Posted on 09/29/2010 4:42:17 AM PDT by Antioch
Zer0 is crusin’ for a brusin’.
This from the big “committed christian” Can’t even say the word creator. Not buyin it. He’s a Muzzie.
it pains him so ......
Communist, moslem, sodomite...
He’s the devil.
Acknowledging our Creator is not a part of the Christianity he chose.
I think he is doing it on purpose. He wants this to be an issue so he and the LSM can brand the Tea Party as religious zealots.
Leave it alone till after November. When the impeachment hearings start, between this, not putting his hand over his heart at a Dem primary stop and everything else he has done to hurt American can be used as evidence.
I don’t have his quote, but I’m willing to bet he didn’t weight in on life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness either.
But, but...he’s a Christian.
He said so.
Heh!
Interestingly, I had a discussion with my dad this week about those rights being taught in my nephews school. Those inalienable rights in the text were listed as life, liberty, pursuit of happiness AND economic equality. Textbooks issued from an Illinois publisher......
He’s such a putz, He says, “All men are CREATED equal”, then doesn’t acknowledge for that statement to be true we have to have a creator.
Bump.
If Christians and conservatives were the unhinged bunch the state run media protrays us to be, Biden would have had to take over the Presidency long ago.
“Interestingly, I had a discussion with my dad this week about those rights being taught in my nephews school. Those inalienable rights in the text were listed as life, liberty, pursuit of happiness AND economic equality. Textbooks issued from an Illinois publisher”
If your schools math books are “Everyday Mathematics or TERC” both from Illinois publishers, you need to organize parents to get the school to stop it now.
See this short video about those math books...
Math Education: An Inconvenient Truth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr1qee-bTZI
It took a fight, but our schools dumped them this year. They were as horrible as the lady in the video says. Even for my son's 2nd grade. The wife and I had a horrible tome helping him with his math.
-------------------------
A Christian would not omit the phrase. It's as simple as that!
That he can take it upon himself, right in our faces to alter a phrase that has existed in our founding documents for over 230+ years, tells you exactly who we have as our president.
Look out Zer0, the hope and change is a coming... and not from you.
It is not a “misunderstanding.” It is a purposeful misreading in order to subvert the consitution. Obama wants to “grant rights” like housing, medical care, affirmative action, —and take away rights like freedom of speech, gun rights, and freedom of association.
God gets in his way.
He hates admitting others accomplishments. Since he has none.
There's more to this than the kenyan interloper just omitting the word 'Creator'. Read the following carefully
"And what was sustaining us was that sense that, that North Star, that sense that, you know what, if we stay true to our values, if we believe that all people are created equal and everybody is endowed with certain inalienable rights...
Do you see it? No? Okay.
Here it is:
"inalienable rights"There is a HUGH difference between unalienable rights, which is in the Declaration of Independence and we get from The Creator, and "inalienable rights" which Barry is saying. As 'inalienable rights' can be given or taken away - by THE GOVERNMENT!
That little fact is already part of Established Case Law in the USA thanks to SCOTUS . All it takes for one to lose his "inalienable rights" is one's (cough) 'consent' to relinquish his "inalienable rights" (thank you Google). And we know how Congress and Barry listen to We The People and get 'our consent' on a matter (SF Nan: We 'deem' that consent was given).
So while omitting the 'Creator' is big, changing unalienable to inalienable is HUGH! THAT is what we should be on guard for.
People’s inalienable rights, endowed by their Creator,
get in the way of Obama’s desire to change the Constitution into a requirement of what “society” must do for you.
By that, he understands that he must necessarily violate the rights of some in order to “grant” “rights” to others.
If he intentionally means what you say he means, and the words have EXACTLY the subtle difference that you state,
then indeed, he intends to “obtain” our consent to relinquish those rights.
A similar “word flag” is their new use of “freedom of WORSHIP” instead of freedom of RELIGION.
Freedom of worship means that you are free to worship as you wish BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
Your “religion”, though, is HOW YOU LIVE YOUR LIFE.
They are telegraphing that they intend to restrict that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.