Beliefnet
Lynn v. Sekulow

Barry, I’m pleased to see that you brought up President Obama’s use of religion during his conference call designed to drum up additional support among religious Americans for his health care plan.  I’m glad that you’re concerned, but disappointed that your response is so muted.  Where’s the outrage, Barry?

 

Your comments barely reflect a slap on the wrist.  If this had been President Bush, you would have issued a press release, sent out a blast email, drafted a letter of concern to the President, and launched a web-based campaign.  I can see the image now – President Bush with a large cross behind him (super-imposed with a montage of Evangelical leaders).  And, maybe a graphic title like:  President Bush crosses the line – violates separation of church and state!

In comments to rabbis before the conference call, President Obama declared that ‘we are God’s partners in matters of life or death’ and asked the rabbis to preach his political agenda in their sermons on Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year — one of the holiest days of the year.  News reports indicate the conversation was supposed to be off the record but was captured on the Twitter feeds and blogs of some rabbis who took part in the call.

 

Barry, the fact is there has been little criticism of this event – in sharp contrast to the reaction that would have occurred if such a message was delivered by a conservative President.

 

Imagine if President Bush had accused opponents of his plan of ‘bearing false witness’ — the outcry would be deafening – from you and the other ‘separationists’ on the Left.  The fact is President Obama’s conference call was a disingenuous use of religion in politics.  It also showed desperation – a pandering for support for a plan that an increasing number of Americans oppose

 

Of course, President Obama should address all Americans – including those who hold religious beliefs.  But, President Obama is not the 13th Apostle, as my son Jordan put it, and his conference call was problematic – trying to imply that his health care plan is God-approved – a health care plan that clearly offends many people of faith.

 

To subscribe to “Lynn v. Sekulow” click here. 

Join the Discussion
comments powered by Disqus