Obama's Easter Message

[East of Eden]

"In a few short days, all of us will experience the wonder of Easter morning. And we will know, in the words of the Apostle Paul, “Christ Jesus...and Him crucified.�

It’s an opportunity for us to reflect on the triumph of the resurrection, and to give thanks for the all-important gift of grace. And for me, and I’m sure for some of you, it’s also a chance to remember the tremendous sacrifice that led up to that day, and all that Christ endured – not just as a Son of God, but as a human being.

For like us, Jesus knew doubt. Like us, Jesus knew fear. In the garden of Gethsemane, with attackers closing in around him, Jesus told His disciples, “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death.� He fell to his knees, pleading with His Father, saying, “If it is possible, may this cup be taken from me.� And yet, in the end, He confronted His fear with words of humble surrender, saying, “If it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done.�

So it is only because Jesus conquered His own anguish, conquered His fear, that we’re able to celebrate the resurrection. It’s only because He endured unimaginable pain that wracked His body and bore the sins of the world that He burdened – that burdened His soul that we are able to proclaim, “He is Risen!�

So the struggle to fathom that unfathomable sacrifice makes Easter all the more meaningful to all of us. It helps us to provide an eternal perspective to whatever temporal challenges we face. It puts in perspective our small problems relative to the big problems He was dealing with. And it gives us courage and it gives us hope.

We all have experiences that shake our faith. There are times where we have questions for God’s plan relative to us, but that’s precisely when we should remember Christ’s own doubts and eventually his own triumph. Jesus told us as much in the book of John, when He said, “In this world you will have trouble.� Let me repeat. “In this world, you will have trouble.�

“But take heart! I have overcome the world.� We are here today to celebrate that glorious overcoming, the sacrifice of a risen savior who died so that we might live. And I hope that our time together this morning will strengthen us individually, as believers, and as a nation."



I thought that was very good, actually. Question for debate: Does anyone think that speech was inappropriate?

[100%atheist]

I don't have a problem if Obama and some of his friends holds a prayer breakfast as part of his personal time. But when it is supported as a government program, Obama is then acting as President and not as a private citizen. The Family that puts on this breakfast is a conservative Christian group that seeks to push Jesus on powerful politicians.

If this prayer breakfast is put on by a private family, then it is not a goverment endorsement of Christianity. It is Christians doing what Christians should do.

Why can't atheists just leave Christians alone? It's oppressive the obsession that materialists have with Christians.

It is because the US of America is not just your extended family of fellow Christians. The oppressive obsession is Christian, and I, as a non-Jesus-believer, am offended by the President bowing to a fictitious idol.

[micatala]

I don't have a problem if Obama and some of his friends holds a prayer breakfast as part of his personal time. But when it is supported as a government program, Obama is then acting as President and not as a private citizen. The Family that puts on this breakfast is a conservative Christian group that seeks to push Jesus on powerful politicians.

If this prayer breakfast is put on by a private family, then it is not a goverment endorsement of Christianity. It is Christians doing what Christians should do.

Why can't atheists just leave Christians alone? It's oppressive the obsession that materialists have with Christians.

It is because the US of America is not just your extended family of fellow Christians. The oppressive obsession is Christian, and I, as a non-Jesus-believer, am offended by the President bowing to a fictitious idol.

I have to ask, are you offended only that the President is a Christian, or are you offended at everyone who is a Christian?


I can understand your objection to the notion that some think of America as an "extended family of fellow Christians." On the other hand, I don't think expressing ones own religious views, even if one is President, amounts to assuming that everyone else shares the same or even similar views.

[micatala]

"In a few short days, all of us will experience the wonder of Easter morning. And we will know, in the words of the Apostle Paul, “Christ Jesus...and Him crucified.�

It’s an opportunity for us to reflect on the triumph of the resurrection, and to give thanks for the all-important gift of grace. And for me, and I’m sure for some of you, it’s also a chance to remember the tremendous sacrifice that led up to that day, and all that Christ endured – not just as a Son of God, but as a human being.

For like us, Jesus knew doubt. Like us, Jesus knew fear. In the garden of Gethsemane, with attackers closing in around him, Jesus told His disciples, “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death.� He fell to his knees, pleading with His Father, saying, “If it is possible, may this cup be taken from me.� And yet, in the end, He confronted His fear with words of humble surrender, saying, “If it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done.�

So it is only because Jesus conquered His own anguish, conquered His fear, that we’re able to celebrate the resurrection. It’s only because He endured unimaginable pain that wracked His body and bore the sins of the world that He burdened – that burdened His soul that we are able to proclaim, “He is Risen!�

So the struggle to fathom that unfathomable sacrifice makes Easter all the more meaningful to all of us. It helps us to provide an eternal perspective to whatever temporal challenges we face. It puts in perspective our small problems relative to the big problems He was dealing with. And it gives us courage and it gives us hope.

We all have experiences that shake our faith. There are times where we have questions for God’s plan relative to us, but that’s precisely when we should remember Christ’s own doubts and eventually his own triumph. Jesus told us as much in the book of John, when He said, “In this world you will have trouble.� Let me repeat. “In this world, you will have trouble.�

“But take heart! I have overcome the world.� We are here today to celebrate that glorious overcoming, the sacrifice of a risen savior who died so that we might live. And I hope that our time together this morning will strengthen us individually, as believers, and as a nation."



I thought that was very good, actually. Question for debate: Does anyone think that speech was inappropriate?

I do not think it was inappropriate. My view is religious remarks, including by public officials, are protected speech and not against the first amendment, especially if they are not associated with public policy proposals. If the President was promoting a policy that had the primary purpose or effect of promoting his religious views, then I am much more likely to have a problem with that.

I don't have a problem if Obama and some of his friends holds a prayer breakfast as part of his personal time. But when it is supported as a government program, Obama is then acting as President and not as a private citizen. The Family that puts on this breakfast is a conservative Christian group that seeks to push Jesus on powerful politicians.

To respond to Quath, I do not believe this breakfast was put on or sponsored by "The Family." This was a White House event, unaffiliated with that particular religious group. There are other events called "prayer breakfasts", and some of those may be sponsored by the Family.



From what I can see, the breakfast was an invited event for a number of religious leaders.

white-house-easter-prayer-breakfast-gathering-leaders-and-partners



Any President meets with a lot of different "interest groups." I can understand that when such meetings occur, there is always the potential for criticism of showing favoritism or having some kind of conflict of interest. My measure would be whether the President provides access to a wide variety of groups, and is as transparent as possible with respect to items of discussion and how those might affect public policy. In this case, there is clearly transparency, even as some public policy issues were discussed subsequent to the short speech shown here.




http://blog.usaid.gov/2012/04/white-hou ... -partners/

After the Prayer Breakfast, the religious leaders took part in a briefing that included hearing about the tremendous progress that has been achieved in the last few decades in child survival from USAID Deputy Assistant Administrator for Global Health Amie Batson. In the past two decades child deaths have fallen dramatically, from 12 million in 1990 to 7.6 million in 2010. In fact, the goal of ending preventable child deaths is possible – if the world works together. Along with strong country ownership, partnership with faith-based and community organizations will be critical to make this a reality.

Non-governmental organizations, including religiously affiliated ones, clearly have long played a role in issues like combatting AIDS and global hunger.





I see Obama referred to the annual Easter Egg Hunt on the south lawn, which seems to go back at least to the Roosevelt era.

http://www.whitehousemuseum.org/grounds/south-lawn.htm

I don't know. Should we abolish the Easter Egg Hunt as a violation of the First Amendment?

[East of Eden]

I see it as inappropriate if he spoke as President of the United States and appropriate if he spoke as a citizen of the United States. I believe this took place at a prayer breakfast, which is a government event. So I find the breakfast inappropriate and unconstitutional.

The opening of Congress is a government event, where the Chaplain says a prayer. Is that unconstitutional also? Which denomination is being established?

[East of Eden]

I do not think it was inappropriate. My view is religious remarks, including by public officials, are protected speech and not against the first amendment, especially if they are not associated with public policy proposals. If the President was promoting a policy that had the primary purpose or effect of promoting his religious views, then I am much more likely to have a problem with that.

He has used religion to sell Obamacare.

[100%atheist]

I don't have a problem if Obama and some of his friends holds a prayer breakfast as part of his personal time. But when it is supported as a government program, Obama is then acting as President and not as a private citizen. The Family that puts on this breakfast is a conservative Christian group that seeks to push Jesus on powerful politicians.

If this prayer breakfast is put on by a private family, then it is not a goverment endorsement of Christianity. It is Christians doing what Christians should do.

Why can't atheists just leave Christians alone? It's oppressive the obsession that materialists have with Christians.

It is because the US of America is not just your extended family of fellow Christians. The oppressive obsession is Christian, and I, as a non-Jesus-believer, am offended by the President bowing to a fictitious idol.

I have to ask, are you offended only that the President is a Christian, or are you offended at everyone who is a Christian?

I am not offended by people being Christians. I am offended by an official politician officially promoting his religion (and any religion at all) over a public broadcast.

I can understand your objection to the notion that some think of America as an "extended family of fellow Christians." On the other hand, I don't think expressing ones own religious views, even if one is President, amounts to assuming that everyone else shares the same or even similar views.

I generally agree with you. By Obama is not merely 'expressing' his views, he is officially endorsing them as a government-approved religion.

[99percentatheism]

I don't have a problem if Obama and some of his friends holds a prayer breakfast as part of his personal time. But when it is supported as a government program, Obama is then acting as President and not as a private citizen. The Family that puts on this breakfast is a conservative Christian group that seeks to push Jesus on powerful politicians.

If this prayer breakfast is put on by a private family, then it is not a goverment endorsement of Christianity. It is Christians doing what Christians should do.

Why can't atheists just leave Christians alone? It's oppressive the obsession that materialists have with Christians.

It is because the US of America is not just your extended family of fellow Christians. The oppressive obsession is Christian, and I, as a non-Jesus-believer, am offended by the President bowing to a fictitious idol.

So you are declaring the death of the First Amendment?

THAT is what you are opposing.

[99percentatheism]

I do not think it was inappropriate. My view is religious remarks, including by public officials, are protected speech and not against the first amendment, especially if they are not associated with public policy proposals. If the President was promoting a policy that had the primary purpose or effect of promoting his religious views, then I am much more likely to have a problem with that.

He has used religion to sell Obamacare.

He has learned well from Saul Alinsky and Flim-Flam TV Evangelists.

Obama is a Chicago politician. Nothing more. He knows how to pay for votes.

[99percentatheism]

Sorry for the double post.

[99percentatheism]

If you don't like Christians speaking freely, change the Constitution.