Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Obama Says You Gotta Have Faith

By Barack Obama, AlterNet. Posted June 28, 2006.


Barack Obama addresses religious progressives at the Call to Renewal Conference.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Also in Top Stories

America's Frightening Alzheimer's Epidemic
Rebecca Hyman, AlterNet

CNN's Lou Dobbs Is Clueless When It Comes to the Drug War
Tony Newman, AlterNet

U.S. Sergeant Refuses to Go to Iraq: "This Occupation is Unconstitutional and Illegal"
Karin Zeitvogel, Middle East Online

Election 08: Misogyny I Will Not Miss
Marie Cocco, Washington Post Writers Group

Dire Consequences with a McCain Supreme Court?
Robert Parry, Consortium News

California Gay Marriage Ban Overturned
Huffington Post

Three Things That Won't Help End the Foreclosure Crisis
Dean Baker, Liz Chimienti, Center for Economic and Policy Research

More stories by Barack Obama

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Good morning. I appreciate the opportunity to speak here at the Call to Renewal's "Building a Covenant for a New America" conference, and I'd like to congratulate you all on the thoughtful presentations you've given so far about poverty and justice in America. I think all of us would affirm that caring for the poor finds root in all of our religious traditions. Certainly that's true for my own.

But today I'd like to talk about the connection between religion and politics, and perhaps offer some thoughts about how we can sort through some of the often bitter arguments over this issue over the last several years.

I do so because, as you all know, we can affirm the importance of poverty in the Bible and discuss the religious call to environmental stewardship all we want, but it won't have an impact if we don't tackle head-on the mutual suspicion that sometimes exists between religious America and secular America.

For me, this need was illustrated during my 2004 race for the U.S. Senate. My opponent, Alan Keyes, was well-versed in the Jerry Falwell-Pat Robertson style of rhetoric that often labels progressives as both immoral and godless.

Indeed, towards the end of the campaign, Mr. Keyes said, "Jesus Christ would not vote for Barack Obama. Christ would not vote for Barack Obama because Barack Obama has behaved in a way that is inconceivable for Christ to have behaved."

Now, I was urged by some of my liberal supporters not to take this statement seriously. To them, Mr. Keyes was an extremist, his arguments not worth entertaining.

What they didn't understand, however, was that I had to take him seriously. For he claimed to speak for my religion; he claimed knowledge of certain truths.

Mr. Obama says he's a Christian, he would say, and yet he supports a lifestyle that the Bible calls an abomination.

Mr. Obama says he's a Christian, but supports the destruction of innocent and sacred life.

What would my supporters have me say? That a literalist reading of the Bible was folly? That Mr. Keyes, a Roman Catholic, should ignore the teachings of the Pope?

Unwilling to go there, I answered with the typically liberal response in some debates -- namely, that we live in a pluralistic society, that I can't impose my religious views on another, that I was running to be the U.S. senator of Illinois and not the minister of Illinois.

But Mr. Keyes' implicit accusation that I was not a true Christian nagged at me, and I was also aware that my answer didn't adequately address the role my faith has in guiding my own values and beliefs.

My dilemma was by no means unique. In a way, it reflected the broader debate we've been having in this country for the last 30 years over the role of religion in politics.

For some time now, there has been plenty of talk among pundits and pollsters that the political divide in this country has fallen sharply along religious lines. Indeed, the single biggest "gap" in party affiliation among white Americans today is not between men and women, or those who reside in so-called Red States and those who reside in Blue, but between those who attend church regularly and those who don't.

Conservative leaders, from Falwell and Robertson to Karl Rove and Ralph Reed, have been all too happy to exploit this gap, consistently reminding evangelical Christians that Democrats disrespect their values and dislike their church, while suggesting to the rest of the country that religious Americans care only about issues like abortion and gay marriage, school prayer and intelligent design.

Democrats, for the most part, have taken the bait. At best, we may try to avoid the conversation about religious values altogether, fearful of offending anyone and claiming that -- regardless of our personal beliefs -- constitutional principles tie our hands. At worst, some liberals dismiss religion in the public square as inherently irrational or intolerant, insisting on a caricature of religious Americans that paints them as fanatical, or thinking that the very word "Christian" describes one's political opponents, not people of faith.

Such strategies of avoidance may work for progressives when the opponent is Alan Keyes. But over the long haul, I think we make a mistake when we fail to acknowledge the power of faith in the lives of the American people, and join a serious debate about how to reconcile faith with our modern, pluralistic democracy.

We first need to understand that Americans are a religious people. Ninety percent of us believe in God, 70 percent affiliate themselves with an organized religion, 38 percent call themselves committed Christians, and substantially more people believe in angels than do those who believe in evolution.

This religious tendency is not simply the result of successful marketing by skilled preachers or the draw of popular megachurches. In fact, it speaks to a hunger that's deeper than that -- a hunger that goes beyond any particular issue or cause.


Digg!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Fantastic Article
Posted by: TheCount on Jun 28, 2006 12:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a Christian progressive who lives in the deep south, I thouroughly enjoyed this speech. If you listen to the right, you might think the only thing in the bible is no gays, and no abortion. In the New Testament, Jesus speaks of helping the poor and downtrodden more than just about any other topic. Jesus himself was a rebel against the religous establishment at the time. Obama is right, those of faith must not strip faith from their politics. I get a lot of strange looks from people when they ask me how come you voted for (insert progressive or Dem here), and I reply because of my faith. A lot of good folks have been brainwashed into believing that all progressives are Godless. My father, who is a devout Christian, lost an election 10 years ago for a state legislature seat when he was painted as an abortionist by the religous right. Since when does the Mississippi state legislature vote on Roe v. Wade? I have never been so angry in my life, but he got over it quickly in large part due to his faith. Anyway great article, I cant wait for the oppurtunity to vote for Obama in a national election.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Fantastic Article Posted by: AlienSlave
Obama is weclome to tell us about his religion. But keep it out of public policy.
Posted by: Sojourner on Jun 28, 2006 9:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I appreciate Obama’s personal stories. But I thought the issue was public policy.

I question his readiness to certify the religiousness of the USA on a tally sheet: so many believe in God (doesn’t matter what kind?), so many go to church (doesn’t matter why or what they do there? close a business deal? pick up a girl friend?) so many call themselves Christians (so do I, but I describe myself as one who loves Jesus and despises many Christians).

The handy division between sacred and secular, while it never amounted to much, is a pigeonhole for mindless confrontations. Take philosopher Jurgen Habermas’ word for it: the secular city is so…yesterday. What that means is that trying to derive some significance from it for ‘sacred’ is similarly toothless.

The only opinions on the First Amendment that matter are written by the Supremes. How you or I interpret it matters only in how scared you might happen to be (as I am) at the prospect of the current court’s meddling. There will be hell to pay.

It may be time for Obama to inquire of the U of Chicago’s Martin Marty Center, where fundamentalism has been studied carefully for over a decade at least. As Bill Moyers pointed out, the conclusion the Center came to is that fundamentalism is a political interpretation of evangelical Christianity. For Moyers and for me, that’s not only dangerous but also contrary to mainstream Christianity. (But who am I, a heretic, to point the finger at apostasy?)

The fact that Americans are so religiously illiterate as to embrace fundamentalism is diametrically opposed to Obama’s assertion that the US is a religious nation. Sheep seeking a shepherd get turned into bully goats.

My religion teaches me that it’s the truth that makes us free. Institutions at best come in second and have to run to keep up. The sabbath was made for us not we for the sabbath, to paraphrase a familiar source, who managed to win his faith and lose to institutions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» "Keep" It (religion) Out? Posted by: Steven Wanzell
Fantastic Indeed!
Posted by: Steven Wanzell on Jul 1, 2006 4:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Basing our personalities and life choices on the absurd babblings of human-invented "Gods", qualifies as surrealism. The "faithful" (ignorant) want speeches based on fiction and fantasy. Many Empires have been more than willing to provide that. One only need study world history to comprehend this.

No wonder America is self-destructing.

Steven Wanzell
artist/activist/ex-American
www.wanzellarts.com.ar

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]