There’s a huge difference between choosing someone who truly follows the teachings of Jesus (all that love and compassion and shit), and “charging onto the stage and thrashing about whith his whuppin’ stick.” Not choosing this bigoted dickhead is not the same as giving a fuck you to neanderthanl fundies. Choosing this bigoted dickhead IS giving a fuck you to gays, women and anyone who cares about their rights, and science.
Not choosing this particular speaker is not the same as “being mean.” Nor is it the same as excluding Republicans, which are already represented in his Cabinet (not to mention the meetings and phone calls he’s initiated).
Maybe he should have a prominent racist speak at the Inauguration. There are still a lot of racists in the country, and he should reach out to them too, ya think? Get one up there, on the podium, with all the minorities watching. If they protest, they’re just whining.
No for me too. People will probably be listening to Warren, because they know that Obama’s speech will come right after. Obama’s speech will be great, they always are, so afterwards people will be buzzing about it, and not paying much attention to Lowery.
Someone said elsewhere that maybe it’s a symbolic thing. Out with the hate (Warren before Obama becomes president), in with the tolerance (Lowery after Obama’s sworn in). I wish I could stretch my mind far enough to accept that, but I can’t.
You there, shut up and get to the back of the bus!
Remember the last 8 years, when the conservative ideology was in charge, had political capital to spare and basically told the left to fuck off?
Didn’t that suck? Didn’t that seem like the winners only cared about their buddies instead of the whole country? Didn’t that seem, you know, wrong?
Remember how both parties this campaign season paid so much lip-service to being inclusive? Well, the guy who won is trying to deliver on it. And now some of us are getting bent out of shape for it. Isn’t that being guilty of the same shit the radicals on the other side were pulling on us?
I for one admire anyone who is able to build upon common ground rather than let the differences between them prevent any kind of coming together. I also argue that being able to do so makes America somewhat nicer to live than, say, Iraq.
I don’t like Rick Warren either. He’s fundamentally wrong on the matter of homosexuals. But as has been mentioned already, he’s not involved in setting policy. This sucks, but on the Suckometer™, him delivering a presidential invocation is pretty irrelevant.
What’s in question is “Is Obama going to be an advocate for the gays?”
I think there is some legitimate concern on the part of the LGBT community: Though he came out against Prop 8, he has also said — along with nearly every other candidate — that they were “personally” against gay marriage. I hope this is a politically-driven hedge, but I don’t know for sure. And neither do you.
So I ask that all the Cassandras take a deep breath and reserve judgement until Obama actually sets a policy or signs a law that affects the LGBT community and applaud or revile him THEN.
Man, if this isn’t one fucking crock of shit! If he wants to get all “inclusive” with irrationality, bigotry and hatred, let’s “include” someone from Aryan Nation . . . then we can all sing a round of Kumbaya, just to “make up for it.”
Warren flat out lied during the Prop 8 election, dishonestly claiming that the legalization of gay marriage would infringe his free speech rights. He’s not someone who just has “different views.” He’s someone who has no problem lying to advance those views.
If Obama wants to play nicey-nice with him, I don’t much care. But Warren is not a man who can be trusted. He is a liar.
Have you ever heard of starting off on as positive a note as possible from day one?
No, I’m not talking about simply picking someone to deliver the invocation (what’s up with that ritual in a “separation-of-church-and-state” country anyway?) who agrees entirely with my (or the other objectors’ here) political/personal philosophies.
This could been about setting a tone for inclusion from a religious perspective that excluded such divisive positions as being anti- gay and feminist but included more of what Jesus, Christianity and spirituality should be about, like some of the ministers in the article I linked above. You know, exhibiting an image of Christianity and spirituality that has room for all humankind, sort of like administration and government Obama says he envisions.
Everything about your president-elect gives me so much hope for your country, my country and the rest of the world.
If there’s one thing I’ve learned during my time here on the dope and perusing the internet is that Americans just fucking hate each other. I’m hopeful that this gesture by Obama is going to help tone down the backlash when he delivers something positive for gay rights.
Times like this I just stop and think to myself … we were || this close to having a conversation about what Piper Palin would be wearing to the inauguration. But America elected Obama. And then I get that election day grin again, and can’t really give a shit about the ceremony details.
Count me among those who are embarrassed that we have to have a prayer in the first place.
And fuck Rick Warren with a flaming cross anyway. Just for Jesus.
No. There’s a fundamental difference between being intolerant of people who do you no harm, and between being intolerant of bigotry. Warren’s a bigot.
Sucking up to bigots isn’t "building on common ground; it’s digging a trench through that ground. This is another example of a politician telling the GLBT community that he’ll take their money and votes, but he doesn’t really regard them as human or care about their welfare in any way.
But he IS involved in passing laws like Proposition 8. And if this is the kind of guy Obama is willing to reach out to, why should I believe he WON’T be taking policy advice from him, or someone very similar ?
Obviously not. They’ve been betrayed yet again.
Nor do I care. Whether it’s cynical opportunism or personal bigotry, opposing same sex marriage is bigotry. Period. No excuses are enough, no justifications exist. Motives don’t matter.
If Obama is really interested in being “inclusive,” why not replace the invocation with a secular speech by an atheist? But no, that would be too “di-VISS-ive.” In other words, atheists don’t represent as large a voting block as homophobic evangelicals. It’s all about political expediency and 2012.
Obama made a great gesture by letting Warren do this silly and archaic ceremony. It shows he is trying to reunite the nation. Demonizing Warren will do nothing to change his mind or those that follow him. Maybe this will cause some social righties to pay more attention to Obama and less to the BS that has been passed around by the smearmongers of the bigoted religious right that still think he is a secret Muslim out to destroy America.
Sometime the liberal element of this board just appears as fucking stupid as the righties of other places. Why care so much about this? How the hell does it hurt? Do you want Obama to be the mirror image of Bush or a real leader that can unite America and rescue us from this mess and start bringing us forward?
This is exactly the kind of thing he said he would do if elected. His bringing Hillary in, keeping Lieberman in the party and apparently doing it in a way that works and making peace with McCain are all aspects of it.
panache45, give it a break. You just sound whiny. No President is going to do what you suggest for the foreseeable future.
How about if we expect the minister who gives the invocation at such a highfalutin’ occasion to at least be familiar with a few of the basic Bible stories? Is that asking too much, or is that “hate”?
Actually it is. Considering how many Americans share this bigotry with Warren it is probably a good idea for a leader on the left to open a friendly dialogue to them.
Maybe you did not notice that the civil rights movements was a fairly peaceful one that did build bridges across a bigoted divide? Many black leaders and liberal leaders worked with bigots to lay the ground work for the future that may well be said to have culminated in the election of Obama.
Besides according to NPR, Obama and Warren have a friendship built from the time that Warren reviewed one of Obama’s books. Specifically a chapter on religion.
No, it’s not. If nothing else, what’s the point ? Why should the left care if a Democrat gets elected, if he just goes and does the opposite of what they want ?
Getting sprayed with fire hoses and chewed on by dogs is an odd definition of “worked with”.
Wait, so you actually want Obama in lockstep with you on every issue?
This is a mostly meaningless gesture. It is not policy and it is not an appointment. Get over yourself.
Do you really think most of the civil rights movement was firehoses and dogs and riots?
What does it really give them except a meaningless prayer? It’s really little more than a patronizing pat on the head. If they thought about it for 5 seconds, they should feel insulted.