I haven’t had a chance to look into all of the items listed on here, but this might be a list worth looking into:
wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=106938
I think exaggerating or misleading others with regards Obama’s anti-religion views can do more harm than good, but, frankly, some of the things I have looked into about Obama et al. in the past have made my skin crawl.
One of the latest was this:
At a recent meeting between staff of the bishops’ conference and the White House staff, our staff members asked directly whether the broader concerns of religious freedom—that is, revisiting the straight-jacketing mandates, or broadening the maligned exemption—are all off the table. They were informed that they are. So much for “working out the wrinkles.” Instead,
they advised the bishops’ conference that we should listen to the “enlightened” voices of accommodation, such as the recent, hardly surprising yet terribly unfortunate editorial in America. The White House seems to think we bishops simply do not know or understand Catholic teaching and so, taking a cue from its own definition of religious freedom, now has nominated its own handpicked official Catholic teachers.
Where’s the puke emoticon?