Five reasons I hate this article

Sen. Barack Obama spoke today (or is speaking this weekend) at a convention of the United Church of Christ. Here's the article from the AP covering his speech.

Obama says some have "hijacked" faith

Stephen Singer, AP writer

Hartford, CONN. - Sen. Barack Obama told a church convention Saturday that some right-wing evangelical leaders have exploited and politicized religious beliefs in an effort to sow division.

"Somehow, somewhere along the way, faith stopped being used to bring us together and faith started being used to drive us apart," the Democratic presidential candidate said in a 30-minute speech before the national meeting of the United Church of Christ.

"Faith got hijacked, partly because of the so-called leaders of the Christian Right, all too eager to exploit what divides us," the Illinois senator said.

"At every opportunity, they've told evangelical Christians that Democrats disrespect their values and dislike their church, while suggesting to the rest of the country that religious Americans care only about issues like abortion and gay marriage, school prayer and intelligent design," according to an advance copy of his speech.

"There was even a time when the Christian Coalition determined that its number one legislative priority was tax cuts for the rich," Obama said. "I don't know what Bible they're reading, but it doesn't jibe with my version."

A call to the Washington, D.C.-based Christian Coalition of America seeking comment was not immediately returned Saturday.

Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ, a church of about 1.2 million members that is considered one the most liberal of the mainline Protestant groups.

In 1972, the church was the first to ordain an openly gay man. Two years ago, the church endorsed same-sex marriage, the largest Christian denomination to do so. Obama believes that states should decide whether to allow gay marriage, and he opposes a constitutional amendment against it.

Conservative Christian bloggers have linked Obama to what they call the "unbiblical" teachings of his church. Theological conservatives believe gay relationships violate Scripture, while more liberal Christians emphasize the Bible's social justice teachings.

Obama trails Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York by 33 percent to 21 percent in the most recent Associated Press-Ipsos poll among Democrats and those leaning toward the party.

I hate this article, which is such a sloppy, piece of trash style of reporting that I'm not even sure I'd line a bird cage with it. Where to begin with why this article is just a mess.

1. Let's start with the sentence "Conservative Christian bloggers have linked Obama to what they call the 'unbiblical' teachings of his Church." The next sentence then goes on to talk about gay marriage, but cites ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in regards to 'unbiblical' teachings of the United Church of Christ, but instead talks about how liberal Christians emphasize the Bible's social justice teachings. Is Stephen Singer saying that the social justice teachings of the Church are 'unbiblical'? If so, shouldn't he give examples, possibly even quoting some of these Conservative Christian bloggers?

2. Singer's characterization of the United Church of Christ (UCC) makes them sound like they're the Ted Kennedy's of the Christian world. Pariahs, even. But the UCC has been around for 50 years. A Catholic bishop even opened up Saturday's UCC conference, applauding the work of UCC members in areas of social justice. But Singer makes it sound like all the UCC does is ordain and marry gays and lesbians.

3. Why does Singer bother to mention the poll numbers at the end of this article? They have nothing to do with Obama's appearance at the UCC convention. Did his editors make him put that paragraph in just to bloat the AP's ego, since it's their poll numbers that are cited? Who knows. But the value added by including irrelevant poll numbers is pretty much nothing, other than to show that Singer's just rehashing dogma that Obama trails Hillary.

4. I just don't personally like the way Singer opens with a line about Obama addressing a church convention, but then later cites "an advanced copy" of Obama's remarks. His opening paragraph makes it sound like he was there in the audience, rather than in his Marriott hotel room writing the story based on a few emails.

5. Why not cite reaction to this talk by members in the audience? Oh yeah, right...because Singer probably wrote this from his hotel room, or the nearby Starbucks.

Anyway, I'm ranting a bit. But in googling a couple articles that Singer has written, it seems he really relies on the press releases sent out by others to do his work for him. See here. Or here. And here. I guess he's no different than other reporters, but at some point I'd hope that our society would demand a little more substance from our journalists, and a little less rehash of company talking points.

So says the guy who works in public relations :) Oh well...we're all hypocrites!

Have a good weekend.