America Bows To Muslim Monarchy

America Bows To Muslim Monarchy
by Ted Slater on 04/09/2009 at 9:49 AM

"It wasn't a bow. He grasped his hand with two hands, and he's taller than King Abdullah." So says an aide to U.S. President Barack Obama.

Of course, the videos clearly show that President Obama in fact did bow -- deeply -- before the King of Saudi Arabia last week, offering him an embarrassing deference no President has ever given a foreign leader in our entire history as a nation.

A few days later the President explained, "We have to change our behavior in showing the Muslim world greater respect." His bow may have been an awkward manifestation of that "respect," or it simply could have revealed his extraordinary ignorance of protocol.

In the words of a Washington Time editorial,

By bending over to show greater respect to Islam, the U.S. president belittled the power and independence of the United States. The bow was an extraordinary protocol violation. Such an act is a traditional obeisance befitting a king's subjects, not his peer.

To be frank, after the surreality of the past couple of months, I'm not surprised by our President's symbolic gesture of submission to the "Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques," protector of the two holiest cities of Islam, Mecca and Medina. Whether this submission is the result of intentionality or ignorance, I can't say.

Or maybe there's a less bewildering explanation: Perhaps President Obama thought there was a teleprompter mounted in the floor.

Politics | Mail This | Share on Facebook

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

1. Jacob M. said the following at 9:59 AM on Apr 9:

I fully agree that for the President of the USA, a country founded by the act of rejection of monarchy, to bow before a monarch, and an Islamic one at that, is disgraceful. However, I'm genuinely interested in knowing whether Ted is similarly critical, as I am, of George W. Bush and his, uh, bromance with Abdullah.

2. Gordon said the following at 10:23 AM on Apr 9:

Ted-

If the president had bowed to the Chinese leader (as is customary in many Asian nations) would you have the same things to say?

3. obewan said the following at 10:32 AM on Apr 9:

Gee, would it have been better if he had offended him with a gross insult? Maybe if he had thrown his shoes at him Ted would have had something good to say about Obama for a change.

4. Samaria said the following at 10:32 AM on Apr 9:

Ted, is your problem with the fact that Obama bowed or is it with the fact that he bowed to a leader that happens to be devoutly Muslim? I ask this question with all serious intent. Somehow, I don't think you would be quite as horrified if Obama had bowed to a Christian monarch (say, Queen Elizabeth II).

5. Adam Thompson said the following at 10:39 AM on Apr 9:

"Perhaps President Obama thought there was a teleprompter mounted in the floor."

Ha. So you watch NewsBusted, too, eh?

6. Ted Slater said the following at 10:41 AM on Apr 9:

Why are many of you resorting to hypothetical questions (*if* he had bowed to the Chinese leader, *if* he had thrown shoes, *if* he had bowed to some other national leader)?

The truth is that no U.S. President has **EVER** bowed to a head of state. Until now. And the head of state to whom the U.S. President bowed was not Chinese, was not the Queen of England ... but was a Muslim man whose title is "Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques."

Let's discuss facts, not hypotheticals.

7. Adam said the following at 10:42 AM on Apr 9:

Not quite sure which is worse... a bow that is a little deeper than normal or basically meeting to beg for more oil.

8. Stephanie said the following at 10:44 AM on Apr 9:

The ridiculous explanation is what makes it seem suspicious. This actually didn't bother me much at first - whether the bow was or was not a violation of protocol or whether it was a possibly misguided attempt to be overly courteous -- there are bigger issues to discuss. But then the White House should have just said which it was instead of coming up with a stupid explanation that now leads people (rightly so) to wonder.

This leads to an interesting discussion though - if someone bows to royalty of a different country, which has a non-Christian religion, does that mean you embrace their religion? Japanese people bow to each other and to their royalty and some American dignataries have done so when visiting - does that mean by doing so one is in agreement with Japan's religious views?

As an aside, I grew up in a British commonwealth and as a kid I didn't like the bowing and curtseying thing, although sue me, I like the British royal family.

9. Ted Slater said the following at 10:45 AM on Apr 9:

Adam Thompson (#5) -- nope, I, um, borrowed the concept from an online forum I visited earlier today. :-)

Adam (#7) -- you really see no meaningful difference between one President petitioning Saudi Arabia to produce more oil to support our largely-oil-based economy ... and another President bowing in submission to that same foreign leader? Seriously? Or are you just being silly?

10. Dan Gill said the following at 10:45 AM on Apr 9:

President Bush holding hands with Prince Abdullah was using a cultural gesture that is common in the Arab world, one that is used between equals.

Bowing in an Asian culture is something both do as a greeting and a sign of respect.

Bowing as President Obama did is obeisance. Not bowing would have been no disrespect, simply what would have been expected of the President of the United States. The President should not bow to any monarch. Period.

11. Stephanie said the following at 10:52 AM on Apr 9:

Ted - please calm down and don't be easily offended. We discuss hypotheticals because they help to illuminate the position one is taking and they also help even the asker to examine their position. So they do aid in examining the facts that actually exist. It is a common way to reason and inquire about someone's position.

By the way, I posted another comment (#8 above) in which I asked a similar question to the other folks here - funny thing is I didn't see their questions until I had posted mine because I was typing while their questions were being posted.

12. Some Dude said the following at 10:52 AM on Apr 9:

"Or maybe there's a less bewildering explanation: Perhaps President Obama thought there was a teleprompter mounted in the floor."

ZING!

13. Charity said the following at 10:59 AM on Apr 9:

Yes, even if it was merely a gaffe, it is far more serious than if the bow had been directed toward a Christian, secular or westernized leader. Why? Because the cultural contextualization of a U.S. President bowing to an Islamic leader has far reaching consequences. I doubt the King of Saudi Arabia (who is used to unbelievable deference from many western leaders, including our former President)thought much of the bow, but it is not his opinion that concerns me. The way the bow, a weighty gesture within Islam, will be interpreted by the broader Muslim community is much more disconcerting. To radicals and true fundamentalists it most likely will be viewed very differently---- as another symbol of the soon-coming victory of sharia over democracy, Islam over Christianity and Allah over Christ. By not recognizing that much (though not all) of the Islamic world views themselves in an apocalyptic struggle with Christianity and the west is to be unnecessarily and dangerously ignorant of the culture, manners and worldview of an important segment of the world's population.

14. Lissa said the following at 11:01 AM on Apr 9:

Like Ted said, regardless of whether not this was a fopaugh or intentional its a big deal. I believe God did not see this gesture as haphazard in the least. It meant something.

We are not a muslim nation, nor should we ever bow to another ruler who proclaims such things... think about the story of Daniel or others in the Old Testament. You do not bow to foreign Kings who are against God's decrees... especially a man such as this... one who represents the very core of the Muslim world.

I have no issue with showing respect. We are called to do that and to pray for leaders and those in authority, but its a whole different ball game when you submit yourself to their authority.

15. Chantel said the following at 11:17 AM on Apr 9:

Why can't you say ANYTHING good about Obama?

16. obewan said the following at 11:18 AM on Apr 9:

And what? Is the speculation about the teleprompter not a hypothetical? I was trying to inject a little humor for a change with the shoes bit.

17. anon said the following at 11:23 AM on Apr 9:

#14 "fopaugh" Please. It's "faux pas" Obviously, you've never studied French.

Well, it was a mistake alright, but in addition to what has already been said, King Abdullah is indeed the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques. I've read from more than one source where he has instructed his subjects not to bow to him, "The faithful bow ONLY to Allah." So, not only was President Obama wrong to bow to him, but even citizens of Saudi Arabia are not supposed to bow before their king, because he is the servant of Allah, and only Allah is worthy of worship.

18. Louise from Chicago said the following at 11:28 AM on Apr 9:

I remember in 1981 there was some contraversy when then First Lady Nancy Reagan failed to curtsy to the British royal family.

She was present in London for the wedding of the Prince of Wales.

19. Mrs. Spit said the following at 11:32 AM on Apr 9:

For a point of reference, it is always unacceptable to touch the British Monarch. It's simply not done. Yet both former president Bush and Mrs. Obama have done so. Violating such protocol requirements treats the office of the Monarch with contempt, whether such contempt is intended or not.

The question that really matters is about whether or not a leader should show the appropriate respect to an authority that they aren't subject too. Put another way, ought former President Bush and Mrs. Obama have behaved in accordance with custom, or however they felt like? Should we treat the institutions of another country with respect, even when we disagree?

Perhaps it comes down to playing nicely in the sandbox, treating others with courtesy, respect, and yes, deference, because they are leaders, even if we disagree with both their faith and the way they govern their countries. To me, treating leaders with respect, even when you don't like them is the mark of being an adult. It's about respecting the office, even if you don't like the office holder.

It is incumbent upon a protocol officer to advise a sitting leader of the appropriate forms of greeting, when dealing with a foreign leader. It is a mark of respect to treat the leader in accordance with their customs, not American ones. It is truly arrogant to dictate that the sitting President treat a leader in accordance with American customs, to make American citizens happy. The President has a greater job to do than making American's content. The American people elected him to do a job, perhaps it would be best to let him get on with it.

It seems to me that it showed great humility on the part of the US President, to great a foreign leader in accordance with the customs of his country, rather than compelling a foreign leader to make-do with the customs of the US. That's grace and respect, not submission.

Frankly, if there was a fault, it lay in the protocol officers' court, who should have told the President what was expected of him. That's what a protocol officer does. After Mrs. Obama's shameful behaviour with the Queen, I'd think the Office of the President would be better served asking themselves why they aren't following the protocol officers' direction, or if they are receiving incorrect advice, finding another such officer.

20. Josh said the following at 11:37 AM on Apr 9:

I want to ask, sincerely, why we as Christians should care about this at all.

21. Rachael said the following at 11:39 AM on Apr 9:

If it is indeed protocol that American presidents shouldn't bow to other leaders of other countries, I think it would be an okay thing to change, if the bow is just taken as simply ordinary respect (like, for example, "how are you?" or "what's up" without really caring about how the person is or what really is up). Was the bow in this case not a symbol of respect? Even IF not, perhaps it was simply an innocent mistake. We all make mistakes.

I'm not highly into politics, but I think it could be kind if leaders would greet one another respectfully according to the customs of the local land just simply from a standpoint of authority, even if they totally disagree with the policies (though if the person was like Hitler then maybe not bowing could be acceptable?).

Hmmm...to bow or not to bow. That is the question.

22. Rachael said the following at 11:43 AM on Apr 9:

As for the aide who tried to cover up for Obama...maybe that aide didn't really get a good look at the action before sharing his/her thoughts. Perhaps it was an immediate defensive reaction without really checking out the facts first. Or maybe they have bad vision and lacks attention for detail...maybe they were tired and their mind was wandering...maybe they didn't really realize what they were saying...or maybe they just plain lied. Kind of embarrassing for them.

(them=him/her. It's 'mendokusai' to write him/her and I think it's about time for the English language to officially and prescriptively change in this respect.)

23. BDB said the following at 11:45 AM on Apr 9:

Americans DO NOT BOW. Period.

Especially not to the King of OPEC.

As America's founders said, No King but Christ.

24. Joe T said the following at 11:47 AM on Apr 9:

Most of these comments are just ridiculous. Changing the subject to President Bush or attacking Ted for being too anti-Obama doesn't say anything about the fact that Presidents don't bow. Period. The fact that he had just spent the previous week apologizing for America and that the King is a Muslim only makes the matter worse. Evangelicals who decided to support Obama despite his record on abortion or his ambivalence toward faith issues should rightly be reconsidering how wise of an action that was.

25. BDB said the following at 11:48 AM on Apr 9:

In fact, in Colin Powell's book, he explained the careful protocool involved when an American is Knighted by the Queen of England, which is indeed a high honor.

The American never bows. They shake hands. They also don't have the medal placed around their neck while bowing, it is handed to them in a box.

President Obama, himself black, should have read Colin Powell's book, himself black.

26. Rachael said the following at 11:50 AM on Apr 9:

Stephanie wrote: "does that mean by doing so one is in agreement with Japan's religious views"

I would say no. And I think Japanese religion to a lot of people is ceremonial/cultural/traditional. Yes they bow, yes they can be religious. Yes, there are many traditions and expectations. But it is my impression, which could be wrong, that for most Japanese people the religion is not as much a part of the heart as Christianity is to born again believers.

But you will see them pray at temples...but do they know who they are praying to or is it a traditional wish? I wonder if for many it's something like crossing your fingers.

I do tend to think that more Asian people born in Asia may believe in ghosts more frequently than Americans, but then again I haven't discussed that topic with many Americans. So perhaps people with Buddhist/Shinto type of leanings/traditions can be more open to the supernatural world than non-religious people in America.

But I digress...and have to go...

27. khalil said the following at 12:10 PM on Apr 9:

I agree with BDB, #23...

Americans do not bow. For all intent and purpose Obama is the peer of any other world leader he should encounter, royalty, elected, or whatever. There should be a civil exchange but there should be no assumption or expectation that we should bow to another leader or government.

It doesn't matter to me one way or the other if the dignitary Obama prostrated himself before was Muslim...it all goes back to not bowing, period.

28. Tom said the following at 12:24 PM on Apr 9:

To expand on what Ted said in #6, in Arab cultures it is quite common to see men walking down the street holding hands. I've seen it in every Arab country I've visited: Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE, and Jordan.

It's an expression of friendship, nothing more.

29. Adam said the following at 12:27 PM on Apr 9:

Obama bowed to the Queen - not to the same extent - but he did. Bush bowed to receive a medal from King Abdullah which is against protocol.

If Saudi Arabia quit supplying oil to the US, it would bring this country to its knees.

While I would still argue that the US is the world's greatest superpower, we are not independent. We borrow trillions of dollars from other countries - such as China.
--
Ted, perhaps I don't see Obama's bow as one of submission. Perhaps I see Bush's repeated "petitioning" of the same King as worse because it demonstrates that America was at the mercy of Saudi Arabia. Obama was greeting another leader at a summit. Bush was playing the role of Oliver Twist when he walks up and says, "Please sir, I want some more."

Was Obama wrong? Yes. But looking at the recent history of this country, it seems like a minor mistake.

30. Rosemary said the following at 12:32 PM on Apr 9:

I miss the old boundless. The good old common sense articles that helped me as a 30 something year old believer embrace marriage and start a family. Why all the incendiary articles? I know you are trying to stir up conversation but does it have to be so brutal? If the man doesn't know he should be taught. He should have an army of special advisers telling what is acceptable or not. He doesn't know it all. Maybe write an article in the newspaper to educate him and not lamblast him on Boundless .
Thank you

31. brx said the following at 12:37 PM on Apr 9:

Re: anon [#17], Josh [#20];

"The faithful bow ONLY to Allah." So...

Good points and implication. So, we followers of Christ should be praying as commanded. 'LORD, please give president Obama your wisdom and guide his heart to be right with you, that he may not seek to be a manipulator of men and nations but a servant of your greater Kingdom, in Jesus' name.'

Grace, peace & radical hospitality

32. BDB said the following at 12:37 PM on Apr 9:

The worst part is that King Abdullah no doubt knew that Obama messed up. Colin Powell used to play tennis with him when he was U.S. Ambassador as Crown Prince. There's some entertaining stories - such as how the crown prince can simply stretch out his hand and bring it back with a Coke in it.

This particular King has been slowly introducing reforms in Saudi Arabia, including trying to address some of the issues with how women are treated. There's still a long ways to go.

33. Samaria said the following at 12:40 PM on Apr 9:

It doesn't matter to me one way or the other if the dignitary Obama prostrated himself before was Muslim...it all goes back to not bowing, period.

This - the fact that Obama has bowed - is the real issue we should be concerned about.

[I say the following because the current post and comments (and others in past blog posts) have led me to believe that a cruel attitude toward Islam exists here.]

Who cares if a leader is not a Christian? I must say this: a lot of us here need to deal with our tendency toward religious bigotry. It is a shame that it seems that so many of us here seem to think that Obama showing respect and partership (albeit in the wrong way) and extending a friendly hand to Muslims is horrific and disgraceful. Despite any religious differences between Christians and Muslims, we ought not to dismiss and discourage peaceful coexistence with Muslims. This world is theirs as much as it is ours, and unless we'd rather breed needless, thoughtless hatred and suffer the consequences of it, we ought to respect Islam.

After all, isn't that what you'd like in return? One can't expect respect and understanding if one does not give it.

The first thing we learned in preschool was to be nice. We ought not to forget that lesson.

Respectfully,

Samaria

DISCLAIMER: I, in no way, support terrorism.

34. Ted Slater said the following at 12:46 PM on Apr 9:

Adam (#29), thank you for making your position clear:

You think it's worse for the U.S. to deal respectfully with a trade partner than for its President to bow deeply before their king. And you think that bending the neck to receive a medal is equivalent to bowing deeply in obeisance to the Saudi king.

Whose faculties are clouded by President Obama-related emotions, I wonder.

35. BDB said the following at 12:46 PM on Apr 9:

And to address Rachael's comments on Japan more specifically - when peers bow to each other in Japan, as I understand it, the lower-rank person bows first, and it is returned.

But peers will maintain eye contact and will bow to the same level. Wha disturbs me is that President Obama bowed LOWER than the King, and clearly broke eye contact. That is what makes it a sign of subservience.

In Cambodia, for example, a common greating and thank you is to put both your palms together and bow slightly. But you maintain eye contact and are not bowing below the head level of the other person if you return the greeting. If anything, you are mirroring their actions.

But Americans do not bow to monarchs.

36. brx said the following at 12:48 PM on Apr 9:

This idea of bowing

reminded me of a short video presentation redarding the current growth of nations and peoples' projected position in the world.

37. pass the ammunition said the following at 12:52 PM on Apr 9:

BDB: Yes, as a Black person I make it my life duty to read every single book written by other Black people. I'll pass the memo on to Obama, he must not have read the "How to be Appropriately Black Handbook by Anonymous White Man we all get at birth.

38. Cassandra said the following at 12:55 PM on Apr 9:

Josh #20

I want to ask, sincerely, why we as Christians should care about this at all.

Dr. Ransom, where are you? We need your gentle parody!

Personally I'm not as concerned about the bow (although maybe I should be, I dunno) as I am about the White House lying about something we can see the evidence of with our own eyes. It's insulting. I know this is a stretch, but I happen to be reading 1984 at the moment, and it reminds me of Winston Smith's job at the Ministry of Truth rewriting the news: Orwell calls it "reality control" or "doublethink."

39. Ted Slater said the following at 12:56 PM on Apr 9:

Samaria (#34) -- something you seem to be forgetting is that Islam means "submission." That is very significant: The Muslim religion is all about submission. And that's what makes this "famous first bow" so disturbing -- it's an act of submission by the U.S. President to the symbolic steward of Mecca.

It's not that the Saudi king is "not a Christian." It's not about "religious bigotry." It's not about mere "respect" for a heretical religion. It's not about "being nice."

It's about our President expressing submission to a leader who represents the Religion of Submission.

40. KM said the following at 1:03 PM on Apr 9:

"Americans do not bow."
"Americans do not bow."
"Americans do not bow."

Why?
Why MUST we always be superior to everyone else?

41. Mrs. Spit said the following at 1:13 PM on Apr 9:

BDB - #23

If you would prefer to not bow to anyone, that's fine. Please stay in the US where you don't need to. The rest of us understand and respect that when we are in Rome, we do as the Romans do vis. a vis. respecting the traditions and customs of another country.

Respectfully, comments like this are the reason that American tourists and leaders are so despised in the rest of the world.

Josh: Christians shouldn't care. Citizens, who would like to see their leader treat other leaders with respect, and so be accorded respect in return should care, deeply.

42. BDB said the following at 1:14 PM on Apr 9:

KM (#40) wrote:

>>Why MUST we always be superior to everyone else?<<

You misunderstand - monarchs have a history of tyranny. Part of ensuring representative democracy is rejecting the divine right of kings. Their authority is false.

No King but Christ!

43. Louise from Chicago said the following at 1:16 PM on Apr 9:

I personally wouldn't bow/curtsey to anyone who wouldn't do the same to me.

44. Simon from Texas said the following at 1:17 PM on Apr 9:

Why does it matter at all? Did you vote for him? If not, then he doesn't speak for you anyway. Does this result in some policy change? While you may find some distasteful symbolic meaning in it, it has little tangible, practical consequence as far as I can see.

We are not sheep who have to follow him off a cliff if he does something really bad. Free people don't need political leaders to follow.

45. BDB said the following at 1:18 PM on Apr 9:

And for commonwealth readers, I'm noting specifically that almost all authority is now vested in a parliament and Prime Minister now. If a monarch is a symbolic head of state, symbolism like bowing is also important.

Slapping the Queen on the back still seems a bit inappropriate.

46. BDB said the following at 1:23 PM on Apr 9:

Pass the ammunition #37 - OK, my comment was aimed at someone else, but thank you for pointing out how silly it is to write that in a blog post!

Obama should have read Powell's book though. It's very well thought out, and frankly, I think it's better than Obama's book. Both of them wrote books laying out many of their policy proposals. Powell also wrote following the first Iraq war, and offers a lot of insight into the region and the political pressures (and lobbying) in America that result.

He really should have read the book.

47. Ted Slater said the following at 1:25 PM on Apr 9:

KM (#40) -- it's not that a mere person expressed humble respect for another person. That's fine.

In this case, it's the top representative of the United States expressing submission to someone who represents the Religion of Submission, Islam. What does that *mean*? Is President Obama's act intentional? Or was it done out of ignorance? Or something else?

It's not that we're wanting President Obama to be *superior* to the Saudi king. I simply don't want him to express *inferiority* by bowing the way he did.

I'm just trying to figure this whole weird thing out. It is not without meaning.

Simon (#44) -- President Obama is indeed our elected *representative*. He's not our leader, as you point out, and I don't "follow" him. But he does *represent* our nation. In a sense, then, yes, he does represent me.

48. P&P said the following at 1:31 PM on Apr 9:

1. About submission: there seems to be a whole lotta submitting in the Bible. In fact, most religions havev some form of submission.

2. I think there are far more important issues to address than a silly breach of protocol. Michele Obama put her arm around the Queen and people got over that fairly quickly.

3. I once curtsyed as an involuntary reflex. I literally bumped into Julia Child (G-d rest her culinary soul) in a hardware store. I was so taken aback by who she was that I curtsyed and all but kissed her ring. I thought she was going fall over laughing. She was buying a grill brush, which I think was rather fitting.

49. Texas Craig said the following at 1:33 PM on Apr 9:

I really am shocked at the attitudes shown by so many on here who claim the name of Christ. Based upon what I have seen about "not bowing" I am sure many would also object to getting down and washing someone's feet. Oh wait, that's the example Jesus gave to us and told us to do! ;-)

Should Obama have bowed? No, it was not necessary. Is it a big deal? I suppose if you are a comnspiracy theorist and see some evil intent behind it. But, otherwise, it is just another gaffe by him - sort of like giving Gordon Brown a boxed set of DVDs (that don't even work on his DVD player!).

To me, I am much more concerned about the *pride* issue that is showing up among so many who are making a big deal about bowing. Jesus washed people's feet. Jesus carried His own cross. Jesus remained silent when falsely accused. He is our example. As we know from scripture, anyone who exalts himself will be humbled. Who cares if our president made a mistake? Who cares if our country is not exalted by his actions? While I can understand geopolitical concerns, from a Christian standpoint, I don't think any of you criticizing Obama have a leg to stand on.

50. Anthony said the following at 1:45 PM on Apr 9:

Two things:

1.) Why does Boundlessline publish posts that seem to be so far removed from the reason Boundless exists? ("From college to career to relationships, we at Boundless want to cast a vibrant vision for the single years, helping you navigate this season while preparing for the challenges and responsibilities of the one to come.")

2.) On Maundy Thursday, as we near the end of Lent and Holy Week, there really wasn't anything more appropriate to talk about? The most important moment in human history is being celebrated in the Church this weekend. This couldn't have waited until next Monday?

51. BDB said the following at 1:46 PM on Apr 9:

Protocol is an interesting subject. When I had friends visiting from Sweden, one of the things that shocked them was that someone had an American flag on the beach. They weren't burning it or anything. They just had it on display. Apparently that's quite illegal in Sweden. We had an interesting discussion on flag protocol.

These things have been worked out for Americans meeting with British monarchs for quite some time. And to an extent it works both ways. As I understand it, when a British monarch or prime minister pays a state visit to the U.S., we don't play "Yankee Doodle," which I understand uses the same tune as a British song. In other words, when Americans play it, it's an insult to them, but not really to anyone else. So we don't play it to them.

President Obama is very inexperienced, so he's going to make lots of these kinds of mistakes - the kinds of mistakes that others might make as a Governor when fewer people are watching.

52. Samaria said the following at 1:59 PM on Apr 9:

You misunderstand - monarchs have a history of tyranny.

So do Christians, and that particular history is just as nasty.

It's not that the Saudi king is "not a Christian." It's not about "religious bigotry." It's not about mere "respect" for a heretical religion. It's not about "being nice."

It's about our President expressing submission to a leader who represents the Religion of Submission.

If his bow is meant to be interpreted, I don't interpret his bow so much as submission as it being a sign of cooperation and respect. If the president bowed to represent anything, I don't think President Obama bowed as a Christian - and he rightfully shouldn't (separation of Church and State). If his bow was to symbolize anything, I suspect he bowed representing America, to symbolize America's new positive relationship with Islam.

But then, I suspect he bowed as a sign of respect, leader to leader. The wrong way to go about respecting, but surely well-meant nonetheless.

Respectfully,

Samaria

53. obewan said the following at 2:22 PM on Apr 9:

#49 and #50:

Amen to that. Actually, a little humility might help America's diplomacy in light of the "arrogance" of the last 8 years. (In the world's eyes if not reality.)

54. Adam said the following at 2:42 PM on Apr 9:

Ted re#34:

Worse? In a way, yes. But allow me to build a base.

I think we both agree that
#1: Showing some level of protocol towards another foreign leader is appropriate.
#2: That may include bowing - such as the way that Obama bowed to the Queen.
#3: Obama's bowing broke protocol and went too far.

When Bush received the medal, he was breaking protocol (see BDB #25). He bowed to receive the medal instead of receiving it in a box.

The key question is: When does dealing respectfully with a trade partner become bowing down to them (either literally or figuratively)?

I tend to cut people a lot of slack on a first instance of an issue. The first time Bush went to Abdallah for more oil, I didn't have a problem with it. To go repeatedly takes an incredible amount of planning and intention. It made America look weak and desperate.

I'm trying to extend the same type of grace with Obama. I think his bow was pretty messed up. It also could have been a spur of the moment mistake. If we see it repeated, I would happily join you in condemning Obama for it.

In November, I voted for the Republican ticket for President. I am not in awe of Obama by any stretch of the imagination. The amount of negative posts regarding the sitting President have seemed to increase rather dramatically since January. That causes me to look at them more critically in light of history rather than just going along for the ride.

But then again, I also kinda enjoy a good debate - so part of it is probably pure obstinance. :)

55. BDB said the following at 3:01 PM on Apr 9:

Here's a tie-in for #50:

The reason American's don't bow to monarchs is that America was founded on the idea that we ought to have no King but King Jesus. Here's an interesting collection of quotes on the subject.

There's even a hymn.

But more specific, as single Christians seek to form the character that results in a successful marriage, it's important to ponder who we worship. As distressing as it is to see the President of the United States bow to a foreign monarch, I am more distressed by the way many Americans worship sports and entertainment celebrities. When I wanted to watch the news this morning, it was all a recap of American Idol. It extends to pondering the religious roots of things like martial arts and yoga.

Last week I was re-reading the book of Daniel. Note that the fiery furnace incident was because three of Daniels friends refused to bow to the image of the king. There's an important lesson there.

56. JB said the following at 3:34 PM on Apr 9:

Wow, Obama violated an esoteric point of protocol with zero implications for US foreign policy! I'll put this on my list of things to worry about right after, "Are lolcats dangerously funny?"

It's going to be a long eight years, huh, Boundless?

57. Craig M said the following at 3:48 PM on Apr 9:

The President is the head of state of a sovereign nation of free citizens. Any show of subservience to any foreign potentate, much less a theocratic monarch, demeans his fellow citizens. End of story.

58. Stephanie said the following at 3:58 PM on Apr 9:

With regard to the alleged Michelle Obama breach with the Queen, I thought the Queen touched her first and therefore it was ok for her to respond. I could be rusty on my British protocol since it's been many years since I was a kid and the Queen visted our little Commonwealth island, but I seem to recall for example, that when little island girls were lined up to meet the Queen, if she touched us, (as opposed to just taking the flowers for example) we could touch her back. But you don't touch the Queen first, which it seems Mrs. Obama didn't do. Am I wrong on this?

59. George S said the following at 5:00 PM on Apr 9:

Can someone, anyone, please for the love of everything explain to me why this matters in the least? People are losing their jobs, soldiers are dying, corporate crooks are getting away with untold crimes, our infrastructure is aging, our environment is getting more polluted, there are starving and diseased people all over the world.... and THIS is what we need to worry about? A minute issue of arcane protocol in a foreign country? What's next, an expose on how one of Obama's shoelaces is dangerously untied?

60. BDB said the following at 5:22 PM on Apr 9:

Something happened to my links.

Try Googling "No King but Jesus Christ" and John Adams. You'll find interesting things.

Also, the relevant section in the book of Daniel chapter 3 to see some scripture on "bowing down."

61. Sarah said the following at 5:30 PM on Apr 9:

#38. Just wanted to say you gave a wonderful reference to one of the most worldview changing books I've ever read.
"1984" has so many parallels that I can see coming through today, and when you stop and think about the consequences, it can be frightening.
Ted, nice post.
Happy Easter!
He is risen indeed!

62. S said the following at 5:45 PM on Apr 9:

WHO CARES???

63. BDB said the following at 5:52 PM on Apr 9:

Samaria (#52) wrote:

>>You misunderstand - monarchs have a history of tyranny.

So do Christians, and that particular history is just as nasty. <<

Ah, but go back through those instances and identify which, if any, of the Christian leaders were elected. Tyranny is not the same as wars, by the way. Tyrants are more like dictators-they can't be voted out of office.

64. Keith said the following at 6:21 PM on Apr 9:

For so long the United States has been, and has been perceived to be, hostile to the rest of the world, and especially the Muslim world. Obama, as the chief representative of the United States is coming in humility, and I don't think there is anything wrong with that. The policy of feeling superior does not seem to have worked; let us see what happens now that we come in humility.

65. Brendan said the following at 6:49 PM on Apr 9:

Mr. Slater -

At the end of last semester, I tried to plan an event for my campus ministry. It was a good event and my heart was in the right place, but I made the mistake of not going through the leadership team (though I am a leader myself). This breach of protocol caused someone to essentially yell at me (let's go with "sharp rebuke") in front of other people. I was crushed. My motive was to do an outreach on campus, not to offend anyone. But I did, and I had to deal with the fallout.

Being a president is a lot bigger job than being on the leadership team at a small-ish university, but that experience gives me a bit of empathy for the President. Bowing may mean submission to you, but it probably didn't mean that to him. It probably had something to do with extending respect and courtesy to a foreign leader in an area of the world that doesn't like us very much.

Mr. Slater, have you ever done something with one intention and it was taken another way? Would you appreciate a post like yours in condemnation of it? I know that if I was labeled as "extraordinarily ignorant," that would not have been helpful or beneficial.

Either he made his mistake and he won't make it again (Adam #54 has this point covered), or he's decided that such a protocol is unnecessary, in which case...what's this have to do with Christianity? All of my discussion on the issue here has nothing to do about what leader he made the gesture to. And the fact that he did it for Queen Elizabeth and King Abdullah shows that this isn't about religion, it's about politics.

As for your dig at the end...I am glad that the person who chewed me out for my error at least had enough grace to refrain from mocking me.

66. Chris said the following at 6:57 PM on Apr 9:

I am reminded of the Daily Show's comment about a similar issue. Obama is a wimp on the world stage......except when he's a cruel tyrant pushing us into socialism at home.

Mr. Stewart, of course, said it much better and in a much funnier fashion.

You people should stop drinking the kool-aid.

67. Saidahwk said the following at 7:20 PM on Apr 9:

I'm just curious: if so many of you dislike Ted's blogs and/or don't have any positive comments, why comment? Just don't read. Or if you read, just move on. I understand presenting an opposing point of view, but if you're just make an argumentative or snide remark, just to hear yourself talk, why bother?

And for those of you who regularly disagree with these sort of posts, why read Boundless? This webzine is obviously written from a conservative Christian worldview. If you're a lot less conservative, maybe this isn't the site for you.

Just a thought...

68. Jonathan Sarfati, Ph.D. said the following at 7:29 PM on Apr 9:

Note the rank hypocrisy of the Left. Somehow it was racist to use Obamov's middle name. But now he gladly proclaims it in his Dhimmitude: bowing to an Islamofascist leader. Saudi Arabia exports the worst Islamofascist doctrine, and sentences the victims of gang rape to jail and flogging.

Also, it was oh-so-terrible to accuse the Obamovs of hating their country, and once again McLame wouldn't allow it on his campaign. But Obamov just went to Europe and badmouthed his own country, which rescued Europe from 2 world wars. At least America doesn't flog rape victims!

69. Jonathan Sarfati, Ph.D. said the following at 7:37 PM on Apr 9:

pass the ammunition (#37):

"Yes, as a Black person I make it my life duty to read every single book written by other Black people"

Then read the books by Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams and Larry Elder. Of course, race shouldn't be an issue, which is why black "leadership" hates these black authors who reject victimitis.

70. Jethro said the following at 7:43 PM on Apr 9:

Sorry, where in the Bible does it say that the US President shouldn't bow to a foreign leader?

FYI, the Huffington Post reports that there is footage of Bush bowing to the Saudis too. Of course, that would be totally different.

Oh, and Christianity is a religion of submission too. Or do you just gloss over that?

71. AJ said the following at 7:53 PM on Apr 9:

Politics is relevant to the mission of Boundless because we all currently live in this world. Don't like it, pick another category to read (left hand panel of this blog). Keep posting, Ted!

72. khalil said the following at 8:34 PM on Apr 9:

Craig (The Texas one),

For me I don't see it as something anti-Obama (and I would hope my response didn't come across as such), I see it as something that did not need to be done. At that level in politics I believe all dignitaries are equal...king, queen, president, prime minister, etc. There should still be a certain level of formality (though happily not in politics I don't know what that is or what it would look like). I think a good question would be, "should an American in a foreign country bow/prostrate/etc.?" I think my take on it would be that if you are residing in another country you are abiding by the laws of that land. If they bow then I bow. Its like when you are in court and rise when the judge enters the courtroom, courtesy and respect are reflected in that gesture.

Personally I'd like to think of this as Obama learning the ropes of the position he has now. He will make mistakes, all the presidents before him did and his successor will too.

As far as footwashing goes, that is indeed a humbling experience. The first time (and almost every time since) I ever participated in one I left in tears. I don't know if I'd make that connection between bowing/politics and a footwashing ceremony though ;)

73. BDB said the following at 9:14 PM on Apr 9:

Interestingly enough, according to The Daily Show the reason no one is supposed to touch royalty is because they are poisonous. They were shocked that the First Lady survived the experience.

Hey, clearly the British have enough freedom of speech for satire...

74. BDB said the following at 9:17 PM on Apr 9:

Brenden (#65) I agree with you that it would be better for someone like Obama to make these kind of mistakes as a member of the leadership team of a small university. Get the mistakes out of his system while he's young...

75. Jethro said the following at 9:20 PM on Apr 9:

Dr Sarfati (#68),

Obama didn't 'badmouth' his country. He offered an honest assessment of it. As he did of the European view of America (although you conveniently ignored that). In case you have never noticed, America can be arrogant. That doesn't mean America doesn't also do much good. It's a country, it's not infallible. Surely a man of your gargantuan intellect can juggle those two concepts at once.

76. jt said the following at 9:40 PM on Apr 9:

Keep this in mind - Obama gave Queen Elizabeth an iPod and the Prime Minister some DVDs as gifts. Who is running the office of protocol? An intern?

77. IMO said the following at 9:52 PM on Apr 9:

"Oh, and Christianity is a religion of submission too."

It's way more than that. It's about the ultimate gift.
Romans 6:23
Romans 5:16

Philippians 2:7-9

George #59...You're right. What is most important is Jesus Christ. There are probably people on who post on Boundless who are unsaved, who will be in hell for all eternity. Pray for those people... pray for your family if they aren't saved.
Our lives our short. Eternity is well, eternity. There's nothing more critical.

78. Jonathan Sarfati, Ph.D. said the following at 11:27 PM on Apr 9:

Not that Jethro would know much about what Christianity means, except what he's picked up from gutter atheist/leftist websites.

As an Australian, I am perfectly aware that America has faults, as does Australia. What is reprehensible for a national leader is exaggerating his own nations faults, especially those shared with other nations, and downplaying its strengths. After all, European arrogance led to two world wars and modern moribud socialist economies, while America bailed them out. And GWB bent over backwards to appease Islam as a "religion of peace", yet Obama calls that "arrogance" as if Islamofascism is oh-so-humble.

And Samaria states:

"So do Christians, and that particular history is just as nasty."

Please cut us some slack, after all, we follow One who made mistakes (after all, what would the Creator of the Universe know about how He created?). But in mitigation, check out Christianity's Real Record for the facts of Christian benefits v atheist atrocities, and Unfair to Islam to refute this moral equivalence.

79. Brendan said the following at 11:30 PM on Apr 9:

BDB #74 -

That's not what I was trying to say at all. I was making a corollary between an experience where I was excessively rebuked over something that was largely a disconnect of intent and protocol and the news item at hand. The goal was to humanize a man who's been caricatured into this monster and remind Christians that we should be treating him like we treat anyone else.

I disagree with plenty of his policies, but I can't even imagine throwing out names like "Obamov" or "Obamessiah" or whatever else gets thrown around. Mocking is very dangerous territory, and if we're not careful we lose our credibility as agents of God's love.

Do the people who mock the President around here throw around slurs or mocking nicknames at gay people because you disagree with THEIR policies? I hope not.

80. Al said the following at 1:49 AM on Apr 10:

I have to echo some here. What does Obama bowing, possibly inappropriately, have to do with singles, Christ, and Christian living?

And in all seriousness, as much of a gaff as it is, how does this really edify us as readers to be encouraged to continually think of Obama as bumbling, ignorant, or inept, especially over something relatively inconsequential? I'm honestly not sure how this helps me to pray for our leader, unless the post was really intended to encourage us to pray for Obama's wisdom and discernment in interacting with dignitaries.

And the event could have been examined as Obama's attempt to display humility and cultural sensitivity, misguided and inappropriate as it was, and have been a seque to a certain King who displayed ultimate, true, and perfect humility, but unfortunately, that opportunity was missed.

81. Al said the following at 2:17 AM on Apr 10:

Ted said, "President Obama is indeed our elected *representative*. He's not our leader, as you point out, and I don't 'follow' him. But he does *represent* our nation. In a sense, then, yes, he does represent me."

The President is more than a mere "representative". To suggest that he's simply a representative demeans the position and allows us to conveniently ignore all laws passed under his authority when we deem that he no longer 'represents' us. He does serve as a practical authority and does lead the direction and policies of the nation, even as he is still accountable to the people. I would frankly say that semantics aside, the President serves as more of a leader than a mere representative or ambassador, though we may not personally 'follow' him.

Anyway, I'm also pretty sure you wouldn't argue that the scriptural commands to pray for, give due honor and tribute, and submit to our rulers and authorities doesn't apply just because we happen to have a democratic, representative government.

82. jordan said the following at 4:09 AM on Apr 10:

Obama, the President of the United States and leader of the free world, bows to a Saudi King who represents a despotic regime noted for its’ human rights violations, a birthplace of terrorists, a symbol of everything that is an antithesis to our system of government, and it’s no big deal?

I consider myself fortunate to have been born in a republic. I appreciate that as a citizen of a republic, I need not bow to any man or woman. We are all created equal, and blood lines do not make one person superior. This gesture by Obama should rankle every citizen for when Obama bowed as President of the United States, we all bowed.

He did bow, see the video from the latest angle:

http://tinyurl.com/obamabowedtowow

83. Tiffany said the following at 6:51 AM on Apr 10:

The irony of this being posted on Maundy Thursday is hard to get over...the day we remember when our Savior got on his knees and washed feet like a servant.

Come soon, Lord Jesus!

84. LouiseinPA said the following at 7:10 AM on Apr 10:

I am disappointed that on the holiest days of the liturgical year, we are arguing about something so trivial. What does that say about the universal Church? How can we ever make disciples if we're so worried about submitting to others? Guess what? Submission is a biblical concept for everyone for follows Christ.

85. S. said the following at 7:26 AM on Apr 10:

The whole problem with this is that most of you Americans actually believe the U.S.A. is a Christian country, and that Americans will not bow. Careful with those exceptionalist claims --sounds a bit too close to pride?

Also, maybe we should be focusing on the bigger things. Like perhaps American citizens bowing in far more significant ways to things like DEBT and ABORTION etc.

And stop obsessing over trivialities like this. Frankly speaking, while I admire your posts on marriage and the like, Ted, these incendiary posts only highlight the many justifiable and justified reasons for the world's dislike toward America. As someone not from this country, I am reminding you not to drag Christianity into it. Leave your political views out of the equation.

Oh by the way, most of the great --and horrible-- kings and rulers in the Bible were monarchs. God does not endorse a particular political system. Let's not start on the problems of democracy. Let's face it, only God is perfect and only His kingdom should reign.

86. Texas Craig said the following at 7:39 AM on Apr 10:

Khalil (#72):

I agree with your assessments completely. In my original post, I brushed with a broad stroke. I agree that Obama should not have bowed, but I do not see it as anything more than a mistake (which most first-term presidents are prone to do).

I am genuinely concerned, though, with those who seem to hold their American citizenship and pride in their country at a level awfully close to where they hold their allegiance to Christ. While I am thankful I live in the U.S., and I agree with many of the principles our country stands for, I am not so myopic that I see us as "better" than the rest of the world or feel strongly that we should not be seen in "submission" to anyone else. As I have said for many years, voluntary submission is actually a sign of great strength. Namely, when one who does not have to humble himself chooses to humble himself, that shows strength. That is what is so great about Christ's example in foot-washing. He acknowledged that He was the Lord, but he still went ahead with the foot washing.

If anything, our greatness lies in the Godly principles underlying many of the foundations of our country. But, many of those principles are being eroded day by day, and our culture is quickly descending into hedonism and self-indulgence as accepted norms. Therefore, every year, it gets harder and harder to be "proud" of my country. But, I am still thakful I live here (or, more specifically, in TEXAS!). :-)

87. Jacob M. said the following at 8:19 AM on Apr 10:

And, Jacob M., two things: 1) President Bush's holding the hand of this Saudi Monarch is a culturally acceptable expression of friendship, not of submission. 2) The press was all over that; where are they on this, arguably far more serious, expression?
1) Culturally acceptable in which culture? Two men holding hands is not culturally acceptable in America, but it apparently is in Saudi Arabia, as is bowing to the king.

2) I don't pay much attention to the mainstream media, but I don't distinctly recall there being much more or less coverage of Bush's holding hands with Abdullah than of Obama's bowing to him.

I don't think it's changing the subject to bring up Bush, because it highlights the real commitment of a person to opposing the West's continued submission to Islam. Many mainstream conservatives will steadfastly oppose liberalism when it's coming from Democrats, but go along with it when it's coming from Republicans (holding hands was just the tip of the iceberg for our previous Dhimmi-in-chief GWB, with his annual Ramadan dinners at the White House, and constant praising of Islam as a "great religion of peace.") My purpose is to try to get conservatives to oppose liberalism both from Democrats AND from Republicans.

88. IMO said the following at 8:54 AM on Apr 10:

#83

Whose feet did Jesus wash? Why did he wash his disciplies feet? And do you think that matters?

John 13:1

I can't stand when people, like you Tiffany, take Scripture out of context and TAKE THE MEANING of of what Jesus did and malign it.

89. obewan said the following at 8:55 AM on Apr 10:

And Boundless is working on Good Friday? Even my secular employer used to give us this day off. Now it is a floater. I too am guilty of working today though, but over 1/2 of the people here are out. I prefer to take the time with my Christmas holiday to spend with family. I think the Jews and Muslims in the company were the ones who complained about getting Good Friday off, so the company compromised and made it a floater. Glad to see some posts related to today at least.

90. Ted Slater said the following at 9:40 AM on Apr 10:

Those who question why I wrote this on Holy Thursday, or who say this is a trivial issue, or who ask how this relates to the Boundless mission -- theirs are the most strident comments.

Does anyone else find this incongruity intriguing?

91. Keisha said the following at 9:53 AM on Apr 10:

I agree with the sentiments of the people who have commented that a slew of political posts during Holy Week is surprising, and somewhat disappointing, coming from this website. However, it is my opinion that this website is useful for figuring out how to be Christian in the world, and not necessarily useful for figuring out what it means to be a Christian in the Kingdom - by this I mean the ideal that we are all striving towards in our Christian journey. I don't think that the Internet is really the best resource for knowledge on that at all. I think that trusted Christian leaders and mentors, the congregation, and the inspired writings of holy men starting with the Apostles and continuing to this very day, are far superior sources. (In fact, that's what Boundless has recommended in the past!)

So, I try to keep that in mind as I visit this website, and as I choose how to spend my free time... particularly during a time in the church year such as this. Blessed Holy Friday to those on the Western calendar, and Blessed Lazarus Saturday to those on the Eastern calendar!

92. Samantha said the following at 9:54 AM on Apr 10:

#85, America IS a Christian country. It was founded on Christian principles and even Obama admits this. He is trying to get rid of this though.

93. Kevin said the following at 10:00 AM on Apr 10:

I am always right about everything.

94. Jeremy said the following at 10:23 AM on Apr 10:

Ted (#90) -- Those who question why I wrote this on Holy Thursday, or who say this is a trivial issue, or who ask how this relates to the Boundless mission -- theirs are the most strident comments.

Does anyone else find this incongruity intriguing?"

Not really. It seems far easier to get worked up over a Christian website's paying almost zero tribute to this time of year's celebration of the most important week in history, than to care overmuch about the President's bowing.

I think some people get fed up over time about the consistently one-sided, petty political posts and comments that pretty much dominate this site now, which is why their comments might come across as "strident".

95. Cassandra said the following at 10:56 AM on Apr 10:

Saidhawk #67

SERIOUSLY!!! I couldn't have said it better myself. Go to HuffPo or Sojourners or Emergent Village! There are PLENTY of resources for you! Boundless holds a more conservative theological and political worldview. Acceptance is the first step.

There are also plenty of fluff pieces on here that get single digit comments so you can go read those ... these meatier issues spark some really great discussions about how we live as Christians in a world where politics affects us and a lot of us really appreciate that!

96. DJS said the following at 11:00 AM on Apr 10:

Lot's of strong opinions on here!

First: There is nothing wrong with showing respect. Anytime I have traveled to other countries, I do my best to follow their customs in a respectful manner. However, President Obama was not a private citizen in this instance. He is representing the United States of America. No leader of a foreign country should ever bow or show any form of submission to another. In political terms they are equals! The President of a tiny African country would not be expected to bow to President Obama, and President Obama should not bow to any other world leader. Note: King Abdullah did not bow, so bowing is not a customary procedure in Saudia Arabia that is would be disrespectful to ignore. I'm not going to say that President Obama is in bed with the Muslim world because of this mistake, but it is a very clear and obvious breach of protocol for world leaders.

Second: Some people have argued that the bow was simply President Obama's attempt to show humility and respect instead of the air of superiority that America has taken on. OK, but true humility and respect comes through actions, rather than a symbolic bow. He needn't have bowed like that to be more humble and willing to compromise. The proof is in the pudding.

Third: The part that is so terrible is that there is not even really a spin on why he bowed. I mean it was just ignored and then declared that he DID NOT bow. At least put a spin on why he bowed, b/c in political speak that is at least aknowledging that this happened.

Fourth: I did not vote for President Obama, and I do not agree with really any thing that he has done as President, but I refuse to mock the man who represents me as an American. I simply wish that he would be more thoughtful in his interactions with foreign countries. Americans should be proud of our past, working hard in the present, and hopeful for our future. Foreign relations is a tough job, but please remember that Americans elected you, don't belittle our nation. We are the ones that you were elected to serve and represent. Do right by us first, the rest of the world second. That is not being selfish, it is just the way things should work in international politics.

97. BDB said the following at 11:08 AM on Apr 10:

S (#85) - to be precise, I'm not saying Americans should not bow to monarchs because America is a Christian country. America achieved independence from the monarchy, it is wrong to submit to something that has no true authority over Americans.

In my opinion, NO ONE should be subject to the authority of an unelected monarch. Keep in mind that in the New Testament, the people in power were not Christians. Political Philosophy changed a lot when Christians ended up in power.

An excellent example was the guy throwing shoes at President Bush. A monarch would have him executed immediately. But such an action would be wrong for a Christian to take, even if the Christian is Commander-in-Chief of the most powerful military the world has ever seen.

Both things are important: American President's should never bow to a monarch. American Presidents also must show restraint in using their power - even if some dude engages in a grave insult by throwing shoes. THAT restraint is what make's the American system great.

98. Cassandra said the following at 11:13 AM on Apr 10:

Those who question why I wrote this on Holy Thursday, or who say this is a trivial issue, or who ask how this relates to the Boundless mission -- theirs are the most strident comments.

Does anyone else find this incongruity intriguing?

Why yes, Ted, yes I do.

I know it's Good Friday today, and that Maundy Thursday, when Ted posted this article, was yesterday. But pointing that out as a reason why we shouldn't post a discussion about the government strikes me as religious. Christians live with the reality of the cross and the resurrection and the atonement every single day.

99. BDB said the following at 11:21 AM on Apr 10:

Brenden (#79) wrote:

>>Do the people who mock the President around here throw around slurs or mocking nicknames at gay people because you disagree with THEIR policies? I hope not.<<

I do agree with you on this. I do think it is important to respect the office. One American president didn't, and I have no doubt that George W. Bush was elected significantly because people remembered how dignified his father was, and deep down, people wanted to restore the dignity of the presidency.

I would fully support Obama becoming the President of a small liberal arts college somewhere. I'll even help him identify a current opening.

100. brandon said the following at 11:38 AM on Apr 10:

100

I feel what is important to mention here is that there is an enormous difference between dipping your head and bending deeply at the waist. One can be seen as a polite greeting, the other as “what is your bidding master”. Several have commented they have no issues with Obama’s deep bow. However I am more concern with the world perception; that is ultimately what is at state here. As leader of the free world, Obama represents America; whether we like it or not. It is his actions that the world perceives and judges. It is how the world perceives his action that you have to consider. I will not begin to act that I understand the jostling that takes place as a world leader. But I can appreciate the dynamic environment where everything you do is scrutinized and plucked apart for some sign of weakness or strength to better promote your country’s position on the world stage. This crucial time in America’s history demands a near infallible leader at the helm. Not just a well spoken character. I hope Mr. Obama would cautiously consider his future actions and work harder in becoming a President that better represents America’s traditional values. It is my belief that Obama’s role model, Lincoln, would not have bowed given the same situation.

Contributors

About Us

Relevant Boundless Articles

SUBSCRIBE VIA EMAIL

Newer Post | Older Post