News Was Oprah right to preach about Obama's moral superiority?

  • Thread starter Thread starter fourier jr
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
Oprah Winfrey's endorsement of Barack Obama at a rally was likened to a religious revival, emphasizing his moral superiority over Hillary Clinton, whom she did not mention. Winfrey's rhetoric suggested that Obama embodies the qualities needed for a president, such as conscience and moral authority, contrasting sharply with Clinton's focus on policy details. The discussion highlights a broader concern about the intertwining of religion and politics, with many expressing skepticism about the sincerity of politicians who use religious language for electoral gain. Participants noted that while religious rhetoric is common in U.S. politics, it often feels disingenuous and serves primarily as a tool for garnering votes. Overall, the conversation reflects a critical view of the role of organized religion in shaping political discourse and the perceived lack of genuine moral leadership among candidates.
  • #61
drankin said:
We all teach our children our belief system. It's our parental obligation. How could we teach them otherwise? I can teach my child about our religion with a clean conscience. It would be disingenuous if I taught my children contrary to my own beliefs.
It would also be disingenuous to not make it absolutely clear that your beliefs are your own personal choice, not based on any verifiable evidence, and that each individual should, when they are old enough to examine various teachings critically, come to their own conclusions about them.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
g33kski11z said:
Doesn't exist.QFT

So, you have no firsthand knowledge.

g33kski11z said:
um, I think that's true, you don't??

No I don't. I guess it depends on your definition of a life's value and what is meant by "get anywhere".

There are also many examples of people who have "got somewhere" and done poorly in school.

I do realize that these might be exceptions. And I do value an education, I have a PhD., but the the question is not whether I believe it is true or not. The question is whether it is a form of indoctrination. It is.

You seem to think that you are qualified to judge which forms of indoctrination should be tolerated.
 
  • #63
g33kski11z said:
.. No fraud..? Your church doesn't claim that "god" will come to save all who worship him/her/it? It doesn't claim to offer "eternal life" in "heaven"? Provide proof of this non-fraud and I'll see you Sunday. :)

Ahh, provide *proof* of a non-whatever...

I'm still waiting for proof that the majority of churches engage in legal fraud.
 
  • #64
g33kski11z said:
Although, these same values are taught to children in Cub Scouts. :)[/QUOTE

In origin, the cubscouts are certainly more theistic, than non-theistic.
 
  • #65
Gokul43201 said:
It would also be disingenuous to not make it absolutely clear that your beliefs are your own personal choice, not based on any verifiable evidence, and that each individual should, when they are old enough to examine various teachings critically, come to their own conclusions about them.

Oh, come on. That would simply confuse a child. "I believe this completely, but there are no reason you should because there is no scientific proof as to why I believe this so deeply, now, quit bugging your sister". Give me a break.
 
  • #66
seycyrus said:
...So, you have no firsthand knowledge...
Not true. I was baptized catholic, and confirmed lutheran. I attended church until I was about 14.
seycyrus said:
...The question is whether it is a form of indoctrination. It is...
Agreed, as stated in post #43. The point I was trying to make is that making your child go to church is also indoctrination.
seycyrus said:
...You seem to think that you are qualified to judge which forms of indoctrination should be tolerated...
Not at all. I just choose not to lie to my child. If a person was so inclined to attend a church with children and explained to them {when/if the children ask} the realities {ie myth's} about the bible, that's fine. As I said there is a lot of good that comes from churches. Based on my life experience with churches {beyond the age of 14} I feel that they are just not for me. My child, when appropriate will make his own decision.
seycyrus said:
I'm still waiting for proof that the majority of churches engage in legal fraud.
I never said that.
seycyrus said:
...In origin, the cub scouts are certainly more theistic, than non-theistic...
I was an Eagle Scout. We had prayers sometimes {ceremonies and such}, so you're right.
 
Last edited:
  • #67
g33kski11z said:
Not true. I was baptized catholic, and confirmed lutheran. I attended church until I was about 14.

Well, I thought you were saying that you never belonged to a church. I would still liek to know what catholic or Lutheran you attended where little kids were taught that everyone was going to hell. I've NEVER heard a going to hell sermon.


g33kski11z said:
Agreed, as stated in post #43. The point I was trying to make is that making your child go to church is also indoctrination.

Well, indoctrinatin certainly has overtones and implication. Go to your next school board meeting and ask them about their "indoctrination" procedure, and see how they respond :)


g33kski11z said:
Not at all. I just choose not to lie to my child.

You start out telling them that light is BOTh a wave and a particle? :)

g33kski11z said:
If a person was so inclined to attend a church with children and explained to them {when/if the children ask} the realities {ie myth's} about the bible, that's fine.

In my experience and those around me, it was more teaching about the good samaritan, than *any* mention of hell.
 
  • #68
seycyrus said:
...I would still liek to know what catholic or Lutheran you attended where little kids were taught that everyone was going to hell...
Grace Lutheran and Most Holy Name Catholic Church. Both in Pittsburgh Pa., Troy Hill to be specific.

.. but back to the original topic (sorry to thread crap).. but I thought we had "Separation of Church and State"? where are the limits on that? {I ask b/c I do not know}
 
  • #69
drankin said:
Oh, come on. That would simply confuse a child. "I believe this completely, but there are no reason you should because there is no scientific proof as to why I believe this so deeply, now, quit bugging your sister". Give me a break.

So now you're condoning arrogance?
 
  • #70
LightbulbSun said:
So now you're condoning arrogance?

You are going to have to break that down for me. I'm not sure where you are coming from.