What I object to is the existence of an invocation at all, regardless of who gives it.
I detest many of Warren’s positions, but I see it as a good political gesture on Obama’s part. Gay activists may squawk and fume over it, but it’s not like they’re going to turn Republican over it, while it extends an olive branch to the right without really giving them anything of substance. It’s a Tessio move (Tessio was always smarter).
Because I’m not a disingenuous, lying person like Warren, I’m going to ask you this clearly. What exactly is the point you are trying to make here?
Well, it seemed to me that Freejooky was objecting both to Warren’s support of possible military action against Iran and also defending it in Biblical/religious ways. I was comparing such rhetoric to FDR’s promoting WWII in “Christianity vs Paganism” terms.
And why should Freejooky care that FDR expressed his rhetoric this way? What in FDR’s argument do you find compelling?
I’ll pass on the first Q as my point was based on the assumptions that Fj is a liberal Democrat & that as such, he has a great deal of respect for FDR. However, those could very well be incorrect.
On Q 2, I think on that subject, FDR was correct in the light of the understanding of his day. I will say that modern neo-Paganism has no sympathy with totalitarianism in any form, BUT Naziism did have a profound strain of blood-and-soil, “Odic Force” Nature-deification, even while Hitler also cloaked himself in Christian rhetoric.
Well, FDR has been criticized for certain of his policies by a number of liberal Democrats. In fact, so much so, that the United States explicitly repudiated one of his policies. So, I’m left to conclude that either (1) you have been living in a cave for the last 30 years or (2) you are like Warren and argue in bad faith.
And this has to do with our current foreign policy situation how? What does this have to do with the US today and our relations with Iran today?
Removed inflammatory rhetoric.
While many of us might find Warren’s positions despicable, reaching out to him in this way was a smart political gesture from Obama.
Just as smart, and quite clever as a counterpoint in my opinion, is his choice of civil rights icon Joseph Lowery to deliver the closing benediction. While Lowery is not a gay activist, he has represented tolerance and equal rights for longer than many of us have been alive. His inclusion is perhaps more symbolic of the path Obama wishes to tread.
I think far-lefters should buy looser panties.
1.) You’re going to conclude what you want. Whatever.
2.) Did I say it did? That didn’t really seem to be the issue.
3.) Hi, Opal!
I’ll Amen that for far-righties also. Of course, one thing both have in common is they need & yet shun looser skivvies.
It’s funny on one level, but it pisses me off on another. It seems like they wanted Obama to go in all huffy and self-righteous and give those right-wing bozos a taste of their own medicine. They have no concept of grace, and no understanding of the kind of leader they have. It’s like someone should spray them with insecticide.
No. If you actually attempted a good-faith argument, I might conclude something different.
I’m not sure what this is in response to. If it’s to the second part of my quote, Warren was talking about assassinating the Iranian president, which is what you responded to. If you don’t want to actually address his arguments, then why are you responding to it?
Yes, indeed. Hi, Opal.
No,
3.) Buckeyes.
Then what would Republicans wear under their suits?
I’m laid off and have little to do - and still don’t have time to worry about this shit.
Obama can pick whomever he wishes - I’m more interested in him helping to get the economy back on track.
I’m very disappointed. Not because I think there’s something wrong with Obama being inclusive. But because Warren in particular, as noted above, does not simply disagree with positions that all men of good faith must hold. It’s that he lies about them, he engages in twisted rhetoric, he uses personal demagoguery to sway people away from righteousness, and he poisons the minds of his flock with hatred and evil. I’ll be on the Mall that day, and if Warren doesn’t say at least three concretely false things, I’ll be surprised.
–Cliffy
Just don’t let Warren talk about his cone of silence again.
It’s interesting to hear more of Warren’s views. I just watched a clip of him on Youtube talking about the definition of marriage being the same in all cultures and religions for 5000 years. What utter hogwash. I just watched Jon Stewart call Mike Huckabee on this fallacy. He also mentions that the minority should not decide for the majority. He needs to understand our democracy better. It’s about defending the rights of minorities. Melissa Ethridge quoted Jefferson on the view saying the majority should never vote on what rights a minority should be allowed to have.
That being said I still agree with him being included in the ceremony. We have to learn how to respectfully disagree and try to keep lines of communication open. We can’t tell someone specifically why we think they’re wrong if we halt communication.
“Fuck you asshole” may be good venting but usually unproductive as communication.
Come back and tell us about it. Sadly, I’ve have to accept the fact that even good people tend to be dishonest at times. That seems especially true when someone becomes gets a lot of attention politically or are fighting the perception battle in general. I think the best we can do is to keep knocking down the dishonesty and distorted facts at every opportunity