What role did religion play in President Obama’s politics?
Generally, socialists following in the traditions of Marxism reject religion (“the opiate of the masses”) outright. The Obamas’ personal adoption of Christianity was ostensibly for political purposes, since Marxist atheists are not usually good candidates for the U.S. presidency. Actually, the president’s religious inclination, if non-religious interest or sentiment can be so characterized, quite apparently belonged to Islam. President Obama has spoken openly and ardently in praise of Muslim culture; there were, however, few signs of religious devotion in his emotional attachment to Islam. Of course, his father’s dreams were Muslim and according to Muslim beliefs everyone is born Muslim and remains so unless they join some “infidel” religion. The President doubtless identifies with the faith of his father; he clearly had no grasp of Christian doctrines in spite of his joining Reverend Wright’s congregation.
In any case, I am convinced that his Christian affiliation was a purely political expedient for his presidential aspirations. When he did join a congregation, it was clearly politicized. Reverend Wright tipped his hand in the first Obama presidential campaign when he publicly spoke out for “black liberation theology,” which is an offshoot of Latin American “liberation theology,” a movement of Catholic Marxists in Latin America. Reverend Wright’s radicalism, viewed during Obama’s first presidential campaign, clearly appealed to the president.
Did Obama wish to generalize human rights?
One of President Obama’s most pressing social policy concerns was to secure civil rights for the LGBTQ community. It was surprising that the LGBTQ community gained formal and legal recognition so quickly in the United States. Sodomy laws were perfectly acceptable to Americans from the founding of the colonies until the Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence v. Texas in 2003 that it is unconstitutional to bar consensual sex between adults, calling it a violation of the 14th Amendment. The Judeo-Christian tradition basically condemned homosexuality for about four thousand years. One would think it might take more than a decade or two to convince Christians to bestow full “civil rights” upon the LGBTQ community, for Christians have always read in the Bible that homosexuality, like adultery, is unacceptable to God.
It does seem to most of us that any moral issue involved in homosexuality should be between God and the homosexuals. Regardless of His views of people’s particular activities, God has commanded all people to love one another and to leave the issue of theological judgment to Him. He has required of Christians to love all men while attempting to flee from human frailties. My personal belief is that the LGBTQ community, appropriately endowed with civil rights, should also recognize the rights of Christians freely to practice their religion as mandated by the U.S. Constitution. The consensus seems to be that all should enjoy the right to practice what they believe, so long as that does not impinge upon the rights of others.
Why Even Bring Up Non-Economic Issues in Socialism?
The purpose of this blog is merely to acknowledge that human rights are a highly important issue for socialists or progressives, as for us all. I speculate that it currently plays a role larger than it otherwise might if socialists had some effective economic policy to promote. The long book I wrote on socialism is really focused on economics and does not address either the issues of Islam or of social policy, although I am greatly interested in the interplay between socialism and personal freedom and in the issue of human rights for the unborn. But these problems are not belabored in my book, which focuses, as indicated, more on economic issues.