"Time and again, Obama returned to the theme of "American promise," and its dependence on responsibility, both individual and mutual."
Wow, did I miss something - when did the left wing of the Democratic party start pushing individual responsibility ("we are responsible for ourselves"). Their message has always been one of governmental responsibility in the past (welfare, government-run healthcare, etc.). And since when does Obama use Genesis as the foundation for public policy ("the fundamental belief that I am my brother's keeper", see Genesis 4:9)? Last I heard, he was ridiculing the Old Testament and cherry-picking parts of verses to demonstrate that the Bible could not be used to guide our public policy (http://www.youtube.com/v/4FCNKwHRCQM).
karlos
· 1 year ago
mark.
it's about blending shared values in the service of progressive policies. i would have used "shared responsibility" rather than "mutual responsibility."
It's each of our individual responsibilities to work to make sure our shared promise is realized through a sense of shared responsibility to our communities, the future and our children.
trip
· 1 year ago
Mark, I appreciate your comment, but as a seminary graduate I am always amused when someone accuses another individual of cherry picking biblical verses. From my experience, people on all sides of political debates, right and left, religious, atheist, often cherry pick biblical verses ad nauseum to bolster their positions. Using the Bible as a resource for your public policy toolkit is dangerous. The second you adopt an approach, there always are verses to undermine your position. Case in point: yes, the Bible does prohibit a man lying down with a man (Leviticus) but it also has God punishing King Saul for not putting King Agag of the Amelakites to the sword, which the prophet Samuel then does, which is basically the equivalent of finishing off the last member of a tribe. So is God advocating the extermination of a tribe but prohibiting acting on same-sex attractions? That's a question a serious reader of the Bible must ask himself or herself. I'l leave that up to much smarter people to decide the answer. Just so you know, I am a big fan of the Bible. I just get sick and tired from a lot of people spouting biblical verses without acknowledging the complexity inherent in the text. As for mutual responsibility, that's a very biblical theme. I am sure you know the Bible makes many more references to taking care of the widow and the orphan than it does to prohibiting action on same-sex attractions. The debate, of course, in American political debate is how to execute that very human action -- taking care of the least of these -- through government intervention or through the bonds that we as human beings feel toward one another and the community. One could argue that the debate is complicated by America's emphasis on individualism throughout its history. But again I will leave that to much smarter people to find the answer to striking a balance.
genegrant
· 1 year ago
The reaction to The Speech has been most interesting. I don't know if anyone caught Tavis Smiley the last couple of nights, but there's somewhat of a racial gulf since. meaning, for some Aftican Americans, The Speech did not do much. I experienced the same talking with some folks who had watched it under a huge tent in the Five Points area of Denver, the AA community there.
Whatever your feelings of Cornell West, he made a very strong case (as an Obama supporter, btw) that the narrative to date on Obama and race has been in essence a white narrative, or POV, if you will. Meaning, the barometer of success (or not) in speaking to this issue has wildly swamped the narrative from African Americans.
The clearest example is this notion of a white narrative driving his angle on race is that Obama cannot risk talking straight at AA issues lest he spook off white fence sitters. This is now accepted as fact.
We'll see how this plays out. What I do know is there will be very little reporting on how this narrative is working in the AA community, which is much more nuanced than one might think on first blush, considering the 90 plus percent of support he is receiving in the AA community.
All Comments
Wow, did I miss something - when did the left wing of the Democratic party start pushing individual responsibility ("we are responsible for ourselves"). Their message has always been one of governmental responsibility in the past (welfare, government-run healthcare, etc.).
And since when does Obama use Genesis as the foundation for public policy ("the fundamental belief that I am my brother's keeper", see Genesis 4:9)? Last I heard, he was ridiculing the Old Testament and cherry-picking parts of verses to demonstrate that the Bible could not be used to guide our public policy (http://www.youtube.com/v/4FCNKwHRCQM).
it's about blending shared values in the service of progressive policies. i would have used "shared responsibility" rather than "mutual responsibility."
It's each of our individual responsibilities to work to make sure our shared promise is realized through a sense of shared responsibility to our communities, the future and our children.
As for mutual responsibility, that's a very biblical theme. I am sure you know the Bible makes many more references to taking care of the widow and the orphan than it does to prohibiting action on same-sex attractions. The debate, of course, in American political debate is how to execute that very human action -- taking care of the least of these -- through government intervention or through the bonds that we as human beings feel toward one another and the community. One could argue that the debate is complicated by America's emphasis on individualism throughout its history. But again I will leave that to much smarter people to find the answer to striking a balance.
Whatever your feelings of Cornell West, he made a very strong case (as an Obama supporter, btw) that the narrative to date on Obama and race has been in essence a white narrative, or POV, if you will. Meaning, the barometer of success (or not) in speaking to this issue has wildly swamped the narrative from African Americans.
The clearest example is this notion of a white narrative driving his angle on race is that Obama cannot risk talking straight at AA issues lest he spook off white fence sitters. This is now accepted as fact.
We'll see how this plays out. What I do know is there will be very little reporting on how this narrative is working in the AA community, which is much more nuanced than one might think on first blush, considering the 90 plus percent of support he is receiving in the AA community.