"But it seems to me that the majority of christians in the US have decided that this argument holds no validity for them. That being (e.g) a catholic does not mean being required to defend catholic teachings (just an example, the same can be said for mormons, lutherans, baptists, moslems, jews, buddhists, hindus etc). That being the case, it should not be valid when used against Obama."

It's not Obama's faith that's been an issue.  It's his going to the services of this particular minister, refering to the minister as his "spiritual mentor", using the title of one of the sermons as the title to one of his books, and generally standing beside the minister until the minister accuses him of "political posturing".

Knut:

I think the point Scott was making was that if you find Wright's position's so offensive (and it was his political positions not theological positions which are at issue) why do you stay in the congregation -- there are other churches that can meet your spiritual needs.  If a Catholic hears a priest in his church make political statements with which he or she disagrees that are not based in faith or catholic doctrine then they too should find another parish.

But I don't think Obama remained a member for spiritual reasons.  I think Obama stayed in the Church for political reasons, for career reasons.  Obviously I can't prove it, its only my opinion.  But I believe that and I kind of understand it.  I don't believe Obama buys Wright's conspiracy theory bull, I don't think Wright has impacted Obama's view of our country, our government or Obama's world view.  But  I do think he liked that that Church is very politically connected.  And its likely those connections helped him as climbed the political ladder.  But because he stayed a member of that Church where Wright said those things it becomes a fair question to ask whether Obama was influenced by his preacher's statements from the pulpit.  I think Obama's has made it abundently clear he does not subscribe to those views (and his record and personal history would also indicate that).  But because he chose to associate with Wright he has to explain the association.   

So I think Obama made a decision to remain a congregant at Trinity because of the political gain he saw.  Making decisions for political purposes is something every politician does and has done throughout history.  I also happen to think Mrs. Clinton has made similar decisions against her better judgement based on what she felt was best for her political career.  As has Mr. McCain.  Sadly, I think its the cost of being president. 

As I said earlier I think Wright is an asshole.  I think he's an egoist who has served to put his interests ahead of those of a member of his flock.  I think Wright's spin that the media has attacked the "Black Church" is bullshit.  There is no centralized structure like the Catholic Church.  No one has attacked Wright's religious teachings -- he has been criticized for his political views.  Not his theological views.  If he does not see the difference perhaps he needs to remember to "give to Caeser what is Caeser's and to God what is God's."

Tom:

I very much agree with Vonnegut remarks regaridng the Beatitudes and the religious.

Sure, I agree that Obama might have stayed in his church for appearance's sake. So? Doesn't everybody? It's why Jesus Christ (according to the bible) expresses his distaste for public worship in the first place ( which is why I made a reference to christ's teachings and public displays of faith being "unbecoming".)

If people don't like hypocrisy, they shouldn't make it a requirement. (sorry, just one my personal pet peeves.)

Sure, I agree that Obama might have stayed in his church for appearance's sake. So? Doesn't everybody?

Not my Mom.  She goes to Church because it provides her some comfort.  When she is upset or scared of something she prays.  I don't understand it but I respect it.  If it helps her I am fine with that.  She doesn't agree with everything in the Catholic church but she takes from it what she needs and ignores the rest.

Good call, Michael.

As for you, Scott - In my own words, he supported him by staying a member of his congregation and defending his bigotry and hatred. 

Wait - where did he ever defend bigorty and hatred - sources, please.

He supported him by allowing his children to grow up under the influence of his "mentor."  A man who should be "mentoring" no one.

Really?  What, exactly, do you know about how much Obama and his family went to chuch, and how seriously they took it?  My understanding is that it wasn't even once a week.  Now, I think I'm in the same boat as you here - working off personal experiences and assumptions, but... I'll wager his kids impression of chuch would be, like the infrequent times me or my friends went - something boring to do for an hour.  I'll wager game-boy play was involved. 

And, if you think that's the only place black children would hear such things, I've got some news for you...

If Obama is willing to let his children be corrupted by such vile preachings of hate then I'd don't even want to know what he'd be willing to let happen to this country.  That speaks volumes about his character.

"preachings of hate".  Really?  Hyperbolic much?  It speaks exactly to his character that he was in a church that had all kinds of people, with all kinds of views, and he worked to be a unifying force in the middle. 

And - I enjoy the damned if you do, get a rope if you don't mentality - as soon as he does what the right wants, and cuts off the church, he's now accused of just doing it for politics.  I'll let you in on a secret - I got a copy of next week's Republican Talking Points - we're due to start calling him a Muslim again on Monday.

I'm still not impressed.

Michael Roberts wrote:  Thom Price wrote: One, I do not believe that Obama was unaware of these comments by Wright, even if he was not present when they occurred. I don't buy it. There is no way a pastor of a church can make such incendiary comments -- videotaped! -- and people aren't going to talk about it. People gossip. I'm barely in my office seat for 5 minutes when I have three people telling me all of the "dirt" that happened while I was away. Why would these comments be considered gossip within a black church?

Why wouldn't they be, Michael?  You seem to be saying that because it is a black church, and Wright (a black minister) said what he did to his black congregation, that it wouldn't be gossip. Nothing would be gossip because, why?  They're all black?  Reeeealy hope you're not going there. Growing up in a church, I don't know any congregation that a) all believes the exact same thing, and b) doesn't gossip.

Matt, if I can answer for Michael, since I agree with him, to be honest, what Wright said?  Isn't so shocking.  It's plenty shocking to a lot of suburban white folks and media types.  This is something I noted a few pages back - I heard the Wright comments and went, "yeah?  So what?  I've heard the same on the street and coffee shops for years.  There's no 'there' there."

Hell, the Chickens coming home to roost comment?  Malcolm X said that about JFK getting shot.  

That would be like people gossiping about the choir singing a song.