Georgetown Says It Covered Over Name of Jesus to Comply With White House Request

[Donger]

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46667

(CNSNews.com) - Georgetown University says it covered over the monogram “IHS”--symbolizing the name of Jesus Christ—because it was inscribed on a pediment on the stage where President Obama spoke at the university on Tuesday and the White House had asked Georgetown to cover up all signs and symbols there.

As of Wednesday afternoon, the “IHS” monogram that had previously adorned the stage at Georgetown’s Gaston Hall was still covered up--when the pediment where it had appeared was photographed by CNSNews.com.

“In coordinating the logistical arrangements for yesterday’s event, Georgetown honored the White House staff’s request to cover all of the Georgetown University signage and symbols behind Gaston Hall stage,” Julie Green Bataille, associate vice president for communications at Georgetown, told CNSNews.com.

“The White House wanted a simple backdrop of flags and pipe and drape for the speech, consistent with what they’ve done for other policy speeches,” she added. “Frankly, the pipe and drape wasn’t high enough by itself to fully cover the IHS and cross above the GU seal and it seemed most respectful to have them covered so as not to be seen out of context.”

On Wednesday, CNSNews.com inspected the pediment embedded in the wall at the back of the stage in Gaston Hall, where Obama delivered his speech. The letters “IHS” were not to be found. They appeared to be shrouded with a triangle of black-painted plywood.

Pictures of the wooden pediment prior to Obama’s speech show the letters “IHS" in gold. Many photos posted on the Internet of other events at Gaston Hall show the letters clearly.

The White House did not respond to a request from CNSNews.com to comment on the covering up of Jesus’ name at Gaston Hall.

Georgetown, which is run by the Jesuit order, is one of the most prestigious Catholic institutions of higher education in the United States.

Roman Catholics traditionally use “IHS” as an abbreviation for Jesus’ name. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, “St. Ignatius of Loyola adopted the monogram in his seal as general of the Society of Jesus (1541) and thus became the emblem of his institute.” The Society of Jesus is the formal name for the Jesuits.

Although the monogram was covered over on the wooden pediment at the back of the Gaston Hall stage where it would have been directly above and behind President Obama as he spoke, the letters “IHS” are posted elsewhere around the hall approximately 26 times on shields representing different parts of the United States and the world.

Obama did not mention the name of Jesus during his address. However, he did mention Christ’s Sermon on the Mount.

“There is a parable at the end of the Sermon on the Mount that tells a story of two men…‘the rain descended and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house…it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock,’” Obama said.

“We cannot rebuild this economy on the same pile of sand,” he added. “We must build our house upon a rock.”

[BucEyedPea]

Why? I mean Obama sounds like Moses when he says things like:
“We must build our house upon a rock.”

Let the people build the house...govt should just be the referee.

[KILLER_CLOWN]

Why? I mean Obama sounds like Moses when he says things like:
“We must build our house upon a rock.”

Let the people build the house...govt should just be heavily monitored officials who serve the people.

FYP!

[stevieray]

Isis, Horus and...?

[petegz28]

Isis, Horus and...?

Superman!

[Jenson71]

Isis, Horus and...?

No.

[stevieray]

Superman!

Clark?

;)

[Mr. Kotter]

WTH? :rolleyes:


:shake:

[petegz28]

WTH? :rolleyes:


:shake:

No, not WTH....IHS.

[gblowfish]

Separation of chuch and state....shameful!

[SLAG]

Here is one Priest's take on the article

Source:
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2009/04/the-georgetown-cover-up/

Georgetown Says It Covered Over Name of Jesus to Comply With White House Request
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
By Edwin Mora

(CNSNews.com) – Georgetown University says it covered over the monogram “IHS”—symbolizing the name of Jesus Christ[actually just "Jesus", a Greek abbreviation] —because it was inscribed on a pediment on the stage where President Obama spoke at the university on Tuesday and the White House had asked Georgetown to cover up all signs and symbols there. [So, rather than risk that the President wouldn’t come, they covered up the name of THE SAVIOR.]

As of Wednesday afternoon, the “IHS” monogram that had previously adorned the stage at Georgetown’s Gaston Hall was still covered up—when the pediment where it had appeared was photographed by CNSNews.com.

“In coordinating the logistical arrangements for yesterday’s event, Georgetown honored the White House staff’s request to cover all of the Georgetown University signage and symbols behind Gaston Hall stage,” Julie Green Bataille, associate vice president for communications at Georgetown, told CNSNews.com. ["For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels." Mark 8:38]

“The White House wanted a simple backdrop of flags and pipe and drape for the speech, consistent with what they’ve done for other policy speeches,” she added.[So… they do this often?] “Frankly, the pipe and drape wasn’t high enough by itself to fully cover the IHS and cross above the GU seal and it seemed most respectful to have them covered so as not to be seen out of context.” [OUT.OF.CONTEXT… the Holy Name on display at a Catholic University… the "IHS" which is specially dear to the Jesuits.]

On Wednesday, CNSNews.com inspected the pediment embedded in the wall at the back of the stage in Gaston Hall, where Obama delivered his speech. The letters “IHS” were not to be found. They appeared to be shrouded with a triangle of black-painted plywood. ["Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." Philippians 2:8-11]

Pictures of the wooden pediment prior to Obama’s speech show the letters “IHS" in gold. Many photos posted on the Internet of other events at Gaston Hall show the letters clearly.

The White House did not respond to a request from CNSNews.com to comment on the covering up of Jesus’ name at Gaston Hall.

Georgetown, which is run by the Jesuit order, is one of the most prestigious Catholic institutions of higher education in the United States.

Roman Catholics traditionally use “IHS” as an abbreviation for Jesus’ name. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, “St. Ignatius of Loyola adopted the monogram in his seal as general of the Society of Jesus (1541) and thus became the emblem of his institute.” The Society of Jesus is the formal name for the Jesuits.

Although the monogram was covered over on the wooden pediment at the back of the Gaston Hall stage where it would have been directly above and behind President Obama as he spoke, the letters “IHS” are posted elsewhere around the hall approximately 26 times on shields representing different parts of the United States and the world. [But here someone else was given pride of place.]

Obama did not mention the name of Jesus during his address. However, he did mention Christ’s Sermon on the Mount.

“There is a parable at the end of the Sermon on the Mount that tells a story of two men…‘the rain descended and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house…it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock,’” Obama said.

“We cannot rebuild this economy on the same pile of sand,” he added. “We must build our house upon a rock.” [Which forces the question: What are the foundations of Georgtown University now?]

[Donger]

Perhaps Obama should have picked a different place to speak if this bothered him enough to cover up the name.

[RaiderH8r]

Speaking at a Jesuit School, that doesn't bother Barry O but with all of his education and intelligence he's startled to find that, at this Jesuit school, the name of Jesus Christ pops up from time to time. F'ing priceless. This is right up there with the Bill Ayers "I didn't know he was a Weatherman" insult to intelligence.

[Amnorix]

errr....the OP says that they requested that ALL school symbols, etc. be covered. And I'd imagine that it's standard operating procedure. Cloak all the institution specific stuff and just leave a flag and generic "US" stuff.

So feel free to calm down about all this. :rolleyes:

[KILLER_CLOWN]

errr....the OP says that they requested that ALL school symbols, etc. be covered. And I'd imagine that it's standard operating procedure. Cloak all the institution specific stuff and just leave a flag and generic "US" stuff.

So feel free to calm down about all this. :rolleyes:

Why should it be covered up at all? I mean you would expect to see such symbols where he was speaking? This has nothing to do with separation of church and state considering where he was.

[stevieray]

Why should it be covered up at all? I mean you would expect to see such symbols where he was speaking? This has nothing to do with separation of church and state considering where he was.

I think it's interesting to cover up His name, then turn around and quote His words...

[HolyHandgernade]

The Christian form of the Eucharist is very similar to the ritual that was practiced as part of the Greek Eleusinian Mysteries. The Eleusinian Eucharist honored both Ceres, goddess of wheat, and Bacchus/Dionysus, god of the vine. The Christians also adopted the Bacchanal symbol IHS (Greek) or IES - Iesu/Jesus. These letters stood for the sun.

The name, Jesus, comes from the monogram of Dionysus, "IES," "Yes" or "Jes," among others: Jesus, Jeosuah, Josias, Josue derive from two Sanscrit words Zeus and Jezeus, which signify, one, the Supreme Being, and the other, the Divine Essence.

Followers of Krishna shouted "Jeye" or "Ieue" during celebrations. "Ieue" is the same as both YHWH and "Jesus" as admitted by Clement of Alexandria, who noted that "the Savior" had been represented by the letters "IE," the same designation found applied to Apollo on his temple at Delphi.

-HH

[Mr. Kotter]

Separation of chuch and state....shameful!

He chose to appear there; no way appearing at a religious school in any, shape, form, or fashion constitutes "establishment of religion"...give us a friggin' break. Holy hell, as a nation we've become stupid. Really stupid.

:rolleyes:

[KILLER_CLOWN]

He chose to appear there; no way appearing at a religious school in any, shape, form, or fashion constitutes "establishment of religion"...give us a friggin' break. Holy hell, as a nation we've become stupid. Really stupid.

:rolleyes:

Other than Holy Hell being an oxymoron i agree.

[SLAG]

I would like for him to show up at a Muslim School and have them take down all Muslim References..

Or How about at a Jewish School or Hospital and have them take down the Menorah or Star of David.

I don't think we would see it happen, its not ok to offend them.. oh but the Catholic Christians, they have been throwing their religion under the bus themselves for the past 40 or so years so lets just trample on it a bit more

[HolyHandgernade]

Were you guys just as upset when they covered Lady Justice because her breasts were showing for an Ashcroft speech?

-HH

[Mr. Kotter]

Were you guys just as upset when they covered Lady Justice because her breasts were showing for an Ashcroft speech?

-HH

That was just as stupid.

[KILLER_CLOWN]

That was just as stupid.

yup.

[Dave Lane]

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46667

(CNSNews.com) - Georgetown University says it covered over the monogram “IHS”--symbolizing the name of Jesus Christ—because it was inscribed on a pediment on the stage where President Obama spoke at the university on Tuesday and the White House had asked Georgetown to cover up all signs and symbols there.

As of Wednesday afternoon, the “IHS” monogram that had previously adorned the stage at Georgetown’s Gaston Hall was still covered up--when the pediment where it had appeared was photographed by CNSNews.com.

“In coordinating the logistical arrangements for yesterday’s event, Georgetown honored the White House staff’s request to cover all of the Georgetown University signage and symbols behind Gaston Hall stage,” Julie Green Bataille, associate vice president for communications at Georgetown, told CNSNews.com.

“The White House wanted a simple backdrop of flags and pipe and drape for the speech, consistent with what they’ve done for other policy speeches,” she added. “Frankly, the pipe and drape wasn’t high enough by itself to fully cover the IHS and cross above the GU seal and it seemed most respectful to have them covered so as not to be seen out of context.”

On Wednesday, CNSNews.com inspected the pediment embedded in the wall at the back of the stage in Gaston Hall, where Obama delivered his speech. The letters “IHS” were not to be found. They appeared to be shrouded with a triangle of black-painted plywood.

Pictures of the wooden pediment prior to Obama’s speech show the letters “IHS" in gold. Many photos posted on the Internet of other events at Gaston Hall show the letters clearly.

The White House did not respond to a request from CNSNews.com to comment on the covering up of Jesus’ name at Gaston Hall.

Georgetown, which is run by the Jesuit order, is one of the most prestigious Catholic institutions of higher education in the United States.

Roman Catholics traditionally use “IHS” as an abbreviation for Jesus’ name. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, “St. Ignatius of Loyola adopted the monogram in his seal as general of the Society of Jesus (1541) and thus became the emblem of his institute.” The Society of Jesus is the formal name for the Jesuits.

Although the monogram was covered over on the wooden pediment at the back of the Gaston Hall stage where it would have been directly above and behind President Obama as he spoke, the letters “IHS” are posted elsewhere around the hall approximately 26 times on shields representing different parts of the United States and the world.

Obama did not mention the name of Jesus during his address. However, he did mention Christ’s Sermon on the Mount.

“There is a parable at the end of the Sermon on the Mount that tells a story of two men…‘the rain descended and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house…it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock,’” Obama said.

“We cannot rebuild this economy on the same pile of sand,” he added. “We must build our house upon a rock.”

Note highlighted bit...

[Dave Lane]

“The White House wanted a simple backdrop of flags and pipe and drape for the speech, consistent with what they’ve done for other policy speeches,” she added. “Frankly, the pipe and drape wasn’t high enough by itself to fully cover the IHS and cross above the GU seal and it seemed most respectful to have them covered so as not to be seen out of context.”


Please learn to read people. It was not Obama who even decided this JFC!

If they had left them showing you'd be on here saying he did it to refer to himself AS jesus

[blaise]

Separation of chuch and state....shameful!

Georgetown isn't a government building.

[Donger]

Does anyone know if Obama has made this request at other schools?

[Chief Henry]

Lets see the messiah go into a Muslim Mosque and try to cover it up.

[petegz28]

Separation of chuch and state....shameful!

you couldn't be more off base with that statelment.

[blaise]

you couldn't be more off base with that statelment.

No, it's correct. Every time Obama drives past a church the cross should be covered up too.

[mlyonsd]

Does anyone know if Obama has made this request at other schools?

No, but rumor has it he was very disapppointed when Emmanuel had to tell him the girls at Notre Dame don't wear plaid skirts with white knee high socks.

[HolyHandgernade]

I'd be disappointed too.

-HH

[patteeu]

Only when it suits him and serves his interests. Georgetown should feel the shame of Peter.

http://synthaetica.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/bat-obama-cross.jpg

[patteeu]

Were you guys just as upset when they covered Lady Justice because her breasts were showing for an Ashcroft speech?

-HH

That was stupid, but it wasn't insulting to a large group of people.

[patteeu]

No, but rumor has it he was very disapppointed when Emmanuel had to tell him the girls at Notre Dame don't wear plaid skirts with white knee high socks.

:LOL:

[SLAG]

It looks as if Notre Dame will be following Suit - covering up Jesus for when "The One" comes:

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_FHzhz1gm0TM/SedYaoswouI/AAAAAAAABrM/_CpRqFuW0_U/touchdownobama.jpg

[orange]

President Obama at Georgetown:

http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/assets/0/18/66/275/315/40730bab-d3f8-428d-9f5a-3bee00e598d2.jpg


A less important speaker for comparison (George Tenet):

http://www.thiefsden.net/archives/georgetenet1.jpg


... oh, and one other President at Georgetown showing a precedent for backdrops (MLK Day speech):

http://bagnewsnotes.typepad.com/bagnews/images/bush-on-mlk-day.jpg

[HolyHandgernade]

Only when it suits him and serves his interests. Georgetown should feel the shame of Peter.

http://synthaetica.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/bat-obama-cross.jpg

Was that a picture after he had been elected President?

[HolyHandgernade]

President Obama at Georgetown:

http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/assets/0/18/66/275/315/40730bab-d3f8-428d-9f5a-3bee00e598d2.jpg


Oh my God, that's horrible! I can see how that offends a greater portion of Americans! :rolleyes:

[orange]

Only when it suits him and serves his interests. Georgetown should feel the shame of Peter.

http://synthaetica.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/bat-obama-cross.jpg

This picture of course was from 2008 - CANDIDATE Obama didn't get the same say in his speaking arrangements as PRESIDENT Obama does - nor the same responsibility to be detached.

[orange]

Georgetown also defers to Presidents in their other venues.

President:

http://pro.corbis.com/images/BE070890.jpg?size=67&uid={a37a9508-15ac-4005-897c-343edb7cd08a}

non-Presidents:

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e372/tlthe5th/jesuits/RupertMurdochGivesSpeechChangesNews.jpg http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Politics/Pix/pictures/2006/05/26/BlairatGeorgetown372.jpg

[orange]

Oh my God, that's horrible! I can see how that offends a greater portion of Americans! :rolleyes:

Seems he didn't like the pulpit, either. Shocking to our friends on the right, no doubt.

[patteeu]

Was that a picture after he had been elected President?

This picture of course was from 2008 - CANDIDATE Obama didn't get the same say in his speaking arrangements as PRESIDENT Obama does - nor the same responsibility to be detached.

That picture is indeed from the campaign,... back when he had a strong political incentive to make voters think he was a Christian believer. That's what I meant when I said that he was more than willing to use this type of symbolism when it served his purposes.

If orange is saying that Obama didn't have the clout to cleanse the scene of offending Christian imagery when he was a candidate as he does today, I'd agree, but I don't think he wanted it cleansed then anyway.

[HolyHandgernade]

That picture is indeed from the campaign,... back when he had a strong political incentive to make voters think he was a Christian believer.

So you don't think he is a Christian believer?

-HH

[SLAG]

So you don't think he is a Christian believer?

-HH

I don't

[HolyHandgernade]

I don't

Because?

[SLAG]

Because?

Because

[HolyHandgernade]

Alrighty then.

-HH

[Pitt Gorilla]

I'm trying to figure out who is petty enough to let something like this bother them. I haven't come up with anyone yet.

[patteeu]

So you don't think he is a Christian believer?

-HH

No, I don't.

[WoodDraw]

I'm trying to figure out who is petty enough to let something like this bother them. I haven't come up with anyone yet.

These forums are awesome entertainment. People don't even read the articles; they just fly with the outrage.

[petegz28]

Because

Because, because, becasuse.......

Because of the wonderful things he does!!! :D

[ChiefsGirl]

These forums are awesome entertainment. People don't even read the articles; they just fly with the outrage.

IHS stands for Jesus? Is that something everyone knows except me? I don't remember that during my confirmation.

[petegz28]

IHS stands for Jesus? Is that something everyone knows except me? I don't remember that during my confirmation.

What does IHS on a Christian cross mean?
In: Christianity [Edit categories] [Edit]


Answer
I've searched on the web and read many possible suggestions for the acronym "IHS," but the most popular seems to be "Iesus Hominum Salvator (Jesus, Saviour of man) in Latin. The "I" instead of "J" seems to be because it is from the Greek "Iesous."


Answer
"IHS" as an acronym has had many words associated with it down through the centuries. It came into more common usage with the Roman Catholic Jesuits in the 1500's as it become their mantra. It has a Latin wordage which I don't remember, but the English translation captures the feeling of the Latin. "IHS" stands for "In His Service".

It was not on the original cross. It is most commonly placed at the feet of Jesus on the cross out of humility and reverence to the sacrifice.


New Answer
Starting in the third century the nomina sacra, or names of Jesus, were sometimes shortened by contraction in Christian inscriptions, resulting in sequences of Greek letters such as IH (iota-eta), IC (iota-sigma), or IHC (iota-eta-sigma) for Jesus (Greek I�sous), and XC (chi-sigma), XP (chi-ro) and XPC (chi-rho-sigma) for Christ (Greek Christos). Here "C" represents the medieval "lunate" form of Greek sigma; sigma could also be transcribed into the Latin alphabet by sound, giving IHS and XPS. Some of these Greek monograms continued to be used in Latin during the Middle Ages. Eventually the correct meaning was mostly forgotten, and erroneous interpretation of IHS led to the faulty orthography "Jhesus". Thanks to "answers.com"


Answer
IHS are the first 3 letters in Jesus' name in Greek. It reminds us that Jesus died on the cross for us and our sins. The three letters come from Jesus' name in Greek, they are the first three letters(iota, eta, and sigma). Also, some other meanings of "IHS" are, in Latin, "IN HOC SANCTIS", which means "in this sacred place", or, in English, "In His Service", or " I Have Suffered".



IHS is also attributed to the vision of Constantine, in which he saw the chi-rho and heard a loud voice cry out, "In this sign, you shall conquer." Thus, the phrase, "In hoc signo" (in this sign) is attributed to the acronym.

[WoodDraw]

IHS stands for Jesus? Is that something everyone knows except me? I don't remember that during my confirmation.

I'm sure more have no idea. Iota Eta Sigma are the first three letters of Jesus in Greek.

[Mr. Kotter]

I'm trying to figure out who is petty enough to let something like this bother them. I haven't come up with anyone yet.

I'm trying to figure out who is petty enough to let something like this inscription at Georgetown bother them. Lefties, Obama, liberals, and others are heading the list....apparently.

:hmmm:

[Pitt Gorilla]

I'm trying to figure out who is petty enough to let something like this inscription at Georgetown bother them. Lefties, Obama, liberals, and others are heading the list....apparently.

:hmmm:Did it bother him? I can't find any indication that it did. Apparently, the speaker/speaker group is allowed to set the stage. This happens with speakers all the time in higher ed, as I helped a lecture series speaker design his stage this past Tuesday. I don't think the periodic table behind him "bothered" him; he just wanted something else.

What evidence do you have that it actually "bothered" Obama?

[HolyHandgernade]

No, I don't.

How come?

-HH

[orange]

I'm trying to figure out who is petty enough to let something like this inscription at Georgetown bother them. Lefties, Obama, liberals, and others are heading the list....apparently.

:hmmm:

So wrong. Check out page three of this thread. The White House wanted a simple, uncluttered, secular, patriotic backdrop. They covered up a garish, baroque background - much, much more than the inscription this article mentions; and Georgetown was happy to oblige.

And as for "who is petty enough to let something like this inscription at Georgetown bother them," it is the CHRISTIAN NEWS SERVICE that thought this was worth a news story.

... and Donger who brought it to this board. I see no liberals aghast here.

[WoodDraw]

I'm trying to figure out who is petty enough to let something like this inscription at Georgetown bother them. Lefties, Obama, liberals, and others are heading the list....apparently.

:hmmm:

Georgetown University is saying that The White House made the request to cover all symbols around the stage but it’s important to point out at there are dozens of religious symbols in Gaston Hall and those were not covered up. Also, other still pictures from the event show portraits of Jesus in the background which are off center from the stage. In addition, I can tell you that it has been my experience on the campaign trail that advance teams do typically make backdrops as generic as possible. It’s pretty much standard fare to make them that way. Also, the fact that Georgetown University actually has a perfectly fit triangle piece to cover up the cross and monogram suggests that they have done this before at other events.

http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/581525.aspx

Run with the outrage!

[HolyHandgernade]

IHS stands for Jesus? Is that something everyone knows except me? I don't remember that during my confirmation.

Its also a borrowed Pagan monogram:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=5675284&postcount=17

[Donger]

So wrong. Check out page three of this thread. The White House wanted a simple, uncluttered, secular, patriotic backdrop. They covered up a garish, baroque background - much, much more than the inscription this article mentions.

And as for "who is petty enough to let something like this inscription at Georgetown bother them," it is the CHRISTIAN NEWS SERVICE that thought this was worth a news story.

Why did they want a secular backdrop while speaking at a Jesuit school? I suppose people will now be watching when he speaks at other locations with religious attachments.

[HolyHandgernade]

Why did they want a secular backdrop while speaking at a Jesuit school? I suppose people will now be watching when he speaks at other locations with religious attachments.

I'm sure Georgetown wanted him to speak there, and apparently, they have made the same arrangements for Bush Sr., yet nobody seemed to care then they turned a Jesuit school into a secular backdrop. Wonder why it's a big deal now?

-HH

[Mr. Kotter]

http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/581525.aspx

Run with the outrage!


Then why ask for anything at all??? :shrug:

:hmmm:

[orange]

Why did they want a secular backdrop while speaking at a Jesuit school? I suppose people will now be watching when he speaks at other locations with religious attachments.

It's clear that the backdrop was only for the cameras. Those in attendance were surrounded by Christian imagery.

Perhaps Obama intended his speech for MORE than just those in attendance. Y' think?

[Mr. Kotter]

...

What evidence do you have that it actually "bothered" Obama?

That he allowed his handlers to make such a petty request at all? :shrug:

:hmmm:

[Pitt Gorilla]

That he allowed his handlers to make such a petty request at all? :shrug:

:hmmm:I think I addressed the "petty" aspect fairly clearly; it is standard practice. Perhaps you should read my post again.

Hypothesis: I think one would have to be fairly predisposed to dislike Obama to be bothered by this at all.

[Donger]

It's clear that the backdrop was only for the cameras. Those in attendance were surrounded by Christian imagery.

Perhaps Obama intended his speech for MORE than just those in attendance. Y' think?

And why should he want the TV audience to not see the Christian imagery?

[HolyHandgernade]

That he allowed his handlers to make such a petty request at all? :shrug:

:hmmm:

Really, Mr. Kotter. I enjoy much of your banter, but is this really one you want to get associated with, it makes you appear less than balanced on the issue. Much ado about nothing, me thinks.

-HH

[Pitt Gorilla]

And why should he want the TV audience to not see the Christian imagery?Speakers often set/select their backdrops when giving talks. Is this really that difficult?

[HolyHandgernade]

And why should he want the TV audience to not see the Christian imagery?

Because its a Presidential speech for all Americans and not a sermon for some?

-HH

[orange]

And why should he want the TV audience to not see the Christian imagery?

Because he's not the church's President.

[Donger]

Speakers often set/select their backdrops when giving talks. Is this really that difficult?

Yes, I know. So why the backdrop and then throw the Sermon on the Mount in this speech?

[WoodDraw]

And why should he want the TV audience to not see the Christian imagery?

I'm sure there is some vast conspiracy behind it I'll leave to you to figure out.

He accidentally quoted scripture though, so he fucked that one up a bit.

Another set back for the vast, powerful anti-Christianity wing in this country. 44 non-Christian Presidents and counting.

[orange]

Because he's not the church's President.

... and he's not Georgetown's, either.

http://www.cbn.com/images5/cbnnews/politics/gtownbefore.jpg

[Mr. Kotter]

I think I addressed the "petty" aspect fairly clearly; it is standard practice. Perhaps you should read my post again.

Hypothesis: I think one would have to be fairly predisposed to dislike Obama to be bothered by this at all.

That, or maybe I reject your explanation. It is petty. Period.

I voted for him; still support him at this point. Just not sucking his schlong like some here.

[Pitt Gorilla]

Yes, I know. So why the backdrop and then throw the Sermon on the Mount in this speech?It could be that the choice of backdrop was not a choice based on religion. I thought I made that fairly clear.

[Mr. Kotter]

Really, Mr. Kotter. I enjoy much of your banter, but is this really one you want to get associated with, it makes you appear less than balanced on the issue. Much ado about nothing, me thinks.

-HH

Exactly my point. It was much ado about nothing to begin with. So why cover it?

[patteeu]

How come?

-HH

Because his parents were atheists, he was raised without religion, he didn't "find religion" until he realized that he was interested in politics, he chose a fairly loosey goosey (i.e. liberal) church that was as much political as it was religious and because that church was probably THE best church an up and coming black Chicago politician could find in order to meet/associate with the right people for career advancement. Oh, and if he went to church on Easter, I think it might have been the first time since he became POTUS. I think religion is part of what he does as a politician not something he does because he's a believer. It's impossible to know for sure, but that's the way I see it.

[Pitt Gorilla]

That, or maybe I reject your explanation. It is petty. Period.

I voted for him; still support him at this point. Just not sucking his schlong like some here.That's just it; you've provided no justification/evidence for rejecting an explanation based on common practice. What is your motivation for rejecting a very-likely explanation?

[WoodDraw]

He was giving a major economic speech, not a major religious speech. For those watching on TV at home, he probably didn't want giant Christian murals or Georgetown logos in the background.

[HolyHandgernade]

Exactly my point. It was much ado about nothing to begin with. So why cover it?

Don't know, who originally broke and put this slant on the story?

Here's what I do know, I get random right wing propaganda that absolutely love this stuff and flood email boxes to "prove" Obama is some sort of devil. I imagine it won't take long for this one to go out either.

"Paranoia, it'll destroy ya!
And it goes like this!"

_HH

[Mr. Kotter]

That's just it; you've provided no justification/evidence for rejecting an explanation based on common practice. What is your motivation for rejecting a very-likely explanation?

Because I dont' think that explanation, however "likely," is a good one.

It's a petty point, made more by his making it an issue at all IMHO.

[Donger]

He was giving a major economic speech, not a major religious speech. For those watching on TV at home, he probably didn't want giant Christian murals or Georgetown logos in the background.

Then why select a non-secular school as the venue for said speech?

[Pitt Gorilla]

Because I dont' think that explanation, however "likely," is a good one.

It's a petty point, made more by his making it an issue at all IMHO.1. He didn't make it an issue.

2. Why don't you think that explanation is a good one?

[Mr. Kotter]

1. He didn't make it an issue.

2. Why don't you think that explanation is a good one?

1. He made it an issue, by allowing his handlers to make such a petty request.

2. Because it shouldn't matter at all to anyone....except to hypersensitive politcally correct/atheist/secularist liberal types. Caving into to that is crap, IMHO.

[Mr. Kotter]

Then why select a non-secular school as the venue for said speech?

Yup.

[WoodDraw]

Then why select a non-secular school as the venue for said speech?

You're reading too much into the venue. You don't think Georgetown holds speeches on things not related to religion? I'm sure they invited him to speak, and as a premier university in Washington D.C., he accepted.

[Simplex3]

“The White House wanted a simple backdrop of flags and pipe and drape for the speech, consistent with what they’ve done for other policy speeches,” she added. “Frankly, the pipe and drape wasn’t high enough by itself to fully cover the IHS and cross above the GU seal and it seemed most respectful to have them covered so as not to be seen out of context.”


Please learn to read people. It was not Obama who even decided this JFC!

If they had left them showing you'd be on here saying he did it to refer to himself AS jesus

Give me a break. I could give a shit less about this whole thing but to pretend that Obama is in the clear because people he hired the people that did this instead of doing it himself is absurd. As their boss he is directly responsible for their actions/inactions.

I do find it curious that a President would choose to speak at a particular location and then demand that the location be disguised. That's just weird.

[HolyHandgernade]

Because his parents were atheists, he was raised without religion, he didn't "find religion" until he realized that he was interested in politics, he chose a fairly loosey goosey (i.e. liberal) church that was as much political as it was religious and because that church was probably THE best church an up and coming black Chicago politician could find in order to meet/associate with the right people for career advancement. Oh, and if he went to church on Easter, I think it might have been the first time since he became POTUS. I think religion is part of what he does as a politician not something he does because he's a believer. It's impossible to know for sure, but that's the way I see it.

Kinda like George Washington, although his father was a Deist but his mother was definitely a Christian. He became a Vestryman in the Anglican Church, because if you wanted to be involved in Virginia politics, you had to, though he always left for the eucharist except one time when he was admonished it set a bad example. So, he just stopped going to service on Sundays the eucharist was given as opposed to excusing himself before it was given. Although he never said anything against religion, and maintained appearances, he also never directly invoked a particular religion, only saying it was good for Americans to have that liberty. Obama and Washington, two peas in a pod. Oh, and then there was Abraham Lincoln.....

-HH

[Pitt Gorilla]

1. He made it an issue, by allowing his handlers to make such a petty request.

2. Because it shouldn't matter at all to anyone....except to hypersensitive politcally correct/atheist/secularist liberal types. Caving into to that is crap, IMHO.It's as though you're unable to comprehend.

1. It's not a petty request, unless 90-some percent of speakers' requests are to be considered similarly petty.

2. You still haven't provided a valid justification, but you probably knew that.

I'm off to teach, as I assume you must do at some point as well.

[orange]

1. He made it an issue, by allowing his handlers to make such a petty request.

2. Because it shouldn't matter at all to anyone....except to hypersensitive politcally correct/atheist/secularist liberal types. Caving into to that is crap, IMHO.

Once again, let us return to reality:

“In coordinating the logistical arrangements for yesterday’s event, Georgetown honored the White House staff’s request to cover all of the Georgetown University signage and symbols behind Gaston Hall stage,” Julie Green Bataille, associate vice president for communications at Georgetown, told CNSNews.com.

“The White House wanted a simple backdrop of flags and pipe and drape for the speech, consistent with what they’ve done for other policy speeches,” she added. “Frankly, the pipe and drape wasn’t high enough by itself to fully cover the IHS and cross above the GU seal and it seemed most respectful to have them covered so as not to be seen out of context.”


The White House requested "cover all of the Georgetown University signage and symbols." Georgetown University decided to cover the IHS "so as not to be seen out of context."

[Donger]

You're reading too much into the venue. You don't think Georgetown holds speeches on things not related to religion? I'm sure they invited him to speak, and as a premier university in Washington D.C., he accepted.

I'm sure they do. But this speech (sans the reference to the Sermon) was not religious.

[WoodDraw]

I'm sure they do. But this speech (sans the reference to the Sermon) was not religious.

Wasn't that my point?

[patteeu]

Kinda like George Washington, although his father was a Deist but his mother was definitely a Christian. He became a Vestryman in the Anglican Church, because if you wanted to be involved in Virginia politics, you had to, though he always left for the eucharist except one time when he was admonished it set a bad example. So, he just stopped going to service on Sundays the eucharist was given as opposed to excusing himself before it was given. Although he never said anything against religion, and maintained appearances, he also never directly invoked a particular religion, only saying it was good for Americans to have that liberty. Obama and Washington, two peas in a pod. Oh, and then there was Abraham Lincoln.....

-HH

I don't know the details of Washington or Lincoln's religious (or lack thereof) beliefs, but if what you say is true, then yes, kinda like that. I don't think that one characteristic is enough to warrant the "two peas in a pod" comment, but if we're focused narrowly on this one characteristic I won't quibble.

Since neither you nor I are believers, let's stipulate that it's OK to be a non-believer. What do you think the odds are that Obama is a non-believer given the background I've recited and the fact that there are strong incentives for him to claim to be a believer whether he is or not?

[HolyHandgernade]

I don't know the details of Washington or Lincoln's religious (or lack thereof) beliefs, but if what you say is true, then yes, kinda like that. I don't think that one characteristic is enough to warrant the "two peas in a pod" comment, but if we're focused narrowly on this one characteristic I won't quibble.

Since neither you nor I are believers, let's stipulate that it's OK to be a non-believer. What do you think the odds are that Obama is a non-believer given the background I've recited and the fact that there are strong incentives for him to claim to be a believer whether he is or not?

Well, I don't follow it that much, because it really doesn't matter to me. People can find religion at many points in their life, for example, was Michelle religious before she met Obama? Were his experiences as a community organizer powerful enough to embrace a religion? I don't know. I do know more Christians who say they are Christian, but rarely attend. I also know people who say they are Christians, but go to Church mainly as a social networking outlet. The truth is, there are so many definitions of what "being a Christian" is, that it would be awfully presumptuous of me to say "That person isn't". So, I take them at their word. Obama wouldn't be the first politician to pay religious lip service.

But, to say, "He isn't", would imply to me he has either stated such or has done actions to imply such. Reverently attending a competing religion's worship rituals would be such an example. Or, speaking on behalf of atheistic organization would be another. He certainly isn't a Christian in the same sense W was, but W wasn't the same Christian his father was, so I have no reason to doubt it.

-HH

[Donger]

Wasn't that my point?

It didn't seem like it. It just seems odd that they'd want/need to cover anything up. The backdrop looked fine to me.

[Sully]

I'm sure glad Obama didn't try to use the image of Jesus to add weight to what he was speaking about. Seems a very humble and Christian thing to do. This president seems far more Christian in his words and actions than any recent president.

[Amnorix]

Wow. So much ado about absolutely nothing.

[Direckshun]

Why am I not surprised Donger's involved in this clusterfuck?

Has he cared about a substantial subject at ALL in the last six months?

[Donger]

Why am I not surprised Donger's involved in this cluster****?

Has he cared about a substantial subject at ALL in the last six months?

Illegal immigration and a presidential election aren't substantial?

[Pitt Gorilla]

It didn't seem like it. It just seems odd that they'd want/need to cover anything up. The backdrop looked fine to me.Once again, you must not deal with speakers much.

[Jenson71]

The idea of covering up religious symbols for any reason of course makes the deeply religious person skeptical. You want us to what? Hide that? Hide the symbol of Jesus Christ? Uhh...??

There are a number of Catholics who are eager to see Catholic institutions stand up strong for something, mostly the faith that supposedly is their foundation. The question "Would you mind covering up the symbols for your university and those letters for Jesus?" should be met with a "**** yes we mind. We do not cover up the symbols of Jesus Christ here. I'm sorry, but the president will have to choose a different room or not be privileged enough to speak at our proudly Catholic institution."

It's not necessarily a Barack Obama problem, although of course to some it is (they wouldn't mind if Bush had asked to cover up the Catholic symbols, for example). It's more a problem of a Catholic university covering up Jesus Christ, very much like giving a pro-abortion bureaucrat an honorary award.

[FishingRod]

I wasn't there and can't read minds. If Obama and his staff wanted Christian stuff covered up because they don't like Christians, well that is bigoted and sad. That being said, if one assumes that to be true it is the Georgetown folks that are the real pussies here. This is the sort of stuff, like bowing to the Saudi King is just another invitation his opposition is going to jump all over his perceived "un-American-ness"??. Strangely the administration continuously giving this kind of ammunition could be perceived as arrogance or just his inexperience and naiveté about how Washington actually works. I think it is a bit of both.

[Adept Havelock]

Because it shouldn't matter at all to anyone(if his aides requested all symbols be covered)....except to hypersensitive theologically correct/religious/conservative types. Caving in to that is crap, IMHO.

FYP. ;)

[patteeu]

I'm sure glad Obama didn't try to use the image of Jesus to add weight to what he was speaking about. Seems a very humble and Christian thing to do. This president seems far more Christian in his words and actions than any recent president.

Yes, Obama would never do that.

http://synthaetica.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/bat-obama-cross.jpg

[Ultra Peanut]

Only when it suits him and serves his interests. Georgetown should feel the shame of Peter.

http://synthaetica.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/bat-obama-cross.jpgActually, what you did by posting that image multiple times was show that there is literally no way he can please you reactionary douchebags. You fucktards are apoplectic about him when he avoids religious imagery and when he's in the presence of religious imagery.

[Donger]

Actually, what you did by posting that image multiple times was show that there is literally no way he can please you reactionary douchebags. You ****tards are apoplectic about him when he avoids religious imagery and when he's in the presence of religious imagery.

I don't see anyone getting apoplectic. It's just an interesting situation. Not unlike Obama's choosing not to place his hand over his heart during our national anthem.

[patteeu]

Actually, what you did by posting that image multiple times was show that there is literally no way he can please you reactionary douchebags. You ****tards are apoplectic about him when he avoids religious imagery and when he's in the presence of religious imagery.

I've already explained what I did by posting that image. Clearly he's willing to appear with religious images when he perceives a political benefit and cover them up when he doesn't need them. That ought to be something that both ****tards and non-****tards can understand.

Besides, regarding your "literally no way he can please" comment, this isn't a case of avoiding religious imagery, it's a case of wiping it out of the picture. He could have easily given this speech at a different location and avoided the problem altogether.

[jAZ]

Now this deserved it's own thread.

[Sully]

Yes, Obama would never do that.

http://synthaetica.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/bat-obama-cross.jpg

When he was campaigning and telling us who he was, and using his faith as a backdrop to some of his beliefs, then the cross is an apt symbol.
Setting policy in front of religious symbols would make me uncomfortable as a believer, though.

[mlyonsd]

If anyone is naive enough to not think the WH covering up the symbol was done so the image of Obama with it couldn't be used by the likes of Al Jazeera or the Taliban to undermine his administration I have a bridge I'm looking to sell. Just fixed up by stimulus dollars I might add.

[WoodDraw]

That other picture is from a church. ROFL

Yeah, that's the same thing as giving an economic speech at a college.

It's also worth mentioning again that Obama never asked them to cover up the cross. They asked that all Georgetown signage and symbols be covered up, and the school included the cross on their own to avoid giving it undue placement or weight or whatever.

[WoodDraw]

If anyone is naive enough to not think the WH covering up the symbol was done so the image of Obama with it couldn't be used by the likes of Al Jazeera or the Taliban to undermine his administration I have a bridge I'm looking to sell. Just fixed up by stimulus dollars I might add.

Uhm, why wouldn't "Al Jazeera or the Taliban" just use a different picture of him with a cross? Or a picture from this same event from a different angle that shows biblical scenes all around him?

Can I sell the bridge back to you?

[mlyonsd]

Uhm, why wouldn't "Al Jazeera or the Taliban" just use a different picture of him with a cross? Or a picture from this same event from a different angle that shows biblical scenes all around him?

Can I sell the bridge back to you?

First off, your check for buying it the first time hasn't cleared.

Second, if there were biblical scenes all around him why go to the trouble of covering up just one with black painted plywood?

I admit though that my thinking was damaged by your post. I could be wrong. Yea, I got nothing.

[WoodDraw]

First off, your check for buying it the first time hasn't cleared.

Second, if there were biblical scenes all around him why go to the trouble of covering up just one with black painted plywood?

I admit though that my thinking was damaged by your post. I could be wrong. Yea, I got nothing.

For TV. While a few hundred might be watching in the audience, a few million will see the clip on TV. These people don't know where Obama is speaking from. Having American flags and a plain blue background with a cross hanging above it would be a offsetting to everyone watching at home. As would huge religious murals all around him. Obama knows this, his advance team knows this, and apparently Georgetown knows this.

These kinds of arguments make the serious issues of religion and religious tolerance look silly. Thankfully, I don't think too many people outside of Chiefsplanet are talking about it. But still, jeeeeze.


As for the check, I'm still waiting for my stimulus money to clear. Ted Stevens devastating loss has put a bit of a damper on the bridge business.

[|Zach|]

The drama.

[jAZ]

The drama.

It's rather wonderful that this is the level of (un)objectionable behavior that leads Donger to venture back in.

It's a sign of the lack of anything substanative to object to, I guess.

[|Zach|]

It's rather wonderful that this is the level of (un)objectionable behavior that leads Donger to venture back in.

It's a sign of the lack of anything substanative to object to, I guess.

Yes, I would like nominate Mr. Kotter as best supporting actor in this drama. His portrayal of a clueless school teacher trying to manufacture a point of view that makes sense was the stuff dreams are made of.

[Velvet_Jones]

Isis, Horus and...?

I Got it - it's Eddie.

[Donger]

The drama.

I don't see anyone being dramatic on this thread, do you?

[StcChief]

Georgetown should tell WH/ Obummer admin to forget the speech. stay home.

[orange]

Followup Time:

I'm trying to figure out who is petty enough to let something like this inscription at Georgetown bother them. Lefties, Obama, liberals, and others are heading the list....apparently.



And as for "who is petty enough to let something like this inscription at Georgetown bother them," it is the CHRISTIAN NEWS SERVICE that thought this was worth a news story.

... and Donger who brought it to this board. I see no liberals aghast here.

http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/581525.aspx

Run with the outrage!

Don't know, who originally broke and put this slant on the story?

Here's what I do know, I get random right wing propaganda that absolutely love this stuff and flood email boxes to "prove" Obama is some sort of devil. I imagine it won't take long for this one to go out either.


Wow. So much ado about absolutely nothing.

I don't see anyone getting apoplectic. It's just an interesting situation. Not unlike Obama's choosing not to place his hand over his heart during our national anthem.

Actually, what you did by posting that image multiple times was show that there is literally no way he can please you reactionary douchebags. You ****tards are apoplectic about him when he avoids religious imagery and when he's in the presence of religious imagery.


These kinds of arguments make the serious issues of religion and religious tolerance look silly. Thankfully, I don't think too many people outside of Chiefsplanet are talking about it. But still, jeeeeze.


I don't see anyone being dramatic on this thread, do you?


Vehement Reaction to Obama Georgetown Cross Story
David Brody - Christian Broadcasting Network News White House Correspondent

April 17, 2009


Brody File readers are swamping me with emails. They have a thing or two to say about the whole Georgetown cross story. More on the story here. Just some of the vehement reaction below: Rev. Patrick Mahoney, a pro-life leader nationwide says this:

"In 32 years of public ministry, I have never seen a President of the United States show such complete contempt and disrespect for faith. This action by the White House should appall and anger every American who cherishes sacred traditions...especially Christians.

"The fact that the Obama White House would ask a Catholic University to cover up a sacred symbol of Jesus to provide a better backdrop for his speech shows that President Obama has no understanding or respect for sacred expressions of faith.

"The image that the Obama team portrayed during the campaign of Mr. Obama being a man of deep faith, understanding and tolerance is now completely in tatters. It is stunning and shameful that anyone would ask a Christian institution to cover up a public expression of Jesus just so they could have a better background for a televised speech. This is not a person who respects or cherishes faith.

"What's next Mr. President, covering up the baby Jesus at Christmas events?"

More from Brody File readers below:

From Megan:

Obama is completely disrespectful to the American Christian community. Why even have his speech there at all? Why not have it at a City Hall? Try asking him to do that to a muslim mosque. They would not put up with him.

From Joyce:

If Obama is not comfortable speaking on a platform with the cross of Christ, he should not use the Georgetown facilities. If GU is comfortable hiding the cross for any reason - they should publicly renounce their heritage, their foundation and their faith basis. They should tell the world who Georgetown really is - an apostate of the faith or a beacon of hope established in faith

From Alan:

As for covering up the logo, I think it is much ado about nothing. When I read your first article, I was at first a bit put off by the White House staff's "apparent disregard" of the IHS symbol. But, it is merely an adapted nickname for Jesus, particular to the Jesuits. It stands to reason that they would be offended, but, I, as a follower of Jesus not connected with the Jesuits, am not offended. The staff meant and did no harm.

From Elizabeth:

Shame! on President Obama for making such a request! Shame! on Georgetown University for complying with such a request!

From Pastor John:

The monogram of Jesus (IHS), the first three letters of Jesus' name in Greek, is not simply a "Catholic" symbol as your story states. It is a traditional CHRISTIAN symbol, found in most, if not all, traditional Protestant churches as well. I am a Presbyterian minister, and every church I have ever served has the Monogram in many different places, such as on the Cross, on the pulpit and lectern antependia, on banners, etc. This is also true of every United Methodist, Episcopal, and Lutheran church I've ever been in. The Monogram of Jesus is also on one of my preaching stoles. We inscribe the Monogram on our Communion bread every week before it is baked. What the Obama administration has done is not simply an affront to Roman Catholics: it is an affront to all Christians. The White House ordered that the Name of Jesus be covered up. Please make this clear: it is not simply Catholics who should feel slighted here. All Christians, Catholic, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox, need to stand together in these times.

From Kate:

I want to thank you for your balanced coverage on this matter I am a stage planner and it doesn't seem to be a situation where they wanted to "cover up" religious symbols, etc. After all, the place is full of these and there is that pic with Christ's outstretched arms behind him. I'd also like to note that there are many Christians who feel symbols, pictures, icons, etc., are not appropriate for the Church (universal and local) or Christians. However, in this case, it's a matter of backdrop with nationalistic symbols and NOT Christian symbols - plain and simple. He wasn't there to preach but as president. Keep up a fair and balanced reporting.

From Tammy:

It is what it is, the cross is usually there, Obama spoke it wasn't there, I don't know who they are trying to fool, but I am not buying it.

From Steve:

Georgetown or any other Catholic University should never compromise its doctrine for anyone President or not. Compromise is not an option in the Catholic faith. Either you are a catholic or your not, there is no gray area or middle ground. Being A catholic is a choice but you can't pick and choose what parts of the catholic doctrine you wish to follow. It is time the so called Cathloics in this country take it or leave and quit trying to change it to conform to their misguided wordly views.

Comments?

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/582388.aspx


Clearly it's the "Lefties, Obama, liberals, and others" that are petty enough to let this bother them.


p.s. Obama at Georgetown 2006 - pre-President

http://www.georgetown.edu/images/main/20060920_obama.jpg

[HolmeZz]

It's a good thing the country's in such great shape. I'd hate to miss out on discussion of important matters such as this. I can't even begin to imagine how much different my life would be right now if Obama had just used a different background for a speech Obama gave at Georgetown that nobody would've been aware of otherwise.

These things matter.