U.S. President Barack Obama leads mourners in singing the song "Amazing Grace" as he delivers a eulogy in honor of the Rev. Clementa Pinckney during funeral services for Pinckney in Charleston, S.C., on June 26, 2015. Pinckney is one of nine victims of a mass shooting at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church. Photo courtesy of Reuters/Brian Snyder

The Obama presidency: 'War on religion' or 'Amazing Grace'?

WASHINGTON (RNS) He had done it before, after Tucson, Aurora, Fort Hood and Sandy Hook: taken on the mantle of the pastor-in-chief before a crowd of mourners for lives taken too soon by a man with a gun.

But when President Obama stood among African-American bishops in Charleston, S.C., to eulogize the minister slain with eight of his flock after welcoming the stranger to their Bible study, what he did was unlike anything he'd done before.

After eulogizing the Rev. Clementa Pinckney and discussing the moral and spiritual dimensions of racial hatred and gun violence, the president broke out into the first stanza of “Amazing Grace,” bringing the overflow crowd in Charleston's TD Arena along with him.

"It was like — wow. Wow," said Bishop Vashti McKenzie, who was standing just behind Obama when he spoke at the June 26, 2015 funeral.

McKenzie, who heads the African Methodist Episcopal Church's General Board, said the speech was an answer to those who questioned if this president -- who some had thought was reticent about his faith and about his role as the nation's first black president -- was a Christian.

“It reminded us that he is a man of faith,” the bishop added. "And it said a lot for his faith and it said a lot to the faith community.”

[ad number=“1”]

But aside from that noteworthy moment, the 44th president has had successes and failures in calming the nation’s culture wars.

“It’s been a mixed legacy” for both sides of a divided country, said former White House staffer Michael Wear, author of the forthcoming book “Reclaiming Hope: Lessons Learned in the Obama White House about the Future of Faith in America.”

One of Obama’s earliest executive orders kept open the doors of the Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships started by his predecessor George W. Bush under a slightly different name.

Over the course of eight years, beneficiaries of government-funded religious social services have won greater religious liberty protections and an interfaith college initiative has grown to include hundreds of campuses involved in service projects.

His advisory councils of religious and secular leaders have included transgender, Sikh and evangelical members, and have promoted goals such as eliminating poverty, preventing lead poisoning, and improving relations between communities and law enforcement.

But the administration also maintained a rule that has roiled church-state separation activists because it allows government-funded religious organizations to hire based on faith.

It was a rule Obama had promised to change.

“If you get a federal grant, you can’t use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can’t discriminate against them — or against the people you hire — on the basis of their religion,” he said in 2008.

For the Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, it was a big disappointment.

“There’s no question that the worst provision, the worst policy contained now in both the Bush setup of the program and the Obama continuance of it was this absolutely indefensible permitting of discrimination by religious recipients of tax dollars,” he said.


RELATED: Obama exempts religious groups from contraception mandate


Some of those who favored maintaining that hiring rule were concerned when he signed a 2014 executive order providing sexual orientation and gender identity protections to LGBT employees of companies that do federal government work.

“They make it more murky because here are categories that overlap significantly with religion,” said Stanley Carlson-Thies, senior director of the Institutional Religious Freedom Alliance. “So where is the line that can be drawn on that?”

Obama’s support of reproductive rights brought out his fiercest critics on the religious right.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins wrote in December that with half of U.S. states permitting elective abortion as part of the Affordable Care Act, it is "failing millions of pro-life Americans who don't want their taxes subsidizing insurance that covers the brutal killing of innocent unborn babies.”

Republican nominee Mitt Romney, who Obama defeated in 2012, accused the president of starting a “war on religion” with the ACA's contraception mandate, which has prompted some 100 lawsuits by religious opponents.

[ad number=“2”]

On gay marriage, Obama cited his faith as he shifted his position to ultimately supporting it. “(I)t's also the golden rule, you know? Treat others the way you'd want to be treated," he told ABC News.

The transition was hailed by religious progressives but posed a dilemma for others, including many in the black church community.

African-American clergy praised the expansion of health care to the uninsured as well as the My Brother’s Keeper initiative, which provided mentors for many black and Latino boys.

But "there was heartache in many corners" over the president's switch on same-sex marriages, said McKenzie, whose AME Church does not sanction them.

On Islam, Lynn of Americans United credits Obama for distinguishing between most Muslims and terrorists who claim to be defending the faith.

“I think that his efforts to make it clear that you cannot blame an entire religion — Islam — for the acts of some people who at least claim an affiliation with that — those are very powerful statements,” he said.

Despite talking about his belief in the birth, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus at prayer breakfasts, Obama couldn’t seem to shake the notion in some Americans’ minds that he was a Muslim. As recently as 2015, more than a quarter of U.S. residents — and 43 percent of Republicans — surveyed said they thought he was.

Wear, an evangelical Christian who worked in the faith-based office, said he and other White House staffers at times fielded emails — even one about rumors that the president was holding Muslim prayers on the South Lawn — from people questioning the president’s faith.

But, as in the case of his Charleston eulogy, when the president chose to speak about his faith, those were remarks people remembered — and wished his opponents had noticed.

“I always thought, boy, if certain critics of the president would just hear what the president said without knowing who it was, they would say I wonder if this is so-and-so preacher that I really admire,” said Carlson-Thies, referring to Obama's words at Easter prayer breakfasts the president hosted at the White House.


RELATED: Obama at last prayer breakfast: ‘We heal hatred with love’


Infrequent churchgoing also prompted questions.

Wear, who early on scoped out possible churches for the first family to join, said the decision not to have a Washington congregational home prevented an ongoing “logistical nightmare” for any church that might have been chosen.

“Folks take pictures and are Snapchatting while the first family’s trying to take Communion,” he said, recalling a visit to a historically black Baptist church in Washington where tourists lined up at metal detectors and displaced stalwart members used to attending each Sunday.

[ad number=“3”]

Over the course of his presidency, Obama welcomed religious figures to the White House. He took counsel from spiritual advisers from his first faith-based office director, Joshua DuBois, to Florida megachurch pastor Joel Hunter, and found private worship through the chapel and the chaplain at the Camp David presidential retreat.


RELATED: Obama’s spiritual Cabinet shapes policy, tends his soul


On inclusiveness, he was the first president to include “non-believers” in an inaugural address, to light the diya, an oil lamp that symbolizes good overcoming evil during the Hindu holiday of Diwali, and to issue a statement on Vesak, a day honoring Buddha.

And despite the hiring rule and the debate over Obamacare's handling of abortion coverage, legal expert Douglas Laycock said the president's administration mostly worked to lift up religion's place in society.

At last year's meeting of the Religion News Association, he cited examples such as the Justice Department siding with the town of Greece, N.Y., whose sectarian prayers were affirmed by the Supreme Court, as well as supporting churches in zoning battles and prisoners’ rights cases.

“They’ve been right on religion and right on religious liberty more often than they have been wrong,” said Laycock, of the University of Virginia School of Law. “And however you characterize the scorecard, it is nothing like a war on religion.”

Comments

  1. Seven Simple Questions about Religious Liberty and Civil Rights:

    1.) Is faith more important than mercy?

    2.) Is it virtuous to claim offense for what strangers do in their private lives?

    3.) When you offend their spiritual/existential values, is that as profane as they they offend yours?

    4.) Do you fathom their hearts, minds, souls, aspirations, motivations, character, and worthiness?

    5.) Do they get say-so over your life, your rights, your freedoms, your body, your bedroom, your spouse?

    6.) Do they get to hold you to their religious or nonreligious beliefs, requirements, and restrictions?

    7.) What of their Religious Liberty?

  2. Take another look at the top photograph, the one in which Obama is standing at the national AME Church podium with all the bigwigs. Lovely dazzling church robes, with matching colors. They had access to President Obama’s ear (most Americans don’t).

    They could have spoken up, back in 2012. and told Obama that AME Church support would be conditional on Obama stopping his public Legalized Gay Marriage crusade and instead standing up for biblical male-female marriage like he used to. Other black churches could have said the same thing. Simply help black churches fight back a little, specifically put your huge legal and media clout AGAINST gay marriage instead of FOR gay marriage, in exchange for grateful Christian votes.

    But we black folks didn’t challenge Obama at all. We were willing to compromise our beliefs, sell our Christian souls, and let people spit on our Bibles, in exchange for political/economic gain. It felt good having “one of us” in the White House, we loved that black pride, we hated those white Republicans, and we loved how Obama kept telling us what we wanted to hear.

    So we were willing to betray our own Bibles (just a few verses, that’s all), and betray our own Jesus Christ (just a little bit, mind you), to keep the good times going. The rest, they say, is history.

  3. Based on the previous 3 comments I would answer thus: (1) The civil courts of America recognize gay marriage legally and practically, however it is my belief based on scripture that God does not recognize it morally and spiritually, but as there is nothing new under the sun, I’m prepared to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and render unto God what is God’s, and am prepared for what I believe will be the long term negative consequences for this nation as a result. The Bible makes it clear that the rejection of a host of behavioral and attitudinal prerequisites from God is the default response of human character. I will not personally approve, but I will not hate. If I thought the American people would favor the rollback of gay marriage I would thus cast my vote, but intuitively I do not expect it. (2) I certainly wouldn’t class Mr. Obama as among the best presidents we have known, nor would I class him as the worst. (3) Faith and Mercy are handmaidens not mutually exclusive. As to privacy, I have to trust God for what I cannot see and would rather not know (this covers a plethora of issues). Offenses are bound to come to all of us, sadly; would that we could stand for what we believe without offense though that is a difficult balancing act for anyone. Religious liberty that does not put any one at risk, except potentially the individual practicing it, ought to be the standard. It seems obvious that all varieties of theology cannot be correct.

  4. Barak Obama’s major accomplishment in the area of religion was to politicize it more completely than anyone had before him–or is likely to after he’s gone. More egregious than “praise the Lord and pass the ammunition,” he unabashedly made religion subservient to his political agenda to give his proposals a spiritual glow. His was the essence of corrupt and dishonest communication.

    It only worked for a short while. The American people responded by handing him huge defeats in the Congress as a way of countering this dishonesty, and they certainly didn’t elect Hilliary Clinton for a “third Obama term!”

  5. 20 million people who have health coverage, Osama Bin Laden is dead, Ford Motors is still alive after an economic meltdown caused by conservative deregulation, Iran dismantled its nuclear program. So many bad things! /sarcasm

  6. Allowed marriage to be profaned, millions of babies murdered in the womb, paid ransom to terrorists etc.

  7. Actually they did by almost 3 million votes. It was the electoral college which didn’t.

  8. Thank goodness for that. Most African-American people are not so hateful and stupid to want that to have happened.

  9. I call bull on all of this. Marriage was never “profaned;” fetii are not babies, and the last is a lie from hate radio and faux News.

  10. Or does it? “Correctness” and “theology” go together like “correctness” and “music.” Any God worthy at all of the title surely knows that.

  11. Civil marriage isn’t a subject for your religious views. It is not Obama who made marriage equality a thing. It was bigots who violated the 14th Amendment with gay marriage bans and the courts which struck them down. If not for the bigots literally making it into as federal court issue, apathy would have prevented marriage equality on a national level.

    Obama didn’t do anything with abortion laws either. But the courts recently struck down unconstitutional restrictions on the procedure. Restrictions which doubled the number of maternal deaths in Texas.

    As for ransom to terrorists, it shows your ignorance of facts. The US called Iran’s bluff on the nuclear issue. Beligerance would have played into the Islamicist regimes hands. (Reactionaries really like doing the bidding of terrorists inadvertently)

  12. No, no, yes, we should, no, no, and we need some but not what the political spinmeisters are calling “religious liberty” laws which are nothing more than licenses to be jackasses. religious liberty means your church service is not interrupted by paramilitaries firing rounds in your sanctuary. It does not have anything to do with bigots who do not want to make wedding cakes for people they hate.

  13. Wise up my hoppity friend! The electoral college is the system we use for electing presidents. Everyone understood the game going in, and conducted their campaigns accordingly.

  14. President Obama has been a far better defender of religious liberty than either of the Bushes or Reagan, and certainly better than what we can expect of his improperly selected successor. Obama opposed restricting the rights of conscience of women on reproductive health issues and opposed the diversion of public funds to religion-connected private schools. — Edd Doerr

  15. Sabelotodo no sabe nada. Sabelotodo is dead wrong. The vast majority agree with Obama’s defense of reproductive freedom of conscience and his opposition to having taxpayers forced to pay for church-run private schools. — Edd Doerr

  16. Heterosexuals like Gingrich, Limbaugh, Frank Schubert, Ted Haggard, Hastert, Long, Alveeda King, Larry King, the catholic Church with its annulments, Ronald reagan, Certain Graham Children and grandchildren, and a host of others profane marriage constantly. Some of them are even professional Christians.
    That doesn’t stop them.

  17. I like that Ben, “professional Christians.” It’s certainly apt. Can I use it, if I don’t forget?

  18. Obama has done much better than recent predecessors in honoring his faith while doing the same for the US Constitution.

  19. Agree with you there. However, Obama had opportunities to change this but instead he supported the perversions. He made it worse.

  20. The court lied to us on multiple levels. There is no right in the Constitution for same sex “marriage”. The justices made that up. Also these “marriages” are not real marriages but fakes because they fail the test of a marriage. A marriage requires a husband and a wife. Only a man can be a husband and a woman a wife. Without this, you don’t have a marriage.

  21. No, you simply don’t understamd the facts they were in play nor the concepts behind the decision. Bigots banned a right to marriage without providing a rational and secular purpose behind it. So it got struck down. “Judges made that up” is cretinspeak for “I can’t reasonably justify my position and don’t understand judicial review”. Your ignorance on the subjects makes any reasonable discussion impossible.

    There is nobody to blame besides the politicians you support who were so malicious to enact gay marriage bans. As to prevent popular votes from permitting it. Had there been no bans, there would be no cases. It’s all the fault of people like you.

    As to your opinion as to real marriages, I couldn’t give a crap. Civil laws especially those dealing with personal liberties are not controlled by whatever religious belief you have.

  22. You have reading comprehension issues. I laid out the facts with homosexual “marriage” on a legal and logic basis. You may enjoy being lied to but I don’t.

  23. Funny how people wrecking their marriages is bad, but people wanting to stand up in front of their churches, families, and societies and affirming the value of marriage…

    Makes it all worse.

    Someday, you’ll get over your hate-on and stop this spiritual masturbation.

    Maybe.

  24. Imitation is the sincerest form of plagiarism.

    St. Oscar Levant.

  25. That is what you call it? Looks like ignorant whining to me.

    You appear to lack a baseline knowledge of the subject from the start. You attributed it to Obama despite having nothing to do with it. It didn’t get any better from there.

    There is no point to continue. There are too many facts you need to learn about to get you up to speed.

  26. No disrespect, but your statement there is not making rational sense.

    For example, Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life, and no person comes to the Father except through Me” in John 14:6.

    Well, that theological claim makes clear that some key theological claims of other major world religions are necessarily and unavoidably wrong, if John 14:6 is correct. Hence Edward would be correct.

  27. No. He did not state a dogma, he only described his grace. The Pharisees and those like them developed dogma.

  28. Of course, that goes without saying. The EC was a compromise at the constitutional convention like the 3/5 rule and needs to be abolished for the same reason.

  29. this is laughable. A term means what it means until it doesn’t. Marriage doesn’t require two or more of the opposite sex anymore.

  30. Marriage is defined and sanctioned by the state. No church or minister is required.

  31. “Religious freedom” = legal cover (and taxpayer funding) to mistreat other human beings and deny them their rights and liberty, particularly the people they hate. See: Evangelical Christians and GLBT people.

    Kind of ironic – the Obama’a who model faithfulness in marriage and have a good marriage and family are vilified and spit on (thankfully just figuratively) by Evangelicals. But Tump, a serial adulterer, with a self-professed hedonistic life, who values women based on their looks, and who’s made a mockery of marriage is praised and supported to the hilt. See: Evangelicals who sold their integrity and soul to the GOP.

  32. And you think you don’t have any dogma? Then you don’t even know yourself. We all do dogma, and you’ve done plenty, as have I.

    But that leads to a question: Is your core dogma really true, or are you gambling your current & final destiny on a lying dogma?

  33. I dunno, are you?

    I guess you can call the Golden Rule dogma, technically. But all the bull hockey about the ebil homrseptuals and abolishing public education is the bull hockey kind of stuff dogma really is.

  34. Except your example is baloney while Her Leftness’ statement is factual.

  35. You did not mention: 1) Obama’s executive orders against over 1,500 Catholic healthcare facilities fining them over $ one million each for not paying for the abortion pill in their healthcare plans 2) Obama’s other executive order against Catholic hospitals and Catholic doctors forcing them to perform sex change operations which is against their religious beliefs. The Catholic Church does not permit the castration of young children or adults as Obama’s orders require.

  36. Well, firstly, the subject is whether Obama was good or bad for religion, not whether he had the slightest thing to do with killing Bin Laden (other than to not prevent it from happening) or whether the Iranians came out behind the eight-ball or in front of it, which the very arguably did. When Obama had the USA abstain from the anti-Israel, anti-reality vote at the UN Security Council very recently, he allowed…by not using his veto…the UN to literally declare that the Jerusalem…THE JERUSALEM…of the Jewish Bible…AND…THE JERUSALEM of the Christian faith’s Bible to be rendered nothing short of nonsense. How’s that for whether Obama was good or bad for religion. NOT sarcasm.

  37. “not whether he had the slightest thing to do with killing Bin Laden (other than to not prevent it from happening)”

    It was a military mission, as Commander in Chief, it was on his watch. We give credit to managers whose subordinates act in a successful manner. This is no different. To try to take that away from Obama is a bit childish and petty.

    “whether the Iranians came out behind the eight-ball or in front of it, which the very arguably did.”

    Iran’s nuclear program was already a shambles between assassinations of scientists and Stuxnet. The ramping up in their rhetoric coincides with the collapse of their effort. No nation which has successfully sought nuclear weapons has ever announced their enrichment capacity to the world. They just hide the very expensive and time consuming enrichment effort underground until the big test when the issue becomes moot. Iran was bluffing. America called the bluff. Nobody had to explode.

    ” When Obama had the USA abstain from the anti-Israel, anti-reality vote”

    The settlements are a colonial holdover from prior attempts to ethnically cleanse the West Bank. They serve little purpose for Israel outside of placating religious extremists. Even the IDF is fed up with defending them. We are at the point where there needs to be serious talk about the borders of a two state solution. Especially since the Arab/Israel conflict has become a superfluous sideshow. The real relevant conflict in the Middle East right now is the Saudi/Iran proxy war which has been more or less playing out since 1980.

    I take Christian views of Jerusalem with a heavy dose of salt worthy of the Dead Sea. The prevailing fundamentalist Christian view is that Israel only exists “to keep the lights on for when their Messiah comes” and little else. Much of the view is rather backhanded towards its actual residents.

  38. The search for Bin Laden was initiated long before Obama became President. He kept the search going without ANY additional resources after he was elected. So…he didn’t screw it up so I suppose he deserves some recognition for that. As to Iran, I’m afraid you are living in a stark dreamland if you believe even a fraction of what you’ve written about Stuxnet and the assassinations of some nuclear technicians. But that isn’t a big surprise because anyone who sincerely believes the Obama presidency hasn’t be a huge dud (to be kind) has to ignore reality and rationalize just about any success that an imagination can come up with.

  39. Mr Obama has been terrible on Christians, except just maybe Black Christians

    and that is one f the many reasons HRC running for Mr O’s 3rd term, lost, to a man who is personally quite at odds with Christian piety

  40. You are getting pathological in trying to keep credit for OBLs death away from the commander in chief at the time. It’s simple. It happened on his watch. As for Iran, it appears you probably need to read a little about it outside the wingnutsphere. The assassinations of the Iranian scientists was well documented from actual news sources. The stuxnet stuff was revealed to the public more or less by accident. It was apparently designed to wreak havoc on uranium enrichment centrifuges Iran was using. A full fledged cyber weapon. Nothing dreamy about them. Just wild stories which were actually well supported. Your reaction denoted a dismissive ignorance on the subject.

    It isn’t technology which limits nuclear weapons production, it’s supplies. U-235 and Pu are expensive, time consuming and difficult to produce. Nuclear blackmail is far easier and cheaper than actual weapons.

    Obama wasn’t horrific. Certainly not as bad as his opponents were claiming. But he was a bit too accommodating to political opponents who had no interest in responsible governance. Case in point, the delay on affirming the replacement of Scalia was a shameful and deliberate dereliction of duty by the Senate.

    Trump has already done more to hamstring the hard line Republican agenda by accident than Democrats could do on purpose.

  41. Listen, Spuddie I know you think the Internet was invented for the singular purpose of giving you a place to spew baseless personal opinion. And, I suppose it can be used by folks like you for that purpose. But, try for a moment to keep your feet on Mother Earth. This thread was intended to address the question of whether Obama was good or bad for religion. It seems like too lofty a question for you so you never addressed that issue AT ALL. Take a deep breath, look back on your postings here, and you’ll see that you have a mental agenda and you couldn’t care less about the issue that the other people here are concerned about. You want to talk Stuxnet. Well, if you know the slightest thing about that matter, you’d know that it’s effects on Iran’s nuclear ambitions was to do nothing much more than to inconvenience them and they are well past its effects, which in the long run did very little to so much as slow them down much, even if it did make for a good news story. Your ability to blindly advocate for Obama as you do, conceding, begrudgingly that his sole fault was being too accommodating to his political opponents. Well, you’re haste to defend Obama even there misses the entire reality of his soon to be dislodged presidential proclamations designed to bypass Congress that he resorted to in numbers that dwarfed any previous President. Good gosh, Man…I don’t think you’re really qualified to comment on the Internet.

  42. If all you are going to do is fling poo, find someone else to talk to. The bullshit insults which pass for discussion by from Breitbart refugees are ridiculous.

    Editing out your long insane tirade the closest thing you came to presenting a fact has been to say a glorified “nyuh huh” rather than offer facts or assertions of your own. You are boring and fairly uninformed.

    Well you got the president the asked for. Someone who has taken the word cretin to levels unseen.

    Now feel free to do eff yourself. You clearly have nothing worth responding to.

  43. No, it was not. It was then and is now a necessary measure to prevent the largest states from steamrolling over the smaller and more rural states. Clinton only won the popular vote because of lopsided votes in favor of her in NY and CA. Take those out of the equation, and Trump wins the popular vote by the same margin as Clinton. We’re a Federal republic — that means the people in each state get a say — not just those in NY and CA.

  44. Really? So suing Little Sisters of the Poor to force them to act against their faith makes Obama a “better defender of religious liberty”? Ignoring the religious beliefs of private businesses and forcing them to provide abortificents, contrary to those? No, you can make all the arguments you want to justify your love for Obama — but “better defender of religious liberty” is just laughable.

  45. That’s your effort to bound other people’s religious liberty in a way that conforms to your anti-religion, statist biases. In fact, the First Amendment was created exactly to protect people of faith from people like you trying to use Government as a club against religious groups you hate.

  46. Wrong. It’s the Little Sisters and some private employers who are trying to impose their religion on others.

  47. Tut, I’m very pro-religion, but opposed to using it as an excuse to hate. People have a right to believe what they want to believe. The First Amendment is indeed created to protect people of faith from discrimination, like Native American peyote users, but that mean old statist Antonin Scalia didn’t think so. That was an exercise of religion. Refusing to serve customers because of the group they belong to however is not an exercise of religion, but of commerce.

  48. Music of any true aesthetic value has rules of rhythm and pattern, it is ordered, mathematical, and precise. Otherwise it is just cacophony, as is demonstrated by many forms of modern American “music.”

  49. I see. So you advocate political correctness in music. Duly noted.

  50. Baloney. Those 80-20 margins in West Nebraska and East Tennessee are just as pronounced as those in Blue Oases. This “federal republic” bull feathers is precisely why this country is ruled by a minority of racists and plutocrats.

  51. That’s a ridiculous assertion. Prior to the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, Jersualem was a divided city between Israel and Jordan. The nonsense that Israel has a right to conquer because of de bibel is just stupid. If that’s what “religion” requires, then it reveals the uselessness of such nonsense.

  52. Perversions? Oh, I see, so marriage equality shouldn’t exist because it makes you feel icky.

  53. No. Its a perversion because homosexual “marriages” are not real marriages. They lack essential characteristics that are necessary for a marriage to exist. That essential characteristic is that you must have a husband and a wife to have a marriage. Only a man can be a husband and a woman a wife. Without this you don’t have a marriage. Even a court can change this fact. The courts have perverted marriage and Obama supported them.

  54. Well, I know what I value and like, I wouldn’t frame it as political correctness because I don’t personally assail the artists, nor try to censor their works.

  55. Go find another job! A feminist employer shouldn’t have to pay for boob jobs.

Leave a Comment