Obama “Improves” Christianity Again

After 2000+ years, Christianity is in need of a remake, our hero must have thought. Why not introduce a Chris 2.0 version then, full of PC applets for the gullible.

Here it is:

I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together, when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married.”  – President Barack Obama

Christianity counts for nothing. What counts in Chris 2.0 is to have an “incredibly committed monogamous same sex relationship”, and one wonders how one can be so confused.

Someone should tell this chap, unbelievably become President thanks to an astonishing episode of reverse racism, that in Christian societies monogamy is a virtue because Christianity says so. An incestuous couple wouldn’t be considered “moral” because it is “incredibly” monogamous. A person sleeping with his dog wouldn’t be considered a fine chap because he is so committed to only commits acts of bestiality with his “lover”.

Logic doesn’t count in Obamaland. Read it again and notice the sugary emotionalism, the hollow fake sentimentalism. O the poor, poor faggot who can’t marry! How sad does the President feel for him after he has been fighting on his behalf! If the american soldiers fighting on his behalf implore him not to allow sodomites among their ranks, will he listen to them?

You would say the man, having been raised a Muslim, simply doesn’t know Christianity. But there are a couple of problems with this reasoning:

a) Muslims aren’t more favourably oriented toward “incredibly monogamous same sex couples” than Christians are, and

b) this man is the sam eon record for saying as follows:

“I’m a Christian. I do believe that tradition and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman.”

Look, in 2004 Obama still had some traces of logic: he acknowledged to be a Christian means to consider marriage something sanctified between a man and a woman. If one doesn’t believe  this, it follows, one is not a Christian.

This doesn’t count now.

Not even if the Christians fight on his behalf.

It is sad to see the most powerful nation  on earth is run by a complete moron. But at the same time it is reassuring to see he has made another mistake (perhaps he didn’t have any choice, after his VP’s gaffe; but it’s still a dangerous step to take) and has decided to take position on this matter on the day it was shown to him it is tantamount to ask not to be reelected.

North Carolina shows this will cost him a part of the black vote. Not a huge one, but one big enough to put him in serious trouble. With the Catholics he is following the same “strategy”: alienate the moderates, and gain the vote of those who would have voted for you anyway.  Who does Obama think will re-elect him in November? There aren’t so many perverts after all…

Still, we should be rather satisfied today. The mask is off, Obama will not be trusted anyway as even the left will smell opportunism, and we have another beautiful battleground, one where North Carolina has already shown what happens when the black vote abandons the President.

Surely, the world need change.


Posted on May 9, 2012, in Catholicism and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 7 Comments.

  1. Mundabor, your blog is a chronicle of the fall of the world into a self-made abyss of sin. And of the Church’s incapacity to do anything about it, hampered as it is by false doctrines and an apostacised clergy.

    Tell me, you are I know somewhat skeptical of the kinds of apocalyptic views of some of us – those who broadly accept the reality of the coming “Great Chastisement”. Given that Our Lady’s words at Fatima to Sr. Lucy, and at Akita, and before both of them at La Salette are clear and consistent, where does your skepticism come from?

    Just interested 🙂

    As to this man – he’s a helper of Anti-Christ if not the real thing.

    • Benedict, did these apparitions contain the day and the hour? Just curious 😉

      You see, Fatima is soon 100 years ago and I personally refrain from overinterpretations. The first Christians did think the end of the world was at hand, in the sense of “this generation, the next at the most”. But the fact is, Jesus had never said that.

      I do not know the apparition of La Salette in detail but I think it’s mid-nineteen century and the event themselves you mention deny the concept of “this generation” as obligatory interpretation. I also thought V II was devastation and punishment enough, but I might be wrong there…

      My blog gives you, alas, a continuous string of what are, in themselves, bad news. But all this is made from a historical perspective, which I hope I care to transmit to my readers. If we talk about corruption, I am sure the Church has lived in times much more corrupted than these, and has prevailed in the end. And together with the bad news there are the good ones! Twenty-nine states in the US have a proper concept of marriage written in their constitution. We certainly can’t say a robust reaction isn’t forming.

      By all dismay, let us not forget we belong to the winning part, and the world doesn’t have to end tomorrow. Of course, if a nuclear war breaks out I hope I’ll have the time to write my apologies on this blog… 😉


  2. I wonder what will happen when the ISLAMIC WORLD takes over? Does OBAMA convince them to stop STONING TO DEATH Sodomites? I am very sorry that this Chris 2.0 was created by Mr. Obama but actually others really beat him to it such as the Episcopalian Church and Anglican Church. Thus now days when someone says to me “Oh! I am a CHRISTIAN!” I don’t sing and dance and know who I am dealing with anymore…..I will have to ask “Is that a HISTORICAL Christian? or a Chris 2.0?”
    I am now waiting for Mr. Obama to come out with the fact that he supports anyone marrying anyPERSON they like! Brother, sister, cousin, mulitiple couples, multiple wives, multiple husbands and then on to “IT’s OK for Bo Peep to Marry her Sheep!” THEN I KNOW the end will be here!

    • Oh well if they are “incredibly committed”, I’m sure Obama will feeeel that if they are fighting on his behaaaalf, surely he must do unto otheeeers?

      But no, I do not think Islam will ever take over anything.


  3. Yeah, that “change” thing ain’t going to work out very well. eh?

  4. A couple of nits on your analysis:

    1. Obama is not going to loose any of the black vote because of this issue. Congress is littered with black members from “black” districts who are more vocal about their support of “gay marriage”. A black Democrat who supports “gay marriage” will always trump a Republican within the black population. Especially in this Presidential election.

    2. I suspect that the VP’s comments over the weekend were not a gaffe. This was carefully coordinated by Obama and his political advisors. He was getting push-back from a number of his big money bundlers (who happen to be gay) and this was a way for Obama to come out in support of “gay marriage” while appearing to be “forced” into vocalizing his support. This is really no different then the then obscure debate question about contraception that George Stephanopoulos poised to Rick Santorum during the New Hampshire debate.

    • I understand where you come from, Kevin, but allow myself to disagree for the following reasons:

      1. if you look at what just happened in North Carolina, it appears rather clear the local black voters are pretty emotional about this, and this is a swing state. I can’t imagine this doesn’t translate in losses of some sort. Some will stay home, some will vote Romney, other might vote for him in the presidential election and for the republican in the Congress or Senate.

      2. I think it is rather common by Obama’s mistake to think there was some “cunning plan” (I have written about this, search “Obama’s cunning plan”) to cover mistakes after they were made. If this is their strategy, they are very mediocre strategist: two days under the cannon of half the country, a vote spectacularly lost, and then this? I think it was damage limitation (clumsy) more than anything.

      We’ll see. I think he is on his way to being as massacred as Kerry.


%d bloggers like this: