US Army disinvites Franklin Graham

[aristotle]

The sanctimonious sycophants at the Pentagon have disinvited evangelist Franklin Graham from speaking at the National Day of Prayer service. It seems Graham has fallen from favor with the Obama administration for referring to Islam as a violent and wicked idealogy for its barbarous treatment of women and nonbelievers.

If Dick Cheney was still President, Graham would be treated with respect.

Graham's stature will only grow as a result of this debacle. I am sure the Pentagon, in a move to appease Mullah Obama, has lined up several nice Muslims to speak at the National Day of Prayer. After all, according to Obama, America isn't a Christian nation anymore.

Obama has palpable contempt for evangelical Christians. It's the only voting bloc that dares confront his agenda. (Don't bother telling me Cheney wasn't President).

 

[chefdennis]

all you need to remember is CAIR...a friend of barry.....

 

[aristotle]

Can you imagine any president disinviting Rev. Billy Graham? Obama has no frame of reference to place contemporary Christian leaders in historical context. There was a time, not too long ago, that to humiliate the Graham family would have sent seismic tremors through the White House.

 

[Pilgrim]

The American people elected a president named Barack Hussein Obama, so they shouldn't be surprised that Christianity is now out of favor. Hopefully, someone is keeping a log of every insulting instance like this so we can be reminded of the many ways he has driven the American people apart and has subverted the values that have made the country great. We can also hope that this will be the only muslim ever elected president, and that the country will survive the next 2.5 years until he and his liberal lackeys are thrown out of office.

 

[Poorboy]

The American people elected a president named Barack Hussein Obama, so they shouldn't be surprised that Christianity is now out of favor. Hopefully, someone is keeping a log of every insulting instance like this so we can be reminded of the many ways he has driven the American people apart and has subverted the values that have made the country great. We can also hope that this will be the only muslim ever elected president, and that the country will survive the next 2.5 years until he and his liberal lackeys are thrown out of office.

The sooner the Better! Too Bad he Can't be Impeached--"YET"! There's always hope that someone might do a Monica on Him like Slick Willy!

 

[greg334]

So who cares anyway. I don't see the pope being there.

This isn't a Christian Nation based on one sect of Christianity and Graham represents only a small percentage of our country who belong to a religions that prays to a or the God but more importantly he is not his father and insulted a lot of people which shows his intolerance.

The national day of pray isn't about Graham as much as it isn't about any specific religion or sect. It is about unity through pray.

It is a lot like the Pray for Detroit campaign which is state sponsors (through little grants), it gets so sickening to hear the excuses made why the city and the former mayor is in trouble - it is better to leave the praying to the individual instead of any group of state.

 

[LDB]

One of the biggest problems in so many of these issues is 1. people don't understand the Constitution and misinterpret separation of church and state or 2. people understand the Constitution and purposely misinterpret separation of church and state.

 

[greg334]

Not at all Leo, I see religion used by the state here with this administration as it is in this area I live in.

It isn't about praying, God/Gods or what even with the state sponsoring a religion but rather the BS about religious leaders being more important than the citizens and the need to maintain an equal footing for all relgions.

I think the founding fathers saw this very thing could happen and even though they were of different christian sects, they understand that there are different religions and what happened with the English Civil war parts one and two.

Case in point is this "US Army disinvites Franklin Graham" and what looks like the trashing of the Christian religion. This is being used by some as an attack on a specific religion while it is not. They are actually preventing a person from speaking in a US government building who has insulted another religion based on his own religious beliefs. Shirley Dobson, who is at the center of the source of the propaganda has fueled the fired by telling the world the pentagon has "melted like butter" and they had something to do with an "assault on religious freedom and people of faith." which is a out and out lie and shows her intolerance.

At this point I would want to see the end of any National Day of Pray if we have zealots like Dobson making statements that fuel more hatred.

 

[aristotle]

So who cares anyway. I don't see the pope being there.

This isn't a Christian Nation based on one sect of Christianity and Graham represents only a small percentage of our country who belong to a religions that prays to a or the God but more importantly he is not his father and insulted a lot of people which shows his intolerance.

The national day of pray isn't about Graham as much as it isn't about any specific religion or sect. It is about unity through pray.

It is a lot like the Pray for Detroit campaign which is state sponsors (through little grants), it gets so sickening to hear the excuses made why the city and the former mayor is in trouble - it is better to leave the praying to the individual instead of any group of state.

greg334... your statement about evangelicism is so full of crap you should carry toilet paper at all times.

The 2007 Statistical Abstract of the United States shows the evangelical percentage of the population at 28.6%

The Catholics at 24.5% and mainline Protestants at 13.9%...

To say evangelicals are only a small part of the country is flat out wrong. Evangelicals are the largest bloc and certainly the most energetic in opposing the liberal secularism preached by Obama. The Catholics practically rolled over and played dead for Obama in 2008. Mainline Protestants are beginning to embrace liberalism without shame.

Franklin Graham speaks the truth about radical Islam. If it offends people in certain quarters, that's too bad.

 

[greg334]

Full of crap, maybe ... maybe not

Let's take the politics out of this, as it muddles the entire discussion. If we continue to worry about what one president does with a connection to Islam, then we have to seriously include the issue of how the Christian church has been used to further black separatist movement under the guise of evangelical Christianity.

The point is that he and his church doesn't represents the entire Christan religion, that would be insulting to a lot of people who think he is not his father nor represents their views.

With 34% of the people claiming they are evangelical Christians (based on 2008 ARIS numbers), that leaves 42% who are not(also based on 2008 ARIS numbers which say 76% of the population is Christian).

Out of that 34%, his church doesn't represent the entire amount but maybe a small percentage of 40% of that number.

In addition, his attack wasn't about "radical" Islam, but the religion as a whole, "a very evil and wicked religion" was one of many statements.

If he would have singled out Wahhabism or another sect of Islam than I could say he is right in his position but not when he attacks an entire religion as evil, that returns us back to the entire issue of Christians and forced conversions and more to return us the history of Christianity.

BUT there is one other thing.

One of the tenets of Islam is that Jesus was a prophet of God, not God (trinity) and he didn't die for anyone's sins. To tell or force the issue that he did die for everyones sins, he is God (trinity) or try to tell a follower of Islam that their religion is evil is wrong as wrong as saying the Jews deserve what they got because they crucified Jesus. Which is the point that is being made with the people who made the decision. They have to be sure that all religions are treated equal, and if he said it about the Dali Lama or the Pope, then he may have faced the same results.

 

[Pilgrim]

So who cares anyway. I don't see the pope being there.

This isn't a Christian Nation based on one sect of Christianity and Graham represents only a small percentage of our country who belong to a religions that prays to a or the God but more importantly he is not his father and insulted a lot of people which shows his intolerance.

The national day of pray isn't about Graham as much as it isn't about any specific religion or sect. It is about unity through pray.

It is a lot like the Pray for Detroit campaign which is state sponsors (through little grants), it gets so sickening to hear the excuses made why the city and the former mayor is in trouble - it is better to leave the praying to the individual instead of any group of state.

I agree with most of the above, and perhaps he should have never been invited in the first place. My problem is with the REASON for the invitation being rescended - a protest not from the public or from military or elected officials,but from the liberal Military Religious Freedom Foundation because he might have offended some muslims in the military with a post-911 statement he made denouncing Islam as "a very evil and wicked religion". In a subsequent op-ed in the Wall Street Journal he added that "as a minister ... I believe it is my responsibility to speak out against the terrible deeds that are committed as a result of Islamic teaching." If this attitude is perceived as intolerant of a religion that promotes the enslavement or death of those who do not ascribe to their beliefs, then so be it. Personally, I see nothing wrong with the intolerance of jihadists and those who enable them.

Once again we see our leaders in Washington caving to the political correctness crowd in an effort to placate the very people who would do us harm.

 

[RLENT]

This isn't a Christian Nation based on one sect of Christianity

Indeed - and anyone would claim otherwise is woefully ignorant of the Treaty of Tripoli - read the following text, from Article 11 of that treaty, very carefully, with attention to the sentiments it expresses:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

For those unfamiliar with the terminology of the day, the words Musselmen and Mehomitan refer to the followers of Mohammed, and what would now be called Islamic nations .....

Historically, what happened:

"The preliminary treaty began with a signing on 4 November, 1796 (the end of George Washington's last term as president). Joel Barlow, the American diplomat served as counsel to Algiers and held responsibility for the treaty negotiations. Barlow had once served under Washington as a chaplain in the revolutionary army. He became good friends with Paine, Jefferson, and read Enlightenment literature. Later he abandoned Christian orthodoxy for rationalism and became an advocate of secular government.

Joel Barlow wrote the original English version of the treaty, including Amendment 11. Barlow forwarded the treaty to U.S. legislators for approval in 1797. Timothy Pickering, the secretary of state, endorsed it and John Adams concurred (now during his presidency), sending the document on to the Senate.

The Senate approved the treaty on June 7, 1797, and officially ratified by the Senate with John Adams signature on 10 June, 1797. All during this multi-review process, the wording of Article 11 never raised the slightest concern. The treaty even became public through its publication in The Philadelphia Gazette on 17 June 1797."

So there ya go - it is enshrined as a matter of law (indeed, the supreme law of the land) that we are not, in fact, a Christian nation .....

but more importantly he is not his father

Man, you ain't kiddin' ....... (if you only knew)

and insulted a lot of people which shows his intolerance.

Which is exactly why he should not be invited to any governmental function to speak in a leadership role .... he isn't preaching unity as a nation, but rather divisiveness between religions ...

The national day of prayer isn't about Graham as much as it isn't about any specific religion or sect. It is about unity through prayer.

Precisely ....

Of course, there will always be those who seek to pervert such things to their own ends .....

The absolute last thing this country needs is a person (who claims to be a man of God) preaching hatred and intolerance of other religions ..... to the nation's armed forces ......

Oh ...... and before anyone considers telling me I am so full of crap that I should be carrying a roll of toilet paper, let me offer you this little tidbit: I have done work for Samaritan's Purse ..... as well as number of other evangelical entities (like Voice of the Martyrs) ..... so I'm not entirely unfamiliar with a number of individuals associated with these organizations ...... and their real views .....

 

[Turtle]

The American people elected a president named Barack Hussein Obama, so they shouldn't be surprised that Christianity is now out of favor.

Using that logic, if his name was SpongeBob SquarePants then Bugs Bunny would be out of favor.

We can also hope that this will be the only muslim ever elected president...

He's no more of a Muslim than he is a Christian, and you know it.

 

[RLENT]

Franklin Graham speaks the truth about radical Islam.

Unfortunately for Franklin, the problem is that he wasn't accurate with his words, and failed to confine what he said to radical Islam only ......

 

[Pilgrim]

He's no more of a Muslim than he is a Christian, and you know it.

You're right - I do know it, but the temptation to throw it out there was just too much. We all know he was a member of a black separatist church in Chicago - was that for political expediency? Probably, but there's no way of knowing what his religious beliefs really are. However, a lot of his actions since he's been in office point toward a strong sympathy for Islam. We'll probably never know what his religious beliefs are, or if he even has any.

 

[RLENT]

I think the founding fathers saw this very thing could happen and even though they were of different christian sects, they understand that there are different religions and what happened with the English Civil war parts one and two.

Bingo !

Case in point is this "US Army disinvites Franklin Graham" and what looks like the trashing of the Christian religion. This is being used by some as an attack on a specific religion while it is not. They are actually preventing a person from speaking in a US government building who has insulted another religion based on his own religious beliefs.

You analysis in this entire matter is exactly spot-on.

Shirley Dobson, who is at the center of the source of the propaganda has fueled the fired by telling the world the pentagon has "melted like butter" and they had something to do with an "assault on religious freedom and people of faith." which is a out and out lie and shows her intolerance.

Exactly - if one wanted to understand where folks of this ilk are really comin' from read up on the following topics:

Dominionism

Dominion Theology

Triumphalism

I view them as being quite similar to say, oh ..... radical Islam - although they have not yet progressed to the point of wholesale butchery in attempting to obtain their ends (although one could easily make the case, with what is going on in Afghanistan and Iraq, that indeed, some have reached the point of butchery)

But lest anyone forget - that sort of whackiness has existed before in the Christian religion - was fairly prevalent back around the time of a little event that I believe was called The Inquisition ......

At this point I would want to see the end of any National Day of Pray if we have zealots like Dobson making statements that fuel more hatred.

Sounds good to me .....

Franklin Graham has a right to his own personal opinions on any matter, and to practice his religion as he sees fit - as long as it does not intrude on the rights of others .....

He does not have a right to act in a leadership role with respect to our government or the armed forces - that's a privilege .... something that one earns by words and deeds ...... and by his own statements he has disqualified himself .....

 

[RLENT]

The American people elected a president named Barack Hussein Obama, so they shouldn't be surprised that Christianity is now out of favor.

That there is exactly the point - no religion should be "in favor" .....

Hopefully, someone is keeping a log of every insulting instance like this so we can be reminded of the many ways he has driven the American people apart and has subverted the values that have made the country great.

And you think what Franklin Graham is preaching doesn't drive people apart ..... and is somehow what "made this country great" ?

Seriously ?

 

[aristotle]

We don't have to go back to the Inquisition days when bad acts were performed in the name of Christianity. The contrast between modern Christianity and Islam couldn't be more stark. Right now, this very day, tens of millions of Muslim women and girls live in terror of the men of Islam.

Muslim females are subjected to unbelievable oppression. Little more than chattel. Islam as practiced in many parts of the world sanctions female genital mutilation, honor killings and public flogging of women. Somewhere it's happening right now.

The great epoch of our time is the current struggle between Islam and the Western world where Judeo-Christian principles are dominant. All religions are not equal and not deserving of equal respect.

It would be nice to live in an Utopian world where religion and politics are not intertwined. Our moral codes come from religion, otherwise an individual is freelancing it as he/she goes along. We in the Western world owe an immense debt of gratitude to the Judeo-Christian tenets which undergird our societies and way of life. It is always a work in progress.

Look at how Muslim infiltration into Great Britain and France have divided those countries. Radical Islam must not be allowed to establish a beachhead in the United States. I am comforted by the belief most Americans would fight to the death to stop the madness disguised as radical Islam. The election of Barack Obama has placed our nation at the greatest peril we have faced to date.

 

[Turtle]

The 2007 Statistical Abstract of the United States shows the evangelical percentage of the population at 28.6%

The Catholics at 24.5% and mainline Protestants at 13.9%...

It can be a dangerous thing to take Wiki at face value, especially when using things "like lies, dаmned lies and statistics."

To say evangelicals are only a small part of the country is flat out wrong.

Well, since evangelicals themselves cannot agree on the definition of evangelical, depending on which definition you use it could be flat out correct to say that evangelicals comprise a small percentage of the country. It you take every flavor of religion that could be construed as evangelical and compile it together, yeah, you get about 28%, but when you start using other criteria the percentages dwindle rather rapidly.

A good idea would be to go to The 2010 Statistical Abstract and look at the actual data yourself, and to note the sources of the information themselves. Graham may be evangelical, but he certainly doesn't represent all of them. And the percentage of our country that he represents is actually a pretty small one.

Franklin Graham speaks the truth about radical Islam. If it offends people in certain quarters, that's too bad.

While his comments about radical Islam is something I agree with, too, that doesn't necessarily make it the truth. But the problem is, two of them really, he expanded his comments to include the whole of Islam, not just Islamic Fundamentalism. And then he, well, you know how when some white dood, for example, will make some really racist comment, and then try to temper it with, "Hey, I've got lots of black friends!" and they come off like a blidiot? (blithering idiot) Well, Franklin Graham did the same thing when he said, "[Islam is a] "very evil and wicked religion. I don't like the way they treat women, the way they treat minorities. I just find it horrific.... But I love the people of Islam. Many Muslims are wonderful people... I have many Muslim friends." Blidiot. He won't apologize for his comments, which I find great, but he shouldn't have tempered his comments in an attempt to not offend somebody.

In any case, the Army can invite, or disinvite whoever they want. I don't care. If they feel that Graham's comments could fuel the tensions in Muslim nations like Iraq and Afghanistan, places where U.S. troops are deployed, and they don't want to put American military lives in any more danger than they already are, that's fine with me. I'd sure hate to think that a soldier died because of something that Graham said. I might be wrong, but I don't think the purpose of the National Day of Prayer is to fuel controversy, much less get people killed needlessly.

 

[Turtle]

My problem is with the REASON for the invitation being rescended - a protest not from the public or from military or elected officials,but from the liberal Military Religious Freedom Foundation because he might have offended some muslims in the military with a post-911 statement he made denouncing Islam as "a very evil and wicked religion".

Are you really saying, in effect, that if the protest had come from the public, or from military or elected officials, that you wouldn't have a problem with it? It's a trick question, be careful.

I'm willing to bet that before this story broke you had never even heard of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, because if you had, you would not call them a liberal organization. They, and their founder, are far from liberal. All they do is fight religious coercion and discrimination in the military. They were founded because of excessive and sometimes brutal discrimination, harassment and aggressive proselytizing by Evangelical or Fundamentalist Christians within the military, sometimes by superior officers.

The organization was founded by Michael Weinstein, a 1977 United States Air Force Academy graduate who then went on to be an Air Force JAG for 10 years. He then spent 3 years in the West Wing of the Reagan White House as legal council, and was the Committee Management Officer of the Iran-Contra Investigation in his capacity as Assistant General Council of the White House Office of Administration, Executive Office of the President. He later served as General Counsel to Ross Perot and Perot Systems Corporation.

The Foundation's stance on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," for example, is one where they are dead set against repealing it, because the policy is both Biblically sound and Constitutionally correct. If the policy is repealed then the government is meddling in religion, in effect establishing a new one by actually redefining Biblical terminology, and is therefore unconstitutional. Those liberal baѕtards!

No one, until now, has ever accused Michael Weinstein of being a liberal. And the only people who could conceivably call the Military Religious Freedom Foundation liberal are the most extreme of fundamentalist evangelicals, A.K.A., Pilgrims.

Many people think the Pilgrims and others came to these shores because the Church of England were too strict, to conservative and were looking for religious freedom. Newp. They were looking for religious freedom alright, but came here because they felt the Church of England was far too lenient.