Can you point out the posts listing that as the “sole extent” of what’s wrong with Warren? I hope you don’t think it’s necessary to defend all of Warren’s sins in order to defend Obama’s decision.
The problem here is that there is no such thing as modern neo-Paganism in any sort of cohesive form. The modern neo-Pagan can believe anything they want, even that the Odic force has selected Germany as the chosen nation and that they need to do away with a minority population that is the chosen peopleo f a different God.
I’m just picking out a post at random here from the thread, but there’s this:
Now clearly, Warren isn’t a terrorist. But he’s also not someone who simply holds an opposing view to me either. He’s a deeply unethical man who resorts to nasty tactics to achieve his goals. Yes, we all agree that people have the right to hold opposing view points, so quit trying to characterize opposition to Warren as simply people who can’t stand to hear opposing viewpoints.
But Sampiro wasn’t characterizing opposition to Warren in and of itself as refusal to hear opposing viewpoints, he was making a specific point about Warren’s inclusion in a public ceremony. The entire thrust of the argument is that Warren was invited as a representative of a particular common point of view that Obama wishes to change, not that this is OK because Warren’s an ethical paragon.
I think you’re reading way too much into other poster’s comments on Warren.
I guess Sampiro will have to clarify. That’s not the way I’m reading his post.
Great article and point.
I don’t support unethical behavior but I support humans being human. Not to excuse Warren but most humans behave in an objectionable way occasionally. Sometimes we’re dishonest, selfish, greedy, self centered, or whatever. When you find someone without sin I’ll be glad to step aside while they cast the first stone. That doesn’t mean Warren shouldn’t be called on his bullshit. He should. However, if we call everyone who exhibits some less than admirable qualities a rotten scumbag, who will be able to call friends?
Not occasionally. It’s not like he had a momentary lapse. He has has exhibited a pattern of behavior here, and I don’t see anything to indicate that he sees his behavior in any way as questionable or unethical.
Strawman.
Strawman. But I’ll respond anyway.
George Wallace did some pretty nasty things during his life, and yet I don’t view him as a scumbag. Can you figure out why? Perhaps Warren will similarly convince me that he’s not a scumbag, but he hasn’t yet.
I know you weren’t the one to bring it up, but its no less of a sstrawman than saying what if it was a KKK leader, as was said upthread.
That particular poster is prone to – well, this is GD, so i’ll leave it alone. If your comments were directed at someone specific rather than a general comment, then you can assume my comments don’t apply to you.
I’m not interested in guessing games. Exactly how long have you been tracking this despicable pattern of behavior from Warren?
Sorry you missed the point I was making. Nice dismissal though.
So a guy wants to deny rights for an entire group of people and that is “just politics” and “just fine” with Obama. Well I guess if we take the word Gay and substitute “African American” Mr Obama would say “Oh that’s fine.”
Of course he wouldn’t. Obama once again proved what I said “He will say anything to get elected and doesn’t care as long as he can be the first black president.” It is all his over inflated ego.
This is a shame gays loved Obama and he laughed at them while showing them that the back of the bus ISN’T OK for blacks but it suits him JUST FINE when gays are required to sit back there.
Since haymarketmarter posted an article about the Taliban, maybe I can use a hyperbolic example to explain how portions of this thread are reading to me:
Thread: I’ve invited Mullah Omar, the head of the Taliban to speak at the next SMDB convention. I think it might start a dialogue that will lead to a better outcome for everyone. And yet, people are upset. Can you believe that? Like other people aren’t allowed to have different viewpoints.
Me: Of course, they’re allowed to have a different viewpoint. But Omar’s regime is a highly repressive regime that commits human rights abuses. People aren’t just objecting to Omar’s views.
Thread: The people who are objecting just hate Muslims.
Me: No, that’s not it. You may be able to succeed with your endeavor, but let’s not forget that Omar’s regime severely opresses women, even going so far as to prohibit educating them.
Thread: So people can’t have a different viewpoint then you?
Me: Of course they can. That’s not what I’m talking about. This isn’t just about having a viewpoint different than me. This is about causing serious harm to people.
Thread: There’s a lot of Muslims in this world. They’re not all going to agree with you on every single little thing.
Me: Yes, I know that. I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about specific actions which I find objectionable. Remember when the Taliban tore down those Buddha statues? Can you not see how people would be upset by that?
Thread: Hey, everyone’s not a saint in this world. People occasionally do bad things.
Me: Oh, come on. The Taliban sheltered Osama Bin Laden, the man behind numerous terrorist attacks.
Thread: Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Now, I would even agree that it may quite possibly be constructive to open a dialogue with Mullah Omar. But that doesn’t mean that we should just gloss over Mullah Omar’s actions in attempting to open that dialogue.
Warren, of course, isn’t in the same league as Omar. And again, for the bajillionth time, I don’t really have an objection to him speaking. But he’s not a saint, and I refuse to be told that my grievances with him are simply mere differences of opinion.
If you can make a point without resorting to strawmen, then make it. Unless you actually think that the idea that everyone has messed up in their lives is some huge revelation.
No I sure didn’t. It just seemed from the tone of your posts that you were forgetting.
The point isn’t just those statements alone but how they apply to the specific situation we’re discussing. I doubt strawman even applies but forget that. Please answer my question.
My objection is not who’s giving the invocation, it’s that he’s having one at all. I firmly believe that we need to quit just giving lip service to the concept of the separation of church and state, and actually start doing it.
While I personally agree with you, it’s Obama’s party and he’s a sincere Christian. If he wants to begin and end with a prayer, it’s his right to do so. But I don’t think such things should be institutionalized. If it were my inauguration, I would not have prayer.
Unfortunately we have devoted Christians living in America, and to solve some of our current problems, Obama needs wide support.
Rick Warren is largely an empty gesture aimed at getting the religious right more comfortable with Obama. That way they can hopefully look at his policies without their prejudice for all things not Christian.
Do people really want to alienate them at the risk of not having enough support to solve our bigger problems, like the economy and health care? There is no point of denouncing Warren now as history will eventually toss him like a used tampon. If we do alienate him, he will still enjoy support from his crowd, but only now they won’t support Obama.
Now, why would you want to spout such bullshit? Maybe you thought nobody noticed when Obama went out of his way to say that he disagreed with Warren’s views on homosexuality, abortion, and other issues. Just so you know, Warren isn’t going to make any sort of policy announcement at the inauguration. He isn’t going to speak on behalf of Obama. But Obama has begun a dialog with him.
If a conversation does not start between gays and people like Warren, nothing is going to change. Obama is doing the right thing by trying to start that conversation. Some people need to grow up. The holding your breath and stomping your feet thing is so last century. Take a seat at the table. Act like you have some self-respect. Be what you want to be seen as.