Barack H. Obama vs. Dr. James Dobson

T

he dialogue that has been going on between Obama and James Dobson is VERY important and "We the people" better take note. Mr. Obama does not have his facts straight. Dr. Dobson is not a minister, priest, or theologian nor makes himself out to be. He is a psychologist and founder and chairman of Focus on the Family. Dr. Dobson represents family values, and is a believer in Jesus Christ. He has fought for marriage, the unborn child, children's rights and is concerned about the deterioration of both our moral values and the moral integrity of our country. I have followed Dr. Dobson for over 40 years. I have relied on his knowledge and wisdom to educate myself, improve my marriage and to raise a son.

Mr. Obama does not seem to know his Bible and should not insult the Christian community in pretending to do so. Judge for yourself by reviewing his outrageous comments:

1. Even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools?

First off, Christians do not want nor would they "expel" anyone. We only want to tell people about Christ and who He is. Secondly, there are no "choices of Christianity" as Obama suggests. It is very clear what Christ believed, taught and what He represents today. Christ did not approve or endorse abortion, homosexual lifestyles or any other sin as mentioned in the Bible. Jesus encouraged those who sinned to give up the sin and sin no more. He encouraged the believer or Christian to love one another but not the sin, which includes not to judge but to discern and not to encourage your fellow man to sin. It is a free country to believe as you may. However, it is not true Christianity unless it follows the complete teachings of Christ as documented in the Bible!

Folks beware, Dr. Dobson does not try to make himself out to be someone he is not. He is very clear in what he believes and why. I do not see that level of character in Mr. Obama.

2. Once again, Obama questions what passage of scripture should guide our public policy? Leviticus, which suggest slavery is ok? Deuteronomy, suggest it is okay to stone a child? Or the Sermon on the Mount?

Mr. Obama really doesn't understand his creator, Christ's relationship to God or what the Bible represents. I am not a theologian, but as a Christian I know there are two testaments. The Old Testament represents the history of creation, God's chosen people, the Jews and the covenant between God and Israel. The New Testament gives us the history of our Savior, Christ, our new covenant between God and his people; believers of Jesus Christ.

As far as the Sermon on the Mount, I suggest Obama start here for his reading. This is the greatest sermon Jesus ever preached. We gain the Lord's Prayer and the Beatitudes. The Beatitudes are meant to provide comfort to the believer.

Oh, yes, regarding stoning anyone to death. May I reference John 8:7. Jesus is speaking in respect to the woman caught in adultery. When they persisted in questioning him, He straightened up and said to them, "Let the person among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." Christ was not advocating throwing stones. He wanted to make the point that if anyone was without sin that he should throw the first stone. Christ was the only eligible one to throw a stone because He was the only one without sin. However, out of love and foregiveness, He chose not to throw a stone.

Is Senator Obama the type of man we want for our Commander in Chief? One who twists the facts. One who believes one thing but says something else? I should "pray" not.

Please do not hesitate to pass this along to a friend.

The First Amendment of the Constitution of the U.S.

Why is it so difficult for some to not see that there was never a "separation of church and state" intended during the pen of the First Amendment. Because some groups of people or organizations say it is so doesn't make it so. History documentation is what should rule.

Let's look at the Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Do you see anything that mentions "separation of church and state"?

It says, Congress shall make no law. It doesn't say established groups either. Now, I am an individual and I should be allowed to express my feelings about my beliefs. If I am not allowed to speak or express my feelings about my beliefs, then that would be "...prohibiting the free exercise thereof." When certain organized individuals or groups tell us what we can or cannot do with our thoughts or expressions, or how we will conduct or carry out those thoughts or expressions, we are being "abridged" upon. There is so much history documented to prove what our Founding Fathers truly felt or intended regarding the First Amendment. Alan Sears, in his book, The ACLU vs. America, states, "What the framers of the Constitution meant when they wrote the First Amendment was only that the federal government-and only federal government's Congress-was to be prohibited from establishing a national church, like the Church of England, or requiring that sectarian policy be forced on an individual state or the federal government. It did not mean that the government could censor public religious expression, deny churches and religious organizations equal access to public facilities, or the church and government could not work together."

I challenge you, Mr. and Mrs. American, to read the documentation of what went into building our Constitution and those individuals behind it (see link and references below), and decide for yourselves on the suspected issue of "separation of church and state." And, while you are at it Mr. and Mrs. American, you may want to read the history of the ACLU's founding authors' beliefs, and intentions. I believe you will find it to be an eye-opener to the power and destruction that has been perpetuated against "We the people..."

Ref: The ACLU vs. America by Alan Sears and Craig Osten.

Alliance Defense Fund

First Amendment, U.S. Constitution; http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1.

http://www.rutherford.org/oldspeak/articles/religion/oldspeak-dreisbach2.asp

See Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School Dist., 113 S.CT. 2141 (1993).

http://www.beyondchron.org/articles/ACLU_Slams_JROTC_as_Violation_of_International_Law_5684.html