The W
Views: 99925421
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
22.10.14 1738
The W - Current Events & Politics - Joe biden says something in pring that annoyed me
This thread has 12 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 5.57
Pages: 1 2 Next
(219 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (28 total)
AWArulz
Knackwurst








Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 7 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.60
Look, to many of you, I know, this is a little thing. Joe Biden, in a wall Street Journal piece, when referring to something Putin might say, said "Jesus Christ" as the usual explicative at the start of some sentence.

    Originally posted by Joe Biden

    I can see Putin sitting in Moscow saying, 'Jesus Christ, Iran gets the nuclear weapon, who goes first?' Moscow, not Washington.


We've all heard this before from people. But I am sure I have never heard it before from a major politician.

Regardless of what you feel about Jesus, he's insulting a major portion of the electorate, don't you think? Is this just more Joe mouth stupidity?

Think on this: what would have happened if he had used Mohammad or Allah in there, instead of Jesus.

Here's the link
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124848246032580581.html



We'll be back right after order has been restored here in the Omni Center.

That the universe was formed by a fortuitous concourse of atoms, I will no more believe than that the accidental jumbling of the alphabet would fall into a most ingenious treatise of philosophy - Swift

Promote this thread!
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 478 days
Last activity: 478 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.75
Dan Quayle in 4 years didn't put his foot in his mouth as much as Biden has in 6 months. Obama needs to put him in Cheney's old 'undisclosed location' before election season starts.
RYDER FAKIN
Six Degrees of Me








Since: 21.2.02
From: ORLANDO

Since last post: 42 days
Last activity: 41 days
AIM:  
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.17
Regardless of what you feel about Jesus, he's insulting a major portion of the electorate, don't you think? Is this just more Joe mouth stupidity?

Think on this: what would have happened if he had used Mohammad or Allah in there, instead of Jesus.


Just Joe being Joe - he's an idiot. Luckily, no one really takes him seriously. As far as Mohammad or Allah, I hope he takes your advice and drops Jesus Christ for Muhammad, er...Ali

FLEA



Demonstrations are a drag. Besides, we're much too high

"Learn to love yourself... for it is the greatest love of all" - Jeremy Borash 11:24 AM May 13th,2009
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 1 hour
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.42
    Originally posted by Joe Biden

    I can see Putin sitting in Moscow saying, 'Jesus Christ, Iran gets the nuclear weapon, who goes first?' Moscow, not Washington.
Well... THAT doesn't sound like something Putin would say!

It's strange that the Journal would pull that quote when it doesn't appear anywhere in the story. Maybe they're just trying to stir up folks like you!

Thankfully, Christians tend to not riot in the streets about stuff like this.



Peter The Hegemon
Lap cheong








Since: 11.2.03
From: Hackettstown, NJ

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 15 hours
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.03
Further proof that political correctness is much worse on the right than it is on the left.

How, precisely, is this insulting? People, both Christian and otherwise, use "Jesus Christ" that way all the time. While I know that some religious Christians try to avoid doing so as they feel it violates the commandment not to take the Lord's name in vain, I've never come across anyone who complained about hearing it. I don't see any way in which it insults Jesus, the Christian religion, or Christian believers (except, possibly, Putin himself if you accept that this would be a violation of the commandment in question, and if Putin indeed is a Christian).
The Goon
Boudin blanc
Moderator








Since: 2.1.02
From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 23 min.
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.75
When you are swearing and saying "Christ" or "Jesus Christ", isn't the point of invoking the omniscient Lord to point out something ridiculous for him to see? ie. "Christ, can you believe this?"

My guess is that originated with people looking to Jesus Christ for support/strength when confronted with incredible stupidity or unbelievable circumstances.

(edited by The Goon on 29.7.09 1047)
Leroy
Boudin blanc








Since: 7.2.02

Since last post: 7 days
Last activity: 6 days
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.53
    Originally posted by Peter The Hegemon
    ...I've never come across anyone who complained about hearing it.


My girlfriend's parents, who are both very Catholic and very liberal, aren't terribly fond of my use of it, but they've never made a huge issue of it. I just try not to use it in their home. (It's just one of many offensive things I tend to say on a regular basis.)

To suggest a "major part of the electorate" is "insulted" by this is a bit much. While I am sure Christians/Catholics who supported Obama/Biden would prefer a different term, I doubt they are quite as offended as Christians who did not support that ticket - as this is yet more "evidence" that Obama is a godless communist.




We all have ways of coping. I use sex and awesomeness.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 1 hour
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.42
    Originally posted by Peter The Hegemon
    Further proof that political correctness is much worse on the right than it is on the left.
Hey wait a minute. AWArulz nearly fell over himself to say that it bugged HIM and he realised that for some of us this wouldn't seem like a big deal at all. He didn't say Biden should be killed or have to resign or anything over the top. I really respect that he put it the way he did.

This shouldn't be a left/right issue. Showing tolerance for Christianity and Christian beliefs is just as valid as showing tolerance for anything else - shouldn't it be? How can you derive intolerance from that? (Well, except an intolerance for using certain language on the record, I suppose.)

I guess the other thing I should point out is this was out in the wild back on Sunday, so for it to get to Thursday Wednesday before we saw this thread, somebody must have said something to someone. I'd love to blame the media again, but I bet some blame should go to the blogosphere, too.

(edited by CRZ on 29.7.09 1213)


AWArulz
Knackwurst








Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 7 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.60
    Originally posted by CRZ

    I guess the other thing I should point out is this was out in the wild back on Sunday, so for it to get to Thursday Wednesday before we saw this thread, somebody must have said something to someone. I'd love to blame the media again, but I bet some blame should go to the blogosphere, too.




I didn't get around to reading my WSJ on my Kindle until last night.

No one really responded (one, kinda) to my other thing. What if he had said
'Prophet Muhammad, Iran gets the nuclear weapon, who goes first?'

Using "Prophet Muhammad" in the same way he used "jesus christ" - do you think it would have made it until Wednesday before you heard about it.

and to other points - I DO believe he insulted a large part of the electorate.

The majority of Americans identify themselves as Christians (76%) (that's from the old CIA fact book). While that number may be dropping and a good number of those probably really aren't, so to speak, 76% is a good starting number.

It is a fact that, whether they do or not, no Christian is supposed to use the Lord's name in vain. Joe Biden is a Christian, a Roman Catholic.

The cathlic catechism says (among many other things)

2155 The holiness of the divine name demands that we neither use it for trivial matters...

Seriously, I really do wonder why not much has been said about it.





We'll be back right after order has been restored here in the Omni Center.

That the universe was formed by a fortuitous concourse of atoms, I will no more believe than that the accidental jumbling of the alphabet would fall into a most ingenious treatise of philosophy - Swift

Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 9 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.07
The Lord's name in vain is an Old Testament thing, though. JC is more of a New Testament guy...




Sign up for Folding@Home and join our team. PM me for details.

Ignorance is bliss for you, hell for me.
Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 2 hours
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.05
    Originally posted by AWArulz


    The majority of Americans identify themselves as Christians (76%) (that's from the old CIA fact book). While that number may be dropping and a good number of those probably really aren't, so to speak, 76% is a good starting number.




That's still pretty dead-on. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_United_States

    Originally posted by Wikipedia
    According to a 2007 survey,[10] the following is the order of religious preferences in the United States:

    * Christianity: (78.4%)
    o Protestantism (51.3%)
    o Roman Catholicism (23.9%)
    o LDS (1.7%)
    o Jehovah's Witness (0.7%)
    o Orthodox Church (0.6%)
    o other Christian (0.3%)
    * no religion (16.1%)
    * Judaism (1.7%)
    * Buddhist (0.7%)
    * Islam (0.6%)
    * Hinduism (0.4%)
    * other (1.2%)



Along the lines of Guru, my experiences have shown me that it's really only people who are about 45+ year olds that really get offended by passing "JC" exclimations.

Us "youngin's" don't really care so much. Yest, 78% identify as Christian, but number doesn't really go into how religious they are.

Are they Christian because they were raised that way, but don't practice and are Christian in name only? Or are they a "Hellfire and brimstone -- all people who work on Sunday should be stoned to death" type? Or are they some shade of gray in between? I would love to see the poll results on this topic.

I can only speak about my life and experiences, but I would have to say that in my circle of friends, Christians make up only about 10%. I know more Jews than Christians and they both are vastly outnumbered by various other religious (and non-religious) people in my life, but I'm sure everyone else will have a different makeup.



-- 2006 Time magazine Person of the Year --

-- July 2009 Ordained Reverend --
Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 9 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.07
OK so you don't think I'm just a hypocrite sniping away at religion....

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gal++3:24

Galatians 3:24 has been read by some to imply that the old law was in place until Christ came.

Romans 7 also seems to empahsize the importance of following JC rather than the older covenants.

Not all Christians agree on all things. I'm not sure all Christians consider exclaiming "Jesus Christ" the same as taking the Lord's name (literal name, not the title Lord) in vain.

This has been your insight into how I read the scriptures for the day.

And yes, I know Jesus also taught the commandments. I still feel that Matthew Chapter 5 is probably a better indication of what JC wanted on earth than is the book of Exodus.




Sign up for Folding@Home and join our team. PM me for details.

Ignorance is bliss for you, hell for me.
DrDirt
Banger








Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 7 days
Last activity: 1 hour
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.35
AWA, I repsect that you were offendedand it wasn't a good choice of words on Biden's part. But I doubt, especially with the mess the country is in, or even if everything was fine, that many paid attention or cared.

The reality is that you stats may be right but way less than 50% attend church regularly. Many 50% are two-timers a year (Christmas and Easter). I live in absolute dround zero of the Bible Belt in a town of 1100. Maybe on a good Sunday, 250 go to services. I know you don't have to go to church to be a Christian. However, most people spend little energy on their religion overall.



Perception is reality
AWArulz
Knackwurst








Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 7 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.60
-----------------------------
Stuff deleted because Guru already posted how he read this stuff on what Jesus said about the "taking the Lord's name in vain" issue.
--------------------

But, seriously, I can't imagine anyone who was anything more than a "I never go to church ever, but, by golly, I'm a Christian" "Christian" saying that it's OK to take the Lord's name in vain. Even if you do it. Like, you know it's a sin, but you do it anyway.

Me too, if truth be told. But I am not vice president and it has never made it into print, as far as I know, not even on the Internet. I have typed a lot of stuff into the ether since 1987 when I started BBSing, so I won't promise nothing would come up. But, again, I am not the Vice President of the United States.


so, do me a favor - answer the other part - what if he had used Allah's or the Prophet's name in that same place. Would it be any different? Why or why not.

(edited by AWArulz on 29.7.09 1824)

We'll be back right after order has been restored here in the Omni Center.

That the universe was formed by a fortuitous concourse of atoms, I will no more believe than that the accidental jumbling of the alphabet would fall into a most ingenious treatise of philosophy - Swift

Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 9 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.07
AWA - I don't think you needed to edit your post. I'm not terribly disagreeing with you here - I just wanted to tell you how I see it. I suppose I was raised with more of an emphasis on the NT than the OT - and some of it is because it is uncomfortable to explain why certain of God's laws still apply and some don't.

For example, Exodus 20:1 - 21 tell the story of the 10 commandments being given to the people. This stuff is pretty straight-forward and it's generally good stuff! BUT - it gets a little bit murky for me when you follow up with Exodus 21. Here are some examples:

Exodus 21:2 - Buying Hebrew servents
Exodus 21:17 - Penalty of death for attacking your father or mother
Exodus 21:20 - How much you are allowed to beat your slaves (not to death, but severely)
Exodus 22:18 - "Do not allow a sorceress to live"

Anyway - before I get too far along and get accused of derailing the topic....

I would not have a problem with any exclamatory statement using any religion in that context, because it doesn't offend me personally. I can see how some might be offended. I can see how some groups might be more offended than others based on the perceived gravity of the statement. It is my opinion that the perceived gravity of the statement by Christians is not much greater than that which would be perceived by someone of a different faith. Perhaps this is just me projecting my own life experience and the casual way I have heard the expression used in my own life.

(edited by Guru Zim on 29.7.09 1538)



Sign up for Folding@Home and join our team. PM me for details.

Ignorance is bliss for you, hell for me.
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 71 days
Last activity: 71 days
#16 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.97
    Originally posted by AWArulz
    Me too, if truth be told. But I am not vice president and it has never made it into print, as far as I know, not even on the Internet. I have typed a lot of stuff into the ether since 1987 when I started BBSing, so I won't promise nothing would come up. But, again, I am not the Vice President of the United States.


I don't see what being vice president has to do with anything. It was a harmless statement. "Jesus Christ" has become nothing more than an expression of disbelief to a lot of people. Also, I don't see what one person thinking another person is a "sinner" according to the Bible has to do with the fact that Americans elected him to office. Is there some sort of Christian litmus test you know about that all of us don't?



    so, do me a favor - answer the other part - what if he had used Allah's or the Prophet's name in that same place. Would it be any different? Why or why not.


Well for one thing, it would be weird because Biden claims to be a Christian. We cannot possibly answer this question because it would require ignoring the obvious Christian influences on American culture, much like asking someone in Iran what he or she would think if one of their leaders yelled out, "Praise Jesus!"

The reaction to Biden referencing "Allah" would be different because it would be substantially a different thing.

But even assuming the answer is what you're looking for - "Yes, it would be different, and it's because we only are OK with hating on Christians" - that doesn't make it RIGHT. It SHOULDN'T be a big deal if Biden were to reference Mohammad. Or were those Muslims rioting over the images of their prophet in a cartoon behaving rationally, in your estimation?

EDIT: To clarify, this line by me:

We cannot possibly answer this question because it would require ignoring the obvious Christian influences on American culture


... does NOT mean, "we are a Christian nation" by any stretch of the imagination. The question was about public reaction, and that's exclusively what I'm talking about.

(edited by TheBucsFan on 30.7.09 0556)
El Nastio
Andouille








Since: 14.1.02
From: Ottawa Ontario, by way of Walkerton

Since last post: 4 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
ICQ:  
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.06
Harmless statement to you, Bucs. Harmless to some. To others, it's a big deal. I'm 27 years of age, and you can file me under those who don't like the Lord's name taken in vain. To me it's not harmless at all, I find it quite disrespectful. My faith is important to me, and I happen to believe that the Lord's name is to be respected, especially by those in public office. Because we are to hold people in Public Office to a higher standard, they are (although human) to try to be beyond reproach.

And it's not weird to consider the implications of saying Allah or Buddah or whatever else. Muslims think of Jesus as a prophet, and they do not take lightly His name taken in vain either. If someone used Allah's name in vain I'd still be pissed about it. Why? Allah = God the Father. Either way, it's still using some sort of religous item in vain, which frankly bothers me for the reason that CRZ said a few posts ago;

"This shouldn't be a left/right issue. Showing tolerance for Christianity and Christian beliefs is just as valid as showing tolerance for anything else - shouldn't it be?

Yes it should. Apparently I am no longer allowed to call soemthing "gay" (or even "ghey" depending on who it is) as an adjective. Racial humor is reserved only for those of that race, and even then it's pretty tasteless at times.

But oh, those religous folks. Their beliefs and their God.....disrespecting their feelings and thoughts are "harmless".



You know, I really don't know what to put here. Close your eyes and thank of something funny!
SKLOKAZOID
Bratwurst








Since: 20.3.02
From: California

Since last post: 45 min.
Last activity: 45 min.
AIM:  
#18 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.00
There are many different interpretations of the Third Commandment. From my perspective on Christianity, it has to do with the intent of the statement. I mean, what is God's name exactly?

When someone steps on a nail and exclaims "Fuck!" they don't mean "copulation!," they might be using an alternate expression of "Shit!" and when people say "Shit!" they don't mean "human excrement." They usually mean "Ow, my foot!"

Given the evolution of language over the years, I believe that when people exclaim "Jesus Christ!", "Christ!" etc. that it's merely another expression that has evolved in the English language, probably from "God damn!" and nothing more than that. Maybe it was more literal in its original usage, but it's not what people mean when they say it today.


I guess I'm posting here because I feel somewhat strongly about this since adults (not my parents, who were cool) would sometimes lecture me whenever I'd say "Oh, God!" as a kid as if I said something horrible when really I was just quite innocently using an expression I heard other adults say (probably my parents). I didn't mean the Big Man Upstairs and never did.

At least we very rarely hear people say "Oh, Yeshua!" which is far more direct and accurate.

EDIT: Or "Yahweh"

(edited by SKLOKAZOID on 29.7.09 1707)
DrDirt
Banger








Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 7 days
Last activity: 1 hour
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.35
    Originally posted by AWArulz
    -----------------------------

    so, do me a favor - answer the other part - what if he had used Allah's or the Prophet's name in that same place. Would it be any different? Why or why not.

    (edited by AWArulz on 29.7.09 1824)


AWA, I'll try. It would probably create a firestorm because of who he is, A Christian VP of the US. But why would he do it as it would make no sense.

How about if a leader of Iran used "Jesus Christ" in that context? Would most of us care? Other than the media, I doubt it.

I get where you are coming from and I try to watch it myself but you were the first and only time I heard about it.





Perception is reality
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 71 days
Last activity: 71 days
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.97
    Originally posted by El Nastio
    Harmless statement to you, Bucs. Harmless to some. To others, it's a big deal. I'm 27 years of age, and you can file me under those who don't like the Lord's name taken in vain. To me it's not harmless at all, I find it quite disrespectful. My faith is important to me, and I happen to believe that the Lord's name is to be respected, especially by those in public office. Because we are to hold people in Public Office to a higher standard, they are (although human) to try to be beyond reproach.


Millions of people every day use "Jesus Christ" in the same context used by Biden in the above quote. I do it, and I don't believe "Jesus" ever even existed. We are only discussing this particular use because Biden happens to be vice president.

I don't know what about a "higher standard" for public officials means Biden can't use what basically amounts to a colloquialism. Unless by "higher standard" you mean "Christian standard," and, well, I'm going to have some problems with that definition if that's the case.

You're obviously free to base your vote on whatever you please, and if saying what Biden said here influences your support for him OK. But you're in a very clear minority, or at least I feel pretty safe in assuming so.


    And it's not weird to consider the implications of saying Allah or Buddah or whatever else. Muslims think of Jesus as a prophet, and they do not take lightly His name taken in vain either. If someone used Allah's name in vain I'd still be pissed about it. Why? Allah = God the Father.


No, you're absolutely talking nonsense. You cannot honestly believe "Allah" and "Jesus Christ" are at all similar in terms of American vernacular, especially from a politician. If Biden were a Muslim, it would not be weird for him to say "Allah." But as Americans have never elected a Muslim to a position even remotely as prominent as that of Joe Biden, it's a question that isn't even worth asking Americans because they've never been in that position.


    Yes it should. Apparently I am no longer allowed to call soemthing "gay" (or even "ghey" depending on who it is) as an adjective. Racial humor is reserved only for those of that race, and even then it's pretty tasteless at times.


You're "allowed" to say whatever you want. Just like I'm "allowed" to question your use of the word gay. I don't see what this has to do with this conversation.


    But oh, those religous folks. Their beliefs and their God.....disrespecting their feelings and thoughts are "harmless".


Right. Biden said something that millions of people from any number of backgrounds and levels of religious indoctrination say every day. Yes, Christianity is clearly under attack in America, and it's because Joe Biden used the phrase "Jesus Christ."
Pages: 1 2 Next
Thread rated: 5.57
Pages: 1 2 Next
Thread ahead: Post Office considering closing 700 branches
Next thread: Cory Aquino (1933-2009)
Previous thread: RIP Gidget the Taco Bell Chihuahua
(219 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Naw - because, you see, nothing matters except the Liberal agenda. Gay rights matters, but not the rights of those who are religious. Abortion rights matter, but not the right of humans to live when they don't have a voice.
- AWArulz, since it's politics (2004)
The W - Current Events & Politics - Joe biden says something in pring that annoyed meRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.305 seconds.