Reply #29: It's a tricky balancing act, to be sure.

[InvisibleTouch]

I'm not without a certain "spiritual" set of beliefs, but I don't believe in "god" as defined by organized religion, and for the longest time I would be offended, or at least put off a bit, by reference to "God" in any manner of discourse or writings. Finally I came to the conclusion that what others write as "God," I could translate for myself into something closer to my own outlook, and accept that we were saying at least somewhat of the same thing. For someone who holds no "mystical" belief whatsoever, "God" might be translated as "nature" or "the human psyche," or some other more left-brained concept.

It also must be remembered that President Obama does have a belief in "God" as defined by an aspect of organized religion, and I'm a big advocate of respecting one another's belief systems, even if they don't match our own - as long as we're not trying to force one another to think as we do. So he was addressing the tragedy from the viewpoint of his own belief system, while still reaching out to and respecting those that hold different beliefs. The prevalence of mostly Judeo-Christian symbolism addresses the plain fact that *most* of the people in his audience probably held some variant of those beliefs - but he also acknowledged others. So, good on him for negotiating that slippery slope, while still demonstrating the quiet conviction of his own worldview.