Like the rest of the progressive world I've been trying to figure out why the usually so careful Obama team would give Pastor Warren the pole position speaking at the inauguration. Certainly in the short term it was an unnecessarily insensitive choice, and it's disturbing to see many unquestioning Obama supporters like CNN's Roland Martin try to rationalize it.
In the short term the choice is needlessly hurtful to all the tens of millions of homosexuals, relatives of gay people seeking equal protection under the law for their loved ones, and progressives.
But what if the Obama team is thinking more than just one move ahead on the chess board? What if they plan on actual actions to bring long overdue civil rights to the nation's last unprotected minority? Wouldn't they need to peel off a few leaders from the religious right? Wouldn't relatively reasonable Pastor Warren be one of the most logical people to start with?
I'm not saying don't be hurt and incensed. Scream, yell, protest. I'm just saying let's revisit this decision in a while and judge it again.
The reality is that right now priority number one is the economy. Nothing else will change until it does. Priority two are the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the unrest in Pakistan. Those issues will take at least two years to wrestle back into some state of control. But if Obama succeeds on those two fronts then he will have unprecedented political capital.
Let's see then if he spends it on the social issues that will finally transform America into a more caring, more modern democracy.
To get a consistent 50+1 you need more like 65% conditional support. That means Rick Warren. If you get your feelings hurt maybe you need to look at yourself. I am gay, I get more support in my life from straights than I have ever gotten from gays.
Gays need to get out of the victim mode, one way or another we are all victims. Clean up your own house before you chastise others for thye dirt in theirs.
Rick Warren is a pompous windbag that has little understanding of what he does or says. Money seems to be his main motivation. But he is a citizen, too. and if he is in that 65% we need, let him Invocate away.
Where's all this "CHANGE" he talked about?
Big Agra/Ethanol at Dept of Agriculture
Heads of failed banks at Treasury and the Fed
Reversing his WINDFALL PROFIT TAX ON OIL COMPANIES (saw that one coming...the Dems pulled that crap in the mid-term elections).
blah blah blah
Just more of the same.
Can you get married legally? I would bet you can.
Thanks for safeguarding the rights of the minority so vigorously.
if they believe gays are the equivalent of rapists and pedophiles, they are anti-gay. if they believe that this view should be upheld at an inauguration, they aren't neutral. believe what you want in your churches. but there is no way a civil event should include this garbage.
IF it is considered a 'political choice' - OBAMA LOST.
IF it is considered a 'deft maneuvering' - OBAMA BLEW IT.
IF it was considered the "RIGHT" thing to do.....OBAMA needs to tell US what "RIGHT" is.
I am disgusted and NOT in the mood to give any BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT.
Three DOUBTS, and yer out.
Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84uxZ8g1EMM&feature=related
Actually as a long time non-Christian, I am used to ignoring the ignorance of some leaders of all the religions.
Just think of Rick Warren as another idiot with a couple of minutes of blather to ignore. Later on in the ceremony, I would bet the Reverend Lowery (?) will be much more interesting. As a man who worked along side Martin Luther King Jr, he has a good perspective of what this day really means to America.
Rick Warren is not only anti-gay, he is anti women's rights, I hope Michelle gives Barack hell over this.
You go girl!!
And Barack: remember the seperation of church and state!
Remember Donnie McClurkin, an antigay singer and crusader who has railed against "the curse of homosexuality"? Obama included him in a campaign gospel tour in the South 14 months ago, despite outrage from civil rights activists.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/25/us/politics/25obama.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin
To be fair to Obama, he said in reference to McClurkin that he believes that all viewpoints should be included under his umbrella and those whose postures are anti-human rights should be "taught".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIQLwe-MmxY
The problem is that Obama has not established a Department of Teaching Human Rights to Americans, and literally millions of Americans have tried to "teach" their fellow human beings tolerance to absolutely no avail. Prejudice is as difficult to eradicate as religion. And when prejudice becomes political, it's reaching for power, not being taught anything.
So it seems to me that the best solution is to marginalize those who would trample on the human rights of others, not give them the spotlight, no attention, and simply leave them on the outside looking in at the benefits of America's rich diversity -- always keep a welcoming door open for the day when individuals one by one have a Eureka! moment and realize that we are all the same in ways that really matter, when they give up their hateful prejudices against others.
What's YOUR point?
The fact of the matter is that since marriage conveys certain legal rights (rather than teacher funding, or physical schools, etc) it is entirely possible to create civil unions which are absolutely equal under the law to marriage. Obama has suggested that. That's not the outcome that I would like to see, but it would be a HUGE step forward, and would be a precursor to marriage. And the only difference would be the name.
The point is that sometimes you have to trust that the leader you selected is going to do what he said he was gonna do. You were right when you voted for him. Trust your judgment, and let him work.
Gays, bi, I'm against all of these acts but it's none of my beezzz wax. I think it's not my life so I consider it above my pay grade to decide how this or these people choose to live their lives. I have a few gay pals and I love them to death and they know my position but again it's their inseam not mine so I say to them "be happy"
I understand that gay people want to be considered as people and I want that for them, but we all have our opinions so let's disagree together, in a civil manner.
It is now even worse because today California's AG asked the state Supreme Court to overturn Prop 8, and I have no doubt whatsoever that after (or even before) the inauguration, Warren will be very loudly and publicly fighting that.
That Obama thinks choosing the bigot Warren for a honored place in his inauguration is truly
shameful.
Get it ! He is a biggot... no need for a lot of discussion! Obama has NEVER done a single thing to support the gay community! Like many "liberals" of the past "seperate but equal" is good enough for those whom are fundamentally "less than" under his "religion".