Bryan Fischer: Obama Isn’t a True Christian Because He Supports LGBT Rights January 21, 2015

Bryan Fischer: Obama Isn’t a True Christian Because He Supports LGBT Rights

The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer is certainly not one to shy away from expressing bizarre opinions, but last week on his show Focal Point, he might have set a new record for the most hilariously contradictory and nonsensical statements uttered in a short time.

It transpired when a caller, Don, wondered, “… how come there’s nobody on AFR [American Family Radio] that will say that Barack Obama’s not a Christian?” The caller speculated that President Obama might instead be a Muslim or a New Age spiritualist and opined that “even” Russian president Vladimir Putin is a Christian. (If only, I guess, we had such a righteous man in charge here…)

Fischer began by noting that he wasn’t sure that he’d call President Obama a Christian, but he did concede that

… I do not know what goes in Barack Obama’s heart.

And then he promptly speculated on exactly that, declaring that the President certainly can’t be a “sincerely devoted follower of Jesus Christ” because he doesn’t hate gays and abortion like Jesus wants.

Because in my mind a Christian is someone who is a sincerely devoted follower of Christ. Barack Obama is not — nobody can support and promote and celebrate homosexual behavior who is a sincerely devoted follower of Christ. It’s impossible, because Christ and his apostles made it very clear that that’s a sin. You can’t celebrate that, can’t promote that and call yourself a follower of Christ. Nor can you be a follower of Christ and support the practice of dismembering babies in the womb. Or support the practice of infanticide, as Barack Obama did as a state Senator in Illinois.

Fischer employs a typical conservative Christian line here, in suggesting that anything approaching equal rights and tolerance for the LGBT community is something to be frowned upon, as if Obama is somehow “promoting” certain sexual acts rather than defending equal rights. But it’s not that or the over-the-top anti-abortion rhetoric that really gets me. It’s the part about Jesus’ “very clear” condemnation of homosexuality.

In case you’ve forgotten his famous remarks on the topic, allow me to quote from the Bible:



The same passages also apply to Jesus’ opposition to abortion.

Fischer then moved on, proving that he’s no more an expert on Islamic views of homosexuality than he is Jesus’.

Now with regard to him being a Muslim, you know, I’ve had people, insiders in Washington, everybody back there says he is, you know. He walks like a Muslim. He talks like a Muslim. He sounds like a Muslim. He acts like a Muslim. Jesus said ‘by your fruits, you shall know them’ and at some point people are going to start connecting those dots.

I have to admit, there’s so much wrong with this answer that I can’t find a favorite point. Is it the, shall we say, bold claim that “everybody” in Washington — at least those with any access to the president — says he’s Muslim? Is it how it’s just assumed that the President being Muslim, as opposed to Christian, would be such a worrisome thing? Is it how Fischer tries to walk a tightrope between agreeing that President Obama is Muslim after all while still maintaining (im)plausible deniability?

Probably the most comical part is the mental hopscotch he’s playing here. He jumps from thinking that, because of Christian teachings on the topic, Obama can’t possibly be a True Christian since he supports gay rights… to agreeing that he’s probably Muslim after all, despite Islamic injunctions against homosexuality.

Fischer’s answer is a curious mix of the No True Scotsman fallacy, combined with a powerful display of ignorance and bigotry. None of it is new, but it’s not often you see someone abuse logic, misstate facts, and contradict himself that often in such a short time. It’s comedy and tragedy combined into one brief clip.

(via Right-Wing Watch)

"The way republican politics are going these days, that means the winner is worse than ..."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."
"It would have been more convincing if he used then rather than than."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
error: Content is protected !!