Posted on 11/21/2012 11:54:53 AM PST by theruleshavechanged
While pardoning the Thanksgiving turkey today, President Obama absolved it with what he called a "special dispensation," making the Sign of the Cross over the gobbling turkey.
It appears that Obama made a left handed, backward sign of the cross.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Somewhere a gay bar is missing their lap dancer.
“Until conservatives get religion out of their politics they “
You are not nor were you ever a Conservative, were you?
You’re one of those libs who believes they are so much smarter than everyone else, secure in their own deluded smug self righteousness and flawed self image as superior to everyone.
Well, you got caught.
Analyze it to your hearts content.
That is one skeery dude! Should have sent that troll packin’...with a singed butt! :)
But TjBlacken didn't get a chance to get very old here, did he. LOL!
Indeed.
[smiles] You tell him, Sarge!
I bet you post more at the DUmp than you did here, so go there and tell your fellow DUmmies you got the ZOT on FR. HEE, HEE!!
I'm not defending President Obama, but I do think it is too much to say “every Christian” knows this.
There are a lot of Christians outside Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Anglican circles who have never made the sign of the cross and probably don't know how to do it since they've rarely if ever seen other people do it.
I can guess why Christian tradition may have made the sign of the cross with the right rather than the left hand — there has been a lot of negative symbolism attached to doing things with the left rather than the right hand — but I wouldn't have known the correct choice of hands had any religious significance apart from this debate on Free Republic.
Maybe this was deliberate but I'd be more inclined to put it into the category of an ignorant gaffe than deliberately offensive or intentional blasphemy.
“He doesn’t know the proper way to do it because he’s not a Christian.... Every Christian knows you make the sign of the cross with your right hand....Have you ever heard of Protestants?”....
Pointless to go there......I’ve never given the cross sign in my entire Christian walk.....And yet, I know I am covered by the Blood of Jesus Christ.....”If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thine heart that God hath raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved”.......
Unlike some others, I'm not going to call you a troll or a closet liberal. I understand that there are conservative atheists, agnostics, and other non-believers.
We need your votes, too.
The Republican Party has been a loose coalition for a long time between the overlapping but separate interests of military conservatives, economic conservatives, and social conservatives. I do not have a problem with voting for an economic conservative or military conservative who doesn't agree with my Judeo-Christian beliefs, as long as he agrees not to fight against my beliefs.
Most Christian conservatives are perfectly willing to agree to demands not to gut defense (both because of Romans 13 and practical politics) and to emphasize a free market (again, both because of biblical principles against state-sponsored theft and because of practical politics). Why is it so hard for non-believers who are conservatives, and who need our votes, to at least pledge not to oppose the issues which motivate us to get out and aggressively campaign for a candidate?
Furthermore, is simply factually false to say social conservative issues lose elections.
Four years ago, Republicans ran a military conservative who had a history dating back to the 2000 election of trampling on Christians and he lost, big time.
This year, Republicans ran an economic conservative who had a pro-abortion history dating back to his own mother's campaign for governor of Michigan in the early 1970s and a recent history of support not only for abortion but also homosexual marriage, and he also lost, though by a smaller margin.
In 2000 and 2004, Republicans ran a candidate who, despite all his problems, at least **TALKED** the language of evangelicals and (more broadly) social conservatives. That candidate, George W. Bush, won.
Maybe that history should indicate that social conservative issues, far from losing elections, actually contribute to winning them?
Social conservative issues motivate people to vote contrary to their socioeconomic interests. They were key to Ronald Reagan winning over the so-called "Reagan Democrats" who were furious over the radicalism of the 1960s and abortion.
They can win again.
Obama is a very little man.
Did he do it twice?
There’s no such thing as a “backwards” sign. The Western church goes left to right, and the Eastern church the other way when making the gesture.
LOL!!!!! That is funny
That makes no logical sense unless you are under the delusion that Romney was some kind of right-wing Christian. This is not even close to being the case.
choom
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.