A censored topic

Submitted by SiliconDoc (United States), Jan 14, 2008 at 14:15

It appears to me very clear that Obama's childhood included Muslim religious training, that is not in doubt. I found it not surprising when you related, E.D. Smith, that Redstate had censored your comment, and violated their own TOS by leaving commentary calling you names, practicing a standard below what they demand of their posters. I'm afraid the moral codes of that site are enforced in only one direction, the leadership there has forgotten to check their own behavior. Not a conservative mindset it is a serious problem that has gone unaddressed there for some time. It will only assist their liberal opposition, and continue to decay their position in the public's eye.

That type of problem appears to be the standard by which Obama's upbringing shall be judged by too many of the powers in media, one whereby they will accuse the questioning and concerned, and instead of substantiating their apparently uninformed and sometimes draconian dismissal, simply be happy with silencing retaliation. At other times, they will will nitpick on one word or idea to dismiss the entirety of the inquiry.

The article here by Mr. Pipes made some interesting points on possible consequences I hadn't thought of, and others posting added to those thoughts. I have to say I appreciate this situation very much, as I'd rather not be uninformed or duped while spending so much time investigating my choices.

I plan to not be voting for anyone I consider to be a non-traditional Christian. I quite understand the Constitution says "no Religious test shall issue" - but that restriction is on the Government, not on me as a voting US Citizen, and that is something those quoting the Constitution should consider. The Constitution restricts the powers of the Government, so they cannot be used against the populace as a whole. I, as a voting US Citizen, cannot refuse the right of any person based on their religion to hold office, but I MAY indeed use my personal opinion in my single secret ballot. This is not a violation of the Constitution if I choose to do so, and the "rule" is my fellow US Citizens may also utilize their individual discretion in such a fashion. The Government, however, may NOT.

It is clear Obama has his chance to obtain another office, and has not been barred by a religious test, he must acquire the votes from the Citizenry to hold another office term. They may refuse to vote for him, for any reason whatsoever, the Constitution does NOT declare the reasons allowed to Citizens in their vote.

Freedom is NOT restricting oneself, while pretending to maintain yourself as the "Government Agent " who tells others for what reasons they may or may not vote for a candidate in the secret ballot. My fellow Citizens should be aware of that, and NOT bamboozled by overblown and incorrect opinions.

In this sense I certainly appreciate this article greatly, and see it has taken courage and a sharply precise intellect to write in this present news and blog environment, and appreciate your attempt as well Mr. E.D. Smith, to add to this line of discussion elsewhere.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".