This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Barack Obama Exposes The Bible

Barack Obama Exposes The Bible - Comments

Meph's Avatar Comment 1 by Meph

" if the American people don't know what's in there."


Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:30:00 UTC | #261041

markg's Avatar Comment 2 by markg

At least we know the next potential attack angle for the McCain campaign and Faux News.

They've called him nearly everything except the n-word.

Nov. 4 can't arrive soon enough...

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:37:00 UTC | #261051

Ed-words's Avatar Comment 3 by Ed-words

RD The God Delusion (p.248)

"Do those people who hold up the Bible as an inspiration to moral rectitude have the slightest notion what is actually written in it?"

He then refers to the death penalty
offenses in Leviticus 20.

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:39:00 UTC | #261053

LessonSmith's Avatar Comment 4 by LessonSmith

I was once a VERY passionate believer, but I was having a crisis of faith so I read the entire Bible back to front (except for Matthew and Luke since even a believer knows they are plagiarisms). That same year, 2005, I became an atheist. Ironically I am the only person I know who has read the entire Bible as well as the only atheist I know (atheism is not an option in the Bahamas). Only believers don't seem to understand their very own book.

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:40:00 UTC | #261057

Adrian Hayter's Avatar Comment 5 by Adrian Hayter

Deuteronomy gave us the 10 Commandments...are these the same 10 that leave out raping of women, and try to get people to "not covet thy neighbours' goods", effectively destroying economics? What ever happened to keeping the Sabbath holy anyway?

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:42:00 UTC | #261062

designsoda's Avatar Comment 6 by designsoda

Senator Obama's words remind me of the episode on "The West Wing" where President Bartlett skewers a religious nutjob.

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:47:00 UTC | #261069

DiveMedic's Avatar Comment 7 by DiveMedic

I love the defense of Deuteronomy because it is the book that "gave us the 10 commandments".....

Well, I guess if it gave us the 10 commandments we should start following the rest of it. Apparently, we are allowed to take captive brides from captured nations... On top of this, after giving the bride a test drive, we can give them up if we arent satisfied.

We cannot sell our captive brides after we have humbled them, however.... That would just be wrong.

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:51:00 UTC | #261073

bobbyc's Avatar Comment 8 by bobbyc

yes we all know god would NEVER advocate turning the other cheek to damn terrorists and enemies of america....

how exactly does he know this?

the mind boggles

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:51:00 UTC | #261075

Blue Monster 65's Avatar Comment 9 by Blue Monster 65

Actually, MarkG, I doubt this sort of thing will stop on Nov 4, no matter who wins. Bill Clinton is no longer in office and we still hear all kinds of garbage about him. Will it stop when Bush/Cheney leave office? I doubt it. We have become so splintered as a nation and a large number of people do not seem to have the ability to think critically (i.e. either prove or disprove) what they read on the 'net that I sometimes truly wonder what the future holds for us as a nation.

I believe the internet is the greatest tool man has ever devised. At the same time, it is also the greatest evil we've ever unleashed upon ourselves. The current election nonsense spread around via the web just confirms it for me. Sigh ...


Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:54:00 UTC | #261080

dvespertilio's Avatar Comment 10 by dvespertilio

What's really a shame is that Obama has to discuss or justify interpretations of scripture at all. It would be nice to just say that these religious documents are not accepted by all, and cannot, therefore, be the basis for law and public policy in a modern, secular democracy. But to do that would be tantamount to political suicide. So he plays the game....

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:55:00 UTC | #261082

Caudimordax's Avatar Comment 11 by Caudimordax

Looking at the comments on YouTube, quite a few people were impressed by the video - but definitely not in the way the poster intended!

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:57:00 UTC | #261085

Muetze's Avatar Comment 13 by Muetze

Oh, I get it! So when Jesus demanded of his followers to turn the other cheek to those who beat them, he wasn't really talking about their real enemies but just people who mildly annoyed them. Or maybe it's the "enemies of America" part that is the key to this; those are a lot worse than regular enemies after all.

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:59:00 UTC | #261088

Ishruul's Avatar Comment 12 by Ishruul

''...came out of the mouth of Obama!''

Well guess what, if I was a US citizen, Obama would get my vote just for that hint of enlightment over that worthless bible crap.

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:59:00 UTC | #261087

liberalartist's Avatar Comment 14 by liberalartist

I'm voting for Obama/Biden in just a few more days and hoping that if they win a semblance of reason may perhaps to return to this crazy place.

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 11:16:00 UTC | #261118

IaninPA's Avatar Comment 15 by IaninPA

CBS news has been broadcasting a series of interviews with Obama and McCain by Katie Couric. One of the questions asked was what was their favourite book.

Obama replied the bible, and that it had "shaped me and moved me the most"

Fucking pandering hypocrite.

Don't believe me' See it here...

EDIT: original link doesn't work here: go to main site and select from top right

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 11:34:00 UTC | #261139

Jeff (HandyGeek) Handy's Avatar Comment 16 by Jeff (HandyGeek) Handy

I like him even more now than I did before seeing this. Sweet!

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 11:46:00 UTC | #261153

Chris Davis's Avatar Comment 17 by Chris Davis

@#15. Comment #274796 by Ian Bamlett

The pandering's distasteful, yes, but it seem that it's necessary when faced with an opposition that will lie, cheat and defame, and has entire television networks to help it.

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 11:51:00 UTC | #261157

SixxSixxSixx's Avatar Comment 18 by SixxSixxSixx

CBS news has been broadcasting a series of interviews with Obama and McCain by Katie Couric. One of the questions asked was what was their favourite book.

Obama replied the bible, and that it had "shaped me and moved me the most"

Fucking pandering hypocrite.

I hope you're right and he is a hypocrite if that means he's not serious about the bible.
If he needs to pander to the electorate that's only what all politicians do isn't it'

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 11:54:00 UTC | #261162

SixxSixxSixx's Avatar Comment 19 by SixxSixxSixx

Question Mark wont work!!!

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 11:58:00 UTC | #261166

Frankus1122's Avatar Comment 20 by Frankus1122


I need to know the web browser and Operating system you are using.

EDIT: it is to help solve the question mark problem.

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 11:59:00 UTC | #261170

IaninPA's Avatar Comment 21 by IaninPA

Comment #274814 by Chris Davis

but it seem that it's necessary when faced with an opposition that will lie, cheat and defame, and has entire television networks to help it.

I don't want to hi-jack the thread so I apologize in advance, but you have to be kidding me. The entire mainstream media is so in the tank for Obama it's embarrassing. I am willing to be proven wrong; can you point me to one negative journalistic expose of Obama conducted by a major US network during the election in print or on Television' (question mark)

I know more about Joe the Plumber after the media's disgraceful dissection of that private citizen then I do the man who would be commander in chief. (And who would not pass the security checks necessary to be a member of the secret service - ironic eh)

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 12:08:00 UTC | #261176

Eshto's Avatar Comment 22 by Eshto


They haven't explicitly called him a "nigger" out loud, but they've definitely been using culturally loaded terms that imply it, like "uppity". They know exactly what image these words will invoke in their racist supporters, and they know they will automatically trigger the word "nigger" in their minds.


There's this little thing called wikipedia. It has information. About people. And stuff.

But in case you're too lazy, Barack Obama is a senator from Illinois who taught constitutional law for twelve years and is now running for president of the United States.

His tax plan would reverse the recent tax cuts for the extremely wealthy and bolster the middle class, while McCain's continues to favor billionaires and deregulation, which is how we ended up with a financial crisis in the first place; Obama's health insurance plan costs .3 trillion dollars more than McCain's but would cover 18 times as many uninsured citizens in the first year. Obama is pro-choice and pro-gay equality while McCain is ant-choice and anti-gay. While both are Christian and pander to the faith-based community, Obama is moderate and a proponent of the separation of church and state, while McCain is more extreme and believes America is a "Christian nation".

Also, Obama chose a running mate who isn't a pathetically stupid, theocratic nutjob.

As for Joe the Plumber, I believe it is McCain's campaign who is running around shoving him into everyone's face, using him to appeal to the basest fears and prejudices of the undereducated working class and frightening them by claiming Obama is a "socialist" who wants to take all their money and give it to people who don't deserve it (which in rural white America is automatically read as "blacks on welfare", and again, the McCain camp knows this racist stereotype exists and exploits it purposefully). The media's just stupidly running with it (like they ran with the crap about Bill Ayers, ACORN, Rev. Wright, etc.)

What I haven't seen is any sort of expose about McCain and his crazy VP pick. I hear a lot of crap about Wright but I don't see the mainstream media talking about the anti-semitic and homophobic pastors who endorsed McCain. I hear bitching about ACORN but very little mainstream coverage of the countless efforts by the McCain camp to suppress the vote. I don't see people discussing Palin's affiliation with an end times cult, or her association with a psychotic preacher from Africa who advocates witch burning; or her husband belonging to an organization that literally hates America and wants Alaska to secede from the union; or the fact that Palin does not consider people who bomb abortion clinics to be domestic terrorists.

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 12:51:00 UTC | #261193

IaninPA's Avatar Comment 23 by IaninPA

Comment #274851 by Eshto

There's this little thing called wikipedia. It has information. About people. And stuff.

I regard wikipedia as a starting place but try not to use it as my sole source.

As I stated, it was not my intention to hijack the thread so I apologise again to all.

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:05:00 UTC | #261201

eclampusvitus's Avatar Comment 24 by eclampusvitus

The best words spoken by a presidential candidate in at least 60 years on the subject. OK, so I've damned him with faint praise.

I'm not a supporter, but this gives me some glimmer of hope as I steel myself to what appears to be his inevitable presidency.


Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:15:00 UTC | #261209

D'Arcy's Avatar Comment 25 by D'Arcy

Gershwin's song said it well:

"The things that yo liable to read in de Bible

"It ain't necessarily so".

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:16:00 UTC | #261210

amalthea's Avatar Comment 26 by amalthea

Oh, my word!
That was great. I've read the bible cover to cover. Prefered Lord of the Rings personally. But I did read it.

I'm confused though. Can't the people who made this film see how howlingly funny it is? Don't they realise see how blurred the line now is between their conviction and parody. I could easily see this on the Daily Show, with exactly the same script but different voice for the voice-over (maybe by John Hodgeman). It would become an instant comedy classic.

Thanks for doing our job for us guys, hats off.


Off to watch Bitchin' Hitchens demolishing a schmuck after a couple of brews. (Him, not me) If Carling did debates, they'd probably be.... no, I'll stop.


Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:26:00 UTC | #261216

javb222's Avatar Comment 27 by javb222

His full religion speech is here:
I think it's pretty good. He basically says: Bible good :(
but shouldn't be taken literally :)
and all public discourse should be done in secular terms :)

Edit: Transcript

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:27:00 UTC | #261217

History_Junky's Avatar Comment 28 by History_Junky

Haha the guy who made this is such a tool. Apparently Jesus, you know the guy who is his own son and god, would not turn a cheek to the terrorists, yet his predestined plan for all life is what led those terrorists to attack the twin towers.

This tool then goes on to say that the sermon of the mount is one of the most inspiring things ever read by a religious figure apparently agreed upon by all (unsourced) historians, what blatant bias. Although im an athiest I was raised in a sikh household and I can tell you that the abrahamic teachings dont hold a candle to the ability to inspire compared to the dharmic religions.

Still all nonsense in the end, but just trying to make a point that these people are the most pathetic human beings on the planet.

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:29:00 UTC | #261218

LetMeBeClear's Avatar Comment 29 by LetMeBeClear

I thoroughly enjoy reading posts from intelligent people on who write about politics. Particularly as they stumble through moral dilemmas with the ease of a skilled evangelist. I thought the very fruit of our intellectual labor is the ability to separate ourselves from organized groups defined by like world views.[herding cats] There is an excellent reason why rational, logical, open minded, free thinking people, who have a love for science and the truth, stay away from politics. They have absolutely no problem pointing out the deficiencies entrenched in each political group. Unfortunately, a large percentage of my fellow atheists are considered single party voters, a majority of which are democrats. What bothers me is they view wealth redistribution as a healthy idea for an organized society. It takes a very minimal amount of economic understanding to know this drives down incentive for both financial groups. You have to “MAKE A LIVING” if you are of able body and mind. When you decide not to, you should be punished with starvation. This is Human Darwinian Evolution in my opinion.

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:38:00 UTC | #261226

Goldy's Avatar Comment 30 by Goldy

What bothers me is they view wealth redistribution as a healthy idea for an organized society.

Explain what you mean by this. Not, I take it, paying a proportion of your salary for services provided by the community to all, I take it'
If, when struck down through no fault of your own, there is nothing coming to you in the way of helping you recover and get back to being a useful member of society, you would accept that' If you are hit by a car and incapacitated, you'd starve' You'd allow a soldier who fought in a war and was injured - a war decided on by people sitting safely far away - you'd not lift a finger to help'
Oddly, there is indirect evidence of H. erectus (I believe) helping an incapacitated member of its community survive. From then came H. sapiens - us. That is evolution. Helping others in a society is what we evolved to do.

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:50:00 UTC | #261234