Rick Warren should withdraw
By John Amato Friday Dec 19, 2008 10:00am
Rick Warren has spoken and commends Obama for taking heat from the base for "inviting someone like me" and making the choice of picking him for the invocation. Good for him. Wow, he just admitted that he's a homophobe and represents the Jerry Falwell wing of the religious right. The LGBT community is furious and rightly so.
Please Rick, do us all a favor and pull out and say he has a stomach ache or something. He knows he's against the gay community except when he serves them some water and donuts and he should thank Obama for the good will and stay home.
Gay bashing is acceptable to the traditional media since it praises Warren almost every chance it gets, but if he made similar statements about Catholics as an example, you know Bill Donohue would be screaming from the rafters.
I know Warren loves the publicity, but there are millions of people upset over this and if he is really a man of GOD, he would ease their suffering and outrage and withdraw fron the proceedings.
Obama represents every American as our President while Warren represents a faction of this country that wants to oppress the rights of a segment of this great nation.
Login or Register to post comments.
wouldn't be an issue if Christianity wasn't in effect the state religion or there was separation of church and state.
I'm free that day (and every other day being under employed in Michigan).
I'll do it and I work cheap.
We would ridicule someone who professed belief in RA, or Zeus, or Thor.
Or the tooth fairy.
There are myriad others.
One more non existent deity to dismiss and you are liberated, folks.
Obama does NOT want gay-marriage.
Why does C&L not give a shit about this? Too many self-professed liberals are so quick to forget that Obama has stated again and again that he believes marriage is between one man and one woman.
But apparently, C&L does not care.
It is only Warren who is in the wrong here. Not Obama.
What, fucking, ever
I think most C&L readers are "liberals" and not progressives.
They are Democrats not progressives.
The are Clintonites not progressives.
Obama is about getting elected and staying elected. He knows that "Americans" hate gay people for the most part. Just like they hate n_____ and greasers.
He knows this.
What a neat and tidy world you live in.
Actions speak louder than words and this action speaks volumes.
Obama is totally in the wrong, and I think you are deliberately skipping over all the people who have expressed this.
Get a grip, calm down.
Point me to one sentence in any of these C&L articles that document Obama's consistent statements on his view of same-sex marriage.
Get a grip? Please, Professor. I think C&L needs to get a grip over this. They're completely glossing over the fact that Obama has zero intention of lifting a finger for the gay community.
and not only know exactly what Obama's intentions are and, better yet, how to numerically measure them.
Gimme a break, Ricky.
That's all you can say in response to this? Look, I like Obama. I gave him money, I voted for him.
But I also know his record and what he has stated time and time again. So, unless you have something to say about Obama's view of gay marriage, then spare me.
I think his view is to try not to get involved because it's a huge hot potato for any politician (as is abortion). I do not, however, think that he is anti-gay. I think he would not crusade against gays, but also not put forth any sweeping proposals in support of gays. It's fence sitting, and probably the kind of thing one needs to survive in Washington.
I haven't said I'm "furious" about Warren, but I am terribly terribly disappointed, and feel there are many other more suitable, less extreme, choices he could have made. Why Warren, is beyond me. Surely there is someone more centre, as it seems, in the USA, religion MUST be involved (for some unknown --fucked up-- reason.)
...in same-sex marriage.
What part of that do you not understand? Do you think he was lying when he said he believes marriage is between one man and one woman?
Obama is a man, nothing more. Sometimes he is wrong (I believe), but overall I think he is a decent fellow. I don't think he is going to go out of his way to hurt gay people like the GOP does.
That said, this is not the only issue in which Obama is too "centrist" for my liking, but I still think he will be a good president.
I am a "flaming" liberal, and a "flaming" progressive! To me, they are one in the same.
My own father wasn't so sure about same-sex marriage(and may have been against it), as are lots of other people.
Before it became legal in Canada, he asked if it wouldn't be acceptable (to gays) to have legally recognized civil unions. (I am gay.) I said that's fine with me because I think marriage is a farce anyway, or at least simply a property contract.
But, then I asked him, "If you're going to go that far (full civil unions), why deny full rights because of some semantics, simply because someone has a sexual prference other than yours?" He agreed. Go all the way-- same sex marriage-- for 'em. Same-sex marriage-- nothing wrong with it. (He's a conservative lawyer by the way.)
Obama might be weighing these same kinds of things, thinking about the 300,000,000 Americans out there. I'm sure he would not campaign against, he's just not going to make it a priority, like change the Constituion. Is that too hard for you to understand?
Yes, it would be cool if he was 100% for it, but what politician is, or could be? Has ANY president pushed for abortion? NO. Political suicide. That's America fer ya. Wake up.
PS Lots of people need some education too. They believe in boogymen.
So what's wrong with Thor?
I heard Daniel Craig was offered the part in a movie but turned it down.
Just as well, he'd probably spend all his time polishing his helmet.
I want the tooth fairy to do it. I never ridicule the tooth fairy.
, 12/19/2008 - 10:06 — LazyCosmos
wouldn't be an issue if Christianity wasn't in effect the state religion or there was separation of church and state.
_______________________________________________________________
At least a trial seperation.
A homophone? Is that a person who speaks Gay?
No, it just sounds like a person who speaks Gay.
No, I think it's a communication device you call gays on, sorta like the Batphone.
So homophones would probably speak to one another over the homophone.
Obama needs to install one in the White House, so he doesn't make a gaffe like this again.
"Sir, Barney Frank is calling on the homophone!"
"I'll take it in the Oval Office."
Shouldn't that be Oral Office?
No. The oval orifice.
It's been the Oral Office since the Lewinsky days.
and they don't let me...is that discrimination?
Or can anyone use one?
Sad that a serious article about homophobia is a launch board for anti gay remarks just because of a spelling error. A**Hol*s
It's based on the same technology as the gaydar.
Relax, dude, we're poking some fun at the misspelling (sp?) not the issue of homophobia. It's also intended to shine a little light on the ignorance of those who are followers of Rev. Warren.
Sorry if you got offended, but lighten up some, OK?
Are you f-ing serious? Maybe we, the gay community, will be able to lighten up when we have THE SAME RIGHTS AS YOU.
Lighten up. Unbelievable.
Marco, Fluffy,
Are we not allowed to make fun of a typo until all human rights issues are solved and we live in complete harmony?
You must be a lot of fun at parties.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if some of the people here making fun of the word homophone are gay themselves.
Not me though; I'm straight
Just not successful.
Am I harshing your good times? I don't want to stop you or any other progressives from making the same, tired gay jokes I've heard for years, but usully from Republicans.
So sorry, again. I'll get back in the corner, take all the homophobic bullshit jokes given and wait silently till you're done having fun at the party.
You've heard a Republican saying that homophones are people who sound gay?
I must have grown up around some pretty uncreative people.
They must've spoke with their mouths full.
I'll keep trying to keep it light while getting insulted and you just keep cherry-picking "hilarious" comments in the thread.
I think for something to be "homophobic" it has to have some malice or at least ignorance behind it.
Scroll up.
I apologize if I said anything hurtful. I try to respect everyone.
But after that thread about NOLA...I needed a laugh...
Sorry if I hurt anyones feelings.
I love "old Billies" like you. We're just havin' some fun on the side.
Yes, lighten up-- you sound ridiculous. I'm gay myself-- you're so anxious to hyperventilate over something that you've gone out of your way to interpret a harmless joke in the worst possible way.
I'm sick of all this shit so sorry if I don't feel like lightening up. It's maddening that the change that was suppose to start in January turns out to be more of the same. Unless you're gay then you can't understand what it's like to be kicked in the head when you're down.
I hear ya, but people here are not "the enemy". Any BIG change scheduled for January sounds dubious to me: it doesn't work that way. "The Change" I see is dunderhead won't be Commander-in-Chief, and that's about all the miracles I'm expecting for a while.
Ya know, it's a pendulum swing, and first we have to pull it out of negative territory, where it's been mired for eons.
I'm a member of the committee too, and hear way worse stuff at any gay bar.
"I'm sick of all this shit so sorry if I don't feel like lightening up. It's maddening that the change that was suppose to start in January turns out to be more of the same. Unless you're gay then you can't understand what it's like to be kicked in the head when you're down."
I'm a middle-aged straight white woman, and I sympathize with you. I was a geeky kid in high school, and I have some sense of what it's like to feel that you don't fit in and have to hide who you are. It really sucks. I also remember a couple of buddies who suffered because they were considered "faggy looking".
I consider gay-bashing to be the same thing as racism, except gay-bashing is more socially acceptable. It's one thing for Obama to reach out to his opponents. It's another to invite a bigot to be a "guest of honor". Would Obama have "reached out" to someone who publicly made racist comments or played on fear of African-American people? Can you imagine the fuss if Obama had picked a Jesse Helmes disciple?
I don't blame the GLBT community for being angry.
Trust me. They WERE using the homophone.
Kate is correct. Collect your prize.
(signed, an English teacher, who happens to be gay.)
It's someone who speaks
toat teh Gay.I'd much rather see some person from a far less insulting Christian Church than a guy like this give the invocation. A Lutheran, Presbyterian, or a Baptist (not Southern Baptist) would be far more acceptable across the board.
Oh, to have a Muslim clergyman give the invocation! The sound of neocon heads exploding would be deafening.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY-03vYYAjA
While we are in front of the mirror admiring our navel litmus, I see we have decided we won't let Southern Baptists pass our litmus test.
I'm getting a sinking feeling that the next four years are going to be more futile, conciliatory attempts by Democrats to "work together in a bi-partisan manner" and a continued total disinterest in working with them from Republicans.
Change you can pretend in.
I have been saying that for a long time.
Though I had HOPED it wouldn't be true.
"Change you can pretend in". Alice, with respect, you are on the fringes of US political and religious beliefs. You will NEVER get the changes YOU want, because almost no one else wants what YOU want.
Many of the rest of us are far more moderate in our outlook and far more realistic in our expectations. For most of us, President Obama represents meaningful and significant change.
It is pure MADISON AVENUE.
That is why the Obama campaign beat out Apple Computer here as Marketeer of the year.
They sold the entire business as 'Change you can believe in'.
BUT:
It will be the same CIA Secret Government.
It will be the same Military Industrial Media Complex.
It will be the same Fat Cat Wall Street Bookies.
It will be the same Organized Religion Racketeers.
It will be the same Corporate Governance.
More or less. Maybe not a LOT more, certainly not a LOT less.
There will be an INTELLIGENT FRONT MAN, and that much IS CHANGE.
That single feature goes a long way in it being CHANGE YOU CAN PRETEND IN.
But, it is not enough for me, and if not being for that cast of characters I've listed places me on the fringe, then I am and will remain glad to be on the fringe.
I just happen to believe that most Americans don't have all of the information that they need to make an informed decision.
They turn on their TVs and believe the BS that pours out. They sit there and are manipulated by Madison Avenue which turns them into Consumer Bots. They consume products and political sloganeering.
I don't know if that includes you or not.
Just as you don't know about me, despite your claims.
Madison Avenue and American politics are about MANIPULATION.
In political campaigns if things are going fine they say 'status quo, stick with the people you know'. If things are a mess they say 'we must have change'.
It is as old as the hills. What is new is the nearly complete demise of our free press.
Here Reporters Without Borders rates the US press freedom as 48th in the world, between Nicaragua and Togo.
Organized Religion is a Racket, War is a Racket.
They run together.
Read your other post on Credit Default Swaps are like life insurance for vampires. Thanks for the info
that you are going to be able to say "I told you so" in a couple years from now with regard to BHO.
As an idiot-boomer, I'm just thrilled to see a black man as Prez.
And I have the damnedest feeling that it is precisely what the corporatists want.
We'll see, I guess. If we live long enough
I dig that about you. Some people don't realize: you can't get to the left unless you push. these moderates will 'discuss' BS to death with people who have shown a willingness to kill for profit and to stand by and amuse themselves as they witness the suffering of others.
Over a million Iraqis dead. 8,000 americans dead from 9/11, and two false-flag wars.
Moderates are good for bringing 'harsh language' to a gunfight. No wonder they get stepped on.
If they paid attention to how this country was founded, they'd realize the true price of freedom.
Obama picks his FRIEND to do the invocation at his inaguration, and all of a sudden, people are moping and claiming that 'ohhh, I guess there won't be any change'. Awwww. Seriously, this whining is pathetic! You guys are so f'ing flaky, it's laughable. Especially over at Americablog, Taylor Marsh, and TalkLeft. First Americablog didn't like Obama because of Donnie McFlurfin (or whatever the F his name is), then they LOVED him (after they decided to hate Hillary), and suddenly they are back to hating him. They even posted a picture of Obama from Time and said, 'have any shoes to throw?'.
Get a f'ing grip! Warren is not deciding policy, he's doing a f'ing invocation. Christ! You guys are using the same guilt by association that republicans used against Obama.
Sad.
that many of us have watched in horror for the last 30 years while our country has been pushed to the right.
In the last 30 years our health care has gone from #3 in the world to #34.
The Constitution is being ignored.
And now Obama is kissing up to the Krisstian KooKoos
What is pathetic is the child who refuses to understand others.
If I wasn't such an excellent person,
I'd tell you to "Go spoon a goose."
No...make that -
eat shit and live.
STICK A FORK IN HIM!
Yeah, we gave him negative six weeks, and what the hell has he done?
So, you would rather have Sarah Palin as President?
I think this whole discussion falls into the "get a life" category.
If it were up to me, there wouldn't be any preachers at all in the inaugural ceremony.
Since it isn't up to me... given the amount of trouble the US is in, they should not only bring in Warren and Lowery, but a rabbi, a Mormon, a Jehovah's Witness, a Muslim, Oral Roberts, Jimmy Swaggart... and hope that one of them gets through.
No, I still think that we dodged the bullet on Little Miss Armageddon!
Gotta say, no preachers would be the most appropriate.
"Spiritual Middlemen for Folks' Imaginary Invisible Omnipotent Friends" is the truth of it.
Caution: May induce vomitting.
wrap my brain around this. I want to believe Pres.-elect Obama is doing the right thing or the correct thing if he wants to bring this country closer together but this is, or at least Rick Warren is, too polarizing an individual. While the LGBT community is upset and rightly so, imagine the furor if PE Obama had picked the Rev. J. Wright.
And yes this "co-President" bullshit will continue for the next four years.
...Between this post and the one about the white militias firing on blacks during Katrina. Things never change do they ? I feel deeply saddened that this bigot is being offered such a position at such an historic occasion. I'm fine if he wants to create a dialogue with these conservative Christians but not on the big day. Not on OUR big day( at least that's how I had been thinking of it ). And no I'm not gay, just a human striving to be humane.
means fucking over everyone who isn't a Republican.
I want a second political party.
Isn't that genocide!?
he wouldn't be a practicing televangelist
This pick really pisses me off. There's reaching across the aisle and then there's kicking your supporters in the teeth, and Obama's doing the latter here.
How about he give his own damn supporters a little consideration here?
Look lower.
Early withdrawal, isn't that a tad onanistic?
named Onan. He used to spill his seed...
If I hadn't spend my adult life in apartments and now a condo, I always wanted a female dog that I would name Bitch.
she bitcha.
Mr Warren has "shipwrecked his Faith". 1st Timothy is a book of the Bible that talks about people like Mr Warren.
Additionally, until WPE chose a Christian for his Inauguration the invocation had always been non partisan. It is unfortunate that President Elect Obama has chosen to exclude all religions except this narrow sect of Christianity.
Obama's been playing fottsie with Warren since 2006. He owes him something, I'm not sure what, but he owes him something.
None of Warren's flock are going to remember what a bigger man Obama was for inviting him to do the invocation when he's running for reelection in 2012. However, ALL of Obama's 2008 supporters will.
someone on the obama inauguration committee (or who/whatever is putting this thing together) fucked up.
warren NEVER should have been offered this chance. and, i would be SHOCKED, if warren withdrew, seems completely out of his nature.
Warren is "a word pronounced the same as another but differing in meaning?"
And the culprit here is Obama, not "someone on the committee". God, people are naive. He's giving a big fuck you to lots of people who supported him. Obama is just wheels and gears on the inside. Same cynical a-hole as Bush.
What is a homophone for Rick Warren?
Rick Warren's ego will never allow him to turn away from this opportunity to advance his empire. He will not retreat to the cone of silence, his cash cow ministry or any other place. And he certainly will not change his opinions and discontinue his atacks on a major segment of the american public.
Bipartisanship requires two sides and i do not see the right joining in on any of bipartisan approach to governing so Obama's attempt here will be futile.
I am so-o-o feckin sick of all these feckin people and their feckin imaginary omnipotent friends -
The whole fucked up religion grift needs to be outlawed.
Barak Obama ought to be ashamed of himself.
That is the first time I've ever slammed Obama.
Here we frikken go again.
Obama refers to...."disagreeing without being disagreeable"...well Warren is disagreeable. Comparing gays and lesbians with pedophiles and beastiality qualifies as "disagreeable" in my book!
Who is next, David Duke as White House dinner guest?
Dems take bipartisianship to the nth degree and only appear weak...like they're looking for approval.
Speaking of books:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzlkvI9EZeA
get over it!
whining on about Warren makes one just as bad as he.
I think you've just created reverse logic.
Or maybe its anti-logic. Don't let any logic get near Golden boy!! The universe will collapse.
Complaining about social injustice makes people whiners.
Just shut up, bend over and roll up your sleeve...
lets see
Warren says he doesnt approve of gays
Gays say they dont approve of Warren
there's injustice against gays and Christian beliefs
the cycle of hate continues
at least Obama is doing something to try to bridge the gap
see: Fri, 12/19/2008 - 10:41 — Old Billy
it fits this post too
Ahmedinejad says he doesnt approve of Americans
Americans say they dont approve of Ahmedinejad
Get over it.
?
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 confront 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, ethnic minorities have finally won acceptance into the highest reaches of mainstream society, but LGBT people remain firmly shut out.
As many have pointed out, the core source of anti-gay 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, 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 can unite around.
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 any difference at all.
We're blowing this way out of proportion. A courageous, purely symbolic gesture by Obama is getting attacked for no good reason. We've become a country of indignation, and intolerance. Obama is telling the world that the days of intolerance of people with differing opinions is over, and how does his base react? Through intolerance. It's really sad. And this moron Warren is getting quality press time.
Who wins through the left's expression of indignation? He does, no one else. We need to support Obama and understand the meaning of this gesture. It's brilliant.
asking a known bigot, an extremely divisive figure, a jesus-profiteer to conduct the invocation while you are talking about tolerance... yeah, that is courageous, courageous that you could make such a claim with a straight face.
and media? hello.... obama is giving this asshole the biggest microphone available.
it is such a head-scratcher when people talk about 'tolerance' and then defend the choice to give a preacher of intolerance such a platform.
And I don't think this is "blowing things out of proportion."
This is a saddening slap in the face to the diverse community who helped put him in the White House and who defended him against every outrageous attack from the wingnuts. He wants to dialogue with the bigots ? That's great. More power to him. but don't do it on THIS DAY. Its outrageously inappropriate and frankly it hurts.
out of picking Warren. First, President Obama gets to to claim bi-partisanship. Second, he gets to distance himself from some of the more extreme elements of the left. Third, he gets some cover from attacks by the right (since Warren is definitely on the Christian right).
...and NO, I am not claiming that every gay person is on the extreme left. Sexual preference is NOT deterministic of political or social outlook.
so curious what the "extreme elements of the left" are asking for... and who are these "extreme elements of the left"?
this should be good...
in this case, would be anyone who goes completely crazy because President Elect picked Warren to give a 3 minute speech.
People who oppose Warren's message (or parts thereof)- not extreme. People who dislike Warren because of his message - not extreme. People who are dedicated to changing US society so that Warren's religious views are embraced by an ever smaller majority - not extreme. People who are disappointed that President Elect Obama picked Warren - not extreme.
On the other hand, people who want to censor Warren because they don't like some of his views - extreme. People who are loudly denouncing the incoming administration and are apparently prepared to try to undermine President Elect Obama because of Warren - extreme. People who dismiss the incoming administration as the same as the outgoing adminstration - extreme.
As examples, see Zenrage's and Tropicgirl's posts some distance below.
Does that help you?
umm, kinda, but not really.
you provide a concise listing of views and ideas that you find "extreme", sure... but what that has to do with the "left" i have no idea.
you are simply giving bob roberts' reasons why he finds some people extreme (based on bob roberts' opinion, however shortsighted) and then declaring them lefties.
also, and maybe i didn't see it, but i am wondering who is trying to censor warren?
In order to be truly tolerant, we must tolerate intolerance?
Yes.
... intolerable.
x
I agree.
This is the flag lapel issue for the left.
Equating crypto-fascist jewelry trends to human rights.
Makes sense to me...
Yeah, unless of course you're gay. Enjoy your happy little life Bro.
...detractors so we can figure out ways to tackle our Nation's many dilemmas.
Until anyone of you members of this angry lynch mob can produce examples of President-elect Obama showing malice towards the LGBT community instead of his continued theme of inclusiveness(Obama didn't renege, apparently many weren't listening), I still don't get it. Obama did this same reconciliation thing with Lieberman(I didn't like that move either).
I sooo wish I could be larger where it counts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYlDbv7MqE8
Being an Illinois resident and having a bit more of a historical perspective on Mr. Obama's style I'm inclined to cut him slack on things like this.
He seems to approach every situation as a consensus builder and I think that's what he's doing here with this whole Warren thing.
He hasn't even been sworn in yet and people are already lining up on both sides waiting for a fight.
John meant to use the word homonym since a little used archaic meaning of "Warren" means giant hypocritical douchebag. Or it will by the time I get finished making the necessary Wiki change.
I was just saying this morning, "My boss is such a Warren."
I guess the question is this: can a reasonable human being think there is a middle ground? Is there some (any) validity to the idea that marriage between heterosexuals holds an unique important cultural significance?
I'm a big opponent of Prop. 8, and I think all people should have the same rights whatever kind of sex you're into; but I've got to say, maybe.
I don't agree, but I think a reasonable person could make the case - it's hard to imagine that it doesn't come down to separate but equal, which I can't abide, but I'm listening to the other side still, I guess.
Maybe not.
Either way, Obama ran this way in the campaign. I don't see why this should be a shock to anyone.
A majority in most states are still not in favour of same-sex marriage. The country is just not ready for this yet. Despite significant changes (progress), US society is not sufficiently socially liberal to accept same sex marriage YET. If liberal social change continues, same sex marriage is only a matter of time.
Until that point, create a separate category for same sex couples that is legally equivalent to marriage in every way (other than the terminology).
Finally, I do accept the logic that, if one part of the traditional definition of marriage is no longer essential, then neither is the other part of the definition. In other words, if Bob and Doug can get married, then so can Bob, Doug and Fred. Of course, US society has not yet liberalized to that extent either.
Should this separate category wear a pink triangle on their outerwear? I mean, we don't really belong, do we?
A majority in most countries are still not in favour of BushCo.-America, and the spawn it's leaving. Should we just forget about it? One day, over the rainbow, bluebirds might sing? (Or is it OK to throw our shoes-- now?)
In the meantime, let's bash a few homos (physically or legally). I get it.
Playing the victim realy seems to turn you on.
Warren do the right thing? That'll be the day!
why doesnt he get ripped for making things up the same way that wright did?
and seriously...let him make the idiotic prayer...who cares
Ever seen the old Batman TV show from the '60s?
Fri, 12/19/2008 - 10:40 — Big Boppa
Trust me. They WERE using the homophone.
_________________________________________________________
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2410/150027007...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18TLHhhHZCA
When has a reichwinger ever stepped down or done anything for the good of national unity?
I respectfully disagree with John Amato's post. It's too late for Obama to chinge his mind about Warren. If he did, he'd look weak and vacillating. Warren is going to do the invocation, bottom line.
OK, gays are offended - rightly so. But is it that big a deal? How many readers of this site have ever cared before about the prayer spoken at the inauguration? The economy is collapsing, and people are upset about a 3-minute homily?
I saw a link on the National Review yesterday (sorry, it seems to be gone) about how upset pro-lifers are that Warren will bless Obama's presidency. So this move is causing conflict on the Right. Good politics, I'd say.
I hope somebody hangs a rainbow flag behind Warren when he speaks. Won't happen, but it would be cool. Others will speak their minds, I'm sure.
Obama recently said an "invisible hand" was guiding the economy. The economy and God must therefore be very much connected in Obama's mind. It would naturally be very important for Obama to have Warren pray to God to make everything nice again.
God is a bit difficult to understand, as he was "invoked" for Bush and that didn't work out well. Maybe the third time is the charm. The whole marriage business shouldn't be too big of a distraction, as God personally didn't seem to find marriage very important. When the rubber hit the road, the Holy Ghost did not get married even after He got Mary pregnant.
Holy Spirit was/is gay.
Q.E.D.
INRI.
;)
Hilarious!! I grew up Catholic, but I never heard THAT one!
The "invisible hand" sounds more like Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, and a reference to the current collapsing boosh economy.
And as far as God knocking up Mary, the rubber hitting the road is unlikely since that's a form of prophalactic.
Right. He threw the rubber on the road and proceeded.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0ns8t9iQck
The term "invisible hand" is not a religious reference. It's straight out of Adam Smith's 'Wealth of Nations', the bible of capitalism.
Lately, it's been the invisible middle finger...
the invisible hand lately has been the hand stuffing cash into envelopes for politicians.
Come to think of it, that has been going on for some time.
Never mind!
levi johnstons mom just got busted for dealing meth
whoo hooo...sarah palin pals around with drug dealers
And no surprise coming from that family.
And I bet she calls herself a good "Chreestian" too.
Maybe David Allen Greer can add "who's baby momma in law got busted for selling meth" to his skit at the 1:35 mark. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoDbO3NeTj4
Oh, my! That certainly is something.
But oh my god, don't call Warren or the Mormons intolerant bigots. We're not haters, waaaaaaa.... We just want to manipulate everyone into conducting themselves as we say they should. Why can't you all just accept our authority?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIVHNylH1Mk
Not that media whore wingnut.
I wonder if Obama agrees with this:
U.S. Opposes United Nations' First Gay Rights Declaration :
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/world/19nat...
or does Warren really have an accumulation of santorum around his pie-hole.
Yeah, Rick Warren should withdraw.
He should also stop being a giant tool who steals money from old ladies, but he won't.
How about this scenario: Warren pulls out of the inaugeration and Dobson, Donohue, Hannity, O'Reilly, Weiner, Coulter, and every other pompous, reactionary fucktard with a microphone goes nuts about the "homosexual agenda" taking over the country. I call it the "gays in the military redux."
Give Obama a little bit of slack to get some momentum please.
to know, do two groups of intolerant s make one tolerant?
but three rights make a left.
But vokka, extra dry vermouth, 3 olives, and some olive squeezins, makes a damn tasty martooni!
Is it intolerant to want your human rights recognized (I mean, there is a U.N. Charter and all, already)? Is it intolerant to dislike someone who advocates not letting you have your human rights? Or is that just common sense?
I'd REALLY love to hear the invocation by Rev. Wright.
Just sayin'.
Yeah...that would be a bit more interesting wouldn't it?
Login or Register to post comments.