In my husband’s home state of South Carolina, the Pastor of a small Church of God in the upstate (Jonesville), put the following on the sign of his church, and says he did not intend for it to be poltical:
Just exactly in what way is that NOT a political statement? Don’t get me wrong, I do not support Barack Obama in any way, but I do think this pastor has crossed a line in making an obviously political statement on the church’s sign. I am a little curious if the IRS would consider this a violation to their tax-exempt status.
Personally – as I’ve said before – I think Sen. Obama is one of the most frightening politicians to come along in quite some time. Obama’s blatant and years long fight against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act shows me exactly the coldness of his heart, but I do question the judgement of this church in South Carolina. This kind of tactic is no better than something MoveOn.org would use. There is plenty of factual information about Obama for use as talking points, but the use of a statement like this just because the names rhyme, is dirty politics no matter which side is doing it.
OneMom
13 responses so far ↓
fortyfour // April 22, 2008 at 5:25 pm
While I tend to agree with you that this is a distasteful comment, I strongly believe in Freedom of Speech. The problem is it is often used to demonstrate one’ ignorance. And clinging to ignorance is a right of the people. It says more about the author than the subject.
Right on! with your comments about Obama’s position on abortion and the BAIPA issue specifically. I cannot understand how anyone can support this man.
Ronnica // April 22, 2008 at 5:47 pm
Obviously I dno’t support Obama either, but if you don’t like a candidate, you fight them on the substantive issues not on their personality/name/whatever else you would here a school kid tease another about.
Who will win in Pennsylvania? « Forty Four // April 22, 2008 at 5:51 pm
[...] BAIPA link swiped from OneMom. [...]
onemom // April 22, 2008 at 6:25 pm
FortyFour – I’m all for freedom of speech, but a church using their sign to spread something that is not true, is a terrible misuse of freedom of speech. I would rather they put on that sign that Obama supports infanticide.
fortyfour // April 22, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Don’t misunderstand me. I totally agree with you. And most people will too. It is distasteful. And, there are real things to challenge Obama on as you point out.
I grew up in the south – near towns that have very active racist organizations. I have witnessed people making these kinds of comments and worse. Fortunately most people recognize it for what it is. The rest will be difficult for you to reach, regardless of what you say.
This church leader has tipped his cards. I think it is worth knowing where he or she is coming from. And, I will use this knowledge to judge anything he says from now on. He may not be racist. But, this shows lack of judgement on his part. And it is better to know about it now.
wickle // April 23, 2008 at 7:16 am
Worse, this kind of idiocy makes it harder to criticize Obama on substance. BAIPA is a big deal, and I think that most people would agree. But if we’re just lumped in with those critics who tie Obama and Osama, and think that sharing the name “Hussein” makes him a terrorist, etc., then we have no credibility.
As to freedom of speech — to have the right to do a thing as not the same as being right. Moreover, Christians shouldn’t be hiding behind that, when we have a standard — and bearing false witness is right out.
Chris H. // April 23, 2008 at 8:55 am
First of all, I agree the sign is TOTALLY inappropriate! The church should not use its pulpit or church sign to endorse or tear down political candidates. As a pastor, any references I make to politics are about the issues that are grounded with a Biblical principle. For example, I can show Biblical evidence for the value of life and discuss how abortion, mercy killing, and embroynic stem cell research violates the Bible’s stand on life. Then, I encourage everyone to look at the candidates … and see if they agree with Biblical principles. But never should a church or pastor call out a candidate’s name and attack them based on the similarity of another name.
Secondly, I have not read an actual news piece on this sign. I’ve seen a couple blog posts criticizing the pastor, but I’ve not yet seen a link to a story with the facts. Did the PASTOR actually put that sign up? How long was this sign up? Many churches that have such signs don’t have the pastor change the sign, they assign that job to one of the congregation. For all we know a high school student or a retired farmer put up that sign. Could it be that it was up for a day and as soon as the pastor saw it, had it changed — but the picture had already been taken and the damage done? Just curious if anyone knows more of the details …
onemom // April 23, 2008 at 9:26 am
Chris, yes this is true.
Associated Press
WYFF (local station in SC)
Fox News
WYFF (updated story about the sign now being changed)
Scott Hagan // April 23, 2008 at 3:30 pm
I agree this is a political statement, but I disagree with the goverment saying churches can not make political statements. This has hurt the church and America. If a liberal professor can make liberal political statements infront of 500 youth. Then I believe a preacher can talk a conservative Biblical version of politics to his congregation. Of course I don’t know what Obama and Osama relations have to do with anything.
onemom // April 23, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Hi Scott – Except the liberal professor is not tax-exempt (of course the fair tax would have fixed all that). The big problem is that the pastor said it wasn’t a political statement (well then, what else could it be?). The second big problem is a church trying to create an issue that isn’t there. There are plenty of substantive factual reasons that we should be very concerned about Obama without creating something out of nothing.
Chris H. // April 26, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Thanks for the links, Kerry … very intereting.
ben gibson // January 30, 2009 at 1:34 am
wow, this is currupt. a priest trying to sway people with unjust and completely unfair accusations. (More ridiculous than saying “omg, he was an islamist because he lived in indonesia when he was six).
and some of you even agree with this ridiculous statement. Honestly, u lot seem like the type of people who are still following George W. Bush’s ideals about politics. Sure his father was alright but he was atrocious. getting us into two quagmire gorrilla war zones, increasing our demand on foreign oil, we’re thirteen trillion dollars in debt, and we’re in the largest economic ressecion since the great deppresion.
Dont even try to pretend this was the “left wings fault” when a party has control of the house, senate and presidency, what follows is thier fault.
Please, if any of you have a reason to dislike obama, give a rational one.
onemom // January 30, 2009 at 8:55 am
Ben- first, it wasn’t a priest that put the sign up in SC, it was a Baptist pastor. Second, if you read what I wrote, you would know I disagreed with what the pastor did. Third, I did give a rational reason why I do not support Obama (The Born Alive Infant Protection Act).