism, even though all abortion clinic violence was and is committed in the name and cause of Christianity? No. And that violence was occurring right here in the US, not in Syria and Iraq.

  2. But you DO condemn all christians, and fail to condemn any Islamists.

    Note I write Islamists, which denotes the subsection of modern Islam that is not just violent, but pushes the hard core regressive version.

    Nice deflections and strawmen.

  3. […] Oh well, what do you expect from the guy who says the Islamic State isn’t even Islamic? […]

  4. John says:

    Teach your description of your co religionists it sounds a tad bit racist
    Ok bottom line
    Most deaths by violence in the last 30 years have been Christian killing other Christians in Africa
    The ISIS are pikers in the killing game
    Tell me that you do not believe that Reagan midwifed radical Islam by giving billions to Islamists to fight the Russians and allowed Pakistan to develop and export to Iran nuke techhttp://m.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/15/1321942/-Anti-LGBT-activist-s-wife-left-him-for-wait-for-it?detail=email
    Tell me that Saddam would have not stomped Islamists if bush had not gotten rid of him
    Tell me that the rightwing oil bunch have not winked at Saudi Arabia exporting militant Islam for decades
    Tell me that there are big differences between ISIS and Saudi Arabia

  5. Teach your description of your co religionists it sounds a tad bit racist

    You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.

    Most deaths by violence in the last 30 years have been Christian killing other Christians in Africa

    Still waiting for a citation for this.

    Tell me that Saddam would have not stomped Islamists if bush had not gotten rid of him

    That’s possibly one of the dumbest things you’ve ever written. It’s so bad that there is zero need to explain reality to you.

    Tell me that the rightwing oil bunch have not winked at Saudi Arabia exporting militant Islam for decades
    Tell me that there are big differences between ISIS and Saudi Arabia

    First off, more than enough on the Left support SA. But, hey, if you’d let us drill for oil on our own soil that would be great.

  6. John says:

    Perhaps you think Kronyand his Lords Resistance Army don’t kill in the name of their religion ?

  7. gitarcarver says:

    Perhaps you think Kronyand his Lords Resistance Army don’t kill in the name of their religion ?

    Perhaps you think that because someone says “I’m a Christian” that makes them so?

    However, even with that mistaken belief of yours, you are still wrong:

    There is a persistent misconception that the LRA seeks to overthrow the Ugandan government and replace it with a government based upon the Ten Commandments, creating the impression that the LRA is a Christian fundamentalist group. This view is not only incomplete, it also underestimates the military knowhow of the LRA, portraying them as a group of religious fanatics rather than as a well-trained and highly disciplined fighting force.

    Sucks to be you, john.

  8. […] William Teach writing at Pirate’s Cove: “I missed the part where Obama specifically said ‘horrible things in Mohammed’s […]

  9. CavalierX says:

    “We bring up the murderous past of Christianity”

    The Crusades were themselves a defense against Muslim aggression. You and your idol Obama really ought to get your facts straight.

    “Did the Presidents and the media refer to abortion clinic bombings and murders as Christian terrorism,”

    Was Eric Rudolph (to whom I assume you are referring) trained and supplied by any actual countries that you know of? Or did he somehow take over any countries you can name? That’s not even in the same ballpark as ISIS, Al-Qaeda and the hundreds of other Islamo-fascist terrorist groups that exist and you know it. And so does Obama.

  10. CavalierX says:

    “Tell me that Saddam would have not stomped Islamists if bush had not gotten rid of him”

    Only if “stomped” somehow can be construed to mean “trained and supplied.” What kind of bizzaro fantasy world are you living in, anyway?

  11. John says:

    Saddam would not tolerate any Islamists
    Challenging his rule
    As far as deaths in central Africa over the last 30 years that is uncontested history
    If you can’t use google watch the movie Hotel Rwanda
    About 800000 were killed there in 4 months of slaughter
    Or YouTube Krony and see what pops up
    Saddam was a despot and would have stomped ISIS
    ISIS grew from the destabilization if Iraq
    If you idiots think that our national interests were served by trading Saddam and getting a new Baghdad that is now aligned with Iraq AND as a bonus ISIS you are all idiots who probably still believe in WMD and that the Iraq blusterfck will somehow have a happy ending
    If you believed that Iraq was going to be a cakewalk like the neocons promised, well hope you do enjoy that taste when you swallow

  12. John says:

    The Second Congo War alone killed 5 million
    But these are in teachs words savages living in 3rfd world dhitholes victims that are not worth of our sympathy or really not worthy to be counted
    That area will however continue to provide us with rate earths that can be used in electronics

  13. Still no links, John? In fact, one of the prime players in the Congo War was Laurent-Desire Kabila, who was….wait for it. ..an avowed Marxist.

    Anyhow, you’re still deflecting, and unable to condemn Islamists in the least

  14. drowningpuppies says:

    Seems little Johnny bases his comments on google, YouTube, and bong hits.

  15. Jeffery says:

    Was Eric Rudolph (to whom I assume you are referring) trained and supplied by any actual countries that you know of?

    Sure, Rudolph and many others. But how is being supported by a country relevant? Western countries largely divorced their government operations from the Christian churches long ago. If radical conservative Christians could take over a nation they would, but Western nations are sensitized to prevent that from happening. Sure there are militia bands and sovereign citizens in the US who would love to take over the country but the US is too stable, and frankly the militia types have neither the brains nor the balls to make it happen. A civil war torn Libya? Not so much.

    So now your argument is that there are more violent Muslim extremists than violent Christian extremists? Fair enough point.

    The practical point is that the world needs the moderate, peaceful Muslims to join with all of us to defeat the murderous fundamentalist Muslims. Calling all Muslims terrorists does not help.

    The tenets of Islam make as much sense as the tenets of Christianity.

  16. Calling all Muslims terrorists does not help.

    That’s a perfect example of a strawman, because very few are saying that.

    Yet, you and John, among others, seem to blame all of Christianity for the deeds of a very tiny few, and often for things that happened hundreds of years ago.

  17. david7134 says:

    John, Jeff,
    So you approve of the morals and tenets of Islam. Then why do you hate such organizations as the KKK and other hate groups? They have almost the same philosophy.

  18. Levothread says:

    The classic straw man argument, aggrandizing and again misrepresenting the truth. All right wing leaning individuals hate all Muslims? Even for a progressive that is pretty far fetched platform to comment about.

  19. Jeffery says:

    dave,

    I didn’t say I approved of the tenets and morals of Islam.

  20. Kevin says:

    You know, polio is a terrible disease, but let’s not forget that Christians committed many atrocities when they tried to commit genocide on that virus.

    So Christians and polio are equally guilty.

  21. Jeffery says:

    So what should the US do about Islamic extremism inside our borders?

    I mean, besides having our President call Islam a violent religion spawning tens of potentially violent extremists each year.

    What would you do to cut Islamic extremism from a little to almost none?

  22. Zachriel says:

    William Teach: Lest you misread that “our religion” as him stating he is Muslim, he is referring to Christians

    Obama: And so, as people of faith, we are summoned to push back against those who try to distort our religion — any religion — for their own nihilistic ends.

    William Teach: With Islam, there is an ever growing movement to regress back to the 7th and 8th century roots.

    Yeah, those young whippersnappers.
    http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/htm7v8/actual-democalypse-2012—islam-s-growing-pains

    William Teach: Take for instance the talking point about Christians killing witches in Africa.

    That’s clearly not what Obama said, which is that a small number of extremists coopt religion for their own violent purposes.

    William Teach: Yet, they, along with Obama, can’t find it within themselves to even chide Islam for their ever-growing group of extremists

    Obama: we have seen violence and terror perpetrated by those who profess to stand up for faith, their faith, professed to stand up for Islam, but, in fact, are betraying it.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/02/05/remarks-president-national-prayer-breakfast

Bad Behavior has blocked 4910 access attempts in the last 7 days.