Moving forward: We need to support candidates that actually believe in equality, true equality. I undersand there is a process and that you atract more flies w/ honey. However on the heels of prop eight, amend 2 in FL, Arkansas adoption laws, and now this inaguration betrayal. It is apparant that no one will progress our agenda. We need to find and support candidates, no matter the long shot that fully embrace us as citizens of the US with full rights. I used to want to take the path of least resistance, but I fear that that approach is feutal.
I want equality now, and I refuse to wait any longer.
Rosa Parks didn't.
devlzadvocate
· 11 months ago
I agree with you. Sending petitions with no teeth a la HRC's Blue Print seem like more of the same. I'm not signing it. Again, what happens if Obama says "NO"? or worse, ignores it.
Think you feel bad now? Wait until you get ignored.
The problem needs a new strategy.
lynchie
· 11 months ago
The surprising thing about Obama is how easily he duped us. I follow his argument of inclusion, but you can't include bigots and exclude the very people you promised to represent. Warren worked against him and supports the far rights view of one religion one sexual orientation. Those that should get rewarded are those without bias in their hearts and minds. Giving a platform to a bigot is not inclusion it is endorsement and Warren will play on this opportunity to convert more to his flock and fund raising activities which is what religion stands for in this country. More money for the pastor none for the flock.
Butch1
· 11 months ago
If he really wants to be inclusive, invite David Duke to speak or give a prayer. Let's see how many blacks sit passively by saying that they understand why he is trying to be inclusive. I don't think it would happen in a second. ( oh, but that is different . . . ) Nope, don't think so.
Mark in Florida
· 11 months ago
YES.....I agree. The umbrella of 'inclusiveness' is BS.
Mark in Florida
· 11 months ago
Well said. .....and thus creating more and more intollerance and hate.
I just don't get it.
No Hope In Politics
· 11 months ago
Time to stop crying & start MAKING REVOLUTION.
It won't be easy, pretty or bloodless, but the time is now.
devlzadvocate
· 11 months ago
Revolution? I'm wondering what kind? I don't mean to be flippant, but what - overthrow Fire Island? It seems withholding support, money, time, etc may be the better approach.
No Hope In Politics
· 11 months ago
Disquiet, Disruption, Disturbing the Pseudo-Peace.
They want to destroy us.
Will you let them?
I won't.
devlzadvocate
· 11 months ago
I have no problem with your demonstrations of discontent for any reason. I don't think what you call for is really revolution (child of the 70's here and adhering to the "Power To The People" definition). I'm kind of an "in-betweener" - believing that "petitioning" is of limited value in a world of screaming people and the violence or boardline violence can be a betrayal to your cause (unless used in self-defense).
I don't think that "they" (whoever "they" may be) all want to destroy us. Some obviously do. Some want us to be happy that we are not placed in prison. Some want us to go away peacefully with crumbs. Some don't understand and don't want to. Some think they do understand and they really don't.
That may seem all really pablum, but I guess I'm saying each situation deserves it's own unique response not "canned" same old, same old.
I'm wondering if going to the Obama Administration and asking to include a GLBT speaker or person of faith in addition to Warren would be better than just targeting Warren. Just a thought.
In answer to your question, "Will I let them?" I'll do my best not to.
Butch1
· 11 months ago
I agree about your comment regarding petitions. What happened to all those petitions sent to Pelosi from the citizens of this United States regarding impeachment? Where did they go? No comment from her one way or another. She doesn't think she has to listen to the people anymore. Power does this. She is ineffective, spineless, and willing to kow-tow to the republicans when they push her too hard. She needs to be replaced by someone with a spine or cojones and not afraid to use them. "Can we all just get along?" Baaaah!!
devlzadvocate
· 11 months ago
That "Can we all just get along" line pushes me right over the edge! Who in the history of the world has gotten along in politics? There have been murders, betrayals, assassinations, etc. just for a vote.
People don't even get along in fairy tales, contrary to popular belief.
Sometimes, I think John would like to wring my neck or at least ban me from the group!
Butch1
· 11 months ago
I of course, was quoting Rodney King, the infamous police punching bag. I probably should have added a <snark> after it.
devlzadvocate
· 11 months ago
I recall it now, but I actually know people who use it regularly - "Why can't we all get along (whine)?" ugh.
Butch1
· 11 months ago
Yes, it usually falls flat for me when I hear it as well.
I wonder if Harry Reid uses it, he seems to be constantly whining that he doesn't have his super majority of 60 senators, which for some reason, he thinks excuses him from ever doing anything.
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
No tears.
Just fury.
Burn them with it.
bad sandwiches
· 11 months ago
You need a better writer.
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
You need to go f#ck yourself, but I don't think even YOU are that desperate.
bad sandwiches
· 11 months ago
That's a really "burning" comment, and I'm sure it looked even better on the Big Dog t-shirt you got it off of, but no one is really compelled by keyboard pounding comments like yours just begging to be the QOTD on someone's blog. I agree 100% with the criticism Obama is taking over this, but the absolutely filthy tone I've seen taken against Obama supporters/volunteers who have nothing to do with the decision (and are against it, ironically) is disgusting. I'm sure screaming "stupid fucking bitch" at a woman wearing an Obama shirt gets a lot of shit done, though. Burn them all, right?
rmichels
· 11 months ago
Thankfully, Rick Warren is not going to be directing any kind of policy in the Obama administration. Keep hope alive. If Obama and Congress enact everything he says he wants to pass re: gay rights (see Change.gov, civil rights agenda), then we'll be fine. If he drags his feet then we can storm the ramparts together.
John
· 11 months ago
Reader Richard's comment really hit its intended target. Where did our country go so wrong? Seems everytime you put a politician in the middle of something it always gets screwed up. The founders knew that there had to be a separation between the church and state. Yet today the boundries have been blurred. From the Vatican which looked the other way for decades as their priests molested children to the Rick Warrens of the world spewing nothing but venom on wedge issues, ones religious ideology has no place in government. You want to pray to your God, your more than welcome to go to your church, synagog or anyother other place where the Lord is worshiped, but religion has no place in government. People are human beings regardless of their personal beliefs and the last place government should be sticking its nose in are peoples personal affairs. If we are all equal under the Constitution, then regardless of sexual orientation, color or anything else we should be allowed as a people to live as we choose. It struck me as odd that Obama would pick Warren. I'm not bright enough to know why. Perhaps there is some reason, but if your going to be an agent of change, I think he could have done better than Warren. Then again election cycle after election cycle a new mouthpiece with new promises. After 58 years of watching the circus go by, there isn't much that has changed and it looks like Obama's Big Top coming to town is no different.
Tim
· 11 months ago
I think this is being very overblown. This is not public support for Warren's policies. If you believe that, then every president that has ever been sworn in by a religous man believed the earth is only several thousand years old.
Also, if people would really think about this, I mean really put aside their understandable emotions, they will see what is being done, that it is good for equality....in the long run. But I understand if the short term hurt is too hard to overcome, I just wish people would think it through.
Including racists, anti-semites and homophobes is not good for equality. They are NOT valid "viewpoints". They are prejudices to be stamped out, not PROMOTED as Obama is doing.
You CAN NOT reason with right wing religious crazies. They will take whatever concessions you give them and then latch onto your neck and drain you dry while giving nothing in return.
That is fact. That is reality.
When they come to your door, you do not invite them in.
Tim
· 11 months ago
Based on your claim that you can not reason with right wing religious crazies you are exlcluding half the country. Warren, in the full spectrum of religion in this country, in in fact to the left of most. He is far more liberal on other things besides LGBT issues, some not, but some he is. Which is more than you can say about most religious leaders.
The fact remains, this is not an endorsement. Like I said earlier, if this is an endorsement of his views then no president of the last 45 years has believed in evolution, birth control, the big bang, basic science and many other religously held views.
This will be a big deal until he is sworn in, then within a week or two it will be forgotten.
Psyche
· 11 months ago
Wow! You certainly seem to be either unaware of the spectrum of religion in this country or just how extremist Warren is. The fact that he is more affable than cranky old right wing birds like Dobson and Falwell doesn't make him a liberal. In fact, Warren has said the the differences between himself and Dobson are more matters of tone than substance. Warren is not only anti-gay marriage. He is anti-gay, anti-women (re: role in marriage and reproductive health issues), anti-science (a creationist, not sure about global warming even though he supports conservation), supports an abstinence only approach to AIDS control, is pro-torture, and thinks the social gospel is Marxist,
And you should realize that the "right wing religious crazies" represented by Warren are not "half the country" but 25% or fewer. In fact, polls suggest their numbers are shrinking and younger evangelicals are increasingly liberal.
Butch1
· 11 months ago
I disagree, it is showing him that his opinions are respected because he has been honored to speak in front of the nation. You do not give this honor to a person unless you approve of who they are or what they say, in my opinion.
cmpnwtr
· 11 months ago
Y'all shoulda voted for John McCain, then you would be happy. There is no national candidate who supports gay marriage, nor one who can be elected. Until a majority of Americans support gay marriage it won't happen, so stop blaming Obama. Threats of violence or trying to harm Obama or the Dem. party won't accomplish anything. So get over this tantrum and get on with the kind of change you want.
In Oregon the courts opened the door to gay marriage and it was knocked down by a state referendum. That wasn't Obama's fault, that wasn't Rick Warren's fault, it's the fault of American culture and beliefs.Threatening people, threatening religions accomplishes nothing. Grow up, people!
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
How about you stop telling us how to feel and act. How about that.
How about you go enjoy your equal rights, and stop trying to tell us how to fight for ours.
timncguy
· 11 months ago
Who here has threatened harm to or violence against Obama? I haven't seen a post like that.
Now, think back in time and remember that when civil rights laws were enacted at the federal level it was not approved of by the majority of the country. But, it was done because it was RIGHT.
When laws against inter-racial marriage were struck down by the Supreme Court, it was done against the view of the majority. But, it was done because it was right.
The same should be done for the LGBT community. Because it would be right whether it is the view of the majority or not.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Uh, the majority of Americans did not support racial equality, interracial marriage, etc. and yet the courts ruled on the Constitutionality of those issues. Who is threatening violence? Go fuck yourself.
Apphouse50
· 11 months ago
If you think this is exclusively about gay marriage, you haven't been paying attention.
Butch1
· 11 months ago
Like McCain would have been a preferable choice? What are you drinking? Like any politician, McCain lies with the best of them and would say anything or change his viewpoint 180 degrees only to get elected.
Obama's Achilles Heel is that he is too proud to change a decision once he makes it., right or wrong.
John
· 11 months ago
Good arguments on both sides. Personally I never cared how many wives a Mormon could have. Never cared if a white man and black woman decided to start a family. Live and let live is what government should practice rather than trying to dictate morality to the masses. I get the feeling, that given this time of year, the stress of the holidays, the added stress of finding or keeping your job or feed yourslef and pay your bills are enough to be concerned about. What people do with their lives should be there business and not governments.
will este
· 11 months ago
In reading your comment, I see you are clear in your thoughts and you beliefs as to you and your life past and present. However, I do not get it as to why you have lost hope. Rick Warren, believed you were not worthy for many many years. When Rick felt you were not worthy you felt you were. I don't get it! Obama is allowing Rick Warren have a spotlight to show that Rick is a bigot, to me this is the best way to show that the christian leadership is not what the USA wants or most of the world. I say to you this should give you hope and courage to stand up and be the American that you heard speak up when you were a child. MLK, shined the light on the wrong of America and now Rick Warren will shine the light on the wrong of the christian right. You, can be part of the ones righting the wrongs of this day and time... I say to you don't give up when the walls will be tumbling down. You are needed and justice has to be done.. Be part of it and be proud of yourself and your service to the cause...
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
"Obama is allowing Rick Warren have a spotlight to show that Rick is a bigot"
..... funny, that doesn't jibe with Obama's explanation for why Warren will be up there. He's not doing it to showcase what a bigot he is, he's using him to draw in the christian nuts from the right at OUR expense!
What gumdrop fantasyland do you live in?
will este
· 11 months ago
Gridlock, It's clear I don't live in your gumdrog fantasyland.. What is clear to me is this will be the result of all of this.....
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Yeah, that's it. It is Obama's strategy to give the bully pulpit to Warren on the MOST IMPORTANT DAY OF OBAMA'S LIFE to show the world that Warren is a bigot.
If you really believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you. . .
Apphouse50
· 11 months ago
Say what? Obama puts this idiot up there to deliver an invocation because he wants to show what a bigot Warren is?
What mental contortions does one have to go through to come to such a conclusion? There's no one who already knows what a creep Rick Warren is who will see him differently, but there are lots of people who like him and lots who don't know anything about him who will see this guy's presence as affirmation.
Just when you think you've heard everything...
GreenOwl
· 11 months ago
Let's face the facts: Warren is a bigot. Anyone who supports Warren and his position is a bigot. And Obama appears to be supporting Warren......
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
Someone will say "he's not a bigot, he's just following the bible!".. cuz you know, if you hide behind Jesus, then your bigotry is just fine.
*bangs head on desk*
Cointreau
· 11 months ago
post hoc, ergo propter hoc
middlegirl
· 11 months ago
Hope is fading? Please, I am sympathetic but really, the melodrama is just too much. Change comes in increments and if you have given up all hope than that's your choice. My choice in this case is too hold my tears to see if Obama does repeal "don't ask, don't tell" and to see how he actually governs.
vrk
· 11 months ago
Wow fighting for people's civil rights and holding people's feet to the fire who don't support such rights is now considered "melodrama". Welcome to the brave new world.
Cointreau
· 11 months ago
Here, as with the Prop 8 situation here in SoCal, I see a whole lot of bitching and not much fighting. I hope to be proven wrong, but it has always taken masssive suffering to get the gay community to work together on anything. How long did it take for people to ACT UP?
I can't see a productive end coming out of the hand wringing I'm seeing online. Prove me wrong. Please?
middlegirl
· 11 months ago
You didn't hear "hope is fading" when Rosa Parks got arrested or MLK got shot. To have one's hopes fade over a 3 minute prayer is melodrama in my book. Not to mention, premature.
.
Ernest Tee
· 11 months ago
OMFG, get over it already. All preachers are bigots. This endless hissy fit is doing nobody any good.
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
More people telling us how to feel and act.
PISS OFF.
will este
· 11 months ago
Seems to me, you don't want to communicate or discuss this issue, but that you are just complaining, whining, and behaving childish.
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
Yeah, because:
"OMFG, get over it already. All preachers are bigots. This endless hissy fit is doing nobody any good."
Is really a way to open a discussion, retard.
Bluebear
· 11 months ago
Shut up.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
All preachers are not bigots and unless we share our anger, we cannot expect Obama's to change. This is happening in the context of the Yes on 8 campaign suing to nullify all same-sex marriages that occurred before the election, which is contrary to what they said they were going to do. So was Rosa Parks having a "hissy fit" when she refused to get up from that seat on the bus? I didn't think so.
Apphouse50
· 11 months ago
What a moronic thing to say.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
I think it is doing a lot of good. Do you not think Obama will think twice before ever again inviting an anti-gay speaker to share a place of high honor with him?
osage
· 11 months ago
I DO NOT BELIEVE that the religious right, as it is personified by Rick Warren, is deserving of Obama's magnanimity. And I am extremely disheartened that inviting Rick Warren to speak at the inauguration is an indirect slap in the face to all the religious leaders who have lived their lives and led their flocks by providing the examples of tolerance and compassion. What Obama is doing is honoring ONE rotten apple in the barrel at the expense of ALL of the good apples whose actions genuinely exemplify Christian values and teachings. Rick Warren represents the same hatreds and prejudices that were the foundation of Hitler's Nazi Party. Judging a segment of a pluralistic society unequal to another is how Hitler got rid of the Jews, and it's how Rick Warren is trying to get rid of everyone who disagrees with his extremist religious views.
devlzadvocate
· 11 months ago
So, now have politicians successfully used Warren to divide the Gay Community?
Looks like it.
Butch1
· 11 months ago
I know how this fellow feels. I'm beginning to think that "change" is only a concept and not a reality. I will watch and see if Obama does what he says he will do. Perhaps, it is time for a new party with new ideas that actually will be realized. One can hope.
devlzadvocate
· 11 months ago
wanna party?
Butch1
· 11 months ago
That would make a great name for a new party. ;-)
devlzadvocate
· 11 months ago
you got it! we can start it. first meeting is at my place. Hey, all you gay guys. "Political" party at my place!
We will be voting for a leader of our new third political party called, "Wanna Party?"
Butch1
· 11 months ago
Let's see, the first meeting of the "Wanna Party" party will be . . . ;-)
whomod
· 11 months ago
If anything it means Obama is true to his word. he did say after all that he was open to listening to and being receptive to the opinions of people THAT HE DISAGREES WITH.
To much hay over this. Not one day in office yet and already everyone is ready to be a cynic because apparently the swearing in ceremony now suddenly is some prophecy of things to come.
Butch1
· 11 months ago
He disagrees with us regarding marriage, where is our seat? ;-)
tlsintx
· 11 months ago
right on!
Butch1
· 11 months ago
I have nothing against him listening to them, but he crosses the line giving them a platform to spew more of their nonsense.
Nigel Elliott
· 11 months ago
Question: Has gay marriage ever been passed through a popular admendment?
Most of the US states and countries like Spain, The Nederlands, Belgium, South Africa allow gay marriage from either a court ruling or act of parliament. Like the 60s civil rights movement, the fight for gay rights will go through the courts, then Congress will act. I hope Obama's strategy is to reach out to conservatives to open a dialogue between loving gay couples and religious leaders. In California, the AG wants the Cal Supreme Court to overrule Prop 8, because our constitution, like the US Constitution, guarantees minority rights, so it's illegal for a simple majority to take away fundamental equal rights from a minority group.
The gay rights leadership is really incompetent at the moment. They ran the worst campaign in memory. Opponents of Prop 8 were swiftboated and smeared relentlessly in TV and radio ads. A couple of lies peddled by supporters of Prop 8 like "forcing children to learn about gay marriage in schools and churches will be forced to marry gays" never were effectively countered by opponents of Prop 8. And now I fear the Prop 8 backlash is hardening positions on both sides of the debate.
Had the HRC done what Obama is doing (reaching out to conservatives and religious leaders) maybe Prop 8 would have failed here.
During the campaign, Obama promised he will open a dialogue with our "enemies" (like Ahmadinejad of Iran) to find peace, so it's no wonder Obama is reaching out to social conservatives like Warren who are our political enemies. Maybe Prop 8 opponents should follow his example to change hearts and minds. We must remember that Prop 8 barely passed. America is after all in its last throws of bigotry towards gays. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_of_same-sex...
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
The California legislature has twice passed a full marriage equality bill, only to have it vetoed by Gov. Schwarzenegger.
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
it didn't have to be like this. this is actually a tragedy, a tragedy of mr. obama's making. the inauguration will now be remembered for demonstrations instead of celebrations.
i have a faint hope that mr. obama will reach down deep and draft a speech in the style of the philadelphia race speech. that was a great speech, although it was already given 12 years before by bill clinton. if you think about that speech, try to remember whether mr. obama legitimized racism as a moral alternative. he didn't. so the challenge is for him to make a speech on heterosexism that doesn't legitimize that kind of bigotry. does anybody think he can?
whomod
· 11 months ago
Wow. An entire AmericaBlog page filled with nothing but Rick Warren? It does come off as rather immature. And i'm sue you can find tons and tons of outrageous things said by the guy. But then you can find similar things said by most Christian pastors. Catholics? um.. most protestant Christians believe that the Catholic Church is the Great whore of Revelation. Jews? Most Christians believe that after the 2nd coming, Jews will get to decide to accept Jesus or not after he definitively reveals himself to be their Messiah. Now I don't find that anti-Jew in the slightest since Jews are waiting for their Messiah and have been for thousands of years. That is the time the 2 Religions will intersect and meet.
Yes, it's unfortunate that Obama couldn't have picked a less divisive guy. But this is after all only a ceremony. He's not putting Warren out to dictate policy or anything. It's just a move to placate evangelicals. Gays' turn to be placated will come soon enough with policy and positions filled. And that will be more substantive and meaningful than peaking at some ceremony. Until then, stop this silly temper tantrum already!
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
way too many words to say you don't give a shit.
devlzadvocate
· 11 months ago
It's not a temper tantrum. It's drama.
tlsintx
· 11 months ago
make me.
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
even MORE people telling us how to act.
Sit down, shut up, be quiet, blah blah blah
I also love how the people doing it (for the most part) are straight and enjoy their rights already.
devlzadvocate
· 11 months ago
I think the thoughts of an uninformed, uneducated, pushy breeder can be helpful in understanding motivations of certain types of people. Kind of like visiting the zoo to look at the caged, dangerous animals.
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
Why am I reminded of that scene in '28 Days Later' where the military commander had one of The Infected chained up in the backyard to see how long it would take for it to die.
devlzadvocate
· 11 months ago
cuz it's true?
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
If i had my way, the chain would only be about 2 links long.
*snicker*
jules
· 11 months ago
good news to talk about!!
AG Brown in CA is challenging PROP H8:)
vrk
· 11 months ago
Absolutely. There are pastors of all faiths who have done what you've said. And you know what. Obama should have treated Warren like he did those pastors and NOT invite him to give the invocation. Is it really that difficult to understand.
existenz
· 11 months ago
I'm not happy with Warren either, but that letter is way too over the top and melodramatic. Picking Rick Warren is small potatoes compared to, say, Clinton signing DOMA or Prop. 8.
Of course, Obama had better deliver on LGBT issues, or I'll be one of the folks with pie in his face.
sherifffruitfly
· 11 months ago
Indeed. Life is truly not worth living. Everything is dark. Nothing is good. All is bad.
I kan haz ur stuff?
middlegirl
· 11 months ago
" I kan haz ur stuff" (very funny). Yes, The world is ending. All civil rights are being repealed because of a prayer. Bad Obama, betraying us with your imperfectness.
sherifffruitfly
· 11 months ago
:) Wasn't sure just how wide the circulation was on that phrase. Glad at least one got it.
Mike Meyer
· 11 months ago
THE INTERNET IS THE NEW THIRD POLITICAL PARTY AND THE BLOGOSPHERE ITS POLITBUREAU. Vote in an INTERNET CANDIDATE next election, the horse and buggy parties will ALWAYS sell YOU out after the fact.
How can hope be fading when this is the first time millions of people are coming to know that Warren is a Bigot? The only people the LGBT community and their supporters need to engage are the anti-gay such as Warren and other bigots. Now in retrospect if this never happened all we would know is Warrens extensive philanthropic work, support for HIV and fighting poverty so when he supports another proposition8 alot of people give him the benefit of the doubt. Lets start squeezing lemonade out of this whole issue by realizing there are millions of Warrens in America who need help through dialog and divine intervention
Cointreau
· 11 months ago
"Hope is fading"- Americablog's John A.
"Oh, the PAIN!" -Lost in Space's Dr. Zachary Smith
Iggy
· 11 months ago
However, President-elect Obama has NOT publicly supported Warren's position. In fact, he has publicly condemned it. So Richard's assertion is false.
Obama campaign on and is expected to "reach out" to various people and groups who differ from him. That's a large one. But have you noticed that he is "reaching out" to the right-wing evangelicals for a purely ceremonial function? The invocation means nothing and affects nothing, and makes not one whit of difference in policy. It's powerless. It's ribbon cutting. And it's out of the way early. So for the rest of his term, Obama will be able to say that he reached out to those people, while giving actual decision-making ability and real input to others INSTEAD of those people.
It's politics, and he's playing it well. And the result will be more of a plus for the gay community than if he had manned the barricades, like some would like him to do. But frankly, if he did that, he may well sacrifice real progress for the principle of the thing.
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
When Obama has a klansman and a neo nazi up there with him then maybe he'll be reaching out to everybody.
Until then, we're being thrown under a bus.
And for the last goddamned time, homophobic bigotry is NOT AN ACCEPTABLE AND DIFFERENT "VIEWPOINT".. anymore than racism or anti semitism is.
LEARN THAT.
devlzadvocate
· 11 months ago
don't give yourself a stroke. they aren't worth it.
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
LOL
I'm only about 20% irritated. If i can stand across from a line of Baptist shitbags screaming "faggot", I can deal with disembodied text on a website :P
devlzadvocate
· 11 months ago
Oh, so you've been to a Westboro Baptist Church (Rev. Phelps) protest, too?
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
No, actually it was in support of gay marriage in Canada.. I stood on Parliament Hill across from a line of religious freaks and a (no joke) interracial baptist couple shipped in from the states who were saying that gay marriage was against god's plan and screaming all sorts of obscenities.. funny, they seemed to have a case of historical amnesia...
KISSman
· 11 months ago
Just remember that the 'they' you speak of are some of the same people you will need to stand with you so that you can attain equal rights. The whole 'they don't understand it like we do' attitude isn't going to help you when you will need plenty of people who don't exactly understand what it is like to be in your shoes to vote with you, to rally with you, to contribute money, etc. I'm pretty sure that you're disregarding the wrong 'they' here...
Iggy
· 11 months ago
[When Obama has a klansman and a neo nazi up there with him then maybe he'll be reaching out to everybody]
But it's not the equivalent of having a klansman up there NOW. It's the equivalent of having someone who was against school integration during the 1950s, when school integration was still a controversial topic. And having him there for the purpose of actually getting the schools integrated. You're right - it's NOT an acceptable viewpoint to you or to me, but at this time in history, it is still a controversial one. And it has to be treated that way, because that's what the situation IS, not what we would like it to be.
Twenty years from now, this whole controversy will seem ridiculous - like school integration does now. But it isn't twenty from now. That's where we want to get. You get there by dealing with the people who haven't YET taken the next step in civil rights instead of just yelling at them. Because if you do it right, they will. Warren won't. But some of his audience WILL.
Twenty years ago, most LIBERALS were saying, "I have nothing against gay people, BUT...." Gay marriage wasn't even on the radar screen, and if you had brought it up, you would have been treated like an alien. Many, many people have changed their minds in the last twenty years. Because they weren't bad people - just ignorant people who knew few if any gay people personally. The same thing is happening now. And it's changing FAST.
Webster
· 11 months ago
Just to let you know, I've had to put up with this discrimination all my life--from before Stonewall, and you know what? I'm likely not to make it another twenty years. I was hoping to see equality--and feel equality--before I die. I invested hope in Obama, and gave more money than I can justify, and so far it looks like he's going to disappoint me as I have been disappointed too many times before. I'm sorry, I want to see equality and feel it and taste it before I go--I can't just wait 20 more years.
KISSman
· 11 months ago
To compare that to Neo Nazi's and Klansman isn't valid because you are talking about an extreme (and violent) minority of people in both of those cases. Warren isn't calling for the death of all gays.
Yes, Warren is against your rights, but he would tell you that he does not hate you. He thinks that you choose your lifestyle and believes you can change it. Of course, that is pure ignorance, but his beliefs -- while idiotic -- are not on par with the other groups you cited since those groups are for ridding the planet of all people who are not like them.
Warren would gladly give you a warm embrace if you would just be straight. He opposes something about you, but something he thinks can be changed/saved. The hate groups you cited don't believe there is any that the targets on their hate can change. Because of that, extermination is the only solution in their view. I'm not saying that there aren't some religious people out there who wishes ill-will towards gays (because there are), but that's not what Warren represents.
I'm not defending Warren; I think he's a douche bag. I'm strongly on your side on this issue (and all other gay rights issues) -- however, I do believe that there are some irrational viewpoints concerning the actual impact of Warren saying this prayer. Gays are not being 'thrown under the bus' in this situation. It would be the case if Warren were creating policy or was going to doing something at this inauguration that was anti-gay, but he's just going to do a prayer.
We should continue to rail against this decision by Obama and expose Warren for all of his moronic beliefs, but Warren reciting this prayer, while angering you, will have no impact on your rights and on your life. That's a fact.
stranded
· 11 months ago
Proud and unrepentant gay people are BANNED from Warren's church. Obama could have picked literally anyone in the world to give this prayer, but he chose a bigot who won't allow gay people into his church. If the rule were that Warren didn't allow blacks or hispanics or jews or any other minority, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all. It's because it's ONLY gay people that makes it okay. Knowing how deeply hurt LGBT people are over Prop 8 and then pulling this stunt shows a complete disregard by Obama for some of his most ardent supporters. A day that I've looked forward to all my life is now a day in which he's made it clear that I'm not welcome.
foxy
· 11 months ago
I do like your rational. I do hope and think there is a a bigger picture here.
J
· 11 months ago
For the love of god...the man is going to give the invocation, he is not setting administration policy, he does not have the ear of Obama, he does not reflect their views. It sucks that he is who he is, but seriously its not worth this level of despair. This continual drumbeat that everything we worked for is now lost and is beyond silly. There are better more important POLICY fights ahead regarding same sex rights, fight the real battles and let this symbolic nonsense go away. He is going to give this thing, its not going to change the direction of the country or administration and life will go on. Period.
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
Funny, i thought symbolism and branding was important in getting a message across, but silly me what does a few hundred years of advertising know....
*eyeroll*
wearing out my F key
· 11 months ago
gays and lesbians that are waiting for politicians to save them, or hoping that the elecorate will come around to doing the right thing, had best not hold their breath. forget politics. the courts are the best avenue for this injustice to be made right.
KISSman
· 11 months ago
I'm all for criticizing Obama for choosing Warren and ripping the hell out of Warren for his hateful beliefs, but some of us need to take a step back for a second.
The inclusion of Warren in Obama's inauguration is simply symbolic. This guy isn't making policy for Obama -- he's reciting a prayer. Yes, we don't like what Warren represents and I'm all for sounding off about this until either Warren is yanked or until the event is over, but to think that Obama has turned his back on his supporters over this one thing is being ridiculous.
I even read someone on here yesterday saying that after supporting Obama the whole way, they now wish Hillary were in his place. Over this?!? C'mon...
We may deplore what Warren represents, but in reality, Warren will be in a role on Inauguration Day that no matter who was chosen to the prayer, would basically be doing the same thing Warren will do. No matter how left or right the pastor is who does it, it'll have no affect on policy decisions made in the White House.
I encourage everyone to keep up the fight, but also to pinch yourself every now & again so you don't allow your passionate emotions about all of this cloud you from the reality of the situation.
stranded
· 11 months ago
Okay, it's only symbolic. The way a flag is symbolic. With that reasoning, it's no big deal to fly the Confederate flag in southern states. After all, it's only a symbol. Obama's "symbolic" gesture doesn't erase the long history of intolerance, suffering, death and despair that religious bigots like Rick Warren bring to the table for gay people. It only supports that view. That's not being melodramatic, it's a fact. When Obama includes bigotry against other minorities in his "inclusiveness," I'll believe his bullshit.
FLEX
· 11 months ago
Obama is not the president of gay people only, he is the president of all americans. If his pick of Rick Warren disappoints you, then be disappointed. But this thinking of fighting fire with fire is not productive in this country and will not lead us anywhere. If you're angry at Rick, then why not educate him instead of segregating him (the same thing he is guilty of). These are our people, and even if we don't agree with them, we have to live and dialog with them to reach common grounds for the goodness of our country.
If you're not careful, you're going to turn-off the same people that are supporting gay rights.
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
Do you dialogue with racists?
Do you dialogue with anti semites?
No, you don't. You exclude them, you oppose them at every turn, you grind them to dust. Religious fanatics are like anti-semites or racists, except worse.. they're impossible to dialogue with because they have JESUS on their side on their minds. They're doing God's work. How many religious fanatics have you known to be open to discussion? In the last 20 years alone, how have they given one f#cking inch? They have tried to take EVERYTHING, and attack gays every day, 24/7, constantly.
Why is it you people only want to 'include different viewpoints' when it's anti-gay prejudice and bigotry?
Look in a mirror and ask yourself.
FLEX
· 11 months ago
"Do you dialogue with racists? Do you dialogue with anti semites?"
Yes and Yes. These, unfortunately, are members of our society with their own families and doing things for their communities. We work with them, we ride buses with them, we share community events with them. Racism, anti-semitism and many discrimination forms happens every seconds in this country; and if you asked yourself why? Its because of ignorance. Even in the gay community itself, these forms of discrimination happening.
When people are informed and understand issues, things get resolved. For example, Prop. 8, I believe failed because a vast majority voters were not educated about the issues and what the proposition actually meant to gay people and their families.
If you think the only way to move forward is through exclusion, then more power to you. For me, I think its educating our people.
How do you solve ignorance??? You solve it by educating people not by fighting them.
SparksNV
· 11 months ago
The disappointing choice of Rick Warren is secondary to the real problem here. The decision to have a religious Invocation as the President elect takes the oath of office means that President elect Obama has chosen to ignore the separation of church and state, that is the real problem. The solution would have been simple, a moment of silence for all to privately express their own invocation based on their beliefs. An invocation is the act of calling for support or help, it does not have to be religious. Given the mess that this country is in, Obama needs all the help and support he can get. We voted for change, that change includes keeping religion out of politics and politics out of religion. The Rick Warrens, James Dobson, et al of this world are one reason that we MUSt have separate of church and state. All Americans must be represnted /considered by the President, that becomes impossible when religion enters politics. Having any religious leader give the invocation is a balant violation of Chruch and state and will result in seqments of the American people being disinfranchised.. We are a nation of diversity, choosing religion or one religion over another in any political situation or political commentary just cannot be tolerated if uniting American is the goal.
Basheert
· 11 months ago
A few thoughts about Rick Warren: First of all, I have forwarded this information to the Jewish Anti-Defamation League (John's blog post below re: telling the Jewish woman she will burn in hell) - I have additionally sent and posted comments to the Obama transition team re: their poor choice in speaker selections and the ramifications of having an antisemite AND a anti-gay represent the Obama Presidency at the Inaugural.
Third - I am attaching the email of the Obama transition team LGBT liaison for your use - I believe we need to body slam these people with our opinions. After all, we did elect this man and we didn't do it to have an antisemitic gay hater shoved down our throats as a representative of this new administration...
So - here she is - the LGBT Obama Team liaison:
Let Obama know what you think about the selection of Rick Warren. His LGBT liaison is Parag Mehta, parag.mehta@ptt.gov
We can make a difference.
cracked
· 11 months ago
By giving Warren the platform, Obama himself sends the message that virulent active anti-gay bigotry is a position he considers rational and reasonable. It makes me kind of nervous about Obama's outlook to be honest.
dula
· 11 months ago
If hope had faded and no tears are left to shed pick up your shoe and throw it at his head.
cracked
· 11 months ago
JOHN A. and MARK IN FLORIDA:
I tried to paste in Mark's contact list from yesterday but must have triggered some kind of attack defense in the program. Can you repost the list? It is a good list and useful to have it in the comment threads.
Thanks, cracked and straight and mad
sherifffruitfly
· 11 months ago
Note to self1: doing something shitty that pisses off a group that has a lot of drama queens is probably not the best idea.
Note to self2: I foresee an SNL skit coming as a result of the melodrama. And also one as a result of the Obama's shitty choice. The melodrama skit will be the funnier.
nicho
· 11 months ago
Please use lots of lube when you go fuck yourself.
sherifffruitfly
· 11 months ago
It's funny the amount of anger you folks have for those who
(a) agree with you on the substantive point that Obama's choice was shittacular, but (b) disagree with you on the cotton-candy point that the "hope is fading" dramarama is stupid.
Grow up, child.
Al
· 11 months ago
sherifffruitfly = idiot who wants a Neo-Nazi and Klansman to speak at Obama's inauguration!
sherifffruitfly
· 11 months ago
Hush. I'm busy committing Holocausts.
nicho
· 11 months ago
Wow -- lots of homophobes chiming in here today. Free Republic must be down.
Ohio_Dem
· 11 months ago
LOL
warbler
· 11 months ago
I've been staying away from this Warren stuff on this site for the last few days because I don't feel the rage that many here seem to be preoccupied with. It's diminishing now, the fire is dying down, the high level of anger is hard to sustain. The desired result, backing BHO into a corner so that he'll dis-invite Warren, is not going to happen. The fury that some gay people feel and which is being vented primarily on this site is not going to change much. Outrage has it's purposes and it's limits. Those of you who will not watch the inauguration on TV, and those who will not travel to the Mall to celebrate, risk marginalizing yourselves and will be missing the opportunity to see a president who opposes DOMA and DADT and is committed to gay equality placed into the most important position in the world. Sorry. We will miss you. Really. We will still be here when you are ready to continue the good fight.
Tom
· 11 months ago
We are not margenalizing ourselves, Rick Warren is doing it.
warbler
· 11 months ago
You're allowing him to have that power over your frame of mind? The marginalization I'm talking about is internal. What you are really feeling about your place in the world. Stop feeling out on the edge. Come in to where the rest of us are.
Al
· 11 months ago
warbler, are you six years old? No, we ARE MARGINALIZED BY THE GOVERNMENT. It's not all in our minds. We're not psychotics. Get some help.
Gridlock
· 11 months ago
IF Obama bothers with that stuff at all.
IF.
Not when.
The good fight is wherever you fight it. What has Obama offered up so far besides token words?
Nothing.
He has to prove himself. So far, he's doing a shit job of it.
cracked
· 11 months ago
This is the problem. Warren will be there representing the "new" detente and you are telling those who think it is outrageously unacceptable to stay home until we can accept the status quo. Rather than throw us a bone with a little gristle left on it, he leaves us scratching our heads with nothing trying not to think about what this may be telling us about Obama.
warbler
· 11 months ago
I'm having trouble understanding you. Explain detente as it applies here. Not getting the bone/gristle analogy. My point is that the effectiveness of the anger is limited. Warren will be there but so will we. His presence changes nothing intrinsic in who we are. I'm mostly talking to those who are simply venting and threatening to take their ball and go home. What purpose does that serve? Organize a protest, fine. send letters to Obama, good. See how effective that will be.But what purpose does unloading streams of vitriol on this site have if that's all they're going to do.
Ohio_Dem
· 11 months ago
Because "unloading streams of vitriol" or as I prefer, making some noise, attracts attention. And this certainly needs a LOT more attention from the msm than it has received so far. It certainly needs a LOT more attention from Obama. I agree totally that there should be protests organized. Letters should be sent. And people should express their outrage as much as they want not only here, but in comments all across the internet.
We can't control whether or not Obama does the right thing and removes Rick Warren, but we certainly can express our opinions, make a lot of noise, gain as much attention as we possibly can, and maybe, just maybe, we can create some positive progressive CHANGE. Afte rall, that's what we all voted for. It's what we expected. And it's what we now should be DEMANDING.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Saying that he opposes DOMA, DADT, etc. and actually doing something about it are very different. Remember how Ronald Reagan strung along the Evangelicals and anti-abortion crowd? I don't expect Obama to dis-invite Warren. I do expect him to understand our anger and live up to his promises to the GLBT community in his first 6 months. If he does not, he will have the mother of all challenges because we will work against him at every turn. We have a model to follow: Richard Mellon Scaife with Bill Clinton. We donated lots of money to Obama. I am prepared to donate to any organization that will dog him if he tosses us under the bus.
warbler
· 11 months ago
No disagreement here.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
Yes, I agree people should absolutely go to the Inauguration, and should turn their backs when Warren speaks.
wearing out my F key
· 11 months ago
"Rick Warren does not beleive that I am deserving of equal treatment under the law, and Mr. Obama has publicly supported that postition."
uh, yeah. obama said that several times. "i don't support gay marriage, because i'm a christian." even came up in the debates, i believe. sorry, but you heard what you wanted to hear.
scottinsf
· 11 months ago
Yup. And now we know where he stands for sure. In retrospect, I think a lot of the confusion comes from his wishy-washy statements during the campaign. One week saying that he was opposed to California's proposition 8, and then the next standing on the stage at Saddleback stating that he personally was opposed to gay marriage.
Now we know where he stands indeed.
Jay
· 11 months ago
My email to change.gov: I am a jewish father with children. I understand that listening to varying viewpoints help build character, but there is no justification for Rick Warren being part of the inauguration. I'm not even talking about the time he told a jewish women that she is going to hell: "at the Aspen Ideas Festival. When it came time for questions, a woman stood up, proclaimed her Judaism, and asked Warren if she was going to burn in hell. He paused before responding--and then answered her question the only way it could be answered. Yes, he said to audible gasps."
Why invite someone that discriminates against gays?
Basheert
· 11 months ago
Why invite someone who HATES for a living? He's just Jerry Falwell in a Hawaiian shirt - suck 'em in and bleed them dry. It's all about the money with these guys - and hatred is great for revenue.
Ohio_Dem
· 11 months ago
EXACTLY!
SouthernYankee
· 11 months ago
I can't stand Warren and his ilk. But saying that why would a woman would stand up in front of those nutjobs and ask a question like that knowing how he would answer. Surely she must have known. These crazy people think they are the only one going to heaven. They seem to forget that jesus was a jew. Hell I would never have gotten up and asked that question. I would never have been in that church. I can't stand evangelicals. They are a bunch of no gooders who think they are do gooders. No I would not have been there.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
Thank you! it was a completely unnecessary slap in the face to many, many people. How many wonderful inclusive clergypeople could have been invited?
kladinvt
· 11 months ago
I'm a liberal who voted for Obama & for about the first two weeks after the election I was elated & felt like finally America really was going to progress & make some long overdue changes. That elation began fading & continues to do so, after first looking at Obama's choices for his Administration; nominees to a letter have been either from the "center" or "center-right" of the political spectrum. I kept hoping that surely Obama would appoint a liberal/progressive to some high level position, but with the first tier of his administration now chosen, I see that at best, we can only expect a secondary position. Then after this week's choice of Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at the inaugural, I realized that I've been projecting my hopes & wishes onto Obama & that he really isn't who I imagined him to be. Definitely, not a liberal or progressive, that's for sure. And since the only way to judge him is by his action (his rhetoric has become hollow), my conclusion is that Obama never did care about the LGBT community nor he was ever a liberal/progressive.
And from the comments of his fans on this website & others, there's a very strong tendency among them to believe in all things Obama, right or wrong, & to not question his administration, along with tossing out insults at gays for speaking up. This is sounding familiar; like the fans of Bush of the past few years. There have been many telling the LGBT community to, "get over it" or they've given the explanation for the Warren pick, as Obama's way of reaching out, reaching across the aisle. That's all fine & dandy, but as a liberal & a gay man, it's apparent that all this 'reaching out' has been at the 'left's expense. Basically it appears that Obama has clearly taken the 'left' for granted & figures that we will follow him no matter what.
That is NOT true though & could be a fatal error on his part. As a once enthusiastic supporter of Mr. Obama, I am less than thrilled with him now & will look at everything his does or proposes with a very skeptical eye, knowing that he cares no more for me or my interests than Bush ever did.
As usual, Obama has behaved as all politicians have over the past 20 yrs, using the LGBT community's enthusiasm, support & financial backing when needed & then shunning us after accomplishing the task at hand. Hopefully, we will wise up to any politicians future entreaties & demand actions over empty rhetoric.
So, what are you going to do about it? and suppose you're wrong about BHO?
kladinvt
· 11 months ago
I've written to Obama's LGBT liason & my partner sent a letter to Obama's transition headquarters in Chicago & we've both been telling our friends & family about our feelings about the Warren pick & have encouraged them to voice their opinions as well. Short of that, I'm no longer blinded by "That One's" glimmer!
Tank
· 11 months ago
Wow, does the opinion change so quick. Obama was God a month ago, now one little choice, and he's enemy number 1. Would you like Bush back?
whomod
· 11 months ago
THANK YOU!
It seems all the sister militants are ready to hobble Obama because he's consorting with the enemy. It's the GOP bunker mentality in reverse.
Al
· 11 months ago
whomod = Left's Freeper
tlsintx
· 11 months ago
we don't want to hobble Obama. we want to educate him. and you.
kladinvt
· 11 months ago
So how many times should we bend over & say thank-you, for once again screwing us. Dem or Repug, we've received the same treatment from both parties.
The Warren fiasco aside, do you see ONE liberal/progressive in Obama's administration appointments? All I see are those from the center & center-right of the political spectrum. Do you believe Obama's going to whip out some surprise liberal/progressive at the last minute? It's not looking good from where I sit on the left-side of the political spectrum.
KISSman
· 11 months ago
That's a little extreme. I agree that there are some irrational viewpoints concerning the Warren situation, however I don't we should simply sit back and smile everytime we disagree with Obama just because he's 1000-times better than Bush.
The outrage about Warren is absolutely valid, but for some to think that Obama is no longer any good because he chose Warren for this meaningless prayer thing is just kooky.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
Tank=Obama campaign employee troll
EarthquakeWeather
· 11 months ago
Count me as someone who sees this as symbolic. And I agree with whoever said the more disturbing thing is having ANY kind of religious prayer at an inauguration. But anyway...
It's the policy that matters. If this gets us fired up to push O into doing the right things, the things he promised, where it really matters, then fine. I can assume that he won't do so without pressure. So the outrage over this is like practice for the main event, such as nominating an anti-gay rights Supreme (or appellate judge). Now that would be a fight I'd rather not have. But we have to consider it a possibility and act accordingly.
whomod
· 11 months ago
This is why it's AMAZING that a Democrat won at all. This is exactly the type of attitude that the GOP has exploited quite easily time and again and it always seems as if the far left is always eager and ready to provide them with ammunition. This attitude AGAINST organized religion. Now it may surprise you to know but the overwhelming majority of people in this country believe in God and they cherish those beliefs.
Now instead of realizing this and perhaps offering an alternative to the far rights bastardization of the Christian religion, the far left seems more than willing to not only accept the far rights interpretation of religion and faith as what religion actually is (ugly, hypocritical, materialistic and bigoted) but they'd rather ridicule and reject the vast majority of people of faith instead of offering them an alternative viewpoint based on Jesus' teachings of helping and loving one another. Y'know Jesus NEVER spoke out against homosexuality or abortion.
Now correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't it be preferable to bring those who have been suckered into the GOP camp based on their faith and based on the LIE that the Republicans are the party of Christianity into the Democratic side and to NOT alienate 90% of the country by not just denouncing these bigoted right wing pastors but by constantly denouncing and ridiculing peoples faith in general?
I've seen this for way too long and way to often in the left wing blogosphere. But hey, if we want to throw away all our gains and marginalize ourselves by picking almost meaningless battles then go right ahead. And by meaningless I mean that Obama hasn't had a chance to help gays make gains but already everyone is ready to toss him under the bus because of the inauguration ceremony? How is this going to TAKE anything away from gays? It's not. It my rub the wrong way but I'm sure once he appoints gay ambassadors and passes pro gay legislation you'll all realize just how petty this issue is.
Ohio_Dem
· 11 months ago
Unlike you, a LOT of voters are sick and tired of having someone else's personal and extreme religion shoved down our throats. We are tired of it controlling our government, limiting our lives through legislation sponsored by taxfree donations. We are sick and tired of these political cults retaining their tax exemptions under the pretense of being just another church. They are not churches. They are INDUSTRY. They makes millions upon millions of tax free income to buy politicians, buy political ads, pay for entire political campaigns that strip away rights from US citizens based on the cult's hatred.
We have freedom of religion in the United States and that means we, as voters, shouldn't have to listen to evangelicals spout their hate speech at our inauguration. I totally support complete and total separation of church and state. Get the Bible and all the rest of it out of our courhouses, out of our government buildings, and away from our president. For ONCE could we not have a president who governs according to the constitution and his intellect?
now THAT would be change I could get behind and support. All this "kiss the evangelical's asses so maybe they will 'tolerate' US citizens who are different from them." I don't give a rats ass if they like me or not. But I do care when the man I helped elect ignores his promises and gives an international platform to a bigot and a homophobe.
whomod
· 11 months ago
And see there you do Exactly what I stated. Wrap the entire experience of faith and define it by the far right and the politicized evangelical megachurches. Listen I realize Warren is one of these people. But he doesn't define Christianity and inviting him to participate is not so much as Obama betraying one group over another, I think it's a way to try to negate or at least minimize their influence when the time comes to actually pass legislation and policy.
But it seems to many people here seem to think that this battle is more important than when the time comes to actually make gains. So instead of dividing the evangelical moment, most of you here seem eager to divide the Democratic coalition. And that's cutting off your nose to spite your face. It's pointless, it's stupid and it's self-defeating. It's like you guys want to do to yourselves what Obama is trying to do to the Evangelicals.
Ohio_Dem
· 11 months ago
Yes we are all pointless, stupid and self defeating, while you are a champion of equality. We get it. Thanks so much for all your wonderful efforts in support of Rick Warren. You should be so proud. You are correct that, I, as a straight retired woman, am wrong to bother with this issue and that i, and everyone else, should sit down and shut up and hope that people who are better informed and in a position to actually change things will take care of it for me.
As a citizen I shouldn't be voicing an opinion with which you disagree. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I'll just quietly go away and leave it to you and Rick Warren. I DONT THINK SO.
coolcatdaddy
· 11 months ago
That's a pretty sweeping, generalized statement.
Rational adults understand there are many ways of expressing one's faith and religion and that the evangelical movement has many faces - there are the big megachurches, sure, but there's smaller churches with wide variations in what they practice and preach. The evangelicals have found themselves defined on the national stage by people like Rick Warren that have put together large congregations, book deals or have television ministries.
There are many people out there who see their faith as something private and a personal relationship with God who find those that mix bigotry and politics into religion distasteful, but you don't hear about them. They're just not really vocal about it. It's really unfortunate, because the megachurch/televanglist side of Christians who seem to want to dictate their beliefs on society as a whole have become the face of Christianity in America.
As for "throwing Obama under the bus" and your sense of this as a "meaningless battle", I can only say that when I see Obama - and the Democratic Party as a whole - actually start living up to what they've been preaching for many years, I'll be convinced. In the meantime, based on Obama's promoting of a Falwell-like minister, I'm feeling we've been through the same thing we've seen in the past - taking our money and votes, then telling us to go the fuck away.
It's happened over and over again with the Democratic Party and LGBTs since the 1970s and this just seems like deja-vu all over again.
Al
· 11 months ago
No, EarthquakeWeather. Obama has just taken the man who helped stripped us of our rights on the first big day of his presidency, election day, and is now putting the Nazi up on the SECOND biggest day of his presidency, his inauguration, and giving him the spotlight and free publicity, while all the time gloating about it. It's a slap in the face. Obama is making homophobia justifiable. There should be no tolerance for the intolerant. PERIOD! I am not a dog fucker, a rapist, a child molester, or an incest supporter.
Obama's response was pure George Bush as well. If Obama actually thinks that "bigotry," is a "disagreement," he's too fucking stupid to be president. Get rid of him!
This is not a policy matter. Obama's hands were not "tied" in this. He made this decision. He's made the decision to promote more hatred in this country.
tlsintx
· 11 months ago
it's really hilarious, all the comments telling people to just shut up and stop making a fuss. when has THAT ever worked...especially here?
never give in!!!!!!!
RobertSanDimas
· 11 months ago
Right on!! I'm with you. Mmmwwwwwwaaaahhhhh :)
samiinh
· 11 months ago
Satire: We Call on You Lord: Leaked Rick Warren Invocation
by Linda Hirshman
(NOTE: Copies of what seemed to be a draft of an inaugural invocation by Pastor Rick Warren arrived in the fax machines of several prominent journalists this morning. This site does not vouch for the authenticity of the draft, although each of the statements does conform to material in Pastor Warren's speeches, interviews, or on his websites.)
O Lord, as we come together on this historic and solemn occasion to inaugurate a president and vice president. We pray, O Lord, for President-elect Barack Obama and Vice President-elect Joseph Biden, to whom You have entrusted leadership of this nation at this moment in history.
We pray for their advisors and supporters, particularly their Jewish advisors and supporters, who will surely roast in hell if they do not abandon their refusal to accept the Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior. Pray for the conversion of Obama chief advisor David Axelrod and his economic wise man Larry Summers, his early supporters Lester Crown and his campaign finance chair Penny Pritzker, for, as the Bible says, there will be a day when there will be a great revival of faith in God through Jesus among the Jewish people. (Romans 11). Obviously, this is a day that we, as believers in Christ, want to pray for! Let the light of Christian salvation come to the Jewish Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel and his family, some of whom survived the German effort to bring them to Christian truth in the last generation.
May all efforts to stop homosexuals from violating the ancient humanitarian institution of marriage succeed as did your will in California in the last election. Attend particularly, O lord, to President Obama's environmental chief Nancy Sutley, and to the man who has worked essentially without sleep for three months to save the American economy from total collapse, Representative Barney Frank. Use the government to bring an end to acts as bad as incest, pedophilia and polygamy, by stamping out homosexuality among the homosexuals, a people evolutionarily unfit, that we may truly become one nation before God. May the First Amendment to the Constitution protect all who want to compare homosexual sex to incest, pedophilia and polygamy from the arrows of hate speech accusations shot by the politically correct.
Change the hearts of the new administration's pro-choice advisors and supporters, including the Justices of the Supreme Court who stand here today with us: Holocaust denier Anthony Kennedy, holocaust denier Ruth Bader Ginzburg, holocaust denier David Souter, holocaust denier Stephen Breyer, and holocaust denier John Paul Stevens, who is about to swear in the Vice-President, in that abortion is a holocaust and the eighteen million or so women who have committed abortion in the thirty-five years since 1973 are thus no better than Nazis.
Bless the women, who have chosen to follow their ambitions into public life, but change the hearts, Lord, of Secretary of State Hillary R. Clinton, Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano, United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, and Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis from independent lives of their own to submission to their husbands, if any, for I love the King James Version's rendition of Ephesians 5:22 "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands" and of course "Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ if God." 1 Corinthians 11:3. These women have chosen to participate in the public life of the community. Enlighten them as to the requirement that women not speak in church, saving any questions they have about their common life to ask their husbands as they return home.
Now, O Lord, despite the plain language of the Constitution that created this great nation, we dedicate this presidential inaugural ceremony to You. May this be the beginning of a new dawn for America as we humble ourselves before You and acknowledge You alone as our Lord, our Savior and our Redeemer. We pray this in the name of the Father, and of the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Len
· 11 months ago
What is actually amazing is that "Reader Richard" thinks anyone at Change.gov is going to read the comment he left there, let alone that it's really going to be seen by the President-elect.
RobertSanDimas
· 11 months ago
What is more amazing is that many of us, after reading his story HERE, will be motivated to multiply our efforts to get our word to Obama and crew.
SouthernYankee
· 11 months ago
:en how do you know that know is reading them. Am sure Obama is aware of our displeasure. I am sure someone in his staff is reading them.
benmerrill
· 11 months ago
I support this statement and sent my own several days ago. Unfortunately, when you send comments to change.org, all you get is a canned message back. I have no hope that my comment, or this one, will ever make it to OBAMA. Sic transit gloria munde
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Warren says we don't deserve human rights. This is how that plays out:
Lesbian Gang-Raped in East Bay
Richmond police are offering a $10,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of four men who allegedly kidnapped and gang raped a lesbian Saturday night, Lt. Mark Gagan said today. Police are investigating the attack as a possible hate crime, Gagan said.
She had a rainbow sticker on her car. This must help Warren sleep at night - his warriors are at work while he sleeps. Obama, thanks for 'reaching out.' Gang-rapists need a voice in your administration. Fuck the gays.
dula
· 11 months ago
What do you say now, Hilary Rosen? (she posted a blog at HuffPost about how we Gays should reach out to those that hate us in order to change their minds instead of complaining about Obama's choice to give Rev. Warren respectability)
Al
· 11 months ago
link?
whomod
· 11 months ago
um... I';m sorry. Were these rapists identified as members of Warrens church acting out on his behalf?
talk about hyperbole.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
If we live in a culture that affirms hatred towards gays and lesbians, then this 'crime' is due in part to that culture. Warren is part of that culture. If this is not true, we should not be concerned about violence on TV, snuff films, etc. It comes down to this: Are there those who are susceptible to cultural messages or not? I believe that they are.
Even if they're not real, it's a pretty shitty example of woman hating that appeals to a certain type of pervert--the total misogynist who usually winds up killing women anyway in real life after raping them. Who would want to watch such filth? And why would anyone encourage it?
Al
· 11 months ago
whomod, I know that you love showing us that you just found this cool new word called, "hyperbole," but we really don't need to see it as a response every five seconds.
Aside from that, Obama is John McCain. He gave the Right everything it could have ever dreamt of, and it started with the voting for FISA. Obama is not needed. We have another Republican, and not even a Right-leaning Democrat. This is pure Republicanism. Iraq will continue. Obama won't make it to a second term.
coolcatdaddy
· 11 months ago
I have a funny feeling you weren't around during the Reagan/Bush years during the heydey of Helms and Falwell. When those guys would start spouting bs about gays, saying many of the same things that Warren's saying, gays and lesbians would suffer violence for it.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
No, clearly he wasn't. Nor has he served in the military.
dula
· 11 months ago
You are dense if you can't see that there is a direct link between hate propaganda and violence.
Brad
· 11 months ago
Obama should be ashamed of himself. I suspect he will end up being hated by progressives and loved by conservatives. He should be ashamed of himself. What he has done in validating Warren is INVITE VIOLENCE AGAINST GAYS. And I'm confident the violent gay bashing incidents will increase over this. Oh, I'm sure he'll come out later and deliver a tirade against anti-gay hatred -- but he has already coded his message to gay haters that it is ok by him, just as he did during the campaign.
Ohio_Dem
· 11 months ago
I agree.
And that is exactly what i said when he brought in Donnie McClurkin to speak in South Carolina and get all the anit-gay bigots all fired up. As a LGBT Youth Leader I was outraged by this insensitive and dangerous action. S.C. is a state that is still dealing with the murder of 19 year old Sean Kennedy. Many of us have stood beside his mother and held her hand while she gave her impassioned speeches and cried along with her. How could Obama be so disrespectful to the LGBT community just for a handful of votes in an all red state? What good came from that?
You can not legitimize a gay bashing homophobe who hides behind the Bible, by giving them a platform, and not expect violence against innocent LGBT kids and adults. After all, the man on the stage says that gays are evil and you have to destroy evil in the name of God. People believe that stuff and they act on it.
Boycottutah
· 11 months ago
They were four African American men.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Nope. Where did you read that? The leader was Latino.
dula
· 11 months ago
Obama has demeaned his own Inauguration. All you Straight people who vent at the Gay Community for refusing to sit at the back of the bus and eat crumbs, are just adding fuel to the fire. Obama, who says he wants to be inclusive by validating extremists who are divisive, has done the opposite. He has divided the Democratic Party by choosing to kick Gays in the face at their most sensitive moments after Prop. 8. For a man supposedly so astute about politics, he goes into Office pitting Democrats against Democrats. Republicans must be loving him!
Philip
· 11 months ago
I just have to say that NO WAY would Hillary Clinton have had anti-gay and anti-choice Rick Warren speak at her inauguration. It's quite amusing to see the Hillary-hating gay misogynists (Sullivan, Crain, Aravosis) sputter in response to what Obama has done here.
tlsintx
· 11 months ago
Hillary Clinton wouldn't be having an inauguration. John McCain would.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Clinton's LGBT platform was a little worse than that of Obama. Clinton wanted to allow states to declare if they wanted to grant civil union status by not eliminating all of DOMA. Obama said he wanted to dump DOMA and have national civil unions for same-sex couples.
Al
· 11 months ago
Gary Hussein OBAMA wanted to allow STATES to decide. Hillary DID NOT. This was the difference all along.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Wrong. Obama wanted states to decide if they wanted same-sex marriage. But he said that he supported a national civil union that had all the rights of marriage and also the complete repeal DOMA. Clinton only wanted to repeal section 3 of DOMA, as can be seen here:
sorry, you are just flat our wrong on this. I emailed the Obama campaign during the primaries to clarify his stance on civil unions. His position was to use the "bully pulpit" of the presidency to TRY to get individual states to enact civil unions. He in no way supports a federal mandate to force states to provide civil unions. What he did promise was to end DOMA so that any gay couples living in a state that happens to have civil unions or marriage would get federal benefits. If you are in a state without those, no federal benefits for you.
Also, check with some legal experts please, ending ALL of DOMA will NOT force states to accept marriages or unions performed in other states either. So, Obama's wanting to end the portino of DOMA that Clinton would keep would have NO EFFECT at all. Honestly, if it would, just how many Republicans or conservative dems in congress do you think would vote to end it? It wouldn't stand a chance because it would IMMEDIATELY make gay marriage legal in all 50 states because MA now allows people from out od state to wed there.
timncguy
· 11 months ago
at the same time that I checked with the Obama campaign on his stance on federal benefits for civil unions, I also checked with his campaign about another statment he made during the primaries. He said he favored civil unions and thought we should leave "marriage" to the individual church denominations. I was excited about this plan because to me it sounded like marriage equality. It sounded like he meant that states should issue civil unions to ALL couples, gay and straight and then let individual churches decide who they wanted to perform religious marriage cerimonies for.
But, the Obama campaign replied that my assumption was not what he meant. He meant that states should issue civil unions to gay couples, but continue to issue marriage licenses to straight couples. And, that churches could decide if they wanted to "marry" gays or not.
So please, check with the Obama team before you make assumptions about what his stance on civil unions and federal benefits for gay couples really means.
prodigal
· 11 months ago
I'm going to withdraw again . . . back into the shadows. I came out and worked for Edwards and then for Clinton and then for Obama, giving him lots of time and money. And he gives me . . .Rick Warren as representative of our nation's spritual leadership.
They call it "social issues" and claim disagreement is to be embraced. I call it "civil rights" and know that is non-negotiable.
Barack Obama has lost my money. No letters to my senators on his behalf. No nothing.
Sorry. I should be much more willing to forfeit my rights for other people's opinions. That's how the voting rights act and school desegregation worked right? Initiatives and referenda?
if we just sit down and shut up these stupid wing-nut religious fanatics will continue to catapult their ignorant bigotry and make it sound so reasonable...
Brad
· 11 months ago
Huckabee is a total dickwad. Maybe he and Palin together can come in in 2012 and win because Obama has flipped off too many of his most loyal supporters.
whomod
· 11 months ago
Yes. Let's let the far right continue to destroy America because you don't like the speaker at the fucking INAUGURATION CEREMONY!
Jesus Christ! [shakes head]
tlsintx
· 11 months ago
calm down, sweetie. you've worked yourself up into quite the tizzy.
whomod
· 11 months ago
Yeah. (slaps face)
The thought of Sarah Palin (or any right winger0 running this country again can do that to me.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
I think it's gotten the best of your reason.
Brad
· 11 months ago
I'm not promoting Huck and Palin, but what I am beginning to think is that Progressives should consider separating from the Democrat Party and forming a separate party. The voting block would probably not be large enough to win an election by itself, but it could be large enough to force conservatives such as Obama to show due respect on many progressive issues that it's becoming clear now he is willing to bargain away.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
You're afraid this controversy will destroy America. You take it that seriously. Yet you can't understand or take seriously what it means when an active Christo/political homophobe receives the highest respect and honor at the inauguration of our next president.
whomod
· 11 months ago
I'm sure Bill O'Reilley and Rush Limbaugh would be delighted to have some of you sister militants badmouth obama on their shows.
I'm surprised they're not booking people off these blogs.
Ohio_Dem
· 11 months ago
What is with all the "sister militant" comments and what does that have to do with this discussion?
whomod
· 11 months ago
"sister militant" was this old ex-black panther lady that i used to work with. All the other black co-workers there coined the phrase. She'd wage useless self defeating battles all the time based on this feeling of persecution that simply wasn't there.
i think you can see why this applies to all the talk i'm reading regarding not so much Waren but Obama in general.
Ohio_Dem
· 11 months ago
Oh I see. You're just making fun of everyone here by referring to a black lady that you used to make fun of at work.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
If you're still so angry with "sister militant", tell her, not us.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Why don't you go back to Rush and Bill where you belong?
whomod
· 11 months ago
um... why would I do that?
OH! You think that because I disagree with you that therefore I must be some right wing plant or something. Tell you what, you're more than free to read ALL my blog posts here and I even have some nice references of actual right wingers who hate my guts and would probably wish me dead at blogs where i argue with them.
Now why don't you grow up and realize that to disagree with you doesn't make me a right winger.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
It isn't that we don't agree. It is your blatant homophobia (sister militant), lack of understanding of our anger (comparing us to Rush and Bill whose motives are 100% different than ours), and the general demeanor of your posts. You could say the same thing without being a jerk - well most people could. You may not be a 'right winger' politically, but stylistically, you sure quack like a duck.
whomod
· 11 months ago
Was it not Nietzsche who said Do not quack like a duck lest you become a duck? Or something like that.... um...
;-)
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
I think you are confused: It was Dostoevsky who wrote "I am a ridiculous duck. Now they call me a mad duck. That would be a promotion if it were not that I remain as ridiculous in their eyes as before."
LeftCoastOracle
· 11 months ago
It doesn't make you right either. I invite you to grow up and recognize that "Power concedes nothing without a demand." We are demanding our rights. Get a clue.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
You appear to only be concerned that Obama has a nice inauguration, regardless of who he is slapping in the face. Letting people get away with slapping you in the face is not the road to progress.
NGLTF
· 11 months ago
Richard's letter is beautiful. But the truth is even more painful. Rick Warren has directly slandered those who have given the ultimate sacrifice for our freedoms by calling gay war vets the same as pedophiles. All gay groups should be characterizing Rick Warren's comments in this factual manner. He has specifically demonized gay veterans who sacrificed their lives as child rapists. There is no other way to interpret Rick Warren's comment that gays are the same as pedophiles and those who practice bestiality.
NGLTF
· 11 months ago
BTW, where are the Veterans groups on this? They should be outraged that Rick Warren characterized our heroic gay service members as child rapists. That is beyond the rhetoric that even Fred Phelps uses.
whomod
· 11 months ago
He called gay servicemen 'child rapists'? He referred to gay servicemen in general? or is this more over the top petulant hyperbole by a shrill sister militant?
whomod
· 11 months ago
And if he never referred to gay servicemen and this is just an attempt to wrap your outrage with serviemen and women, gay or otherwise, it's just as tacky as when Bush and the GOP do it.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
Again, he compared all gay people to pedophiles, etc., etc, etc. You want to say that if he didn't specifically say the words "gay servicemen", then we must assume that his repeated blanket condemnation of gay people does not include gay servicemen? By the way, I am a Viet Nam veteran, and I am gay. He worked hard and was successful in getting Prop 8 passed here in California. So are you saying that he does not condemn me as a gay veteran, but only for getting married? Because that's where your "logic" is taking us.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
By extension, yes. He didn't condemn all Jews to hell, but he told one Jewish woman that because of her beliefs, she was going to hell. By logical extension, it is the same as telling all Jews that they are going to hell. He compared same-sex couples that want to marry to child molesters. By extension, this goes to all gays, including those who honorably served in the military.
Simple, no?
whomod
· 11 months ago
It's kinda tortured dude. it's 3 degrees of separation in order to wrap the gay cause in the sacrifice of servicemen and women of any orientation.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
I was just explaining it. While I may not agree, I don't have ANY problem lowering myself to their (Warren) level by stretching the truth to make a point. It seems like the ignorant masses only respond to this type of crap.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
Warren has made many ugly statements about gay people. Many service men and women are gay. He didn't exempt any gay people.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
Are you unaware of the kind of things Rick Warren has been saying about gay people?
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
Warren compared all gay relationships to pedophilia and incest. Is this really a person you want to defend?
chad
· 11 months ago
GET OVER IT!!!!!!! Really, how quickly they turn. He isn't even prez yet and your already ready to feed him to the wolves. Its not all about you or anyone else.
Ohio_Dem
· 11 months ago
Yes. Everyone should go to the back of the bus and sit quietly. We're sooooooo sorry to have offended you!
whomod
· 11 months ago
gays sit on the back of the bus?
Yes yes, it's not a literal phrase....
You guys do realize that most far right evangelical churches say that obama is the anti-christ do you? You all do realize that they also say the anti-christ is a homosexual, do you? You do realize that by inviting Warren, he minimizes that, don't you? You do all realize that if he listens to the gay community he'll appear to be beholden and taking his marching orders from gays, don't you? You do realize that if he does capitulate to your DEMANDS, he'll appear to be the gay candidate that these evangelicals can then twist to again make him the Anti-Christ figure that some of them already are doing. You do realize if that happens then he'll have a large base of opposition and any pro-gay legislation he tries to enact will meet fierce and relentless resistance, don't you? You do all realize that the evangelical community is larger than the gay community don't you? You do realize that since they are larger, they can be a potent roadblock to any moves he may make to HELP YOU GUYS, don't you?
Now doesn't sitting in the back of the bus, figuratively speaking, at least for the inauguration sound a lot more palatable than losing the war because you want to fight a largely symbolic battle?
Ohio_Dem
· 11 months ago
So if we protest about Rick Warren speaking at our inauguration, that forbids us from participating in any future discussion about LGBT equality with the Obama administration? I think we can do both without breaking a sweat..
whomod
· 11 months ago
It's Obama's inauguration. And he can invite anyone he wants. it'd be nice though if it was a celebration and not an attempt to show disunity and opposition over what is essentially a political move by Obama to cover his right flank for when the real change comes...
You know the media will have a field day with this disunity. it already started on Friday on MSNBC.
Ohio_Dem
· 11 months ago
I am going to boo Rick Warren right off the stage and i hope there are thousands who join me. And you can do whatever you want to do (nothing).
And I am HOPING the media has a field day. The more attention to this, the better IMHO. You're entitled to your opinion, and I am entitled to mine. Deal with it.
whomod
· 11 months ago
I'm not saying you're not. I'm just questioning the long term wisdom of all this.
Ohio_Dem
· 11 months ago
Hey, we all know that Obama doesn't hold a grudge! Hell. If you consider the appointments he is making to all who completely trashed him in the primaries anything we say AGAINST Obama's judgement regarding Rick Warren should HELP OUR CAUSE more than anything else we could do. It's obvious.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
I question the long-term wisdom of being silent.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
It's not just Obama's inauguration. It belongs to us all. And it's hard to celebrate when bigotry is being honored. I think your only concern is that Obama looks good on inauguration day and that we all look unified. That is what gay people wanted as well. But Obama made himself look bad, and he threw the wrench into unity.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
Largely symbolic to you, because you don't see it for what it is.
Trismegistus
· 11 months ago
I've noticed this theme in this thread: symbolism=unimportant. Actually I think this is very inaccurate. Symbolism is very important! This choice of Warren is symbolic and significant and important. Do a mental experiment with me: suppose Obama had chosen a woman priest to lead the prayer? Aside from any of her positions what would that symbolize? Suppose he had picked a Latino or Asian american? How about a survivor of the holocaust? Remember he could have found a plain vanilla (joke intended) clergy with the same positive views of Waren but either pro-gay rights or at least neutral. By the gods, he could have been REALLY symbolic and had a group prayer led by catholic, protestant, jewish and muslim clerics, holding hands and saying the prayer together or even in antiphone, getting the audience involved. Think about all that symbolism!! You see, I am not gay but I do indeed see the import here! The LGBT community deserve all the rights the rest of us have. To deny them is to deny us all. Warren and his ilk want to deny some rights to most of us. They want a theocracy with themselves determining which god-flavor will rule. They are antI-choice and anti -birth control. They are also anti-non-christians (which includes not just jews and muslims and hindus and budhists; but also catholics, who worship satan, I guess that includes anglicans and orthodox too.) Obama knows all about symbolism. And that is what disturbs me the most.
LeftCoastOracle
· 11 months ago
You do realize that Warren's supporters are just as exercised about this as we are, don't you? Get a clue! Inviting Warren to deliver the invocation at his inaugural will not win over one single right wing evangelical, especially Rick Warren. He only accepted the invitation because he believes he will win over Obama. We have an obligation to speak up for our own rights. Failure to do so is suicide. Remember, "Power concedes nothing without a demand," to quote - who? DuBois? Douglass? I think it was Douglass, a great black wise man. Obama would do well to remember such men.
Trismegistus
· 11 months ago
In some respects your comments are accurate, albeit perhaps somewhat overstated. However, they would be a *result* of what the Obama camp chose. Of course they can't change the plans now. That does not change the actual result of this choice as perceived by the LGBT community. Obama has 'dissed' the LGBT community. I would suggest they did it knowingly and with forethought. Their calculation was as you suggested: to win over some evangelical christianists. I think it will fail. The first pro-LGBT action taken by Obama will be condemned by that cohort, led no doubt by Warren. Kissing up to bigots and the right wing will not result in them being open to reasonableness. That is just not how they think.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
I think you greatly overstate the real impact of evangelicals in a country that has overwhelmingly elected a Democratic President, House and Senate. I really, really doubt that this dustup will produce anything negative for gays and may do a whole lot of good for them.
tlsintx
· 11 months ago
it is about us since we're the ones having our civil rights rescinded.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
Actually, I've turned the other way, from a Hillary supporter to an Obama supporter. But his support of a bigot who helped to pass the ballot measure that may end up invalidating my marriage is not something anyone can expect me to just get over. No I am not ready to feed him to the wolves. But I am ready to make known what a terrible mistake he made, what a terrible slap in the face it was, how I resent any president honoring bigotry, and how I expect to be treated with more respect. I will continue to demand my rights, and sometimes that means making waves and upsetting those who would rather see a prettier picture than the one that actually exists.
LeftCoastOracle
· 11 months ago
So, we should just sit quietly in the back of the bus huh? I don't think so. Power concedes nothing without a demand, to quote H.E.B. Dubois. Our President Elect would do well to remember his wise ancestors.
SouthernYankee
· 11 months ago
People just forget. They don't care.
Boycottutah
· 11 months ago
On the bright side, California Attny General asked the state Supreme Court to throw out Prop 8!!!
Yep. Jerry saw the light apparently. Don't forget he's running for governor in next time around and he'll need our votes. Him and Gavin Newsom and every other political opportunist in California.
warbler
· 11 months ago
Before the riots i used to hang at the Stonewall in NYC. At the door you had to sign a form (with a phony name) giving you membership in the "Private Club" which allowed you to drink. There was an invisible door in the wall which led to a back room with a jukebox and booths where dancing occurred although frequently the jukebox would abruptly turn off and floodlights would go on filling the room with atmosphere killing brightness. When that happened you would know that the police were in the bar hassling people. This happened every 45 minutes or so. It was really disconcerting and we pretended to be blase about it but it was scary if the lights stayed on for more than ten minutes because you never knew if this was the night that you'd be arrested. I was not there for the riots (although I did attend Judy Garland's wake along with every drag queen in town,) but I was out at the time and I know I benefited from the advances made in our movement since then. I also know that that was a different time and the methods and attitudes that were used then are not necessarily effective in our continuing struggle. This is a pivotal time. Days of rage can be harmful. We have substantial political clout and we know strategy, and while Prop 8 caught us sleeping, I believe we are closer to full legal parity than we've ever been. Warren saying a prayer at the inauguration does not signal the end of days for us.
whomod
· 11 months ago
I agree. While it is disappointing, it is politically shrewd and it paves the way for obama to try to help nudge that full parity along. It seems self defeating to me to see all this anti-obama talk now as if Obama is now suddenly gay enemy #1. it's not seeing the forest for the trees to me.
coolcatdaddy
· 11 months ago
I don't think anyone expected Obama and the Democratic Congress to pass all manner of LGBT friendly bills in their first 100 days in office. However, I don't think we expected Obama to start embracing a Right-wing nut before the ink on the ballots were even dry.
You know, those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
Gays were very quiet before Stonewall, trying to advance Gay rights for many decades, and absolutely nothing happened. The Stonewall Riots and other visible public protest in the 70s put Gay rights in the national debate.
Nothing - and I mean nothing - happened with AIDS before the AIDS Quilt and Act Up protests in the 80s started making people talk about and begin to understand the issue.
Nothing happened with continued violence against Gays until people started talking about Matthew Shephard.
During the Clinton years, we remained pretty quiet and we got DOMA and Don't Ask, Don't Tell. More recently, we've showed more patience as the Religious Right has formed the national debate on issues like employment discrimination against LGBTs, Gay marriage and a host of other issues.
If you don't express an opinion, you don't get anywhere and you let others shape the debate for you.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
No one thinks Barack is gay enemy no. 1, and no one is mistaking forest for trees. The only thing that is happening is to make clear he cannot throw us under the bus for political gain. Seems to me there is no downside to that unless you predict some huge political shift against gays, which I do not think is gonna happen.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
I agree that Warren may not be the end for us. But I disagree that our rage can be harmful. It was the rage of those in the Stonewall Inn that led many of us to demand our rights. It was rage that led FDR to do the right thing during the depression. Sadly, nobody is ever going to hand us anything out of the goodness of their heart - the AIDS epidemic and initial slow government response taught us that lesson with the death of thousands of gay men. We have to demand our rights or forsake them.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
So true!
warbler
· 11 months ago
As I said, this is a different time. I have AIDS and I watched dozens of my friends die. I was outraged and said so, marched on Washington, supported act-up. This is simply a religious crank saying a prayer. It does not reach the level of homosexuality being illegal or people dying unbearable deaths because of governmental negligence. Or a depression, for that matter. We are ON the bus and the prospect of being thrown UNDER it (overused phrase) ever again is over. We really must own our advances and realize they will not be easily taken away.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
I hope you are right. I am expressing my outrage that a homophobe is being asked to give the invocation on the most important day in Obama's life. But I will not act on my rage until June 30th. If Obama can not 'throw us a bone' in the first 6 months, I will work against him.
LeftCoastOracle
· 11 months ago
I repeat: Lyndon Johnson inviting a racist to deliver the invocation at his inaugural? I don't think so. Why didn't he ask the Rev. Dr. Joseph Lowery to deliver the invocation? He's great on equal rights for us, including marriage. Instead, he leaves him to deliver the benediction. I sincerely hope he takes the opportunity to make a statement on our behalf.
warbler
· 11 months ago
Who gave the invocation at Johnson's inauguration? I can't remember. If he was from Texas you can be sure he was a racist. Unless he was black, which might have been the case. .
dula
· 11 months ago
Haven't you heard about Prop. 8? Our rights are as easy to take away as putting a prop on the ballot. Maybe you're just too old to fight anymore. That's fine, but don't make doormats out of the rest of us.
Trismegistus
· 11 months ago
"Closer" is merely a comparison between now and yesterday, so of course the LGBT community is "closer". But is that the point.? During the civil rights movement there were many who espoused the same viewpoint: "Oh, we're so much closer to our rights, don't push any harder' If the civil rights movement, the demonstrations against the Viet Nam war, the womens' movement and the disability rights movement have taught us anything it is that those opposed to us will not surrender their prejudices and give up their bigotry. Indeed, those battles are still being waged. We must all learn to evaluate each action of every politician and all other leaders as to whether it promotes or hiders movement toward the stated goal. This action by Obama does not promote equality for the LGBT community and therefore it diminishes and limits the freedom and equality of all the rest of us.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
Thank you warbler, for everything. Every one of us owes you a deep debt. We would not be where we are without you. I too do not believe Pastor Rick signals tragedy for us, but it is roughly the modern equivalent to Jimmy Carter inviting Anita Bryant to sing at the White House. (That did not actually happen, I am just drawing a comparison.) But in 2009 (yes, really, we are well past the year 2000), we should not feel any shame about letting politicians know that they need to think before they go out of their way to slap us.
tlsintx
· 11 months ago
here's another good article...an evangelical is shifting on the issue of gay unions...and Daddy Dobson is pissed!!! see? it can happen.
Cizik has been moderating his views for some time so this is not a huge surprise. Do not hold your breath until Rick Warren changes his views. He has built an empire on his reactionary preaching and truly believes the swill he dishes out.
Lolis
· 11 months ago
Caroline Kennedy supports full marriage rights. Maybe the gay movement should focus on electing officials who actually pledge to fully support you. She would be a high profile supporter who could help the movement a lot.
Obama, Clinton, Edwards, Richardson, Biden, Kerry, Dean, and most of the other Dems have never supported gay marriage equality. So I guess I don't understand why gays had so much hope in Obama or any of the others?
He will be an advocate and I believe he will overturn DADT, but he was never going to fight for full equal rights. None of the Dems even came close to promising that and they all held the same position to protect each other. I voted for Obama in the primary and GE knowing that he was not Harvey Milk and that all the Dems think they cannot get elected president if they support gay marriage.
That being said, I think the progressive and gay movement is winning the war for hearts and minds all across the U.S. I am optimistic that civil unions could pass in most states and perhaps even nationally in four years. I am confident that Obama would sign anything that crossed his desk to help improve the equality rights of gays.
Use the Obama network available online to advocate for gay marriage. You can advertise for any kind of group on his website and start one. Don't quit his network, take it over. Obama inspired hope about our abilities to affect change, but our hope should be in ourselves and each other, not just him. My two cents today.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
Caroline (along with Gavin Newsom and a very few others) gets it. The corner has been turned on this issue. There will be full equality within our lifetimes, and everyone else is gonna have some splainin' to do.
Indigo
· 11 months ago
fading . . . it's worse than that but okay for now. Meanwhile, the lame duck hasn't been inaugurated yet but let's look to the future. Hillary in 2012?
kladinvt
· 11 months ago
You're missing one of the major points here, Obama is acting just like a Clinton. I would have expected Hillary to toss under the bus, just like Bill did back in 1993. So my disgust with Obama is that he's acting like a Clinton!
Indigo
· 11 months ago
Fair enough. Then who? Dean? Kucinich? I'm doubtful either one of them is electable. Nader? Oh, please!
The Bag of Health and Politics
· 11 months ago
It's not whether they can be successful or not that matters. Pat Buchanan pretty much torpedoed HW's re-election. Te Kennedy ruined Jimmy Carter's re-election. Ronald Reagan ruined Gerald Ford's re-election. To a lesser extent, Bill Bradley prevented Al Gore's election.
If a consensus candidate--a President or Vice President f a popular administration--faces a serious challenger from their party's base, they will be forced to tact to the fringe after they win the nomination in the name of party unity.
People who could pose problems for Barack Obama in 2010: Gavin Newsom (if he gets elected Governor/Senator of California), Howard Dean, Russ Feingold, Barbara Boxer, etc.
If one of those candidates runs, then Obama will probably lose. Feingold would probably be the toughest for Obama to dispatch. (The one thing Obama has going for him is that Biden may well decide to retire in 4 years if there's a contentious primary, and the progressive opponent can be given the VP slot).
Indigo
· 11 months ago
Good analysis. I'm going to file it and watch as events unfold.
Boycottutah
· 11 months ago
Yesterday a lesbian was gang raped by four men in Richmond California . She had a rainbow sticker on her car, so they decided to teach her a lesson. All these hateful messages from the supporters of Prop H8 fuel the fires of anti-gay violence. Sick and sad. I wonder what church these four men attended.
Irrational acts of violence are happening everywhere these days, it seems. Were they caught? What a horrible act. I hope the victim is going to be vindicated because I'm a rape victim twice myself, when much younger. I'm an older woman now (67) who is becoming much more cautious every day. Even though I live in a mostly rural area now, I'm still very careful and aware of my surroundings and have even stopped driving at night since it would be hard to defend myself if I were run off the road or carjacked.
LeftCoastOracle
· 11 months ago
This report is dated yesterday.
LeftCoastOracle
· 11 months ago
This is appalling. I live in San Francisco and will monitor this situation along with you. The police must get the "men" who did this and they must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
So sad. But unfortunately not unusual.
Older_Wiser
· 11 months ago
Yahoo also has a casual poll (as did CNN earlier) asking people if they thought Warren was a good influence and choice for the invocation; sadly, 53% said yes.
When are people in the US going to grow up? Why do we even have to have religious influence in our govt? Why do we have to have anything religious taint our govt ceremonies? Separation of church and state--something most people don't know the meaning of--practice religion all you want, but not on the govt's dime. NO establishment of religion by the US govt--period. People who live in this country may be majority christian, but we don't have mob rule and there are far more religions in the US now. Christianity is only about 1/3 of the world's religions. In fact, 16% of the world's population doesn't have any religion at all.
So Warren and his ilk believe that 2/3 of the world is going to "hell"? How rational is that?
whomod
· 11 months ago
So 53% of an informal poll will accept Obama and his policies (pro-gay or otherwise) more enthusiastically (or at least less warily) because he made a symbolic gesture to someone they still see as a respectable public religious figure?
Sounds like a good trade off. Change comes in small increments. Not in grand and sudden gestures. Warren's day will come. But it's not yet and it's not because gays forced Obama to expose the bigot. Especially since too many people still agree with the bigot.
LeftCoastOracle
· 11 months ago
Good trade off? Tell that to any of us who a) was fired for being gay, b) was denied the legal right to guardianship of a child they parented, c) couldn't fight for their country because of who they are, d) couldn't sponsor their partner for US citizenship, or e) was denied any of the more than 1,100 rights, responsibilities, and privileges that come with marriage - including the right to file a joint tax return.
Wake up! This is 2nd class citizenship. We deserve better.
Tim
· 11 months ago
Nobody is denying you are treated badly and unfairly....if I could flip the switch now I would, but we can't...nobody can.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
The civil unions that Obama supports instead of marriage are the equivalent of saying that we will not allow gays to drink at our water fountains, but we will work to build them water fountains of equal quality.
Tim
· 11 months ago
And the comparison to seperate but equal isn't exactly accurate. To start, I am not religious, I am agnostic. But "marriage" now, and I know I know wasn't always like this, but now is a religous sacrament for the most part. The other drinking fountain in your analogy isn't a religous object that the gov't has to avoid infringing on, like marriage probably is.
Personally, I think we should have civil unions, with the exact same benfits, for everyone...I mean everyone, no marriages from the government.......and then if someone wants to get "married' they can go find a church that will do it.
Trismegistus
· 11 months ago
Marriage is essentially a way to handle property and wealth inheritance, even for the patriarchs in the Torah with multiple wives. Your idea is the best way to deal with this: The state-issued license makes you "married" (call it whatever you want) if you want a religious thing go ahead. BUT NO clergy can perform a legal marriage. Make them separate!!!
timncguy
· 11 months ago
CIVIL marriage is NOT a religious sacrament. If it was atheists couldn't get married and ALL people would be required to get married in a church which is NOT the case at all. Just because many people are unable to distinguish between CIVIL marriage and a religious marriage cerimony, doesn't mean the distinction doesn't exist.
Besides, there are Churches, including Christian churches the support gay marriag, so why should one set of religious beliefs trump another set of religious beliefs when there is supposed to be a separation of church and state? If as you claim marriage is a religious sacrament, then those religions that believe in gay marriage should be able to perform a legal gay marriage.
Ben Dover
· 11 months ago
I am still amazed at the number of (apparently) younger posters who think singing Kum-ba-ya to the music of the religious reich sharpening their knives in the background is a good thing. "Just wait" and "incremental" has been going on since the 60's and has produced nothing. Obama sold us out to the religious reich faster than you can say "change you can believe in." Money and time we were good for, actual change and support not so much.
LeftCoastOracle
· 11 months ago
The younger generation didn't have to struggle for the advantages they now enjoy. It's why they can "look at the big picture." Obama should be asking whether a racist would have been invited to deliver the invocation at Lyndon Johnson's inaugural. I don't think so.
Ben Dover
· 11 months ago
I agree completely. That's why I have such enormous respect for ACTUP and their tactics. It worked, and I fully believe that those same tactics would work again. Being dissed, but being "allowed" to participate in the parade only diminishes us once again. IMHO.
LeftCoastOracle
· 11 months ago
Yep. But the younger generation either doesn't remember, or didn't experience what it was like to be in the streets demanding that our government do something about a disease that was taking an entire generation of our men. I miss them and in their memory and honor I will speak out against bigotry whether it rears its ugly head.
Ben Dover
· 11 months ago
We share a lot of the same experiences. My very best wishes to you.
evan_la
· 11 months ago
Me too.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
They don't understand what it took to get this far.
cmpnwtr
· 11 months ago
Peace on earth, good will towards all beings.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
How DARE you say that?! ;0)
Brian
· 11 months ago
People need to stop hyperventilating. Obama publicly supports LGBT rights. Rick Warren may be a bigot but he is in favor of action on climate change, AIDS in Africa, and a host of other issues not traditionally in the realm of the religious right.
Obama is going to need all the support he can get if he wants to fulfill his ambitious agenda, so having a mainstream evangelical on his side is just smart politics.
Gary SF
· 11 months ago
Uh, he has the House and Senate. Why do you think he needs the ignorant Evangelicals to support him? Does he also need the Klan vote as well?
gymnjim
· 11 months ago
I am not interested in LGBT Rights. I am interested in Equal Rights. Which Obama most assuredly does not support.
Well if Obama needs all the support he can get he might start by not offending large blocks of voters that supported him.
Older_Wiser
· 11 months ago
Warren is in favor of anything that he believes will fill his coffers and extend his influence. The AIDS "ministry" was thought up by his wife when she read about AIDS in a magazine 6 yrs ago and Warren peddled his "purpose driven movement" bullshit by exporting it to 160 countries, claiming to have trained 350,000 preachers. Giving this prick a platform at the inaugural will give him even more gravitas while he damns Jews, gays & lesbians and anyone else who doesn't swallow his swill.
Ben Dover
· 11 months ago
Warren is NOT on Obama's "side". Warren will only play nice with Obama as long as Warren gets what he wants. After that, Warren will denounce Obama at each and every turn.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
Amen. From your lips to God's ears. This will happen nanoseconds after the inaugural. Gee Barack, hope it was worth it to alienate you supporters only to empower those who will try to defeat you in 2012.
LeftCoastOracle
· 11 months ago
I repeat: Lyndon Johnson invite a racist to deliver the invocation at his inaugural? I don't think so. People need to wake up!
I'd prefer that presidents didn't want or need to have an invocation and/or benediction at their inaugural but given that they do, it is important that they respect the people they claim to be a "fierce advocate..." for. He claims to advocate for equal rights for L&G people but he doesn't believe in marriage equality, just civil unions. That's the very definition of separate but equal, something the U.S. Supreme Court ruled was "inherently unequal" when applied to race. One would think he would remember that, being a constitutional scholar and all.
LeftCoastOracle
· 11 months ago
Don't forget that Warren's church denies membership to "unrepentant" gays. It's on the church's website. Look it up.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
Obama is about to honor a man who fights against LGBT rights. Fighting against that is also smart politics. Doing nothing is not.
Trismegistus
· 11 months ago
The probable result of this is that the extremist christianists will adopt these typically progressive views and not abandon their other views thus increasing their numbers. Obama is giving away the middle to the bigots and the right wing.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
I hear Adolph Hitler was a big fan of physical fitness and vegetarianism. Should Obama invite a Neo-Nazi? And if being a "mainstream evangelical" means you think gay relationships are just like pedophilia and incest, as Warren does, I think we can do without them.
LeftCoastOracle
· 11 months ago
A racist delivering the invocation at Lyndon Johnson's inaugural? I don't think so. Barack Obama needs to think again about disrespecting us. We are truly second class citizens.
warbler
· 11 months ago
Do you really think you're a second class citizen? It does you no good to think of yourself that way.
LeftCoastOracle
· 11 months ago
Well you be the judge:
1. In many states I can be fired for being gay 2. In many states, I cannot be the legal guardian of a child I parented 3. I cannot fight for my country because of who I love 4. I cannot sponsor my partner to become a US citizen 5. There are over 1,100 rights, responsibilities, and privileges lost because I cannot legally marry the person I love (including the right to file a joint income tax return).
I call that 2nd class.
RitornaVincitor
· 11 months ago
I am married (for the moment) in California, but if I die, my husband may not receive my Social Security benefits despite the fact that we pay our taxes, own our home and have lived together in a monogamous relationship for nearly a quarter century.
Pete
· 11 months ago
What I find so particularly infuriating about the Rick Warren invitation is that it was utterly unnecessary. Obama could have easily found some humble (which Warren surely ain't) apolitical clergyperson, and it would have resulted in no one having been run over by the bus.
We need to educate, educate, educate....and make Obama ever more ashamed -- duly ashamed -- about his decision.
timncguy
· 11 months ago
you don't get it do you? Obama picked him on PURPOSE to appeal to the fundies. He knew exactly what Warren's positions are when he picked him. He made a political decision that he would gain more from the right than he would lose from the left by making this pick. Picking an apolitical clergyperson who not have made the fundies happy at all.
Tim
· 11 months ago
If you truly think it through, this will be a gain to the left in the long run. You simply cannot ignore half the country, they have to be engaged, no matter how unseemly their views are, and eventually, if it even takes that long, reaching out now will help pave the way for equality. Obama may be the only person capable of this.
SouthernYankee
· 11 months ago
You are so right. He is the president for the whole country. That was the problem with Bush.
Trismegistus
· 11 months ago
Nope! He chose Warren to appeal to a small minority of extremist christianists. He doesn't value the LGBT minority. The prayer role is totally symbolic so it must be dealt with as such. BTW apparently there are no people qualified to fill ANY role in Obama's administration who happen to be LGBT!!!
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
Really? Do half the country think that gay relationships are just like pedophilia and incest, which is what Warren has said? If so, I am worried. Should I be packing my bags for a concentration camp?
Tim
· 11 months ago
This being "newsworthy" amazes me.
This will be a big deal for another 3.5 weeks, and then after another week or two it will be forgotten, the reason being this is not a big deal.
Warren does not get to make any decisions for Obama. This is not a public endorsement by Obama. If this is an endorsement by Obama then every president of the last 45 years didn't believe in evolution, birth control, basic science, the earth being older than a few thousand years and did believe all jews were going to hell, adam and eve were the first people, and shellfish is an abomination. This choice does not mean Obama is moving to the right on LGBT issues.
Also, if you really think this through and not let your emotions get in the way or rational thinking, which is understandably tough about such issues, this has the potential to help equality issues in the long run. It really does. Read here: http://joshuetree.blogspot.com/2008/12/obama-an...
The fact is, this news is getting a great deal of attention, meanwhile a senate report released this week showed the Bushites committed war crimes, a bunch of great environmental and science appointments were made by Obama and a travesty is happening in NY with a non deserved Kennedy apparently getting a senate seat.......and this is what everyone is talking about....the guy who hold a book out in front of Obama for 2.5 minutes.
Incidently, when the right was ridiculing Obama for his association with Rev. Wright....wasn't it us who were screaming you can't have guilt by association........well it seems like that is what is going on now.
Ben Dover
· 11 months ago
I, for one, am unemotional about this. This is not my first rodeo. I have seen many of these guys come and go over the years. All make wonderful, warm and fuzzy promises that never seem to happen once they're elected. I never thought Obama would do this; I expected fully that Obama would do this. It is my life experience that if you do not fight at the beginning, then you will surely lose at round two and three. If you give just one inch, I guarantee you that the religious reich will hang you within that very inch.
Tim
· 11 months ago
Well this kind of reaction only feeds into the ridiculous current feeling of some americans about what Newt said was a "militant gay" faction. The fact of the matter is, headway is being made, it need only be a matter of time. I know it's hard to be patient when you're being treated harshly, and I'm not saying lay down and not fight. But you need to pick your fights, and this is a losing one, and frankly isn't necessary. The current environment and the severe reaction after prop 8 is going to backfire...I really think it's going to. I hope not, and I really wish it wouldn't, but I fear it will.
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
which fight have you picked? and what will you say if somebody tells you it's the wrong fight?
Tim
· 11 months ago
If someone tells me it's the wrong fight and I think it is the right one, then I simply disagree with them. I see that as civil, not an attack on me.
My fights tend to be more political. And tend to involve something more substantial than who the guy who holds an empty book in front of the new president for a few minutes...then tend to involve people who make law, report news, research topics and that group.
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
what will you say when somebody says your political fight is not substantial?
Tim
· 11 months ago
who said that?
Then I will disagree...but I don't remember anyone saying that about the fight for equality......at least I didn't, marriage equalit is a fight not only worth having, but must be had.
I don't understand the point of the comment.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
What evidence do you have that it's going to backfire? The only poll I know of says that if Prop 8 were on the ballot today, it would lose.
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
maybe you forgot that Obama left the Wright church. now he seems to be joining Pastor Rick's church. maybe you could revise your comment in light of reality?
Tim
· 11 months ago
No Steve in NJ he isn't actually joing rick's church. He is actually searching for one in DC and interestingly he never left Wrights church for any reason not involving ridicule from the right on a guilt by association basis and basic family needs.
Furthermore, if we are looking to reality, he hasn't been to church in months. But I guess we'll just be sarcastic and flippant about such things.
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
i have no idea what you just said.
warbler
· 11 months ago
Clear as a bell to me.
sherifffruitfly
· 11 months ago
Clear here.
Tim
· 11 months ago
Yeah, that actually is perfectly clear...but I'll put in in bulleted form, maybe that'll help 1 - Obama isn't joining rick warrens church 2 - Obama is searching for a church in DC 3 - Obama might have left Wrights church, but that was because of the rights ridicule based on a guilt by association basis 4 - Obama hasn't been to church in months 5 - that is reality
Is that clearer for you Steve in CNJ?
Steve_in_CNJ
· 11 months ago
1. if you are still talking about obama looking for a church in DC you have obviously missed my point. 2. the reason obama gave for repudiating wright did not mention guilt by association but perhaps you can read his mind and i can't. 3) but if indeed the right forced obama to reconsider his association with wright, there is obviously hope that the left can force him to reconsider his embrace of Warren.
SouthernYankee
· 11 months ago
Sweetie you need to get a grip of yourself. It is only a 1-2 min prayer. He isn't setting Obama's policies. Am straight and a big supporter of my gay friends. Obama has battles to fight with the right. You are making a mountain out of a ant hill. Believe me Obama supports gay issues. He is putting his hand out to the other side. Be patient. It took women many years to finally get the vote. It took many years for african-americans to be able to move where they want and to vote. It will come for gays. But patience is a must. If our gay friends go off the deep end than you are playing into the nutty ring wing playbook.
Ben Dover
· 11 months ago
60's, patience.
70's, patience
80's, witness to many deaths because of "patience"
90's, patience wearing thin
00's, I no longer have time for patience.
You fight this your way, I'll stick with what I know works. No offense intended.
Tim
· 11 months ago
godspeed my friend, I hope it works.
warbler
· 11 months ago
You're deluded if you think the 60's and 70's were about patience. It really isn't about whether or not you have time for patience. It will take as long as it takes. It's happening now. You commenting here is not hastening anything. No offense.
NGLTF
· 11 months ago
"Sweetie you need to get a grip of yourself. It is only a 1-2 min prayer."
Would you say the same thing to Jewish people if Obama had invited a Holocaust denier to speak at his inaugeration and said that he respects the person very much even though they disagree?
Tim
· 11 months ago
I'm sorry, I know this is important and I am a staunch supporter of marriage equality, but comparing the current treatment of homosexuals to the treatment of Jews in mid century Germany is a bit off...at the minimum.
SouthernYankee
· 11 months ago
Tim have you ever read the book "The Pink Triangle". Read it some time. It is an eye opener about gays in Germany prison camps. They even put non-jews in the prison camps.
timncguy
· 11 months ago
why must there always be a "comparable" amount of physical harm done to gays before they are considered to be worthy of equality? Besides, you are aware of the fact that the Nazis imprisoned gays in the concentration camps and exterminated them right along side jews, right?
Would it have been apples and apples if the commenter had just said an anti-semite instead of a hollocaust denier? Would have been OK with you?
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
How about a visit to the Holocaust Museum, where you can see the clothing of gays who were sent to concentration camps along with their Jewish brothers and sisters?
SouthernYankee
· 11 months ago
Apples and oranges. All am saying is you working yourself up and you will have a heart attack. Thats all am saying. I sure do care what happens to people know matter who they are. I was raised not to hate anyone. I meant to harm to you. I am just worried about the Richard.
mirth
· 11 months ago
Get a grip on your own damn self, Sweetie.
Because you are either too ignorant or too uncaring about your fellow citizens or too satisfied with the guarantee of your civil rights to *get* it doesn't mean it can't be got.
SouthernYankee
· 11 months ago
Hey you little queen. Shut your fucking mouth. You have no idea about me and my life. In my family we have transexual, 2 gays, 1 black in-law. I come from a very mixed family background. I love them all. You have no right to call me ignorant or uncaring. I sure care alot. All am saying is in the big picture a 1 prayer is not policy making. I can't stand Warren. I will wait to see what Obama does once he becomes president. HE IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE WHOLE COUNTRY asshole. Sorry if I have offend you but that is the way it is. I have a grip and I am not getting worked up of some fucker saying a minute prayer.
dula
· 11 months ago
Warren's views have been given respectability by Obama. The hate speech directed at Gays at his church is now validated by the POTUS. He only has 2 minutes at the Inauguration but his lifetime of hatred is now confirmed by Obama as being legit whether he agrees with it or not.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
How would you feel about a preacher who said your current relationship and any relationship ever you might hope to have with a member of the opposite sex was just like pedophilia and incest? I am guessing you might not want that person given a place of honor at the inauguration. There is zero downside to having gay people make this legitimate and completely true point.
cracked
· 11 months ago
Just sent this to the inauguration comment site:
Dear President Elect Obama,
This invitation to Rick Warren to give the invocation at the inauguration is a slap in the face to those who seek equality and justice in our nation.
I'm not gay, but I have to ask, "Why didn't you invite a politically active anti-semite or racist to join you, if you want to be inclusive of all viewpoints, not matter how hateful.
A bigot who spreads hate and lies, is just that. Giving that bigot a forum in this case legitimizes his positions.
Good Luck,
Tim
· 11 months ago
Indicentally a few months ago, Warren gave Obama a forum, especially within the Evangelical community, does this mean Warren legitimized Obama's LGBT positions?
How do you feel about the possibility that Brown's argument on Proposition 8 is right and that Obama as a constitutional scholar agrees with Brown's argument. Where then will the gay community stand with respect to the Warren's participation in the Inauguration should Brown's argument get up and Prop8 be struck down - after the Inauguration? If this happens the pro-Prop8 constituents will be just as humiliated and angry as the gay community is now. They will also have won only to have that win taken away. Obama will be in a position to console and conciliate. And the Law will have won – Obama's preferred position. Perhaps the Law should be allowed to run its course without too much mud slinging in the meantime. It is just as unwise to wallow in defeat as it is to proclaim victory. Gay marriage is not over by a long shot. Phillip
Tim
· 11 months ago
Well that's wonderful news. Jerry Brown is a tough customer and an important Cali figure. I doubt it will work, but I hope his argument carries the day.
Gbennett
· 11 months ago
In 2004, I worked my tush off doing door to door canvassing for John Kerry and Ken Salazar (CO Sen. candidate at the time, now CO Senator and Obama's nominee for Sec'y of Agriculture). I put in every free hour I could over the span of many months, as the prospect of a continuation of Bush and his assault on the Constitution and the rule of law, science based policy, and other rational bases for governance was inconceivable.
When Bush won, I was very disappointed. I could not believe that my country had fallen for the fear baiting tactics of the Bush cabal. (recall all the orange alerts emanating from the Dept. of Homeland Security that miraculously stopped on election day 2004?)
But what really got to me that election year was when the newly elected Senator from Colorado, Ken Salazar, in his first major public act as my Senator, introduced and recommended Alberto Gonzales, author of the memo that called the Geneva Convention's ban on torture "quaint", to the Senate for confirmation as Attorney General. I felt that Senator Salazar did not understand or care about what had motivated me and many others to work for his election, all in the name of political expediency. Gonzales proved to be an inept upholder of the rule of law and a Bush sycophant, and was forced from office. Salazar would go on to vote in 2006 to uphold the Bush policy on torture and permanent detention along with the majority of the Senate.
I am feeling almost the same way about Obama right now. In his first major public act as my President, the inauguration ceremony will begin with an invocation by avowed homophobe/bigot Pastor Rick Warren. Warren worked avidly to remove marriage rights of gays and lesbians in California in the Prop. 8 campaign. Warren has equated same sex love with pedophelia and other criminal behavior. This is a highly divisive choice, and an extremely unfortunate note to begin his presidency on.
Right now, I am glad that I did not invest the time and energy into the Obama campaign as I did in 2004. Some niggling thought told me not to really trust Obama's progressive rhetoric. I voted for him (twice) and canvassed one day for his campaign. To me politicians like Obama and Salazar, by seeking to bridge the divide between right and left, end up abandoning core principles. I will have a happy day on Jan 20, as the Bush years will be over, but it will be bitter-sweet as I will have rubbed in my face that I, as a gay man do not count.
Gerald Bennett Boulder, CO
SouthernYankee
· 11 months ago
Well get use to it. They all lie to us sooner or later. I don't care if they are republican or democrat. Its just democrats screw the little guys less than the republicans.
Midwest Me
· 11 months ago
As a straight who's always been somewhat-to-very supportive of gay rights, I'm finding all the gay hyperventilation on this topic quite tiresome.
Yeah, Warren has abominable views on gays and abortion. I'm Jewish, he doesn't think so much of me and mine either. And it bugs the hell out of me when he compares abortion to the Holocaust. That's a grave insult to the memories of my people.
And you know what? I'm still willing to let him play a short and entirely symbolic role in the inauguration. Obama isn't appointing him to a position of actual power and authority. He's letting him read a prayer for a minute or two.
Why am I even willing to tolerate that, given what a creep I think Warren is? Because Rick Warren speaks FOR millions of evangelicals. He speaks TO tens of millions of them in his books. He is one of the two or three biggest evangelical leaders, vying with James Dobson and Pat Robertson for leadership of the group. And as much as I've read angry queers saying that Warren and his followers are exactly the same as Dobson and his followers, THEY ARE NOT.
Warren's group is open to talking about issues like global warming, stopping the slaughter in Darfur, ending AIDS in Africa and helping the poor everywhere. Obama is reaching out to THOSE people, trying to get together a coalition on these issues, a group of both evangelicals and progressives that could be twenty million strong or more. A group with the size and reach to pressure leaders on both the left and right, and get things done.
Are you saying that your hurt over a symbolic role this man is playing for a minute or two in the inauguration is more important than stopping global warming? More vital than ending the genocide in Darfur? More pressing than the needs of the sick and destitute all over the world?
This is what Obama meant when he talked about reaching out to find points of agreement even with people you strongly disagree with. I hate Rick Warren's views on gays and gay marriage, on abortion, and on Jews. I find his views on global warming and genocide in Africa somewhat admirable. Because of the pressing need that those latter issues present, I am willing to reach out a hand to Rick Warren and his followers, DESPITE THE FACT THAT THEY THINK I'M GOING TO HELL.
It's called being a big person. I'm pretty sure some of you never heard of the concept.
Now, I'm not telling you to surrender. Keep fighting for what you believe, and certainly let you displeasure with the pick be known. I'm not saying you should just roll over and just take it.
But the total despondency, the attacks on Obama, the shrieking rhetoric...it's not winning you any friends in my neck of the woods. Quite the opposite, I see you alienating some of your former allies.
And for the love of God, please pick your battles. You want your end-all-be-all battle to be over who gets to read the invocation? Sheesh. Save your ammo for repealing DADT, or DOMA or any other thing that really and actually AFFECTS YOUR LIVES.
Holding Obama accountable for his actions is my right as a US citizen. It is my duty.
tlsintx
· 11 months ago
you don't know tiresome, buddy.
Bob reader
· 11 months ago
Midwest Me:
If you were gay 24 hours a day, had been for as long as you could remember, had a history of being second-classed in ways and to an extent that I doubt you can actually comprehend (every TV show, every song on the radio, every advertisement, looked out at the world with gay eyes every millisecond of every day, brain assaulted with uncountable second-classing messages from family, synagogue or church, peers, "society"), then I think you'd understand the total despondency and rage about Obama doing something so gratuitously insulting. I appreciate your at least perceiving the emotion involved, per your term "total despondency." That's an apt description.
I otherwise appreciate your being supportive and your good intentions. But please know if you haven't walked a lifetime in our shoes, you don't know what it's like. The total despondency, and the rage at Obama re Warren, are legitimate. And it does affect our lives because Obama has conspicuously granted significant legitimacy on (Prop. 8 supporter) Warren and his offensive views. It applies friction on all of our progress toward equality.
cracked
· 11 months ago
Hey. I'm straight and I think you said it correctly in two words: "gratuitously insulting", to gays, to their families, to their descendants, to their friends, to their neighbors, and to all citizens who give damn a bout justice and equality. needlessly, recklessly, consciously
I'm a friend, neighbor, family, descendant and citizen - and I'm really hurt. I had really hoped we were donating our money to Obama for more than just "stopping the crazy..."
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
Exactly. The point is Obama went out of his way to be insulting when there was just no need for it. How many wonderful clergymen and women are there in this country who could have given a stirring invocation and who do not on a daily basis through their ministry demean the lives of a significant segment of society?
timncguy
· 11 months ago
You may think that Warren is different than Dobson. But, when asked for ANY POSITION he differed on with Dobson, he could not come up with one at all.
dula
· 11 months ago
Warren preaches hate against Gays at his Church. When he says Gay relationships are equal to incest and bestiality he dehumanizes them in the eyes of others. When Gays seem subhuman to ignorant people, they feel they have the right to TIE THEM TO A FUCKING FENCE AND BEAT THEM TO DEATH. As a Jew, you should know what propaganda like that can do. But with your logic, the Jews should have just accepted Hitler for the good things he did...I hear he was sweet to children and animals.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
I do appreciate your perspective (Jews have had to deal with this kind of thing for a very, very long time). But I think the problem is that while gay people are perfectly willing to reach out to Warren and his friends, Warren and Co. are not willing to reach out to us on the same terms. What dialogue can be had with people who compare your relationships with pedophilia and incest, and who believe that your relationships should be denied equal recognition before the law? And as far as the "pick your battles and save your ammo" point, this whole dustup can only help us. Realistically, there is zero chance that Obama is going to be LESS supportive of gay rights because of this than he was before.
The Bag of Health and Politics
· 11 months ago
The problem here is that Warren is fundamentally incapable of doing what Obama asked him to do. Warren cannot lead a national prayer because he believes that gay believers are not believers, and refuses to admit them to his church. So Warren giving a NATIONAL prayer means that people are being excluded from that moment of contemplation. Worse, there is a high probability Warren freelances and makes dumb, divisive statements with his prayer. The reason: there is an opening on the fruitcake right he's trying to fill. What Obama should do is invite Peter Gomes to come by and give a co-invocation with Warren. Then the onus is on Warren to either admit his gay hate is hot air aimed at $elling books by praying with Gomes, or to admit he is a hypocrite and fruad who is so uncivil that he refuses to pray with those he disagrees with.
Demo_Dave
· 11 months ago
So many Liberals on the left were against Hillary but I can assure you she would have never slapped the gay community in the face the way Obama has .
Demo_Dave
· 11 months ago
And by the way I don't think a gay band should now play in the inaugural parade.
If Obama has to have a preacher for an invocation why doesn't he choose someone truly inclusive, maybe someone from the United Church of Christ ( Congregational) a true American religion. Send that bigot packing along with all his evangelicals. They are the ones who brought us bush and company. Religion needs to be downplayed in this country, remember seperation of church and state. This comment from a straight, lapsed catholic..
Please give Obama a break
· 11 months ago
Good grief people. The more you all scream about this very insignificant thing, the more paranoid you look. You are ridiculing the most gay-friendly president-elect in the history of the nation and showing your racism at the same time. You all seem to think that just because Barack Obama is black that he should force everyone's cause down the throat of the nation. You don't realize that your cause will not be won because you scream and alienate the most gay-friendly president-elect in the history of the nation. Barack Obama has a lot of battles to win because of his race and he took a step in showing his inclusiveness by inviting someone whose views he is diametrically opposed to to do a very short prayer. Barack Obama is trying to be the president of all Americans. We have not had that in a very long time. Could ya'll be a little more patient with the man? Allow him to have a track record before ya'll jump off the deep end screaming about how Obama wants you all to die and be chained to fences. He is not advocating that gay people are hurt and killed, but is trying to bring those who are intolerant to the table. You all know that the only way to defeat ignorance is through education. The people who hate you will not come to the table unless they feel as though they will be heard. Once you get them to the table, you can then begin to educate them. But nothing will happen if you don't get them to the table.
So let's say that this one prayer gets some evangelical to begin an actual dialogue about the rights of gays. And let's say that that evangelical begins to do research and changes his or her mind because he or she feels accepted, then isn't it worth it? Isn't it worth it to have a movement of the heart? You will not change these people's minds with hateful rhetoric about their "star" pastor.
I know that many of you will not see reason and will attack me as a homophobe or hate speaker or a supporter of the "right". But none of you know me or my ideas. I was once someone who thought that all gay people were going to hell. My views were validated in my mind the day that a lesbian spit on me as I went to church. There was a protest outside of my church and I was the one who got the spit in my face. That solidified my views. Until I began to work with one gay man. This gay man really got me to think and to do some research. He told me that he didn't hate me for my views and encourged me to take a deeper look at homosexuality. And I realized that God would not want me to hate and condemn any man or woman. I became convinced that it was not my place to consign anyone to hell, and that my job was to love everyone. So now, I have many gay friends and I have quit my church after trying to start a gay outreach ministry. (Not one to change someone's orientation, but to teach the love and acceptance of Christ.) I have found a church that accepts gays with the same love as straight people. And my children love their uncles and aunties. Now if I could change my viewpoints, then anyone could change. So, please gay people work with love.
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
Thank you for changing. I have been hoping for years to find a dialogue with evangelicals. But how do you have a conversation with someone who compares your relationship to pedophilia and incest, and who will not allow you to be a member of his church unless you "repent" and promise to try not to have sex? Could you recommend to me one prominent evangelical pastor who shares your views? If so, that is the person who should have been invited, not Rick Warren.
SouthernYankee
· 11 months ago
OK ChrisSF, I give, I throw in the towel. Now what?
ChrisSF
· 11 months ago
I have no solution. Harvey Milk probably had the right answer. Change will come only from each individual deciding to come out to loved ones. Everyone should see the movie "Milk" to appreciate the power of this idea.
SouthernYankee
· 11 months ago
Good point. I will see it when it comes out on dvd. I live in a rural area. I am willing to bet they won't show it. But they don't show alot of good movies. You have to go to the bigger theaters to see any top notch movies.
SouthernYankee
· 11 months ago
I know this is going to make alot of you mad, but I am going to say it. Some times gays act just as badly as evangelicas. I get your points, I really do. But it isn't going to change anything but work yourselves up into heart break and high blood pressure. You need to stay calm and fight the big issues like Prop 8. You will have a lot of support. If you can't see that than you are just as blind as the right. Now I will say am sorry if you are offended. Get over it. You must or you will not make it in this fucked up world we live in. I DO SUPPORT YOU. I want to see what Obama does in the future.
mirth
· 11 months ago
"I have lots of Gay friends and I lovelovelove them all."
barf
faith brooks
· 11 months ago
I also left a comment. I worked for the Obama Campaign in Georgia. I am white and the amount of racisim I encountered is unbelievible. I have Far Right releatives and believe me they won't reach back to Obama until he changes his, views. I was one of the the " sorry whites who put a N--- in office." I was proud of what I did until Rick Warren was given the HONOR and it is a honor to give the Invocation. I have a LGBT daughter and sister. I feel sick about it. I am going to take a wait and see approach and see what Obama does for the LGBT community. But like I told the Campaign my money will stay in my pocket and my support at home, until I see what he does.
All Comments
Moving forward: We need to support candidates that actually believe in equality, true equality. I undersand there is a process and that you atract more flies w/ honey. However on the heels of prop eight, amend 2 in FL, Arkansas adoption laws, and now this inaguration betrayal. It is apparant that no one will progress our agenda. We need to find and support candidates, no matter the long shot that fully embrace us as citizens of the US with full rights. I used to want to take the path of least resistance, but I fear that that approach is feutal.
I want equality now, and I refuse to wait any longer.
Rosa Parks didn't.
Think you feel bad now? Wait until you get ignored.
The problem needs a new strategy.
I just don't get it.
It won't be easy, pretty or bloodless, but the time is now.
They want to destroy us.
Will you let them?
I won't.
I don't think that "they" (whoever "they" may be) all want to destroy us. Some obviously do. Some want us to be happy that we are not placed in prison. Some want us to go away peacefully with crumbs. Some don't understand and don't want to. Some think they do understand and they really don't.
That may seem all really pablum, but I guess I'm saying each situation deserves it's own unique response not "canned" same old, same old.
I'm wondering if going to the Obama Administration and asking to include a GLBT speaker or person of faith in addition to Warren would be better than just targeting Warren. Just a thought.
In answer to your question, "Will I let them?" I'll do my best not to.
People don't even get along in fairy tales, contrary to popular belief.
Sometimes, I think John would like to wring my neck or at least ban me from the group!
I wonder if Harry Reid uses it, he seems to be constantly whining that he doesn't have his super majority of 60 senators, which for some reason, he thinks excuses him from ever doing anything.
Just fury.
Burn them with it.
You want to pray to your God, your more than welcome to go to your church, synagog or anyother other place where the Lord is worshiped, but religion has no place in government. People are human beings regardless of their personal beliefs and the last place government should be sticking its nose in are peoples personal affairs. If we are all equal under the Constitution, then regardless of sexual orientation, color or anything else we should be allowed as a people to live as we choose.
It struck me as odd that Obama would pick Warren. I'm not bright enough to know why. Perhaps there is some reason, but if your going to be an agent of change, I think he could have done better than Warren. Then again election cycle after election cycle a new mouthpiece with new promises. After 58 years of watching the circus go by, there isn't much that has changed and it looks like Obama's Big Top coming to town is no different.
Also, if people would really think about this, I mean really put aside their understandable emotions, they will see what is being done, that it is good for equality....in the long run. But I understand if the short term hurt is too hard to overcome, I just wish people would think it through.
Go here:
http://joshuetree.blogspot.com/2008/12/obama-an...
You CAN NOT reason with right wing religious crazies. They will take whatever concessions you give them and then latch onto your neck and drain you dry while giving nothing in return.
That is fact. That is reality.
When they come to your door, you do not invite them in.
The fact remains, this is not an endorsement. Like I said earlier, if this is an endorsement of his views then no president of the last 45 years has believed in evolution, birth control, the big bang, basic science and many other religously held views.
This will be a big deal until he is sworn in, then within a week or two it will be forgotten.
And you should realize that the "right wing religious crazies" represented by Warren are not "half the country" but 25% or fewer. In fact, polls suggest their numbers are shrinking and younger evangelicals are increasingly liberal.
In Oregon the courts opened the door to gay marriage and it was knocked down by a state referendum. That wasn't Obama's fault, that wasn't Rick Warren's fault, it's the fault of American culture and beliefs.Threatening people, threatening religions accomplishes nothing. Grow up, people!
How about you go enjoy your equal rights, and stop trying to tell us how to fight for ours.
Now, think back in time and remember that when civil rights laws were enacted at the federal level it was not approved of by the majority of the country. But, it was done because it was RIGHT.
When laws against inter-racial marriage were struck down by the Supreme Court, it was done against the view of the majority. But, it was done because it was right.
The same should be done for the LGBT community. Because it would be right whether it is the view of the majority or not.
Obama's Achilles Heel is that he is too proud to change a decision once he makes it., right or wrong.
I get the feeling, that given this time of year, the stress of the holidays, the added stress of finding or keeping your job or feed yourslef and pay your bills are enough to be concerned about. What people do with their lives should be there business and not governments.
However, I do not get it as to why you have lost hope. Rick Warren, believed you were not worthy for many many years. When Rick felt you were not worthy you felt you were. I don't get it! Obama is allowing Rick Warren have a spotlight to show that Rick is a bigot, to me this is the best way to show that the christian leadership is not what the USA wants or most of the world.
I say to you this should give you hope and courage to stand up and be the American that you heard speak up when you were a child. MLK, shined the light on the wrong of America and now Rick Warren will shine the light on the wrong of the christian right. You, can be part of the ones righting the wrongs of this day and time... I say to you don't give up when the walls will be tumbling down. You are needed and justice has to be done.. Be part of it and be proud of yourself and your service to the cause...
..... funny, that doesn't jibe with Obama's explanation for why Warren will be up there. He's not doing it to showcase what a bigot he is, he's using him to draw in the christian nuts from the right at OUR expense!
What gumdrop fantasyland do you live in?
If you really believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you. . .
What mental contortions does one have to go through to come to such a conclusion? There's no one who already knows what a creep Rick Warren is who will see him differently, but there are lots of people who like him and lots who don't know anything about him who will see this guy's presence as affirmation.
Just when you think you've heard everything...
*bangs head on desk*
I can't see a productive end coming out of the hand wringing I'm seeing online. Prove me wrong. Please?
.
PISS OFF.
"OMFG, get over it already. All preachers are bigots. This endless hissy fit is doing nobody any good."
Is really a way to open a discussion, retard.
Looks like it.
We will be voting for a leader of our new third political party called, "Wanna Party?"
To much hay over this. Not one day in office yet and already everyone is ready to be a cynic because apparently the swearing in ceremony now suddenly is some prophecy of things to come.
Most of the US states and countries like Spain, The Nederlands, Belgium, South Africa allow gay marriage from either a court ruling or act of parliament. Like the 60s civil rights movement, the fight for gay rights will go through the courts, then Congress will act. I hope Obama's strategy is to reach out to conservatives to open a dialogue between loving gay couples and religious leaders. In California, the AG wants the Cal Supreme Court to overrule Prop 8, because our constitution, like the US Constitution, guarantees minority rights, so it's illegal for a simple majority to take away fundamental equal rights from a minority group.
The gay rights leadership is really incompetent at the moment. They ran the worst campaign in memory. Opponents of Prop 8 were swiftboated and smeared relentlessly in TV and radio ads. A couple of lies peddled by supporters of Prop 8 like "forcing children to learn about gay marriage in schools and churches will be forced to marry gays" never were effectively countered by opponents of Prop 8. And now I fear the Prop 8 backlash is hardening positions on both sides of the debate.
Had the HRC done what Obama is doing (reaching out to conservatives and religious leaders) maybe Prop 8 would have failed here.
During the campaign, Obama promised he will open a dialogue with our "enemies" (like Ahmadinejad of Iran) to find peace, so it's no wonder Obama is reaching out to social conservatives like Warren who are our political enemies. Maybe Prop 8 opponents should follow his example to change hearts and minds. We must remember that Prop 8 barely passed. America is after all in its last throws of bigotry towards gays.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_of_same-sex...
i have a faint hope that mr. obama will reach down deep and draft a speech in the style of the philadelphia race speech. that was a great speech, although it was already given 12 years before by bill clinton. if you think about that speech, try to remember whether mr. obama legitimized racism as a moral alternative. he didn't. so the challenge is for him to make a speech on heterosexism that doesn't legitimize that kind of bigotry. does anybody think he can?
Yes, it's unfortunate that Obama couldn't have picked a less divisive guy. But this is after all only a ceremony. He's not putting Warren out to dictate policy or anything. It's just a move to placate evangelicals. Gays' turn to be placated will come soon enough with policy and positions filled. And that will be more substantive and meaningful than peaking at some ceremony. Until then, stop this silly temper tantrum already!
Sit down, shut up, be quiet, blah blah blah
I also love how the people doing it (for the most part) are straight and enjoy their rights already.
*snicker*
AG Brown in CA is challenging PROP H8:)
Of course, Obama had better deliver on LGBT issues, or I'll be one of the folks with pie in his face.
I kan haz ur stuff?
"Oh, the PAIN!" -Lost in Space's Dr. Zachary Smith
Obama campaign on and is expected to "reach out" to various people and groups who differ from him. That's a large one. But have you noticed that he is "reaching out" to the right-wing evangelicals for a purely ceremonial function? The invocation means nothing and affects nothing, and makes not one whit of difference in policy. It's powerless. It's ribbon cutting. And it's out of the way early. So for the rest of his term, Obama will be able to say that he reached out to those people, while giving actual decision-making ability and real input to others INSTEAD of those people.
It's politics, and he's playing it well. And the result will be more of a plus for the gay community than if he had manned the barricades, like some would like him to do. But frankly, if he did that, he may well sacrifice real progress for the principle of the thing.
Until then, we're being thrown under a bus.
And for the last goddamned time, homophobic bigotry is NOT AN ACCEPTABLE AND DIFFERENT "VIEWPOINT".. anymore than racism or anti semitism is.
LEARN THAT.
I'm only about 20% irritated. If i can stand across from a line of Baptist shitbags screaming "faggot", I can deal with disembodied text on a website :P
But it's not the equivalent of having a klansman up there NOW. It's the equivalent of having someone who was against school integration during the 1950s, when school integration was still a controversial topic. And having him there for the purpose of actually getting the schools integrated. You're right - it's NOT an acceptable viewpoint to you or to me, but at this time in history, it is still a controversial one. And it has to be treated that way, because that's what the situation IS, not what we would like it to be.
Twenty years from now, this whole controversy will seem ridiculous - like school integration does now. But it isn't twenty from now. That's where we want to get. You get there by dealing with the people who haven't YET taken the next step in civil rights instead of just yelling at them. Because if you do it right, they will. Warren won't. But some of his audience WILL.
Twenty years ago, most LIBERALS were saying, "I have nothing against gay people, BUT...." Gay marriage wasn't even on the radar screen, and if you had brought it up, you would have been treated like an alien. Many, many people have changed their minds in the last twenty years. Because they weren't bad people - just ignorant people who knew few if any gay people personally. The same thing is happening now. And it's changing FAST.
Yes, Warren is against your rights, but he would tell you that he does not hate you. He thinks that you choose your lifestyle and believes you can change it. Of course, that is pure ignorance, but his beliefs -- while idiotic -- are not on par with the other groups you cited since those groups are for ridding the planet of all people who are not like them.
Warren would gladly give you a warm embrace if you would just be straight. He opposes something about you, but something he thinks can be changed/saved. The hate groups you cited don't believe there is any that the targets on their hate can change. Because of that, extermination is the only solution in their view. I'm not saying that there aren't some religious people out there who wishes ill-will towards gays (because there are), but that's not what Warren represents.
I'm not defending Warren; I think he's a douche bag. I'm strongly on your side on this issue (and all other gay rights issues) -- however, I do believe that there are some irrational viewpoints concerning the actual impact of Warren saying this prayer. Gays are not being 'thrown under the bus' in this situation. It would be the case if Warren were creating policy or was going to doing something at this inauguration that was anti-gay, but he's just going to do a prayer.
We should continue to rail against this decision by Obama and expose Warren for all of his moronic beliefs, but Warren reciting this prayer, while angering you, will have no impact on your rights and on your life. That's a fact.
*eyeroll*
The inclusion of Warren in Obama's inauguration is simply symbolic. This guy isn't making policy for Obama -- he's reciting a prayer. Yes, we don't like what Warren represents and I'm all for sounding off about this until either Warren is yanked or until the event is over, but to think that Obama has turned his back on his supporters over this one thing is being ridiculous.
I even read someone on here yesterday saying that after supporting Obama the whole way, they now wish Hillary were in his place. Over this?!? C'mon...
We may deplore what Warren represents, but in reality, Warren will be in a role on Inauguration Day that no matter who was chosen to the prayer, would basically be doing the same thing Warren will do. No matter how left or right the pastor is who does it, it'll have no affect on policy decisions made in the White House.
I encourage everyone to keep up the fight, but also to pinch yourself every now & again so you don't allow your passionate emotions about all of this cloud you from the reality of the situation.
If you're not careful, you're going to turn-off the same people that are supporting gay rights.
Do you dialogue with anti semites?
No, you don't. You exclude them, you oppose them at every turn, you grind them to dust. Religious fanatics are like anti-semites or racists, except worse.. they're impossible to dialogue with because they have JESUS on their side on their minds. They're doing God's work. How many religious fanatics have you known to be open to discussion? In the last 20 years alone, how have they given one f#cking inch? They have tried to take EVERYTHING, and attack gays every day, 24/7, constantly.
Why is it you people only want to 'include different viewpoints' when it's anti-gay prejudice and bigotry?
Look in a mirror and ask yourself.
Do you dialogue with anti semites?"
Yes and Yes. These, unfortunately, are members of our society with their own families and doing things for their communities. We work with them, we ride buses with them, we share community events with them. Racism, anti-semitism and many discrimination forms happens every seconds in this country; and if you asked yourself why? Its because of ignorance. Even in the gay community itself, these forms of discrimination happening.
When people are informed and understand issues, things get resolved. For example, Prop. 8, I believe failed because a vast majority voters were not educated about the issues and what the proposition actually meant to gay people and their families.
If you think the only way to move forward is through exclusion, then more power to you. For me, I think its educating our people.
How do you solve ignorance??? You solve it by educating people not by fighting them.
Having any religious leader give the invocation is a balant violation of Chruch and state and will result in seqments of the American people being disinfranchised.. We are a nation of diversity, choosing religion or one religion over another in any political situation or political commentary
just cannot be tolerated if uniting American is the goal.
Third - I am attaching the email of the Obama transition team LGBT liaison for your use - I believe we need to body slam these people with our opinions. After all, we did elect this man and we didn't do it to have an antisemitic gay hater shoved down our throats as a representative of this new administration...
So - here she is - the LGBT Obama Team liaison:
Let Obama know what you think about the selection of Rick Warren. His LGBT liaison is Parag Mehta, parag.mehta@ptt.gov
We can make a difference.
pick up your shoe and throw it at his head.
I tried to paste in Mark's contact list from yesterday but must have triggered some kind of attack defense in the program. Can you repost the list? It is a good list and useful to have it in the comment threads.
Thanks,
cracked and straight and mad
Note to self2: I foresee an SNL skit coming as a result of the melodrama. And also one as a result of the Obama's shitty choice. The melodrama skit will be the funnier.
(a) agree with you on the substantive point that Obama's choice was shittacular, but
(b) disagree with you on the cotton-candy point that the "hope is fading" dramarama is stupid.
Grow up, child.
We will still be here when you are ready to continue the good fight.
Stop feeling out on the edge. Come in to where the rest of us are.
IF.
Not when.
The good fight is wherever you fight it. What has Obama offered up so far besides token words?
Nothing.
He has to prove himself. So far, he's doing a shit job of it.
My point is that the effectiveness of the anger is limited. Warren will be there but so will we. His presence changes nothing intrinsic in who we are. I'm mostly talking to those who are simply venting and threatening to take their ball and go home. What purpose does that serve? Organize a protest, fine. send letters to Obama, good. See how effective that will be.But what purpose does unloading streams of vitriol on this site have if that's all they're going to do.
We can't control whether or not Obama does the right thing and removes Rick Warren, but we certainly can express our opinions, make a lot of noise, gain as much attention as we possibly can, and maybe, just maybe, we can create some positive progressive CHANGE. Afte rall, that's what we all voted for. It's what we expected. And it's what we now should be DEMANDING.
uh, yeah. obama said that several times. "i don't support gay marriage, because i'm a christian." even came up in the debates, i believe. sorry, but you heard what you wanted to hear.
Now we know where he stands indeed.
I am a jewish father with children. I understand that listening to varying viewpoints help build character, but there is no justification for Rick Warren being part of the inauguration. I'm not even talking about the time he told a jewish women that she is going to hell:
"at the Aspen Ideas Festival. When it came time for questions, a woman stood up, proclaimed her Judaism, and asked Warren if she was going to burn in hell. He paused before responding--and then answered her question the only way it could be answered. Yes, he said to audible gasps."
Why invite someone that discriminates against gays?
Then after this week's choice of Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at the inaugural, I realized that I've been projecting my hopes & wishes onto Obama & that he really isn't who I imagined him to be. Definitely, not a liberal or progressive, that's for sure. And since the only way to judge him is by his action (his rhetoric has become hollow), my conclusion is that Obama never did care about the LGBT community nor he was ever a liberal/progressive.
And from the comments of his fans on this website & others, there's a very strong tendency among them to believe in all things Obama, right or wrong, & to not question his administration, along with tossing out insults at gays for speaking up. This is sounding familiar; like the fans of Bush of the past few years.
There have been many telling the LGBT community to, "get over it" or they've given the explanation for the Warren pick, as Obama's way of reaching out, reaching across the aisle.
That's all fine & dandy, but as a liberal & a gay man, it's apparent that all this 'reaching out' has been at the 'left's expense. Basically it appears that Obama has clearly taken the 'left' for granted & figures that we will follow him no matter what.
That is NOT true though & could be a fatal error on his part. As a once enthusiastic supporter of Mr. Obama, I am less than thrilled with him now & will look at everything his does or proposes with a very skeptical eye, knowing that he cares no more for me or my interests than Bush ever did.
As usual, Obama has behaved as all politicians have over the past 20 yrs, using the LGBT community's enthusiasm, support & financial backing when needed & then shunning us after accomplishing the task at hand. Hopefully, we will wise up to any politicians future entreaties & demand actions over empty rhetoric.
parag.mehta@ptt.gov
Short of that, I'm no longer blinded by "That One's" glimmer!
It seems all the sister militants are ready to hobble Obama because he's consorting with the enemy. It's the GOP bunker mentality in reverse.
The Warren fiasco aside, do you see ONE liberal/progressive in Obama's administration appointments? All I see are those from the center & center-right of the political spectrum. Do you believe Obama's going to whip out some surprise liberal/progressive at the last minute?
It's not looking good from where I sit on the left-side of the political spectrum.
The outrage about Warren is absolutely valid, but for some to think that Obama is no longer any good because he chose Warren for this meaningless prayer thing is just kooky.
It's the policy that matters. If this gets us fired up to push O into doing the right things, the things he promised, where it really matters, then fine. I can assume that he won't do so without pressure. So the outrage over this is like practice for the main event, such as nominating an anti-gay rights Supreme (or appellate judge). Now that would be a fight I'd rather not have. But we have to consider it a possibility and act accordingly.
Now instead of realizing this and perhaps offering an alternative to the far rights bastardization of the Christian religion, the far left seems more than willing to not only accept the far rights interpretation of religion and faith as what religion actually is (ugly, hypocritical, materialistic and bigoted) but they'd rather ridicule and reject the vast majority of people of faith instead of offering them an alternative viewpoint based on Jesus' teachings of helping and loving one another. Y'know Jesus NEVER spoke out against homosexuality or abortion.
Now correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't it be preferable to bring those who have been suckered into the GOP camp based on their faith and based on the LIE that the Republicans are the party of Christianity into the Democratic side and to NOT alienate 90% of the country by not just denouncing these bigoted right wing pastors but by constantly denouncing and ridiculing peoples faith in general?
I've seen this for way too long and way to often in the left wing blogosphere. But hey, if we want to throw away all our gains and marginalize ourselves by picking almost meaningless battles then go right ahead. And by meaningless I mean that Obama hasn't had a chance to help gays make gains but already everyone is ready to toss him under the bus because of the inauguration ceremony? How is this going to TAKE anything away from gays? It's not. It my rub the wrong way but I'm sure once he appoints gay ambassadors and passes pro gay legislation you'll all realize just how petty this issue is.
We have freedom of religion in the United States and that means we, as voters, shouldn't have to listen to evangelicals spout their hate speech at our inauguration. I totally support complete and total separation of church and state. Get the Bible and all the rest of it out of our courhouses, out of our government buildings, and away from our president. For ONCE could we not have a president who governs according to the constitution and his intellect?
now THAT would be change I could get behind and support. All this "kiss the evangelical's asses so maybe they will 'tolerate' US citizens who are different from them." I don't give a rats ass if they like me or not. But I do care when the man I helped elect ignores his promises and gives an international platform to a bigot and a homophobe.
But it seems to many people here seem to think that this battle is more important than when the time comes to actually make gains. So instead of dividing the evangelical moment, most of you here seem eager to divide the Democratic coalition. And that's cutting off your nose to spite your face. It's pointless, it's stupid and it's self-defeating. It's like you guys want to do to yourselves what Obama is trying to do to the Evangelicals.
As a citizen I shouldn't be voicing an opinion with which you disagree. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I'll just quietly go away and leave it to you and Rick Warren. I DONT THINK SO.
Rational adults understand there are many ways of expressing one's faith and religion and that the evangelical movement has many faces - there are the big megachurches, sure, but there's smaller churches with wide variations in what they practice and preach. The evangelicals have found themselves defined on the national stage by people like Rick Warren that have put together large congregations, book deals or have television ministries.
There are many people out there who see their faith as something private and a personal relationship with God who find those that mix bigotry and politics into religion distasteful, but you don't hear about them. They're just not really vocal about it. It's really unfortunate, because the megachurch/televanglist side of Christians who seem to want to dictate their beliefs on society as a whole have become the face of Christianity in America.
As for "throwing Obama under the bus" and your sense of this as a "meaningless battle", I can only say that when I see Obama - and the Democratic Party as a whole - actually start living up to what they've been preaching for many years, I'll be convinced. In the meantime, based on Obama's promoting of a Falwell-like minister, I'm feeling we've been through the same thing we've seen in the past - taking our money and votes, then telling us to go the fuck away.
It's happened over and over again with the Democratic Party and LGBTs since the 1970s and this just seems like deja-vu all over again.
Obama's response was pure George Bush as well. If Obama actually thinks that "bigotry," is a "disagreement," he's too fucking stupid to be president. Get rid of him!
This is not a policy matter. Obama's hands were not "tied" in this. He made this decision. He's made the decision to promote more hatred in this country.
never give in!!!!!!!
by Linda Hirshman
(NOTE: Copies of what seemed to be a draft of an inaugural invocation by Pastor Rick Warren arrived in the fax machines of several prominent journalists this morning. This site does not vouch for the authenticity of the draft, although each of the statements does conform to material in Pastor Warren's speeches, interviews, or on his websites.)
O Lord, as we come together on this historic and solemn occasion to inaugurate a president and vice president. We pray, O Lord, for President-elect Barack Obama and Vice President-elect Joseph Biden, to whom You have entrusted leadership of this nation at this moment in history.
We pray for their advisors and supporters, particularly their Jewish advisors and supporters, who will surely roast in hell if they do not abandon their refusal to accept the Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior. Pray for the conversion of Obama chief advisor David Axelrod and his economic wise man Larry Summers, his early supporters Lester Crown and his campaign finance chair Penny Pritzker, for, as the Bible says, there will be a day when there will be a great revival of faith in God through Jesus among the Jewish people. (Romans 11). Obviously, this is a day that we, as believers in Christ, want to pray for! Let the light of Christian salvation come to the Jewish Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel and his family, some of whom survived the German effort to bring them to Christian truth in the last generation.
May all efforts to stop homosexuals from violating the ancient humanitarian institution of marriage succeed as did your will in California in the last election. Attend particularly, O lord, to President Obama's environmental chief Nancy Sutley, and to the man who has worked essentially without sleep for three months to save the American economy from total collapse, Representative Barney Frank. Use the government to bring an end to acts as bad as incest, pedophilia and polygamy, by stamping out homosexuality among the homosexuals, a people evolutionarily unfit, that we may truly become one nation before God. May the First Amendment to the Constitution protect all who want to compare homosexual sex to incest, pedophilia and polygamy from the arrows of hate speech accusations shot by the politically correct.
Change the hearts of the new administration's pro-choice advisors and supporters, including the Justices of the Supreme Court who stand here today with us: Holocaust denier Anthony Kennedy, holocaust denier Ruth Bader Ginzburg, holocaust denier David Souter, holocaust denier Stephen Breyer, and holocaust denier John Paul Stevens, who is about to swear in the Vice-President, in that abortion is a holocaust and the eighteen million or so women who have committed abortion in the thirty-five years since 1973 are thus no better than Nazis.
Bless the women, who have chosen to follow their ambitions into public life, but change the hearts, Lord, of Secretary of State Hillary R. Clinton, Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano, United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, and Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis from independent lives of their own to submission to their husbands, if any, for I love the King James Version's rendition of Ephesians 5:22 "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands" and of course "Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ if God." 1 Corinthians 11:3. These women have chosen to participate in the public life of the community. Enlighten them as to the requirement that women not speak in church, saving any questions they have about their common life to ask their husbands as they return home.
Now, O Lord, despite the plain language of the Constitution that created this great nation, we dedicate this presidential inaugural ceremony to You. May this be the beginning of a new dawn for America as we humble ourselves before You and acknowledge You alone as our Lord, our Savior and our Redeemer. We pray this in the name of the Father, and of the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Lesbian Gang-Raped in East Bay
Richmond police are offering a $10,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of four men who allegedly kidnapped and gang raped a lesbian Saturday night, Lt. Mark Gagan said today. Police are investigating the attack as a possible hate crime, Gagan said.
She had a rainbow sticker on her car. This must help Warren sleep at night - his warriors are at work while he sleeps. Obama, thanks for 'reaching out.' Gang-rapists need a voice in your administration. Fuck the gays.
talk about hyperbole.
http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/snuff.asp
Aside from that, Obama is John McCain. He gave the Right everything it could have ever dreamt of, and it started with the voting for FISA. Obama is not needed. We have another Republican, and not even a Right-leaning Democrat. This is pure Republicanism. Iraq will continue. Obama won't make it to a second term.
And that is exactly what i said when he brought in Donnie McClurkin to speak in South Carolina and get all the anit-gay bigots all fired up. As a LGBT Youth Leader I was outraged by this insensitive and dangerous action. S.C. is a state that is still dealing with the murder of 19 year old Sean Kennedy. Many of us have stood beside his mother and held her hand while she gave her impassioned speeches and cried along with her. How could Obama be so disrespectful to the LGBT community just for a handful of votes in an all red state? What good came from that?
You can not legitimize a gay bashing homophobe who hides behind the Bible, by giving them a platform, and not expect violence against innocent LGBT kids and adults. After all, the man on the stage says that gays are evil and you have to destroy evil in the name of God. People believe that stuff and they act on it.
http://www.bilerico.com/2007/08/hillary_clinton...
Also, check with some legal experts please, ending ALL of DOMA will NOT force states to accept marriages or unions performed in other states either. So, Obama's wanting to end the portino of DOMA that Clinton would keep would have NO EFFECT at all. Honestly, if it would, just how many Republicans or conservative dems in congress do you think would vote to end it? It wouldn't stand a chance because it would IMMEDIATELY make gay marriage legal in all 50 states because MA now allows people from out od state to wed there.
But, the Obama campaign replied that my assumption was not what he meant. He meant that states should issue civil unions to gay couples, but continue to issue marriage licenses to straight couples. And, that churches could decide if they wanted to "marry" gays or not.
So please, check with the Obama team before you make assumptions about what his stance on civil unions and federal benefits for gay couples really means.
They call it "social issues" and claim disagreement is to be embraced.
I call it "civil rights" and know that is non-negotiable.
Barack Obama has lost my money.
No letters to my senators on his behalf.
No nothing.
Sorry.
I should be much more willing to forfeit my rights for other people's opinions. That's how the voting rights act and school desegregation worked right? Initiatives and referenda?
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/12/20/huckabee-wa...
if we just sit down and shut up these stupid wing-nut religious fanatics will continue to catapult their ignorant bigotry and make it sound so reasonable...
Jesus Christ! [shakes head]
The thought of Sarah Palin (or any right winger0 running this country again can do that to me.
I'm surprised they're not booking people off these blogs.
i think you can see why this applies to all the talk i'm reading regarding not so much Waren but Obama in general.
OH! You think that because I disagree with you that therefore I must be some right wing plant or something. Tell you what, you're more than free to read ALL my blog posts here and I even have some nice references of actual right wingers who hate my guts and would probably wish me dead at blogs where i argue with them.
Now why don't you grow up and realize that to disagree with you doesn't make me a right winger.
;-)
Simple, no?
it's 3 degrees of separation in order to wrap the gay cause in the sacrifice of servicemen and women of any orientation.
Really, how quickly they turn. He isn't even prez yet and your already ready to feed him to the wolves. Its not all about you or anyone else.
Yes yes, it's not a literal phrase....
You guys do realize that most far right evangelical churches say that obama is the anti-christ do you?
You all do realize that they also say the anti-christ is a homosexual, do you?
You do realize that by inviting Warren, he minimizes that, don't you?
You do all realize that if he listens to the gay community he'll appear to be beholden and taking his marching orders from gays, don't you?
You do realize that if he does capitulate to your DEMANDS, he'll appear to be the gay candidate that these evangelicals can then twist to again make him the Anti-Christ figure that some of them already are doing.
You do realize if that happens then he'll have a large base of opposition and any pro-gay legislation he tries to enact will meet fierce and relentless resistance, don't you?
You do all realize that the evangelical community is larger than the gay community don't you?
You do realize that since they are larger, they can be a potent roadblock to any moves he may make to HELP YOU GUYS, don't you?
Now doesn't sitting in the back of the bus, figuratively speaking, at least for the inauguration sound a lot more palatable than losing the war because you want to fight a largely symbolic battle?
You know the media will have a field day with this disunity. it already started on Friday on MSNBC.
And I am HOPING the media has a field day. The more attention to this, the better IMHO. You're entitled to your opinion, and I am entitled to mine. Deal with it.
You see, I am not gay but I do indeed see the import here! The LGBT community deserve all the rights the rest of us have. To deny them is to deny us all. Warren and his ilk want to deny some rights to most of us. They want a theocracy with themselves determining which god-flavor will rule. They are antI-choice and anti -birth control. They are also anti-non-christians (which includes not just jews and muslims and hindus and budhists; but also catholics, who worship satan, I guess that includes anglicans and orthodox too.)
Obama knows all about symbolism. And that is what disturbs me the most.
nothing without a demand," to quote - who? DuBois? Douglass? I think it was Douglass, a great black wise man. Obama would do well to remember such men.
http://www.edgesanfrancisco.com/index.php?ch=ne...
I was not there for the riots (although I did attend Judy Garland's wake along with every drag queen in town,) but I was out at the time and I know I benefited from the advances made in our movement since then. I also know that that was a different time and the methods and attitudes that were used then are not necessarily effective in our continuing struggle.
This is a pivotal time. Days of rage can be harmful. We have substantial political clout and we know strategy, and while Prop 8 caught us sleeping, I believe we are closer to full legal parity than we've ever been. Warren saying a prayer at the inauguration does not signal the end of days for us.
You know, those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
Gays were very quiet before Stonewall, trying to advance Gay rights for many decades, and absolutely nothing happened. The Stonewall Riots and other visible public protest in the 70s put Gay rights in the national debate.
Nothing - and I mean nothing - happened with AIDS before the AIDS Quilt and Act Up protests in the 80s started making people talk about and begin to understand the issue.
Nothing happened with continued violence against Gays until people started talking about Matthew Shephard.
During the Clinton years, we remained pretty quiet and we got DOMA and Don't Ask, Don't Tell. More recently, we've showed more patience as the Religious Right has formed the national debate on issues like employment discrimination against LGBTs, Gay marriage and a host of other issues.
If you don't express an opinion, you don't get anywhere and you let others shape the debate for you.
We are ON the bus and the prospect of being thrown UNDER it (overused phrase) ever again is over. We really must own our advances and realize they will not be easily taken away.
We must all learn to evaluate each action of every politician and all other leaders as to whether it promotes or hiders movement toward the stated goal. This action by Obama does not promote equality for the LGBT community and therefore it diminishes and limits the freedom and equality of all the rest of us.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/...
Obama, Clinton, Edwards, Richardson, Biden, Kerry, Dean, and most of the other Dems have never supported gay marriage equality. So I guess I don't understand why gays had so much hope in Obama or any of the others?
He will be an advocate and I believe he will overturn DADT, but he was never going to fight for full equal rights. None of the Dems even came close to promising that and they all held the same position to protect each other. I voted for Obama in the primary and GE knowing that he was not Harvey Milk and that all the Dems think they cannot get elected president if they support gay marriage.
That being said, I think the progressive and gay movement is winning the war for hearts and minds all across the U.S. I am optimistic that civil unions could pass in most states and perhaps even nationally in four years. I am confident that Obama would sign anything that crossed his desk to help improve the equality rights of gays.
Use the Obama network available online to advocate for gay marriage. You can advertise for any kind of group on his website and start one. Don't quit his network, take it over. Obama inspired hope about our abilities to affect change, but our hope should be in ourselves and each other, not just him. My two cents today.
If a consensus candidate--a President or Vice President f a popular administration--faces a serious challenger from their party's base, they will be forced to tact to the fringe after they win the nomination in the name of party unity.
People who could pose problems for Barack Obama in 2010: Gavin Newsom (if he gets elected Governor/Senator of California), Howard Dean, Russ Feingold, Barbara Boxer, etc.
If one of those candidates runs, then Obama will probably lose. Feingold would probably be the toughest for Obama to dispatch. (The one thing Obama has going for him is that Biden may well decide to retire in 4 years if there's a contentious primary, and the progressive opponent can be given the VP slot).
http://www.ktvu.com/news/18321357/detail.html
When are people in the US going to grow up? Why do we even have to have religious influence in our govt? Why do we have to have anything religious taint our govt ceremonies? Separation of church and state--something most people don't know the meaning of--practice religion all you want, but not on the govt's dime. NO establishment of religion by the US govt--period. People who live in this country may be majority christian, but we don't have mob rule and there are far more religions in the US now. Christianity is only about 1/3 of the world's religions. In fact, 16% of the world's population doesn't have any religion at all.
So Warren and his ilk believe that 2/3 of the world is going to "hell"? How rational is that?
Sounds like a good trade off. Change comes in small increments. Not in grand and sudden gestures. Warren's day will come. But it's not yet and it's not because gays forced Obama to expose the bigot. Especially since too many people still agree with the bigot.
Wake up! This is 2nd class citizenship. We deserve better.
Personally, I think we should have civil unions, with the exact same benfits, for everyone...I mean everyone, no marriages from the government.......and then if someone wants to get "married' they can go find a church that will do it.
Besides, there are Churches, including Christian churches the support gay marriag, so why should one set of religious beliefs trump another set of religious beliefs when there is supposed to be a separation of church and state? If as you claim marriage is a religious sacrament, then those religions that believe in gay marriage should be able to perform a legal gay marriage.
Obama sold us out to the religious reich faster than you can say "change you can believe in."
Money and time we were good for, actual change and support not so much.
Being dissed, but being "allowed" to participate in the parade only diminishes us once again. IMHO.
Obama is going to need all the support he can get if he wants to fulfill his ambitious agenda, so having a mainstream evangelical on his side is just smart politics.
Well if Obama needs all the support he can get he might start by not offending large blocks of voters that supported him.
I'd prefer that presidents didn't want or need to have an invocation and/or benediction at their inaugural but given that they do, it is important that they respect the people they claim to be a "fierce advocate..." for. He claims to advocate for equal rights for L&G people but he doesn't believe in marriage equality, just civil unions. That's the very definition of separate but equal, something the U.S. Supreme Court ruled was "inherently unequal" when applied to race. One would think he would remember that, being a constitutional scholar and all.
1. In many states I can be fired for being gay
2. In many states, I cannot be the legal guardian of a child I parented
3. I cannot fight for my country because of who I love
4. I cannot sponsor my partner to become a US citizen
5. There are over 1,100 rights, responsibilities, and privileges lost because I cannot legally marry the person I love (including the right to file a joint income tax return).
I call that 2nd class.
We need to educate, educate, educate....and make Obama ever more ashamed -- duly ashamed -- about his decision.
This will be a big deal for another 3.5 weeks, and then after another week or two it will be forgotten, the reason being this is not a big deal.
Warren does not get to make any decisions for Obama. This is not a public endorsement by Obama. If this is an endorsement by Obama then every president of the last 45 years didn't believe in evolution, birth control, basic science, the earth being older than a few thousand years and did believe all jews were going to hell, adam and eve were the first people, and shellfish is an abomination. This choice does not mean Obama is moving to the right on LGBT issues.
Also, if you really think this through and not let your emotions get in the way or rational thinking, which is understandably tough about such issues, this has the potential to help equality issues in the long run. It really does. Read here: http://joshuetree.blogspot.com/2008/12/obama-an...
The fact is, this news is getting a great deal of attention, meanwhile a senate report released this week showed the Bushites committed war crimes, a bunch of great environmental and science appointments were made by Obama and a travesty is happening in NY with a non deserved Kennedy apparently getting a senate seat.......and this is what everyone is talking about....the guy who hold a book out in front of Obama for 2.5 minutes.
Incidently, when the right was ridiculing Obama for his association with Rev. Wright....wasn't it us who were screaming you can't have guilt by association........well it seems like that is what is going on now.
It is my life experience that if you do not fight at the beginning, then you will surely lose at round two and three. If you give just one inch, I guarantee you that the religious reich will hang you within that very inch.
My fights tend to be more political. And tend to involve something more substantial than who the guy who holds an empty book in front of the new president for a few minutes...then tend to involve people who make law, report news, research topics and that group.
Then I will disagree...but I don't remember anyone saying that about the fight for equality......at least I didn't, marriage equalit is a fight not only worth having, but must be had.
I don't understand the point of the comment.
maybe you could revise your comment in light of reality?
Furthermore, if we are looking to reality, he hasn't been to church in months. But I guess we'll just be sarcastic and flippant about such things.
1 - Obama isn't joining rick warrens church
2 - Obama is searching for a church in DC
3 - Obama might have left Wrights church, but that was because of the rights ridicule based on a guilt by association basis
4 - Obama hasn't been to church in months
5 - that is reality
Is that clearer for you Steve in CNJ?
70's, patience
80's, witness to many deaths because of "patience"
90's, patience wearing thin
00's, I no longer have time for patience.
You fight this your way, I'll stick with what I know works. No offense intended.
Would you say the same thing to Jewish people if Obama had invited a Holocaust denier to speak at his inaugeration and said that he respects the person very much even though they disagree?
Would it have been apples and apples if the commenter had just said an anti-semite instead of a hollocaust denier? Would have been OK with you?
Because you are either too ignorant or too uncaring about your fellow citizens or too satisfied with the guarantee of your civil rights to *get* it doesn't mean it can't be got.
Sorry if I have offend you but that is the way it is. I have a grip and I am not getting worked up of some fucker saying a minute prayer.
Dear President Elect Obama,
This invitation to Rick Warren to give the invocation at the inauguration is a slap in the face to those who seek equality and justice in our nation.
I'm not gay, but I have to ask, "Why didn't you invite a politically active anti-semite or racist to join you, if you want to be inclusive of all viewpoints, not matter how hateful.
A bigot who spreads hate and lies, is just that. Giving that bigot a forum in this case legitimizes his positions.
Good Luck,
How do you feel about the possibility that Brown's argument on Proposition 8 is right and that Obama as a constitutional scholar agrees with Brown's argument. Where then will the gay community stand with respect to the Warren's participation in the Inauguration should Brown's argument get up and Prop8 be struck down - after the Inauguration? If this happens the pro-Prop8 constituents will be just as humiliated and angry as the gay community is now. They will also have won only to have that win taken away. Obama will be in a position to console and conciliate. And the Law will have won – Obama's preferred position. Perhaps the Law should be allowed to run its course without too much mud slinging in the meantime. It is just as unwise to wallow in defeat as it is to proclaim victory. Gay marriage is not over by a long shot. Phillip
When Bush won, I was very disappointed. I could not believe that my country had fallen for the fear baiting tactics of the Bush cabal. (recall all the orange alerts emanating from the Dept. of Homeland Security that miraculously stopped on election day 2004?)
But what really got to me that election year was when the newly elected Senator from Colorado, Ken Salazar, in his first major public act as my Senator, introduced and recommended Alberto Gonzales, author of the memo that called the Geneva Convention's ban on torture "quaint", to the Senate for confirmation as Attorney General. I felt that Senator Salazar did not understand or care about what had motivated me and many others to work for his election, all in the name of political expediency. Gonzales proved to be an inept upholder of the rule of law and a Bush sycophant, and was forced from office. Salazar would go on to vote in 2006 to uphold the Bush policy on torture and permanent detention along with the majority of the Senate.
I am feeling almost the same way about Obama right now. In his first major public act as my President, the inauguration ceremony will begin with an invocation by avowed homophobe/bigot Pastor Rick Warren. Warren worked avidly to remove marriage rights of gays and lesbians in California in the Prop. 8 campaign. Warren has equated same sex love with pedophelia and other criminal behavior. This is a highly divisive choice, and an extremely unfortunate note to begin his presidency on.
Right now, I am glad that I did not invest the time and energy into the Obama campaign as I did in 2004. Some niggling thought told me not to really trust Obama's progressive rhetoric. I voted for him (twice) and canvassed one day for his campaign. To me politicians like Obama and Salazar, by seeking to bridge the divide between right and left, end up abandoning core principles. I will have a happy day on Jan 20, as the Bush years will be over, but it will be bitter-sweet as I will have rubbed in my face that I, as a gay man do not count.
Gerald Bennett
Boulder, CO
Yeah, Warren has abominable views on gays and abortion. I'm Jewish, he doesn't think so much of me and mine either. And it bugs the hell out of me when he compares abortion to the Holocaust. That's a grave insult to the memories of my people.
And you know what? I'm still willing to let him play a short and entirely symbolic role in the inauguration. Obama isn't appointing him to a position of actual power and authority. He's letting him read a prayer for a minute or two.
Why am I even willing to tolerate that, given what a creep I think Warren is? Because Rick Warren speaks FOR millions of evangelicals. He speaks TO tens of millions of them in his books. He is one of the two or three biggest evangelical leaders, vying with James Dobson and Pat Robertson for leadership of the group. And as much as I've read angry queers saying that Warren and his followers are exactly the same as Dobson and his followers, THEY ARE NOT.
Warren's group is open to talking about issues like global warming, stopping the slaughter in Darfur, ending AIDS in Africa and helping the poor everywhere. Obama is reaching out to THOSE people, trying to get together a coalition on these issues, a group of both evangelicals and progressives that could be twenty million strong or more. A group with the size and reach to pressure leaders on both the left and right, and get things done.
Are you saying that your hurt over a symbolic role this man is playing for a minute or two in the inauguration is more important than stopping global warming? More vital than ending the genocide in Darfur? More pressing than the needs of the sick and destitute all over the world?
This is what Obama meant when he talked about reaching out to find points of agreement even with people you strongly disagree with. I hate Rick Warren's views on gays and gay marriage, on abortion, and on Jews. I find his views on global warming and genocide in Africa somewhat admirable. Because of the pressing need that those latter issues present, I am willing to reach out a hand to Rick Warren and his followers, DESPITE THE FACT THAT THEY THINK I'M GOING TO HELL.
It's called being a big person. I'm pretty sure some of you never heard of the concept.
Now, I'm not telling you to surrender. Keep fighting for what you believe, and certainly let you displeasure with the pick be known. I'm not saying you should just roll over and just take it.
But the total despondency, the attacks on Obama, the shrieking rhetoric...it's not winning you any friends in my neck of the woods. Quite the opposite, I see you alienating some of your former allies.
And for the love of God, please pick your battles. You want your end-all-be-all battle to be over who gets to read the invocation? Sheesh. Save your ammo for repealing DADT, or DOMA or any other thing that really and actually AFFECTS YOUR LIVES.
This aint' it.
Midwest Me
Holding Obama accountable for his actions is my right as a US citizen. It is my duty.
If you were gay 24 hours a day, had been for as long as you could remember, had a history of being second-classed in ways and to an extent that I doubt you can actually comprehend (every TV show, every song on the radio, every advertisement, looked out at the world with gay eyes every millisecond of every day, brain assaulted with uncountable second-classing messages from family, synagogue or church, peers, "society"), then I think you'd understand the total despondency and rage about Obama doing something so gratuitously insulting. I appreciate your at least perceiving the emotion involved, per your term "total despondency." That's an apt description.
I otherwise appreciate your being supportive and your good intentions. But please know if you haven't walked a lifetime in our shoes, you don't know what it's like. The total despondency, and the rage at Obama re Warren, are legitimate. And it does affect our lives because Obama has conspicuously granted significant legitimacy on (Prop. 8 supporter) Warren and his offensive views. It applies friction on all of our progress toward equality.
I'm a friend, neighbor, family, descendant and citizen - and I'm really hurt. I had really hoped we were donating our money to Obama for more than just "stopping the crazy..."
http://tinyurl.com/Romance-in-the-White-House
So let's say that this one prayer gets some evangelical to begin an actual dialogue about the rights of gays. And let's say that that evangelical begins to do research and changes his or her mind because he or she feels accepted, then isn't it worth it? Isn't it worth it to have a movement of the heart? You will not change these people's minds with hateful rhetoric about their "star" pastor.
I know that many of you will not see reason and will attack me as a homophobe or hate speaker or a supporter of the "right". But none of you know me or my ideas. I was once someone who thought that all gay people were going to hell. My views were validated in my mind the day that a lesbian spit on me as I went to church. There was a protest outside of my church and I was the one who got the spit in my face. That solidified my views. Until I began to work with one gay man. This gay man really got me to think and to do some research. He told me that he didn't hate me for my views and encourged me to take a deeper look at homosexuality. And I realized that God would not want me to hate and condemn any man or woman. I became convinced that it was not my place to consign anyone to hell, and that my job was to love everyone. So now, I have many gay friends and I have quit my church after trying to start a gay outreach ministry. (Not one to change someone's orientation, but to teach the love and acceptance of Christ.) I have found a church that accepts gays with the same love as straight people. And my children love their uncles and aunties.
Now if I could change my viewpoints, then anyone could change. So, please gay people work with love.
barf
racisim I encountered is unbelievible. I have Far Right releatives and believe me they won't reach back to Obama until he changes his, views. I was one of the the " sorry whites who put a N--- in office." I was proud of what I did until Rick Warren was given the HONOR and it is a honor to give the Invocation. I have a LGBT daughter and sister. I feel sick about it. I am going to take a wait and see approach and see what Obama does for the LGBT community. But like I told the Campaign my money will stay in my pocket and my support at home, until I see what he does.