Obama criticizes 'less than loving Christians' at Easter prayer breakfast

As the Washington Times points out, the latest Obama signal of religious relativism came after his administration had issued a statement on the Kenyan massacre at a Christian college without once mentioning the religion of the victims - or the attackers.

Addressing an ecumenical gathering at the White House of cardinals, ministers, pastors and the lay faithful, Mr. Obama was talking about the Apostle John’s call to love “with actions and in truth” rather than with words. The president then briefly gave in to temptation, and deviated from his prepared remarks.

“On Easter, I do reflect on the fact that as a Christian, I am supposed to love,” Mr. Obama said. “And I have to say that sometimes when I listen to less-than-loving expressions by Christians, I get concerned. But that’s a topic for another day.”

The audience in the East Room murmured, some with apparent disapproval, as others laughed. The president did not elaborate on what he meant, and returned to his address.

“I was about to veer off,” Mr. Obama told the crowd. “I’m pulling it back.”

The president’s zinging of Christians came four days after he sanitized any reference to religion in the terrorist attacks at a college in Kenya that left 147 dead and scores wounded. Witnesses said the extremists, reportedly belonging to the Islamist terrorist group al-Shabbab, targeted Christians for death by asking hostages if they were familiar with passages from the Koran.

Mr. Obama’s official statement on the attacks described “terrorist atrocities” and “innocent men and women,” but never mentioned religion. His spokesman did say that Christians “reportedly” were targeted.
Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, called Mr. Obama’s comments at the prayer breakfast “very disturbing.”

Ed Morisey of HOTAIR observes:

In Kenya last week, almost 150 Christians got slaughtered in an al-Shabaab terrorist attack, deliberately chosen by the terrorists for murder, but nowhere in Obama’s official statement on that atrocity can one find a mention of their religion. Neither can one find in the statement any mention of the “less than loving expressions” of Islam. Two months ago, when a group linked to ISIS butchered 21 Christians from Egypt specifically for their religion, the White House statement on that mass murder not only didn’t mention either religion, it emphasized that ISIS’ attacks were “unconstrained by faith, sect, or ethnicity.” Riiiiiiight.

Furthermore, Obama seems very unconcerned when it comes to “less-than-loving expressions” from his negotiating partners. Recall this moment from his NPR interview, conducted the day after this “prayer”? Obama seems less-than-concerned about the virulent anti-Semitism of the Iranian mullahs, whom he wants to trust to adhere to a deal which would keep them from threatening millions of Jews in Israel

Did Obama tell us again, to get off our high horse, and talk about what happened in the name of Christ in medieval Europe? Did he give us a history lesson about the Crusades??

Even if we take on face value that some bad things happened in the name of Christianity in history, why does Obama bring it up now? Does that somehow justify atrocities done in the name of Islam today, if we say bad things happened in medieval Europe???

Well, what can you expect when Christians marched homosexuals down to the beach and cut off their heads….oh, that’s right. That was MUSLIMS, who beheaded Christians on the beach. So why isn’t Brarack Hussein criticizing Muslims, who kill homosexuals, too, instead of getting on his “high horse” about the few little merchants in the once-free USA who don’t want to bake wedding cakes or photograph the phony “marriages” of the ungodly?

If any Christian votes for the anti-Christian Democrat Party, they aren’t Christian.

I get the feeling that somewhere in his education on Christianity, the President missed the distinction between loving the sinner and hating the sin.

I question the president’s Christian faith. And his knowledge and understanding of many things.

Why?

Because, he has said he was attracted to Christianity, by tenets of the faith, such as how we are our brother’s keeper and our sister’s keeper.

Being our brother’s and sister’s keeper is not a tenet of Christianity.

For him to cite a completely mangled and misunderstood interpretation of a Bible story as his inspiration for Christianity, shows us all just how little he understands his own faith.

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.