A Response to Melissa Etheridge

Ms Etheridge,

I just read your description of the phone call between yourself and Rev. Warren.

I have been angry for so many days now. Furious with myself for trusting Obama while knowing he failed to support gay marriage during the election and furious with Obama for calling himself a "fierce advocate" for LGBT rights while promoting a man who refers to people like us as pedophiles. I even stopped watching CNN and MSNBC because I couldn't stand one more pundit calling the Warren pick "smart politics."

I am so relieved that you had the opportunity to hear Warren denounce his previous views on LGBT relationships. Your story about that conversation made me breathe easier than I have for days. I also heard that he recently revamped his church's website, removing many homophobic phrases.

But I know that one private telephone conversation and a quick edit of website content is not sufficient to undo the damage of the Warren choice.

Obama promised a presidency that reached across the aisle. Many are pointing to the Warren invitation as evidence of compromise. He wants to be president for all Americans and if that means upsetting his base, it might well be worth it. I support his message of inclusion. I acknowledge that giving the invocation at the inauguration is a nominal position without policy implications and could go a long way towards purchasing political capital in Congress.

Still, this concession legitimizes a kind of hate speech that torments LGBT people across the U.S. on a daily basis. It says, even though you irrationally degrade a group of American citizens, you are not excluded from the conversation. You will, in fact, be rewarded for convincing so many other Americans that what you believe is correct. You may be instrumental in passing regressive legislation, but we want you to play an important symbolic role in this presidency because you are so popular and your particular hatred is so popular.

I am willing to agree that Reverend Warren is a good guy who said some bad things. I, like you, do trust that communication and cooperation will lead to increased tolerance and progress. I welcome his conversation with the LGBT community.

I can't forgive Obama, though.

It was his choice that legitimized homophobia. It is his continued support for Warren without the demand that Warren apologize or publicly retract his statements that teaches other Americans to be okay with the hatred and degradation of LGBT Americans.

You have been fighting for equality for so many years longer than I have. I am indebted to you and your struggle and I share your hopefulness for the future. But I fear that this action by the Obama administration has set us back significantly.

Comments

[hapiday]

Why is it that gay folks feel if you don't agree with them, you must be a bigot? So, if you invite someone to your party that your friend or family doesn't like you are the enemy? Does that mean you can't be trusted?
I had a family gathering during the summer and it was the following:
1. A cousin who is Muslim, 5 wives, 22 children (this is the truth)
2. A gay cousin, he's not out, but everybody knows he's gay. He doesn't flaunt it and smack people in the face with his gayness.
3. Many devote Christan older relatives.
4. Some male cousins with white females
5. Cousins who are cops and brought their co-workers
6. A cousin who is Hebrew
7. A sister who just loves white folks and think they can do no wrong.
And this is my short list. Every body on the list didn't like something or someone. They all think my husband and I are strange and I'm sure they have a thing or two to say about us. And by having all these people in one place offended someone. But, that's the way the world is and everyone has a place at my table. PE Obama sees that everybody should have a place at the table whether some like it or not.

[RightwingisFascism]

Send emails to [e-mail] Telling Rick what you think about him.
He needs to know!

[NYCwill]

Exactly right. I, with you, respectfully tell our new president: you've now opened the doors to further hatred and violence against gay people. And you have nothing to say about it.
I thought you were strong, and fair, and kind.
Now I see you are just another politician. I'm devastated.

[benne]

This is a terrific reply, respectful yet principled.

[mcpizzie]

Bravo! I feel exactly the same way. Obama could have represented the end of cynicism in politics - instead he now stands for more of the same. Or should I say, "More of the Shame."

[kayatarms]

How absurd! To say who you can't forgive? I have never seen such blatant hypocrisy as to what I am seeing espoused by the very same group of people who want acceptance? Now, Obama is to be blamed for the ill felt feelings towards gays, he is responsible now? How selfish of you and others to have made Obama's choice for someone to give a prayer (if you agree or disagree) a indictment on his supposed gay agenda. I tell you what, if anything this has made people who are against gay rights hold strong in their convictions the histrionics have become outlandish and outrageous. This is the reality, everyone is not gay, there are evangelicals and non-evangelicals who are not for the understanding of anyone gay. I oppose anyone who is against gays or denies them rights although I get angry when they compare gay rights to what African american rights in one breath. Skin color kept gays alive. But to field this rage and feed this monster and say who you can't forgive is also intolerable. Bottomline, it is what comes out of this that prevails period. And somehow I think Obama has thought this out before people have accused him of not thinking deeply enough.

[infantryman]

We have seen the enemy, and the enemy is us...Pogo

[mari2JJ]

Yes!!! It is obvious that folks are missing the issues at hand regarding the Obama Inauguration. Surely, no thinking person could make the assumption that the ceremony that will occur could possibly be controlled by ONE group - one that thinks it is their right to demand certain people do not appear on the Inaugural program. I find it strange that some seem not to understand the fact that to slight folks who have their own opinions about gays is another form of profound bigotry. Bring in folks with all sorts of opinions and let us celebrate our American heritage or respect and tolerance. Seems to me that folks who sadly have been the object of so much bad feelings could possibly miss that they have no right to expect certain folks or opinions to be excluded. That idea of exclusion seems to me to be the very basis of anti-gay treatment by those with differing views. that would mean that those with differing opinions from any particular group automatically have to be excluded from this particularly All-American celebration. In fact, strange as it seems, they are practicing the same sort of judgmental diatribes that they claim anti Gay folks demonstrate. Thank you, Mr. Obama for your firm commitment to represent all groups in this historic inauguration.

[HUkid07]

Amazing that you "cannot fogive" b/c of the fact that he invited someone whom you disagree with to give a prayer invocation, disregarding the fact that he also invited someone who is an advocate of gay rights (Rev Lowery) to then give the prayer bennidiction. Simply Amazing!

The outrage at having Pastor Warren is understandable but to then imply that P.E. Obama is going to take part in setting back the rights of gays/lesbians is ridiculous. It is a prayer! I mean come on, can any of you name anyone who gave the invocation at the 4 previous presidential inaugurations?

I guess it's not enough that from the beginning P.E. Obama has outlined his stance on gay marriage and civil unions, that his website was the first to include gays in its message. (side note... lets remember that not all of the country looks upon gay marriage in favorable terms anyway), so the whole gay rights movement needs to be taking better steps and strides to make it a true issue of civil rights, and equating it to the Civil Rights movement of African Americans is not the best way to go about reaching out. Gay is not the new Black and is a horrible message to let get out.
So to all you progressives, liberals and GLBT advocates: Step Your Game Up. You need a massive PR campaign to get out your message and reach out.

[kylennblack]

The only way Obama can salvage this, in my eyes, is if he presents Warren as a pastor of the past who needs to be left in the past (say goodbye to him and his antiquated views) and introduce Joseph Lowery as a pastor for the future.

[IRepTheKing]

The only people who will have a problem with Warren's presence are who? And do they make up the views of most Americans? Probably not. Beating this man up is crazy. First the Repubs tried to pin his (Obama) pastor's words on him. Now you're trying to pin Warren's words on him. When will it end? Will you have an issue with everyone who has the audacity to call a sin a sin? That is what it amounts to: people do not like to hear that what they are doing is wrong. Whether it's heterosexual or homosexual sin, we hate it when someone speaks the truth. Warren isn't physically hurting anyone, but he's speaking out (whether you agree or not) which is a Bill of Right. In one breath, we scream about freedoms until someone uses their freedom to expose us to ourselves or until someone uses their freedom to say something we disagree with. Then we want that person silenced. Such hypocrites. I'm not a fan of Rick Warren's (my view of him is neither good or bad), but taking a stance against Obama's inaug' because Warren will be there is stupid. There are going to be plenty of people present (and yes even speaking) whose view will differ from yours. Get over it.

[Agentprovokatur]

When those people use their freedom of speech to advocate the stripping of others Civil Rights (which you call sin) then, yes, we have the freedom of speech to condemn them for their ACTIONS.

Now you please get over that.

Thank you.

[Avril1]

I think Warren was a terriffic pick - he represents the mojority of Americans. I think some people tend to forget that they are in a MINORITY because they surround themselves with like minded people. But the reality is that most people in this country are not in favor of gay marriage, and never will be.

I think you set your cause back with your lack of tolerance - Obama doesn't do exactly what you want so now he's a bad guy and he single handedly set your cause back??? So if his every move isn't about gay rights, you won't support him?

[mishi]

Never is a long time, and support for same-sex marriage - and LGBT rights in general - has grown rapidly. The biggest opposition comes from older people, less-educated people, and the most frequent churchgoer, and at least one of these groups is, in fact, dying off.

I don't think the vast majority of us ever said we now "don't support" Obama. We are hurt, very angry, and basically fed up with supporting liberal Democrats only to be crapped on in return. No one is saying he singlehandedly set our cause back. He - apparently calculatedly - did something that insulted us, and, given the context of Prop 8, made a bunch of p-o'ed people even angrier.

It's charming to have presumptuous straight people like you swan in and tell us what is and isn't good for our cause, though. Thanks.

[FearlessFreep]

Fundamentalists are NOT a majority; they're an interest group to be ingratiated.

[beyobi]

Hey, HP. If you're not going to post my comments just let me know and I'll stop writing them.

[Ogiv]

Please take a moment to go back and view the Warren video where he "compares" a gay marriage to an incestuous marriage.

If he were at all concerned about the potentially violent impact of incendiary language, then it certainly was not evident here. However, I believe he is making a more nuanced argument than simply saying a gay person is the same as a committer of incest or a pedophile. He's not saying molesting a child is the same as being gay, but that marriage between gays is as wrong to him as marriage between a brother and sister. If I were to say that gays getting married is as wrong as dogs and cats getting married, am I saying a gay person is the same as a cat?

I don't necessarily believe his logic is assailable. Look at it this way. He has built a house for himself. Everything, the bricks, the roof, windows, doors, they all fit together. You may not like the style, but thus far it has kept the occupants warm and dry. Where it may be weak is the foundation, the assumptions and beliefs. If you don't like the house, that's where it needs to be attacked, not the rhetorical red herrings.

http://technorati.com/videos/youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D8sehLdHveho

[eden4barack08]

I was appalled at that comparison also, until I listened to the entire tape, not just the edited part ending in "Oh I do", and understood he was not willfully comparing the acts of those relations, but rather his objection to the redefinition. Anyway, yesterday he also clarified that on his podcast.

http://www.saddlebackfamily.com/blogs/newsandviews/index.html?contentid=1723

[jatoner]

are you getting paid by the cons who want to divide Obama's coalition with these stupid wedge issues, or are you just an ignorant dupe?

[Coinyer101]

she just not a sheep like many of you.

[standforpeace]

One of the things that troubles me the most in many of the responses to this and other blogs on the Rick Warren issue is the basic misunderstanding that many seem to have about citizenship in a democracy. Responsible citizens should support their elected representatives when they take stands with which they agree and oppose them when they do not. This is especially important when the issues have to do with fundamental fairness and equality. Politics should not be a cult of personality. When I pulled the lever for Obama, I was asserting that he was the better choice not making some sort of statement of unconditional loyalty. The fact that I am loudly criticizing Obama on the Warren issue does not negate my satisfaction that Obama's inauguration will signal the crashing of another racial barrier. Neither does it mean that I will not support his global warming initiatives or stand with him on other issues where we agree. Responsible citizens should remain alert and work to effect the actions of political leaders including our new president between elections rather than just being used as foot soldiers to get folks elected. If all of our activity only comes down to the choice between two candidates every four years, we will find ourselves constantly having to back the lesser of two evils rather than playing a real role in shaping the policies and politics of our nation.

[Beninn]

Rick Warren's public participation in the inauguration is wrong.

It will go down in history as defining of a failed presidency as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was as the opening act for Bill Clinton's presidency.

This is not how Obama wants to begin. It's not the way to kick off CHANGE YOU CAN COUNT ON.

It's just more of the same. Call it Bush 44. It's the same callous, deaf disregard for all of the people who have been shut out of government the last 8 and thirty years, in favor of those who are responsible for today's collapse of the US.

Don't do it, Mr. President-Elect.