The fundamental values of American society, as well as Europe and the West in general, are based on Christian values. This should not be confused with religious precepts and rituals, because among these core values are freedom, including religious freedom. Therefore, such fundamental values ”does not imply the imposition of religious beliefs.” As an example, is to say that religious values are adequate to define what is life, resulting in issues such as abortion and euthanasia. It is so fundamental that it is accessible and acceptable even for non-believers. We are talking about something quite different from imposing crenças.Se people become insensitive to the life of a baby in the womb, because there will be to become sensitive to the time immediately after birth?
For know that President Obama voted against the Law for the Protection of Infants born alive. This law required the hospital to keep alive the newborn who survived an attempted abortion. Obama voted three times against this bill as a senator from Illinois. The “hipsters” will call it “reproductive right”, but anyone who has a Minino of humanity (no need to carry a Bible in hand …) will call it infanticide. The Brazilian press does not speak it. That’s why Barack Obama is so “darling” in Brazil … (9)
Another telling example of Obama’s profile, appears in the ad campaign targeting the female audience (10): Obama gives us an idea of how are your “values”: A cartoon: “Life of Julia” tells the story of a woman’s his childhood to retirement: Julia is the typical woman “moderninha” can touch your life and sexual as single without worry, because “Obamacare” – the health plan goberno Obama, will care if the girl becomes pregnant. The U.S. government paid abortion. After 30 years decides to have a child. There is no mention of a father or husband. Julia retires and son studies funded by the government.
Another video campaign called “First Time” in which the actress Lena Dunhan compares the experience “amazing” to vote for Obama, to lose his virginity … just that …. this debasement of moral values and family, is a trademark of Obama campaign ….
Religious values are perennial and fashion trends are efêremas. What is abhorrent in a secular society today, tomorrow may be tolerable for future generation (and note that already ….) since secular society is anchored in the wills of the moment rather than fundamental values. It is this situation that the European and American secularist tendency to place the Western society as a pretext not to oblige those who do not believe and live the same way as those who believe.
Again I say …. this is a false dilemma …
In 2003 during discussions of the New Constitution of the European Union, in which several European leaders wanted to delete the text, the mention of God, Pope John Paul II, made the following statement at the Angelus on February 16:
“Exactly … so if asked in the future Constitutional Treaty of the European Union, be sure to give space to this common heritage to the East and the West. A reference to draw anything like this just secularism of political structures (cf. Lumen Gentium, 36; Gaudium et Spes, 36, 76) but, instead, will help preserve the continent, on the one hand, the double danger of ideological secularism and secondly, the sectarian fundamentalism … “(11)
Note that the Pope refers to “a just secularism” which distinguishes the political sphere of religious therefore respect the different beliefs, not taking (and imposing) the state to a “state religion”. Moreover, the state should not prevent Christians contribute to society and express their views, which is a disguised restriction on religious freedom. This attitude of silence the Christian is called ideological and Secularism.
Speaking at a Protestant church (12), Barack Obama sought to explain his position regarding receiving criticism from religious and worth commenting here:
Obama: “… Given the increasing diversity of the U.S. population, the risks of sectarianism are greater than ever. Whatever we have already been, we are no longer a Christian NACA. At least not only. We are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, and a Buddhist nation, and a Hindu nation, and a nation of descrentes.E even if we had only Christians among us, if expulsássemos every non-Christian from the United States of America, Christianity who we would teach in schools? Would be that of James Dobson, or Al Sharpton? “
Comment: Here, Obama plays with the division between Christian denominations quoting James Dobson, an evangelical pastor faithful to the Christian tradition in the field of sexual morality, and another, Al Sharpton, also pastor, but controversial position because it is favorable to “gay marriage “. Now Sharpton, is not representative of Christian thought. If Obama wanted to develop a serious discourse, cite the teaching of Catholicism and mainline Protestant churches. However, he chose to make a joke …
Obama: Which passages of scripture should instruct our public policies? Should we choose Leviticus, which suggests slavery is acceptable … and that eating seafood is an abomination? Deteuronômio Or we could choose, which suggests stoning your child if he divert the Faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount? A passage that is so radical that it’s doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application … We … So before we empolgarmos, we read our Bibles now. People have not read the Bible.
Comment: Barack Obama seems unaware that Deteuronômio and Leviticus were written in the era prior to Christianity, therefore, attaches to Christianity something that he is not himself, but the Old Testament. As for slavery and Christianity, it is to inform you that in the year following the discovery of America in 1492, and over the whole century that followed, the Popes have issued 839 documents condemning slavery. Therefore, to relate Christianity and slavery is making a mistake knowledge of Christian doctrine and history. If I were to give a speech on “healthy eating,” the Democratic president, certainly consult nutritionists to guide you, but to talk about topics related to religion, prefers improvisation. The press works the same way.
Obama: What brings me to my second point: What democracy requires that those religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal values, rather than a specific religion. What I mean by that? It (democracy) requires that bids them are subject to discussion and are influenced by razão.Eu can be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, to take one example, but if I want to pass a law banning the practice, I can not simply recourse to the teachings of my church or invoke the Divine Will I have to explain that abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths … including those without any faith. Now, it will be difficult for some who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, as many evangelicals do, but in a pluralistic society we have no choice. The policy depends on our ability to persuade each other of common aims based on a common reality. It (the policy) trading involves the art of what is possible. And, at some fundamental level, religion does not allow trading, it is the art of the impossible.
Comment: Did Barack Obama do not agree that life is a universal value? Mr. Obama, people who condemn abortion, they have only religious arguments, but also civilians, since fetuses are human beings and have a right to life. If I were to make laws enforcing religious precepts, forcing non-believers to fulfill, Adventists, would propose laws prohibiting stores from opening on Saturdays, Catholics would stipulate fines for those who lacked the Sunday Mass, and the Jews would prohibit laws , sale and consumption of pork. Nothing in that such religious, are doing well in life American Civil …
Obama: “If God has spoken, then it is expected that the followers, to live according to God’s edicts, regardless of the consequences. Now, basing one’s life on such uncompromising commitments may be sublime, but to base our policy making on such commitments would be a dangerous thing. And if you doubt that, let me give you an example: We all know the story of Abraham and Isaac.Abraão was commanded by God to sacrifice his only son Without discussing, he takes Isaac up the mountain to the top and tie the Altar. Raises his knife. Is prepared to act … as God had commanded. Now, we know that things worked out, God sends an angel to intercede at the very last minute. Abraham passes the test of devotion Deus.Mas is fair to say that if any of us, when leaving this church saw Abraham on the roof of a building raising his knife, we would at least call the police. And we would expect that the Department of Services to Children and Family, take away custody of Isaac Abraham. We would do so because we do not hear what Abraham hears, we do not see what Abraham sees. So the best we can do is act on those things that we all see “
Commentary: Obama, can see and hear the ultrasound. You can see the fetus in the womb of a mother. The same Democrats that the fetus does not feel wrong to kill. Meanwhile, the press “Democrat” is scandalized when a Republican supporter of hunting, grabs his shotgun and blows the head of an animal (which certainly is not a pleasant image to see ….), while at the same time Thousands of children are forcibly ripped from the womb of their mothers (yes, the kids seek to defend himself …) and to the dustbin of hospitals. In this case, the journalists treat the matter as a “reproductive right” or “public health” … Barack Obama, can see and hear the ultrasound. He does not need the Bible and not see what Abraham sees ….
Gilles Lapouge, Paris correspondent of the state, wrote in his column in last Saturday (13): “If the Europeans had to choose today U.S. President Barack obama would win 75% of votes and Mitt Romney settle for 8% .. “What is that Obama is looking for many, represents hope. But hope for what?
In the few jobs created in the U.S. and many elimininados? In massive U.S. public debt of more than $ 16,000,000,000,000, which should end 2012 above 100% of GDP? How this situation could give “hope” to the Europeans? This overwhelming preference for Obama from the Old World, has a strong ideological component, although the degree of consciousness of each individual varies widely.
An interesting test Theologian George Weigel, titled: “The Cube and the Cathedral – Europe, America, and politics without God” (14), gives us clear clues of what is happening in Europe today. The “Cube” that comes Weigel’s book, is the “Grande Arche de La Défense in Paris, a modern building in the shape of a hollow cube, which was erected in 1989 in commemoration of the Bi-centenary of the French Revolution and which serves as a metaphor of European civilization that has been striding away from their Christian roots, in contrast to previous generations who built the Cathedrals. The modern “civilization cube”, is striding turning away from God, atheism is growing and this lack of belief in a transcendent Being Good and makes people lose all sense of good and evil. This has made generate anxieties and hopelessness among youth and adults. Violence and suicide has grown amid a individualistic and materialistic society, so that Weigel asks:
“You can keep standing democratic political community without moral reference points that Christianity has to offer?”
For it is precisely this secularism that Europeans see in Obama that motivates all the identification and support of the American president. One should not fail to take into account that in varying degrees, both Americans and foreigners in general, including in Brazil, see Barack Obama in a positive way, because of a massive propaganda (yes … that’s the word: propaganda)
The project of the Democratic Party in the U.S. is Marxist matrix because expels religion as “promoting the well” and puts the man himself as a promoter of “good” … and therein lies the root of the confusion, because gradually the concept of well with reference to the “human will without religious matrix”, is subject to fashion trends … ie “democratically” vai settling a real tyranny. Who is to say this is right or wrong? How is the perception of good and evil, without the guidance of a Higher Instance?
It is very convenient to oppose Barack Obama because of his political agenda, or more precisely for moral reasons, and at the same time give a much greater emphasis on economic issues that are clearly unfavorable to the American president. On the other hand, supporters of Barack Obama are acting exactly this way, but in the opposite direction: they recognize the economic failure, but want their reelection precisely the same reason that his opponents do not want: Obama’s agenda on issues elativos the Family . The Democrats’ message is simple: We want a different America, with other values …. even if it costs another 4 years of unemployment …
So goes the question: what if the American economy was good?
Would be easy for Democrats, even more easy to press, and extremely difficult for Romney and the Republicans, but I will make a placement very simple: It is not expected that a different candidate will occupy the White House, to spoil everything well, especially when you have so much confidence people linked to the world economic and elsewhere. This is the case for Romney.
We can Mr. Obama, allowing the White House and America adopt the form of a cube? No, we can not.
Only American citizens can resolve…