Obama tries to explain Rick Warren
By John Amato Thursday Dec 18, 2008 1:00pm
(h/t FDL)
Here's what Obama had to say about Rick Warren:
Mr. Obama himself responded to the growing controversy when prompted by a question during a news conference today designed to announce a trio of financial regulators. The president-elect stressed that he is a "fierce advocate for equality for gay and lesbian Americans," but said it was also important for Americans to come together despite disagreements on social issues.
Mr. Obama said the inauguration would include people with a wide variety of viewpoints represented and "that's how it should be."
He also pointed out that he was invited by Warren a few years ago to speak at his church, despite his disagreement with Warren on those issues. "That dialogue is part of what my campaign has been about," he added.
The Left in this country has been tormented and assaulted for eight years under Bush, conservatives and religious-right leaders like Rick Warren. We were called traitors, America-haters, and Socialists who didn't support the troops -- everything that they called Barack Obama during his presidency run. Well, we got that too and fought as hard as we could against it.
What Rick Warren represents is something that is dark and ugly in American culture. He is given a huge platform to disparage groups of people to the media under the guise of his religious beliefs. And he is also celebrated for it. During the whole Brian Nichols/Ashley Smith hostage and murder saga back in 2005, the media gave more attention to Rick Warren's book than to the actual victims of the crime.
Segment after segment these shows paraded every minister, preacher, evangelical, and man of faith they could find to bath the segments into "how the goodness of God" or "the power of Jesus" entered into the heart of Brian Nichols by Ashley Smith’s faith and convinced Brian Nicholls to turn himself in.
The real hero that most of them are touting is the book "The Purpose Driven Life" written by Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church, a megachurch south of Los Angeles. It has sold more than 21 million copies and has been near the top of best-seller lists for more than two years. Publishers Weekly says it is the best-selling hardcover non-fiction book in U.S. history.
Ashley Smith said that she read part of "The Purpose Driven Life" to her captor, Brian Nichols who formed a bond with his captive, calling her "his angel" and gave himself up.
Of course, it later turned out that Ashley also gave Nicholls crystal meth from her own stash during the standoff.
So far there hasn’t been one segment done on the victims of Nicholls rampage. It's almost like they are an after thought to the story. The preachers throw around a blanket statement like " this is an awful tragedy" then get back to what they really want to talk about. As long as the right leaning shows can prove somehow that God had a hand in Nichols surrender, then "praise the lord" because God is the real hero in this mess. Jerry Falwell says that Nicholls must have been exposed to the lord somehow when he was a child " I don't know for sure" Why would he know? He wouldn't have bothered to look.
If I went on any of the shows to discuss the story with anyone of these TV hosts, I'll bet you a thousand bucks, not one of them could name all the people who were killed. I'm going to now again. Fulton County court reporter Julie Ann Brandau, Judge Rowland Barnes, Sheriff's Deputy Hoyt Teasley and federal agent David Wilhelm.
I understand that Obama wants to "reach out" to the other side, and that's fine in certain circumstances, but when you reach out to the other side, usually there is another hand to grab hold of. The reality that he seems oblivious to is that the Rick Warrens of the world hate Obama, and all his voters will never change because there is too much money to be made when your flock is angry. The Christian Right will always find something to be angry about and the target of that anger will be Obama and us, including the gays and lesbians who are being deprived of basic civil rights.
Bring out the accounts and ask Jerry Falwell and his crowd how much money they made on the phony "War on Christmas."
I saw a hack on MSNBC this morning who said that it was good for Obama to get his base angry. Really? Why doesn't the media ever talk that way about the right-wing religious base of the Republican party? It seems it's always "good" to kowtow to them.
There was no doubt that Obama, like every president before him, would pick a Christian minister to perform this sacred duty. But Obama had thousands of clergy to choose from, and the choice of Warren is not only a slap in the face to progressive ministers toiling on the front lines of advocacy and service but a bow to the continuing influence of the religious right in American politics. Warren vocally opposes gay marriage, does not believe in evolution, has compared abortion to the Holocaust and backed the assassination of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Warren has done a masterful job at marketing himself as a "new" kind of evangelical with a "broader agenda" than just fighting abortion rights and gay marriage.
{snip}
Warren represents the absolute worst of the Democrats' religious outreach, a right-winger masquerading as a do-gooder anointed as the arbiter of what it means to be faithful. Obama's religious outreach was intended, supposedly, to make religious voters more comfortable with him and feel included in the Democratic Party. But that outreach now has come at the expense of other people's comfort and inclusion, at an event meant to mark a turning point away from divisive politics.
It was a very divisive choice, as Team Obama knew it would be after their Donnie McClurkin experience. "Inclusiveness" does not meaning putting whatever hatemonger you can find onto the program, if it did we'd have the Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan delivering the invocation.
Login or Register to post comments.
Yeah, it sucks, but at least Aretha will be singing.
I love me some Aretha...
I'm not a big fan of Warren, nor for that matter, any Jebus pushers, but I can see how Obama is trying to reach out to everyone
A Jebush pusher.
I don't know why C&L are up in arms about this, as Obama has spoken at great length about his beliefs. Obama doesn't believe in gay-marriage precisely because he is a christian. He has and will continue to let his crappy belief-system cloud his judgement, and to be "surprised" about any of this is a joke.
Is C&L just making hay to get readers and commenters, or have they forgotten that Obama is a Christian, and also belonged to a completely wackadoodle church?
Sorry, I'm non-theist, so even a smidge of christianism to me is a giant red flag, Warren or not.
Actually, Obama and his family belonged to a United Church of Christ congregation, a liberal congregation, which openly accepts everyone. They are probably the most liberal Christian denomination, and the UCC churches that are "God is still speaking" churches are even more liberal within that denomination. Don't take the few Rev. Wright soundbites that you heard to heart. The UCC denomination is far from "wackadoodle."
to a hand that isn't reaching back just makes the bozo not reaching look even more like an idiot.
Obama is the bigger man in this.
Yeah it's great that Aretha will sing , but I LOVE Etta James and she sang at the inaugural ball for Bush.
Talk about a let down!
rick warren is incredibly disappointing, why give that asshole a platform? why give him any legitimacy?
but, really, i would rather have an explanation on why duncan, or clinton, or geithner, or summers, or emanuel, or salazar, or vilsack were picked to fulfill obama's promise of change.
rick warren is a disgusting choice. the others are alarming choices.
We all hated the ultra-partisan, serve-Bush agenda that has run our country into the ground but if Obama can make progress by not treating his fellow citizens, with whom he has deep ideological differences with as enemies then we'll all be better off.
The last thing this country needs is a liberal administration that runs itself with the same ruthless ultra-partisan viciousness that the Bush administration did. Just because it would serve our ends, and be quite enjoyable, doesn't make it right.
there is quite a large divide--a HUGE chasm--between treating someone as an "enemy" and asking them to preside over the inauguration
and, please, never confuse partisanship with liberalism.
Obama isn't starting from a blank slate. The expectation is that those that aren't in accord with his principals, will be snubbed. That is the norm the Bush admin has set. I can hardly think of few events as more symbolically appropriate to show that the Bush ways are gone than the inauguration. Whats the problem? In what way does having Warren at the inauguration effect or impact any actual policy. Its a purely symbolic gesture.
I didn't confuse liberalism and partisanship. Liberalism can be represented by partisanship the just as any other ideology can be represented by partisanship.
The point being that an empty gesture that builds goodwill between the left and right especially after 8 years of gestures designed to aggravate tensions between the left and the right needn't be looked at as such a bad thing.
You know what concerns me? Policy. That is it. What actions Obama and the Dem congress actually enact. That is what counts.
the problem is that warren is a divisive asshole. the only thing warren symbolizes is the intolerance-posing-as-xtianity that is so reprehensible and abhorrent, to a lot of people. me included. and instead of bringing people together, this will just push them apart.
so... i don't think we agree on that.
i also don't think we agree what partisanship is. partisanship, to me, is party-adherence without regard to ideology.
and, really, where is the goodwill to the left? where is the left-leaning appointee? the left-leaning policy being suggested?
i do agree with you, though, that what really matters is policy. and, as you wrote, "actions Obama and the Dem congress actually enact"....
I hold Warren in the same esteem you do. Nonetheless he is a citizen and he represents many who feel the same as him. If Obama is to 'fix' anything, its got to be done with as much buy in as possible. I see Obama playing as smooth and slick as he can to be able to get done as much as he can. Do I like it? No. But as I've said, the condition Bush has left the country in has left us very little wiggle room to be fighting amongst ourselves.
As far as arguing, 'ok, we'll be good, but the right won't be, so we shouldn't be good after all' that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
A group of people can be partisan regardless of their ideology. Bush was a conservative and ran an administration that was partisan in that it excluded those who didn't profess loyalty to him and the RNC. The same is possible of a liberal leader.
of his base no good at all--the 'prog/lib/left'--whose intolerance of "us" is both offensive and harmful, who delegitemize our cares and concerns at every turn, and work against them, I take it as a shit-encrusted thumb in the eye...I take it that he's saying if he can entice these other folks then it doesn't matter that "we" are discomfitted.
Me? not that that gives me any great pleasure...but
I knew all along that this was gonna come down like this. I knew when he attended the christo-fellation at brokeback chapel. I fuukin TOLJA SO!
Thanks for that sentiment. I agree completely. This is a symbolic gesture that the Bush years of excluding opinions that don't tow the party line are over. It is nothing more than this. It does not reflect a change in Obama's thinking at all. The very definition of 'liberal' includes tolerance of ideas. A lot of the left has forgotten this, including sometimes the mainstream left media like Maddow and Olbermann.
Following Obama's leadership, let us shed this bulls*it moral high ground and get with the program.
Well put Amato!! Thank you so much.
I had forgotten that whole story (I think I had only heard half of it when it happened.
What a bitch! I'm glad she wasn't killed and everything, but what the hell? A lunatic with a gun asks you for some weed and you say, "I don't have any, but I can give you some meth"? What the hell was she thinking?
As a meth addict she was probably thinking "who doesn't love meth?"
She's awful lucky she survived that. I think I'd give him beer before meth - hell, I wouldn't give anyone meth. I've met a few angry, violent drunks; but every tweaker I've met has been unpredictable at least.
IMO silence is tacit consent. Please continue to speak out against the religious right and the democrats who pander to them.
Isn't a warren where you keep rabbits?
Would'ja prefer Obama selected these two?
http://www.pagannews.com/images/gyf.jpg
yes.
...against the hateful and hurtful religious/bigotry that is trying to turn them into second class citizens, but I really wish that people in the Gay community would discontinue comparing their struggle to 400 years of the middle passage, slavery and apartheid/Jim Crow(listen to a very angry and passionate Hillary Rosen). If they truly knew the horrific facts of that long atrocious experience(it would make the holocaust seem like Woodstock) they would stop. To try and make that likeness is extremely insulting to us African-Americans.
It's not just Warren, but Obama himself has stated numerous times that he does not believe in gay marriage. Where does this come from? From his religious belief system.
But somehow it's Rick Warren who is evil, when the POTUS-elect himself will never lift a finger for marriage equality.
Get your priorities straight, people.
No, the GLBT has "no rights to compare themselves to any other group which has been discriminated against."
GLBT Americans are killed and beaten regularly in America and around the world on a daily basis if anyone cares to know. "Who owns History," is a fine book written by Historian Eric Foner.
Nobody owns history just as no group has a monoploy on pain and suffering. Just remember this though. Gays and lesbians were gassed to death in Nazi Germany by Adolf Hitler and were stamped with the pink triangle. To say, that GLBT cannot compare their torment and continued death at the hands of gay haters worldwide and in America is ridiculous and total sophistry.
And let that bullshit comparison go...it is a different human rights fight...period! If you are trying to make that argument you're the one who is absolutely ridiculous.
Someone clearly slept through their history courses.
Oppression is Oppression is Oppression is my point.
Specify in my points made where and why you disagree. One can see similarities of groups which have been and continue to be denied their full equal rights. Moreover, gays and lesbians are subjected to hate crimes and violent death for just being gay or lesbian.
In short, I can make any comparsion I want and also reject the notion that one group has a monopoly on pain and suffering. Throughout history, the Bible has been used to justify slavery, death penalty, subjugation of women, and is now being used to deny gays and lesbians their full rights such as marriage.
Comparsions do not necessarily mean "sameness" but one can certainly compare those who have been oppressed and look for similar concepts and arguments which leads to such occurrences.
It is unfortunate that you have such a closed-mind.
My major point has been that it is typical that Barack Obama tried to explain his way out of another slick political move. Let's stick to the issue at hand here and that is Obama's embrace of anti-gay preacher Rick Warren. At this point, I do not take your post that you "support the rights of GLBT" all that seriously. From your posts attacking me, it appears that you agree with Obama and Warren and for the GLBT community to just shut up and stop "comparing" themselves with anyone else who have been hated upon throughout world history.
Another item for you LeftandLeft: that by virtue of Rick Warren's giving the invocation at the inaguration is more proof that Barack Obama is a big fraud. This is again, the main issue at hand, here. I suggest you expand your thought processes and go read the writings at www.blackagendareport.com if you think Obama is some kind of civil rights president to be.
I am so tired of this Obama cult movement and that he is somehow immune from criticism. Obama is just another slimy politico, folks and the sooner you all realize this fact, the more you will be able to absorb the lies yet to come your way. Obama is a master at deception and for this, he has been elected the president of the USA. Obama has mastered the art of con jobster, and so well, that the liberal/progressives of the Internet have never grasped. Only true leftists knew what an abject liar Obama was all the way through the election cycle. Just because McCain-Palin were more repulsive than Obama, does not make the man with many "changes" a true liberal or progressive. Read the writing found on www.counterpunch.org or www.blackagendareport.com if you want a real critique of the fraud known as Obama from Chicago. Wake up already folks. Rick Warren. Doug Kmiec. Donnie McClerkin. All these folks are anti-gay and anti-women and firm now in the Obama camp. Obama is a gay hater and he like Rick Warren is opposed to gay marriage!!!
If you are shocked at Obama's choosing Rick Warren, don't be. Those bones that you all think Obama is just stalling to throw to the real liberals and progressives will not be coming anytime soon. Obama is a skilled establishmentarian, who used elite rhetoric on a very gullible and naive progressive movement found on the Internet and elsewhere. Contrary to Barack "Fraud" Obama, his campaign only received 25% of its funds from those "small donors" given through the Internet rather than the 90% lie put out by his lying campaign staff led by Mr. David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel. Perhaps, Patrick Fitzgerald can help save liberals/progressives from themselves.
I do not intend to minimize the history or your pain. I watched the struggle for civil rights with great sadness and hope that justice would prevail. I was ten, I couldn't do much else. I was thrown out of school for fighting red-necked racists in Alabama who came after my African-American friends. I could see the pain, the injustice, the long history of hate filled discrimination and horror that was slavery, the Klan, and Jim Crow. I have marched against the Klan and worked for greater equality for every human being. I have done this because I had to. As a citizen, a fellow human, and as a person of conscience I knew I must.
As a Lesbian I ask you to see the similarities in the struggle. Here are some:
The murder of my people, the beatings, the suicides of the taunted and abused gay children, the legal and religious nullification, the women who's children are torn from their arms because Lesbian equals unfit, Lesbians burned alive in their home, Transpeople murdered at a horrific rate. There were 1,512 victims of hate crimes based on sexual/gender orientation in 2007. Link The Nazis, the Klan, and the Religious fundamentalists have brought their war down on my people, they will continue. Will you join me in my people's civil rights fight?
"No one is free while anyone is oppressed." -Gandhi
As admirable as your intentions might be, these people will not be reciprocating the love. It will just be perceived as a weakness, and simply embolden them in their theocracy-loving mania. This is what happens when reasonable people try to interact with unreasonable people - the reasonable people get run over, as we've seen throughout this entire decade. You can't play nice or take the high ground with psychopaths, sorry.
...and because of that he treat us like we didn't exist. As ignorant as these fanatics appear to be Obama has to give them the benefit of doubt that our present POS in chief failed miserably with many groups. Stop blaming Obama for not picking up the baton and further dividing this nation into groups for political manipulation purposes.
If Obama acts like Dumbya....Hannity, Rush, Dobbs and company will scream at the mountain tops to point out his hypocrisy.
This nut claims to be be a tame James Dobson. Why would Obama do this. They will shit on him until after his last breath. They hate Obama and everything he stands for. They hate me and you. They wish death on everybody who do not think like them or give them money.
Did you really expect honesty? If so, you were very naive.
Obama supports the LGBT community only as much as he needs to in order to get their votes.
He does not support same-sex marriage.
He is a black male; he falls into the demographic that helped Prop 8 pass.
He is a Christian, a group not exactly known for being LGBT friendly; they are also part of the "anti-equality" demographic.
Evangelical Christian Americans outnumber LGBT Americans. If he needs to chose to gain the support of one or the other, I think we can all do the math.
During the invocation people should, IMO, turn their backs.
Yeah, that's it: because Obama is black, he therefore would have voted for Prop 8. Or at least he is responsible for his "demographic"?
If he's half black is he only half responsible?
I am totally opposed to Prop 8. I think there should be federal hate crimes legislation. I think "don't ask don't tell" is a crock and needs to be changed. I support equal rights (including the right to marry whomever you want) for all people, and I think you are a jackass.
His opposition to same-sex marriage is a matter of record, though. I was more sourcing why he might have that attitude as opposed to blaming him for a group; sorry that wasn't clear, I tend to talk in "inane nuggets".
I appreciate your nuggets, and I shouldn't have called you a jackass without being sure of what you meant.
Let us get this in our sights. Warren and his church fought tooth and nail against the California referendum 8. They poured tens of thousands of dollars into the anti campaign and Obama knew it. I do not regret voting Democrat but by all that is proper I regret seeing the way the Pres elect is starting to show his true colours so soon, he obviously has hidden agendas, I am concerned that Hillary knew something we didnt and were are being conned. I reserve my decision, but I am getting bad vibes.
My mother-in-law is a church-going type, and her children are not. She got each of her children and children-in-law a copy of Mr. Warren's book for our very own. I sincerely tried to read it. The more I read, the angrier I got - not at any intolerance or bigotry, just at the austere idiocy of the whole thing.
IIRC, he spoke about how his book would make sense for all people because it was written based on indesputable logic and reason. He then proceeded to explain how all of our problems can be solved because the bible is the divinely written word of god that is too mysterious for our feeble little brains to understand.
Warren is a snake-oil salesman.
Obama is clearly calculating that people who are offended by anti-gay bigotry are more forgiving, thoughtful, and inclusive than your average evangelical. I don't see why he didn't choose a third path - a win-win - like maybe T.D. Jakes or something.
I think I'd be happiest if they announced an invocation and then had Barry Lynn or maybe Jonathon Turley come up and talk about the first amendment.
...are, generally, more forgiving, thoughtful, and inclusive than your average evangelical. Jesus was accused of eating and drinking (shocking!) with "sinners"--and that's what evangelicals consider us.
I really like your suggestions for the inauguration. T.D. Jakes would get the place rocking and then Rev. Lynn or Prof. Turley would give us all some schooling. Awesome work...
Rick Warren will explain to NBC's Ann Curry how gay marriage "hurts people." Yep. Gay marriage equality harms people, according to Obama's BFF, Rick Warren.
This is who Obama is reaching out to.
You know, Obama barely did better than Kerry did in 2004 with the radical, religious right, yet Obama still feels this peculiar desire to reach out to them and in the process, throw the LGBT community under the proverbial bus.
IT'S FULL OF CANADIANS!!11@2!!
I would love to see how that chowder head thinks two ladies getting married in California has weakened my marriage.
Teevee evangelists are like used car salesmen who don't have any cars.
Obama does not believe in gay marriage.
Why are people forgetting this?
Barack Obama to many Americans is off limits to criticism or close introspection. He has received a free pass from criticism by the Internet liberals and progressives whom justify anything he does or says.
This cult-like following is harmful to this country as the lack of criticism of the Bush-Cheney rogues had been in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks on America.
Obama has chosen as the "precious one" to reach out to the religious right and their belief system opposing gay marriage, by inviting Rick Warren.
Choices have consequences. When will all this sucking-up to Barack Obama end? When will you Internet liberals/progressives say enough and no longer support Barack Obama or the criminals in the Democratic Party?
It's interesting you refer to "September 11, 2001" and "religious" in your remark. If you choose to dismiss people with regards to their beliefs, you just may regret it? The religious people that carried out 911 were not stupid. So what was their problem that caused them to fly those Jumbo jets to their demise? If you ignore a problem as such, it will not just go away, to say the least. Thanks
I am not a mind-reader, but think I understand your abstract, if not totally vague response.
That the hijackers on 9-11-2001 were opposed to secularism and their beliefs of Western decadence, such as gay and lesbian rights, as are the Christian right, and that I should make sure not to "ignore a problem" and for me to know that "the religious people that carried out 911 were not stupid."
I think you have made a leap from my posting which is not there, however. Linking words from one sentence to another and trying to make an association which is not there might be interesting, but not necessarily real, either.
Taking a chance on getting hit by a verbal bullet, I'm gonna make my comment.
I am all about the environment and I have put together county wide beach clean ups in the past. If I met Warren and he said perhaps he could encourage his followers to volunteer to help with the beach clean up, I would welcome their help. It wouldn't mean that I agreed with much of anything he and his followers stand for and he sure as hell wouldn't agree with anything I believe in, but by finding common ground we would have gotten something accomplished.
Okay, before the bullets start flying, I'm running to the nearest exit.
I think it's a good move for the obvious 'let's come together' reason, and I think the spotlight will test Warren's ideas.
who gave the invocation at Bush's inaugural? I don't remember either. And six months from now nobody will remember nor care about this either. Sheesh...people act like Obama gave him a cabinet post! He is going to say a prayer...yada yada...amen...then buh bye. This little gesture gives those on the other side the feeling that Obama is reaching across the divide to unite the country and it is brilliant. It is a ceremonial, meaningless act that will have ZERO consequences to the policy or direction of our government...but it will show those who did not vote for and do not agree with Obama that he is not going to shut them out or shun them from his administration. Haven't we had enough shutting out and shunning for the past eight years?
"Obama wants this to be the most inclusive inauguration"
Will Obama invite anit-Semites? David Duke types who hate blacks? Why not? I thought this was to be an "inclusive" inauguration.
Gays are the last minority in this country that can be sacrificed at the alter for political expediency and thrown under the bus, even by a Democrat.
Shameful. I'm starting to have buyers remorse.
Big deal that Barack Obama tried to explain his way out of another slick political move.
Rick Warren giving the invocation at the inaguration is more proof that Barack Obama is a fraud. I am so tired of this Obama cult movement and that he is somehow immune from criticism. Obama is just another slimy politico, folks and the sooner you all realize this fact, the more you will be able to absorb the lies yet to come your way. Obama is a master at deception and for this, he has been elected the president of the USA. Obama has mastered the art of con jobster, and so well, that the liberal/progressives of the Internet have never grasped. Only true leftists knew what an abject liar Obama was all the way through the election cycle. Just because McCain-Palin were more repulsive than Obama, does not make the man with many "changes" a true liberal or progressive. Read the writing found on www.counterpunch.org or www.blackagendareport.com if you want a real critique of the fraud known as Obama from Chicago. Wake up already folks. Rick Warren. Doug Kmiec. Donnie McClerkin. All these folks are anti-gay and anti-women and firm now in the Obama camp. Obama is a gay hater and he like Rick Warren is opposed to gay marriage!!!
If you are shocked at Obama's choosing Rick Warren, don't be. Those bones that you all think Obama is just stalling to throw to the real liberals and progressives will not be coming anytime soon. Obama is a skilled establishmentarian, who used elite rhetoric on a very gullible and naive progressive movement found on the Internet and elsewhere. Contrary to Barack "Fraud" Obama, his campaign only received 25% of its funds from those "small donors" given through the Internet rather than the 90% lie put out by his lying campaign staff led by Mr. David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel. Perhaps, Patrick Fitzgerald can help save liberals/progressives from themselves.
When Obama said to let Joe Lieberman back in the fold, I then had enough of the spineless Democrats and registered with the Green Party. It is now time for others to join me in the Green Party and help build that party as an alternative to the "justice-starved" Democratic Party. After all, the Democrats have criticized the Bush war on Iraq, yet when Jack Murtha said it was time to leave, Rahm Emanuel, said Mr. Murtha speaks for himself and not the party. Who is the Democratic Party any more? Do you need them any longer? What have the Democrats done for you lately, other than abandoning your better selves? When have you all had enough of being stepped on and kicked around by the Democratic Party?
As long as you stay in the Democratic Party, expect similar results. The Democratic Party are not "pro-gay" in their policies, even as their rhetoric may sound somewhat (but, not really) conciliatory. It is apparent that the Democratic Party has much contempt for the GLBT community, and has just about said as much. The Democrats look at the left and groups hailing from the GLBT and women's movement as detriments to electoral success. It is time now to rip up your Democratic Party cards and join the Green Party or become unaffiliated. Leaving in exodus form, will rapidly get their attention folks. It is time now for taking radical action!!!!
Rick Warren was in favor of banning gay marriage in California and elsewhere. Barack Obama also opposes gay marriage. They are both in total agreement on this anti-gay issue.
Again, Obama and Warren have identical views in opposing gay marriage, and thus neither actually then really supports the civil liberties of gays and lesbians!!!! Get that through your heads already, folks!!!!!
I hate Rick Warren. Probably wouldn't even shake that douchebag's hand but that is because I'm pretty damn weak. You can be pissed off as you want about Obama bringing in people like Warren, but you can't say he didn't warn you.
Obama is trying to build consensus trying to advance the policy of community and shared responsibility. He couldn't do that without including people with whom he has large disagreements. Crooks and Liars agenda is the liberal one. Obama's agenda is that of bringing people together. To do that, it is essential to bring in people who he disagrees with.
Do you want a cookie? Does being treated like crap entitle you to act like a child? We're not republicans, we're democrats and that means we should be better than that. Don't act all butthurt because Obama is doing exactly what he said he would and try to bring people together.
Here is what I'm getting from you John:
"We want to bring people together... but not him or him or him or her or her, just the people we agree with... those are the people we want to bring together"
by legitimizing a divisive figure obama is bringing people together?
rick warren, known bigot, on stage with obama "advance[s] the policy of community and shared responsibility" community, as long as gay/lesbians are included, eh?
logically illogical
that is quite a stretch...
Is he?
Obama does not support marriage equality, and has stated as much time and time again.
But somehow it's ok for the POTUS-elect to stand in the way, but not Rick Warren?
pffffff
Okay. Obama wants everyone to get along. That would be nice if everyone in America was protected equally under the law and not subjugated to laws based on religious hatred and bigotry.
I wonder if Obama would agree to allowing Nazi war criminals to go free under the guise of "let's now get it together?"
Obama did yell about "change" but was quite vague as well as obfuscating specifics in his deceptive presidential camapaign. No, Obama does not deserve free passes or immunization from criticism any more than the Bush-Cheney administration does.
Moreover, Obama's choices cannot be analyzed as merely inconsequential any longer. Who he chooses for his cabinet and other items say quite a bit about the way he will govern, and its not gonna be from the left, but from the center-right. It is time for the Internet progressive/liberals to wake up and smell the coffee of that reality you have yet to grasp!
Hey, I'm with you there. Tell me which of these two ways will be more likely to inspire change.
Ostritization, completely ignoring or actively attacking those who are against you?
Bringing those people in and having conversations with them, involving them with your plans and making them feel like they're important.
Obama is trying things a different way than normal. Trying to bring people together and focus on more issues than just the hotbutton issues. Rick is a bigot, but he also has power, influence and the ability to push an agenda. He also does good in other areas, and just because I think he is a complete asshole doesn't mean that Obama couldn't use this asshole's influence and power for good.
To me, this is one step in bringing people together. Republicans have spent so much time and effort driving wedges between everyone that we've all accepted their way as the only way. It is time to start acting like adults and stop acting like republicans.
Come Together?
Simultaneously?
That homophobic black man on the panel makes me sick. I have no patience for a member of a minority group that has experienced discrimination yet finds it ok to discriminate against another minority.
...to discriminate against the Gay community, Martin was supporting Obama's inclusiveness. And where was Martin being "homophobic"? In Grant Park here in Chicago on Nov.4th, Obama clear said during his acceptance speech that he would be President also to those who didn't vote for him.
And you people bring up Nazi and Klan analogies to buttress your arguments to create some kind of black guilt are just plain wrong.
"Obama clear said during his acceptance speech that he would be President also to those who didn't vote for him. "
I didn't take that to mean he would throw his own gay supporters under the bus for homophobic bigots who didn't and will never support him. maybe you saw it that way, I didn't
Slick Barry didn't say at anytime during the campaign he would reach out to homophobes and hate mongers. Maybe that was dog whistle politics I didn't pick up on and you did.
Obama has stated, time and time again, that he does not support gay-marriage.
So is he a "bigot" as well?
I don'tknow, has he compared gay marriage to incest or bestiality? If so then the answer is yes. If no, then at the very least he's a shrewd politician because he would have never been elected had he said he supported gay marriage on the campaign trail.
Does that help answer your question?
Does one need to sling verbal insults to be a bigot? Or is denying rights based on sexual preference enough?
I don't know. If you go to the inauguration ask Rick Warren. He'll be there.
Exit Slick Willie enter Slick Barry.
Well first Mr. Warren had a s**t-load of boilermakers, and Mrs. Warren downed a bunch of stingers, they turned on some Johnny Mathis, took some Dramamine and turned off the lights so they couldn't see each other, fantasized they were with Cary Grant and Sophia Loren and then just got BUZZAYYY!!!
I was referring to the bigot rick warren's parents.
Obama said that he will represent all Americans. When he does, you whine like a bunch of beeches.
rubbing the noses of your liberaql supporters in the shit of the righteous?
Fuck that...
You just proved my point.
n/t
And the KKK will be guarding the motorcade, along with the Skinheads and the Satanists Local 666.
What, Rev. Hagee was busy?
tsh tsk tsk we aint allowed to bitch!
i am just waiting for obama to represent the left... or, are we not americans mr. tough guy?
When GLBT Americans are treated as full American citizens under the law and Obama stops cozying up to anti-gay preachers like Rick Warren, then yes, he would be representing all Americans.
Americans who are yet to have their full constitutional rights under U.S. law have every right to hold Barack Obama responsible for that breach. Obama also shares Warren's opposition to gay marriage as well. Obama said he was for "change." Supporting Warren's anti-marriage proposals is not "change." Therefore, Obama does not "represent all Americans."
When has the right, especially the Christo-fascist/theocrat Right, EVER negotiated anything, much less negotiated in good faith.
close to 50 percent of the electorate rejected the notion of taking ANY responsibility for ANYTHING that happened over the last 8 years...
mending fences? it's showing your belly.
This is a despicable choice and everybody -- conservatives and liberals -- who defends it is being despicable. Would you all be OK with Obama's decision if Warren was a anti-Semitic or racist?
In my opinion, there is no way Obama or the Dems would have asked Warren to perform the inauguration if he was a racist and was pro-slavery. Of if he thought Jews were evil and had lied about the Holocaust.
What it comes down to is it is still OK to discrimminate against gays.
Why not just buy us all candy and booze? Why pretend? This is wretched.
It's good to see that Crooks and Liars won't be joining the Huffington Post echo chamber that steadfastly refuses to criticize anything Obama does.
I can understand that Obama wants to reach out to evangelicals, but Warren is a bigot, a huckster, and an apologist for war and torture. He even recently suggested that assassinating Amhadinejad would be morally justified. A true Christian my ass.
I wonder what it would take for some of Obama's supporters to admit that he made a mistake, bring back Rumsfeld as Sec. of Defense? I can hear the "pragmatists" now, "well Rumsfeld certainly has the experience, who did you want him to pick, Kucinich?" Ugh. I realize now why I never get my hopes up for politicians.
Anne Curry's interview today with Rev. Homophobe http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/18/rick...
"For 5000 years religions have defined marriage as between a man and a woman" Yea, in the past 5000 years religion has been used to justify the Crusades, witch burning, lynching and the banning of interracial marriages.
If the church insists on staying in government, tax em! God knows after the budget mess the current Christian in the White House has made we could sure use the money.
Rev Homophobe continues with the usual comparisons between gay marriage and incest and child rape. You bury one Jerry Falwell and another pops up. They're like hydras.
I am reminded again of the quote from a prior college history professor "The more you learn about the history of Christianity, the more you come to understand why the Romans threw them to the lions"
That, my friends, is a crock full of shit.
That is the ultimate lie. Marriage was in a sense a man buying a woman at a certain cost to take that daughter off the hands of her father. Marriage was used to subjugate woman as well. And, don't get me started with polygamy. Polygamy was routinely practiced without any fire or brimstone raining down on the practioners(i.e. King David and King Solomon). Also, King David and Jonathan were thought to have a homosexual relationship and that was never condemned. And, please give me a verse in the Bible where God condemns any lesbian relationship.
Rick Warren and his ilk like to cherry pick passages from the Bible and just ignore others. The sooner evangelicals realize that no human holds all the keys to the interpretations of the Bible the better off we all will be.
Which offends you more:
A - Rick Warren is a doofus who thinks that he has been divinely inspired to report that an almighty sky fairy says that homosexuals must be considered second-class citizens.
or
B - Rick Warren is a highly functioning idiot who has figured out how to use sound effects and foundation make-up to induce lower-functioning idiots to give him lots of money and attention by imitating a cross between Charlton Heston in the Ten Commandments and a carnival barker.
or
C - Obama, knowing both A and B are true, calculates that he can influence a couple Senate votes or mid-term election races by politely ignoring Mr. Warren's bigotry so as not to chafe the hides of the lower-functioning idiots.
I think I'm most bothered by B.
All of the above.
say his prayer and then he can go back to Brokeback Church.
This is really the pilot episode of Obama's new reality show, "Ba-ROCKED".
In the pilot, Rick Warren stands up to speak and then Hillary Clinton gets on all fours behind him and Barack pushes him and he falls over backward, then when he starts to get up three gay midgets run in and hit him in the face with cream pies.
"HA HAHAHAHA" goes everyone, "YOU BEEN BA-ROCKED!"
CUE WACKY MUSIC
I was with you, but then why you got to bring a midget into it?
It's always about midgets with you, isn't it?
Barak, you don't use a bigot and a hate monger to bring people together. That guy is a cancer, and the only thing he has up his sleeve is destruction. You need to get your shit together and stop trying to convince us and yourself that you can do business with sociopaths, predators, bigots of any flavor and the maladjusted, because the only thing they will ever accept from anybody is complete capitulation to their position, and their position only. You are insulting the living shit out of everybody who has supported you.
You're better than that, I know it.
On the evidence, I am daily becoming more and more dubious of that assertion...
it could be just this once Rick Warren is in the picture.
I wasn't amused by CNN's "free Saddleback commercial" or Warren's phony civil discourse. I'm sure all the wingnuts on Warren's side dislike it just as much.
If anything, they should do away with the holy roller stuff at inaugurations altogether.
I agree with doing away with the hand-on-Bible and other religious connotations at the inauguration. I mean, we all SAY that we aren't a Christian or religious state, right?
We say it, but...
they told me to place my hand on the bible, but i refused. I pledged to tell the truth. I told the truth.
I do it Roman style
Grab my balls and swear on them
That's where the testi in Testify comes from,
But warren don't know that.
This is a huge disappointment considering all of the others available and more appropriate for the task of providing an invocation at a GOVERNMENT FUNCTION! But considering all the other disappointments since the election, I'm just going to wait and see and judge by the results.
In the meantime, my e-mail has been set to "Report as SPAM" anything coming from Obama.
His way of telling "us" (left/lib/prog) to stfu, and get out of the way until the next election cycle, when you'll have no where else to turn.
I suspect there will be no small number of further affronts.
I'm with the guy on the left. (no pun intended) :-P
Emotions are powerful, they often override honest thought. IMHO
Obama is giving some of his credibility to Warren but I doubt Obama is getting anything back in return. Building bridges to alienated parts of the populace is a good idea but if they won't meet him half way then it's a doomed effort. Surely he could have found a more reasonable leader of that community who would have been happy to participate. Then that person's standing would have increased in his community and help displace the unreasonable demagogues who keep their sheep isolated.
...if Warren takes this opportunity to attempt to tear Obama a new one. Republicans are scorpions; they cannot and will not change their basic natures.
In the end, this doesn't really ruffle me much. (Sorry, poster 'woody', a few posts above me). It's all politics, it's all a game. The proof will be in the puddin' when he really starts governing in January and I doubt Warren will be writing policy on war, civil rights and the economy.
As humilitating as it might be, the sooner Obama learns that he cannot trust these Republican thugs and religious zealots, the better off he and the rest of the country will be.
Maybe Obama is one of those who needs to actually touch a red hot iron to realize that it burns.
Thirty-percent less controversial than the old preacher.
He's going to team up with Christians to wipe out pedophelia while the Vatican holds their age of consent at twelve.
who gave the invocation at Bush's inaugural? I don't remember either. And six months from now nobody will remember nor care about this either. Sheesh...people act like Obama gave him a cabinet post! He is going to say a prayer...yada yada...amen...then buh bye. This little gesture gives those on the other side the feeling that Obama is reaching across the divide to unite the country and it is brilliant. It is a ceremonial, meaningless act that will have ZERO consequences to the policy or direction of our government...but it will show those who did not vote for and do not agree with Obama that he is not going to shut them out or shun them from his administration. Haven't we had enough shutting out and shunning for the past eight years?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmDipZ-AQh4
Monsanto is not a good corporation. Appointing one of their guys as head of agriculture is anything but progressive.
Monsanto is patenting seed and livestock as their own intellectual property and suing farmers that sell and re-use products containing their patented material (this is patented food!)
Monsanto doesn't want to let dairy companies tell you that their products do NOT have rbst hormones in them. Can you imagine being told that you cannot state you product does not have a certain additive?
Obama has been a naughty, naughty president elect.
Reverend Billy & The Church of Stop Shopping
http://www.revbilly.com/ :-)
- Mr. Obama seldom misses a chance to poke "Teh Liberals" in the eye.
The Democrats are treating Liberals the way Repug treat the Religious Nuts: Promise them everything, Give them very little. Repugs have strung the Dobsons & Dobsin-Lites for a couple of decades, and Dems know they have our votes because the Rs are so awful.
Time to get better Democrats in Congress.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-z1Cp3TciA
Jack and Rexella van Impe. My to favorite biblical prophesizers have been getting it wrong for nearly 60 years now.
See the latest on the "infastructure" job creation dollarama?
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-ob...
If true, that is truly incredible. These stimulus packages, are going to be no more than pork barreling at it's finest. Best part is, Canada has now jumped on board, so I get to watch my tax dollars go to canoe factories that employ 10 people, and other great job creators. Sigh.
Should be called Porkstructure. The biggest industry here in Humboldt is pot production.
I wonder if the government would be willing to open the TARP to pot farmers? It has been a rough year, lots of jobs lost, with all the busts ya' know.
Our nations will elect Restructure Czars to oversee the draining of our wallets?
What I find disturbing is this statement from Obama about bringing Rick Warren into his fold:
If you read the statement carefully, it appears that Obama plans to focus and work only on common concerns with people like Warren. If Warren champions educating people about AIDS, then Obama will work with him and ignore the rest of Warren's chilling political activities.
This is apparently Obama's idea of "post-partisan" governing, which effectively gives his blessing to Warren's ENTIRE message that is contrary to American interests, rights, and responsibilities. If their commonality is a concern about AIDS, there are PLENTY of people who are working to eradicate AIDS and are not homophobic as Warren is.
Yet Obama's strategy involves choosing the most discordant or inharmonious personalities he can find to make alliances with as long as he has one or two issues in common with them. It appears that Obama plans to ignore anything that may be contradictory to his own or his supporters' values and not deal with the problems they cause.
So are avid racists just "part of the dialog", President-Elect Obama? Would you have one of them officiate at your inauguration, and validate their viewpoint? No? Then why is it okay to allow other bigots to do it?
what i do care about is that the sf boys and girls choruses were invited
they have never been invited to perform at an inaugeration before
as an alum of the sf boys chorus, this makes me proud
so the hateful pastor gets his moment in the sun
i wont listen anyway...i dont think invocations have a place in politics
One of my lesbian friends believed all along that Barack Obama was a gay hater. She warned me even though I was more reserved on this issue and had a more wait-and-see view of it. As a matter of fact my lesbian pal did not see much difference between Obama's views on GLBT issues than Sarah Palin or John McCain's.
I am sure Rick Warren like Sarah Palin believes in that "gay cure" crapola. Well, folks, it appears that my wise lesbian pal was right all along about the gay hating Barack Obama and the spineless Democrats!
Did he come up with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and the Defense of Marriage Act? I didn't see anyone scrutinizing Shrillary's hubby for any of those policies. Anyway, until we see his actual policies regarding gay rights, I'll leave it at that. My bet is that he's really trying to steal the fundy vote from South Republicans for the 2010 mid-term elections.
Warren was chosen as some insurance against a domestic terrorist hit.. I understand but I'm still very disappointed. I too would have prefered Reverend Billy and the choir of the Church of Stop Shopping.
Obama has said that marriage is not the business of government and that the contractual relations included in present day marriage should be available to everyone through the state- i.e. civil unions.. While I agree with that, Warren is a lousy, insulting, divisive choice at a time when we need to find common ground.
thats the democrats for you.... they tell the gay community what we want to hear. they get the votes we promise, then they promptly look for a prominent evangelical ass to kiss at the expense of the gay community.
I know Ricks appearance is a symbolic one, but its insulting to some of us still licking our wounds from the marriage defeat.
Is it too much to ask that the party we helped get into office show a little backbone? Or is winning over middle class christians (who dont really share democratic values) really worth it?
Its a good thing the clinton years killed my naivete.
.
I am beginning to wonder just what we are getting in Obama . There are many decent and true Christian pastors and preachers and evangelists out there , why choose this fat ass fraud ( as are most all the "biggies" in the trade ) who is controversial to boot ? Obama is doing way too much catering to and butt kissing of the right , frankly it's is beginning to make me nervous , will he turn out to be a big let down and Lieberman light ? Damn , I sure hope not .
I have to admit I'm beginning to get impatient with Obama.
I suspect this has less to do with Warren than it does with Wrighting the damage.
Lieberman kept his committee chair so you may be right.
I was watching ABC News while fixing dinner and a report came on about Barack's choice to give the invocation (not even a 15 min. gig).
It seems there are as many disappointed people on the bible thumper's side as there are represented here. It seems that they are very unhappy that their Rev. Warren is 'approving' of the new President who is a baby killer by giving the invocation. Kinda of funny that the two of them are pissing people off.
In an earlier thread, it was brought up that Barack & Warren are strongly committed to doing something about AIDS in Africa.
Common Ground.
What is wrong with that? How about not taking what Barack is doing personally?
I respect those of you who have strong convictions - you are our conscience. But then there are the rest of us who are willing to let Barack do what he has to do. I believe he is brilliant and has our best interests at heart.
We are not so naive to know that games need to be played, backs to be scratched but we must stop at money under the table. The greed must end . . . but I digress.
So bemoan the invocator choice all you need to but it will soon be over.
"So bemoan the invocator choice all you need to but it will soon be over."
That's what rev warren tells his wife when it's boot knocking time.
That's what I referred to in my earlier post, and wondered why Obama can't find another person who's interested in doing something about AIDS. There are thousands of people who are very concerned and aren't homophobes. There's something WRONG with choosing someone who believes that gays are the scum of the earth and exposing him to the spotlight as the center of attention all over the world.
Not my line but I'll remember it forever. Thank you Mr. Boston.
What if when the guy speaks at the inauguration everybody turns their back to him?
I know Obama is trying to make these people happy, but the only thing that would make them happy is if Obama resigned, and moved out of the country.
Warren praises Obama for spitting in the face of the gay community
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/18/rick...
Barney Frank weighs in http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-barney-fran...
but maybe this is a smart move for Obama.
Could it be that he could be a force for change with Warren and his followers?
I don't know if this is too far fetched or not, but the true religious right is a cancer, so, just maybe, reaching out to someone who is not as far right as Dobson, et. al., might help win some people who aren't yet completely against the Democratic Party?
I look to Obama to reach out to many. Then, say, "Follow me."
i'm curious. if a christian pastor equated your relationship with pedophilia would you be ok with that? also would these views be a sign of moderate-non-far-right christian?
another question. if a christian pastor thought he could pray away the gay, and turn gay people straight. would this be an example of a christian moderate?
sounds like youve bought into the lie that Rick Warren is somehow different than the people you think are "far right".
Thank you for your questions. You are obviously more learned regarding Warren's positions than I am.
I am not ok with his positions on gay marriage, relationships, or Proposition 8, and perhaps you are correct that he is further right than we realize.
I find it interesting to read the debate on this subject, especially on Huffington. I have to ask, "What is Obama's angle on this?"
Does Obama see Warren as someone whose good (regarding giving to the poor) outweighs the bad? Does he think that bringing Warren into the fold might be a way to get him to soften his position on gay rights?
Again, it might be far fetched, but I appreciate Obama's shrewdness and his political acumen. I just wonder what he has in mind for Rev. Warren, after the inauguration.
I've given it 24hrs and the decision to invite Warren still hurts. I don't regret the time and energy spent supporting Obama and I even understand his whole big tent thing but quite frankly, I'm getting tired of being treated like the red-headed step child at the family reunion. This is a question of civil rights, pure and simple and in the future, I will work to support candidates who aren't afraid to admit it.
But I believe he has only done so because a majority of Americans (no matter how wrong-headed we may believe them to be) are against gay marriage but have no problem with civil unions which grant the exact same rights as a marriage to gay and lesbian couples.
Rather than try to change the minds of the majority, or saying things that may cost him votes, Obama has agreed with the majority. He has stated, in the past, when running for the Senate that he opposes the Defense of Marriage Act -- which is the piece of legislation that stands in the way of civil unions granting the exact same and equal rights to gay and lesbian couples.
He wrote this for the Windy City Times in 2004:
http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbia...
Now, unless you want to believe that Obama has completely reversed his position on equal rights since then, I think it's rather silly to consider this whole Warren thing as him throwing the LGBT community "under the bus." It's not as though he has appointed Warren to his cabinet or done anything else in the way of announcing he has abandoned his own beliefs regarding LGBT equal rights and adopted Warren's.
And let's not forget what Biden stated in the Vice Presidential debate:
"Do I support granting same-sex benefits? Absolutely positively. Look, in an Obama-Biden administration, there will be absolutely no distinction from a constitutional standpoint or a legal standpoint between a same-sex and a heterosexual couple."
So I'm not stressing about this. I'm trusting in Obama to be a man of his word, to stick to his guns, and to accomplish the things he has set out to do.
Just the facts that there will be any "invocation" at all by anyone, and that Congress opens with a prayer, and that "In God We Trust" is on our coins and paper currency are outrageous attacks on the United States of America.
We have a secular government; we have separation of church and state--or at least we are legally required to if we want to call ourselves the United States of America.
Middle Eastern superstitions such as Judaism and its two sects called Christianity and Islam, along with all other childish (and dangerous)delusional belief systems in imaginary "gods" have absolutely NO place in U.S. government and public policy.
Face the truth, fellow citizens: ALL religious belief is a sign of serious mental and emotional disorder; religious people are mentally ill. Parasites such as Rick Warren, the Pope and all the other "religious leaders" feed off the emotional needs of the sick, needy,and wacked-out believers in an imaginary sky pixie.
The public should demand that Obama and all other public officials keep primitive superstition OUT of ALL government activites and events.
Good job mate. Thanks for affirming everything that the Right thinks about the left. Some people think that homosexuality is a mental defect. I am an atheist and I don't give a shit for religion. That said, people have the right to believe in whatever the fuck they want, and that is one of the great things about the USA.
I hate arguing with fellow liberals about religion. Yes, it has been divisive. Yes, it has caused wars. But I have met and worked with a great deal of religious people that have done a hell of a lot of good work and continue to do good work. I was very devout when I was in college, and there weren't that many folks from the LGBT, the College Democrats or College Republicans for that matter that were building Habitat for Humanity homes for the poor in rural Illinois. My former church did, as did the ROTC and the fraternities and sororities. Oh yeah, Jimmy Carter, that well known God-botherer and advocate for peace is the founder of Habitat for Humanity!
Get over yourself, and rememeber the meaning of liberal. It's rooted in freedom and that freedom means being able to believe whatever without some twit labelling you as mentally ill.
I don't really care who gives the goddamn invocation. Who is going to remember it after a while? I wish it had of been Michael Pfleger, someone whose good work I am familiar with.
Good job mate. Thanks for affirming everything that the Right thinks about people who pretend to represent the left. Your post reeks of ignorance. The fact is that literally hundreds of psychological and psychiatric studies show that religious belief is symptomatic of delusional thought disorder--a serious mental illness. It is not me who labels all religious people as mentally ill, it is a fact of Science.
Still, I do not dispute the right of people to believe in imaginary sky pixies if they are unable to escape the psychological abuse they were subjected to by their sick parents, church and society when they were innocent, vulnerable children. Most of these unfortunate victims are trapped by the delusional thinking they have been ruthlessly conditioned into. And I do not challenge the right of those emotionally unstable individuals who have freely elected to adhere to a delusional belief system to get them through the night. Nothing in my post that you so incompetently responded to suggests otherwise.
But I do maintain--as does the United States Constitution--that there must be a clear separation of church and state. A religious "invocation" or "prayer" by a nutcase parasite as part of any official government activity is a clear violation of Law. Those who do not think so would be much happier living in a theocracy such as Iran. Bon voyage, mate.
I'm new here, and I'm not sure what I did wrong.
I'll try this again.
Letter from Obama to the Windy City Times:
http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbia...
With my new full length mirror I can clearly see my navel and my litmus is better than theirs.
I've suffered so long, with hope in my heart
To one day witness the glory, that has kept us apart.
Some days it seems, as though nobody cares
Often called names, with cold hearted stares'
I never knew this would happen, the day I was born
Why I often feel triumph, trodden, trampled and torn
I'm sure I'm not alone in my thoughts, my feelings or views
Though its true I must admit, I've not walked in all shoes
Why can't they just listen to me, if it's just for one night
At least make an attempt to understand, instead of just fight
Words mean so much and describe so many things
Like music to my ears, when he or she sings
When times get hard, like they sometimes do
I rely on our relationship, to often pull me through
The good and bad days will come, I can't hold back the future
A broken heart can't be healed, with merely a suture
There are so many others, far off worse then I
I often forget to remember, and forget to ask myself why
It's so easy to dismiss, with one full swoop
The innocent victims that appear in a group
I must be better then the critical, careless and rude
Because if I do the same, it's just simply crude
Though with caution in mind, I choose to love through labor
Though I don't need a book, that tells me how to treat my neighbor
PS. Best wishes
In a world where people actually respected the idea of separation between church and state, there would be no invocation. Our country is not called the Christian United States of America, and the Bible is not the law of the land. It is not wrong or immoral to demand that the church be separated from the state. Until we actually do this, we will continue to see a parade of assclowns masquerading as tolerant and compassionate Christians (whatever that means) who will be given a voice by our government because no one in power can seem to grasp the idea that religion has no business being involved in the matters of the state.
Our President-elect should know better. If he wants to bring diverse views to the Inaugural, how about someone who believes African-Americans should not be allowed to marry whom they choose nor be guaranteed not to be discriminated against in housing or jobs? It is absolutely no different, and the idea that it somehow is not equivalent is a sign of moral failing in whomever takes that position.
Sam, I'm not to familiar with the preacher scene, who still holds them views? "If he wants to bring diverse views to the Inaugural, how about someone who believes African-Americans should not be allowed to marry whom they choose nor be guaranteed not to be discriminated against in housing or jobs" Do you have any names? Thanks
Amended: I'm sorry, I missed your intelligent point. You were making a point right? Because I'm sure there are some out there.
With the United Stated touted to be the most christian country (ouside the Vatican - if you consider that a country) with more people in prison than any other country, I am wondering just how 'religious' Barack Obama is.
Being cognizant of the fact that an atheist would have no chance of being elected to the presidency in today's political climate, Obama broadcast a Thanksgiving message without any reference to god. He also claimed that he was not aware of any of the rants of Jeremiah Wright. How often did he attend his services?
Just where does Obama stand on religious belief?
:-P
I think there are many layers to this situation.
I do not think that this decision really has anything to do with Obama's considerations towards gays and lesbians.
I think the intention leads elsewhere.
He may be trying to bridge a gap in regard to the religious right , the old church ladies, conservatives and what have you.
If this is the case ,it makes sense , and yet it is a rather outrageous move.
Not to mention a huge stomach turner!
It is simple reality that a political figure who pledges to bring "change" is subject to a variety of challenge and restriction ,but contradiction is another unsettling story.
Obama's response to the situation of him being invited to speak by the Pastor despite opposing views does not mean that said pastor be allowed to move into the guest room out of politeness.
There are other religious leaders out there to choose from.
Again, I say this goes beyond the obvious.
I do not like ,do not agree and am not happy with it , regardless the argument.
I sincerely hope Obama makes some changes, this being one of them
I think he is a poor choice. Rick Warren has done good but he also is not tolerant of those different from what he tries to advocate.
Much as Clinton caved on the issue of gays serving openly in the military, Obama undermined his flacid support of LGBT rights with his clear statement that "marriage is between a man and a woman". Obama's self-contradictory formal opposition to Proposition 8 didn't discourage the Yes on 8 campaign. They proudly pictured Obama along with McCain on their advertisements, the two candidates united in support of traditional marriage.
Of course, Obama's lack of conviction on same-sex marriage has been no worse than his running mate's, or for that matter, the Democratic Party's cowardice. But Obama has become the undisputed leader of his Party and an inspiration to all Americans who hope to see the nation make a change for the better. If Obama himself won't muster up the courage to oppose discrimination against LGBT folks, how can anyone expect any more support from Democrats as a whole? Is it not clear that it's an issue that Obama has declared "off the table"?
Moreover, Obama has become a powerful role-model for oppressed minorities in America. He has set an example for African Americans in particular, whom exit poles indicated as voting over 70% in favor of Proposition 8, on how to vote homophobically while maintaining a clear conscience. In Obama's America, non-whites have finally won acceptance into the highest reaches of mainstream society, but queers remain firmly shut out.
And the reason has nothing to do with racism and everything to do with homophobia. As many have pointed out, the core source of Prop-8 bigotry lies at the heart of the Christian and Mormon church, and its hateful message cuts a wide resonant swath across American ethnic communities. Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics have all bought into Christian propaganda and share responsibility for its virulent homophobia.
However, as a prominent Christian and African American, not to mention leader of the Democratic Party, it is Obama who now leads the way for those who seek to block the acceptance of LGBT people in mainstream society. He has shown them how and where to draw the line that keeps us shut out, while betraying absolutely no animosity or prejudice against us personally. It is exactly the balance of benign neglect that homophobic Christian America has been searching for.
This is truly Obama's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" issue, and it is he who has the opportunity to break the stalemate. But until Obama does some genuine soul-searching on his commitment to social justice, nothing that he says is going to make a difference.
Not sure I have much to add. I'm just thinking that the media should stop acting like Obama is making such a brave move by reaching out to evangelicals while "potentially offending a part of his base" by selecting Rick Warren to deliver his invocation -- as if evangelicals are such a marginalized minority in this country. I mean really - what's a braver, riskier move -- openly voicing support for gay people, or reaching out to the Christian community.
I can guarantee Obama wont back down from this choice. The fallout if he did would seriously tarnish his presidency from the get-go. Let's face it -- if you have to choose between Christians and The Gays to offend on Day One, it's pretty obvious who will win that argument.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbFEnoITiWE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZlgDQbvo9I
Let's put the holly back into the holiday
Let's do it Druid style.
Jim Wallace from Sojourners would've been a far better choice for this invocation. Inclusiveness is noble and admirable until your friend has a knife at your throat. Warren is a businessman, nothing more. And like every good businessman he doesn't commit to any side but his own. Had it been McCain & Palin taking the oath of office it would've been Warren right up there with them too, with the same shit eating grin across his face. Dobson painted himself into a corner just like Robertson with respect to Obama. I expect Warren to be the new NAE leader with the same access Ted Haggard had to Bush inside a year.
My greater concern is this decision being couched as a gay issue. I can understand homosexuals beef with Obama over this, but you knew his position on gay marriage, etc. and you still voted for him, because the alternative was even more horrible. For Warren and the mega-churchers it's much more than a conflict with homosexuality. It's their supporting an illegal elective war for profit based on verifiable lies. It's a support of a neo-con agenda as world view steeped in faith. These are the same people shouting "KILL HIM" at Palin rallies, and continuously driving home Obama as "terrorist", "muslim", "anti-christ" etc. during the campaign. These are the 23%ers, the Jesus Campers, the people with W stickers still affixed to their SUVs after 8 years.
What are the limits of "coming together"?
Dick Cheney -- because he sincerely believes torture works?
The torturers themselves because they were only following orders?
George Bush -- because he sincerely believed an executive could do anything?
Every bigot who has a sincere religious excuse for his bigotry?
Ah, yes. "Coming together". But coming together where? The same old fascism?
Login or Register to post comments.