enough about the Warren selection. It's just a bloody prayer, folks.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

I suppose a little bit of disclosure is in order. Two points to disclose:

Without channeling a certain very confused, laughable, and very sad species of GOP senator, I am not gay. I have not been gay, and I have no urge to be gay, much less act hypocritically like Rev. Ted. or Senator Water Closet.
Am I anti-homosexual? Hell, no. I sent money to oppose Prop 8, I supported gay and lesbian candidates across the nation in 2008, and for my personal friendships and relationships, it matters not one bit what the sexual preferences and inclinations of others are in business, personal or family dealings. In my relatively small extended family (death, Stalin, Hitler, and disease has taken a toll on the numbers), I know of three openly gay folks, and four others that have tried to live life a more closeted style, each with unfortunate and unnecessary pain and confusion. A best friend of mine died of AIDS. Another close friend has serious health issues and complications. In terms of sex and sexual preference, I draw the line in on and only one area - sex predators feasting on the defenseless, whether they are adult women being raped, children being "taught" by their priests, or even adults being beaten and controlled by their spouses or partners.


I am not religious. Let me amend that. To those few who recognize me or my writing, you already realize that I am not just agnostic or atheist (I love the wars between those two groups, given the slight differences between the dictionary definition, common usage today, and other factors) but I am virulently agnostic AND atheistic. Therein lies a contradiction which I acknowledge. While my personal thoughts are that all organized religion is a scam, a travesty, a lie, and while I believe that the indoctrination of youth by parents, ministers, preachers, imams or priests is a form of brainwashing, I will also support the constitutional right of people to choose a faith, any faith, as their own. (Kids being sent to sunday school are never given the choice - they are forced to accept the bible, the torah, or koran is fact from an early age - but that's another issue for another time.

Rev. Warren is a non-issue. His obvious, admitted, and patent homo-phobia makes as little difference to the inauguration as do his crazy religious ideas that drive his homophobia. The fact that they are inseparably related is rather amusing, form a theoretical perspective, but the reality is that his views are more common than we would like on both issues, sexual orientation and religion.

We have suffered the pains and arrows of 8 consecutive years of feith-based intelligence, faith-based initiatives, attacks on secular social programs, science, stem cells, and a whole dictionary full of topics that may or may not start with the letter S. The false ideology of unfettered, unregulated, absolutely free marketism combined with an ultra-conservative brand of christianity has taken a fairly healthy country and turned it into Doug Adams' Disaster Area. It has torn the fabric of our culture and our society apart, and is at risk of further serious, permanent damage.

The emergency is here and now. It is NOT the time for retribution, (except for the war crimes trials of Bush/Cheney and their cabal) and it would be foolish of us to make like a metronome, and make the same mistakes the GOP made, but only on the other side of the political spectrum. While going to the other extreme may provide some small measure of psychic pleasure, it would only split the country apart, and we simply cannot afford that here and now.

Yes, Warren is crazy. His religion is silly, illogical, warped, perverted and dangerous. Those conservatives who associated themselves with him also suffer from seriously irrational religious beliefs. But guess what, folks? They suffer no less than we do in today's economy. They, too, suffer loss of jobs, loss of income, loss of homes, and a loss of access to health care. What makes their case sadder is that they compound their problem greatly by wasting their time doing that silly prayer ritual. Not only will it not solve anything, it also gives them false hope, and wastes increasing amounts of their time, precious time that could be used to fix the problem.

Barack Obama came to the national stage on several simple, straightforward messages. A. Extreme partisan politics solves nothing and can cause great damage. B. We must reach across the aisle on issues where we can, to find common solutions to our worst problems. C. Inviting everyone in for a dialogue is good, not bad.

By inviting a homophobe like Warren into the NATION'S inauguration (it is not ours. We do not own it. We have no right to claim it as exclusively ours.) is actually a brilliant step. It tells all Americans that they are welcome. It puts the rabid right on notice that our words and deeds are precisely what we said they would be. It gives the irrational religious majority of America the hope that ideology is not the first, last, and worst part of our immediate future, but rather, despite our differences, our SERIOUS differences, we are reaching across a large divide in the hopes that we can set aside those differences and reach agreements where the fire is burning now.

There is a side element to this that many here have forgotten. Our ideas and ideals of free choice, benefits for all, legal standing for gay couples, etc., will not change. But by simply inviting Warren to pray next month, several things will happen. Gays and lesbians will no longer appear to be some secret unknown, something scary, something evil - a picture that Warren and others have tried to paint for a generation. More importantly, Warren himself will be transformed. He can't help it. When we act in a mature, reasonable, and respectful manner to him, he will learn something that he never knew before - humanity is the key, regardless of their sexual preferences. Despite his preaching, his bent education, and the warped message he carries, he will be the one who gets an education and he will be the one who becomes more open-minded and rational by doing this.

It may not happen in a month. But it will happen. Warren will come to terms with his homophobia and realize how cruel that message has been. He will change his message as a result. All we have to do is to encourage his education a bit.

[Captain Hilts]

1. This will be the biggest TV event since JPII's funeral, & a bigot gets to lead off. It's a BIG deal.

[Cattledog]

4. Well no one is forced to watch.

[Captain Hilts]

6. It's just not an image I want to project or to advertise this guy's personal church/business.

[babylonsister]

15. Aww, your concern is touching. nt

[No Elephants]

56. Not the point.

[Phx_Dem]

They'll be watching to see Obama, not Warren.

No one ever remembers (or cares) who gives the benediction or the innvocation.

Yeah I know, you do. But most everyone else doesn't care much who gives a prayer.

[No Elephants]

55. Not the point.

[AZBlue]

32. Except that no one ever remembers who does the Invocation.

Well, unfortunately some will now, but that's not Warren's doing.

[No Elephants]

57. Not the point.

[bvar22]

37. Agreed.

It is FAR from being "just a prayer".

This is the First Official Act of the Obama Administration....solo spotlight, Center of the Global Stage, Opening Act.

[boppers]

45. Actually, no.

It will be the last Official Prayer of the bush administration.

Obama gets sworn in after the prayer.

The first Official Prayer given under Obama will be by a pro-civil-rights preacher.

I've been wondering if this is a coincidence.

[anigbrowl]

50. Ah, so I'm not the only one who noticed that.

[fortyfeetunder]

80. Makes sense to me too.

And I bet Obama will create a slam-dunk inaugural address.

Maybe you should create a thread on this so people will have a clue.

[JNelson6563]

73. IMO the broohaha over it

is making it one of the more memorable invisible friend greetings at an inauguration.

Such a thing is pretty inconsequential. I am more interested in what Team O is going to do about all the urgent problems like people freezing, going hungy with no home. Then there's the people who are getting killed on regularly enough basis in our war zones....all those who go without health care of any kind....

Julie

[snooper2]

86. Um, he actually will get 2 minutes near the very end..

of hours and hours of events...

[crappyjazz]

2. It may not be a big deal to you, but it is to me and many others

we're not going to be quiet about it and we shouldn't have to be

you have the right to start a Rick Warren thread expressing your opinion about it, and so does everyone else

[peace frog]

3. Good thoughts

However, I think you place too much faith in the good reverend Warren's *conversion*. He was described recently as "Jerry Falwell in a Hawaiian shirt" and I tend to agree, from what I've seen of him. All the education in the world may not be enough to change his mind and message. Not counting on it.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

5. But I do count on it, because

despite his hatred, his message of religious bigotry, he is also human, and humans respond (most of the time) humanly. If we accept him as a simple human, his message of hate becomes defanged. He becomes confused, and over time, his message will change.

[peace frog]

7. Good for you

and I understand the impulseto place faith in his *humanity*, but it's highly improbable that the kinder, gentler Falwell will change so radically as you describe.

[No Elephants]

58. Doctrinally, he is not different from Falwell, Dobson, Kennedy, Robertson or any of the usual

suspects.

[K Gardner]

8. Oh, stop making sense. You're squashing the hysteria. K&R.

[No Elephants]

59. Is "hysteria" your term for things with which you disagree that draws a lot of comment?

[Solon]

9. How "brilliant" is it to legitimize his homophobic viewpoint?

All this does is make the guy seem MORE reasonable, not less. And you are a fool to think he's going to change his mind.

[yowzayowzayowza]

40. Look at all the time spent ...

in the media replaying and analyzing his hateful positions that both you and Obama deplore. Thatz free publicity for the price of a generic Christian blessing.

K&R

[No Elephants]

60. Not merely legitimize. Single out for one of the highest governmental honors for a pastor.

[rox63]

10. The only thing Warren will be doing at the inauguration is sprinkling magic gawd dust on it

It's not like he's being given a policy role in the administration. It's just a symbolic move.

Obama promised to be everyone's president, even the ignorant, bigoted believers in magic gawd dust.

Never forget that Obama is a politician. He promised to be non-partisan or post-partisan or whatever you want to call it, and that's exactly what he is doing. Imagine that, a politician doing what he said he would do? That in itself is pretty strange, but it's been part of his message from the beginning. Why is everyone so surprised?

This being "Democratic Underground", we here are all somewhat partisan. I think Warren is a bigoted asshole. But I'm not about to be the president of all the bigoted assholes in this country. Obama is. He will need even their support to get his agenda passed into law. This is just his way of reaching out to them.

[Cattledog]

11. Exactly!

[Raineyb]

23. Then that would be two things wrong with it.

1. The prayer is being led by an asshole and
2. The prayer is part of the ceremony in the first place.

Regards

[No Elephants]

63. "Just symbolic?" you mean like the flag, the cross, the burning cross, the swastika? Symbolism is

powerful. No one knows that better than Obama.

Giving campaign speeches from behind something that looked like the Presidential seal (a political mistake, but still an attempt to use of symbolism) Accepting the nomination on the anniversary of MLK's "I have a dream" speech, with Greek columns evoking democracy. Having Lincoln as the theme for the Inauguration and taking the train to Washington, as Lincoln did. All "just symbols."


Inviting Warren is not non-partisan in the least. It is highly partisan, just in the wrong direction.

This is NOT a way of reaching out or building bridges or anything of the kind. You can reach out to people without honoring them with the most historic inauguration this country has had since Washinngton's.

[Pab Sungenis]

12. It's not a prayer. It's a symbol.

Obama is embracing and lending legitimacy to a bigot.

[CitizenPatriot]

13. I'm not sure if he's going to change his mind

or not, and frankly, I could care less -- so long as politically he feels some obligation to deal with Obama so we can get a few things passed.

To me, this isn't about high-mindedness, though I agree that we must not become what we hate. It's about show. Diplomacy. And that is what Obama has always done well. He will also go and speak to foreign leaders whose values he abhors. But he will do it with a smile and act graciously, just as he did on Bill O'Rielley's show, because that is the only way to disarm the enemy.

The same tactics we tried and failed with in Iraq will also not work on domestic soil. You can not shut people/terrorist down with might, their ideas spring back up and are given fuel! We have proven that in Iraq. New hatred blooms when you're oppressed, and that gives rise to a NEW generation of haters.

You shut them down with a polite amount of inclusion, with very strict rules. You don't turn your back on your enemy and think he will be your friend, but you act like they are capable of being your friend. You disarm them over time, by killing the IDEAS. Making the ideas BAD can only happen from within, not from without. They must see a better way. This isn't done through hope, it's done by building schools for people who didn't have them...it's done by making sure there's something in it for them while you re-educate them.

It's coldly calculating, IMO, and that is something I"ve watched Obama do many times. He's never mean. He doesn't do thuggery. He won't use this occasion to publicly shut out our enemy. He would never be that foolish as a politician and a diplomat who wants to get something done. Never for a moment have I thought he didn't know who the enemy was. The man is a rational person. He's been the victim of enough hate crimes to GET it.

I know everyone needs to work through their emotions and maybe will never be OK with this. Everyone also deals with things differently, and just because we're not all objecting to this doesn't mean we support Pastor Warren's message. Come on. No sane person could support the message. And as for who he's anti-, he is almost anti everyone we as liberals care about -- only the white males are safe. He worked for Prop 8 and he worked for the bill Bush just passed so that I can be denied birth control or medical assistance should I be dying of an ectopic pregnancy. He's not on my high list. However, I tend to be an analytical person who has learned the hard way the value of diplomacy, though it is not something I am good at. I admire Obama for doing what he does, because I know I couldn't do it. This world is full of assholes and some really sick and warped people. Obama does have to dirty himself dealing with them if we are to get change of any sort.

And dealing with assholes and people you don't agree with is change number one. Bush would have bombed Warren, and then his supporters would rise up with their martyr and come after us with even more vengeance. Human nature dictates the way you let the air out of the tires. Our ability to get a black man elected came about in part due to our unitedness over our hatred of Bush. We rocked this nation with this election- we rocked the world with our fury and our ENOUGH! I'd rather not act in a way publicly that feeds our enemies with the same burning desire and need for change BACK to fundies leading the WH.

Yes, it's extremely unsatisfying and even frustrating. We've been kicked around for so long we would love to use this moment to stand up for ourselves FINALLY. But when should we use our power??? There's only so much power to be used - it isn't endless, and it's fueled by good will, not by force. I would rather use the power to strike a policy blow that can not be taken back.

I'd like to see separation of church and state brought back, and the Morman church prosecuted for involvement in politics. And pro-choice be re-established. And Prop 8 OVERTURNED. And civil unions legal everywhere. And US sign the UN treaty.

I'm sorry if you think I don't care or I don't get it. Yesterday, I wrote a post replying to someone whose post had made me cry. I"ve been on the bad end of the stick of power often enough to get it. I've seen horrible things. We continue to see injustices everyday. We're all working toward changing them -- our METHODS vary.

I'll be throwing things at the TV when he's saying his prayer. Nothing infuriates me more than the fundy take over of this country. It makes me so angry that I've had to flip an internal switch or I would have gone insane. I want them disarmed. I want their ability to impact policy GONE forever. Even if we get another Bush. And we will -- get another Bush, that is.

I know my opinion makes me unpopular around here, and I'm sorry for that. I'm sorry that it can be misinterpreted as bigotry and Obama worship and all of that nonsense. I'm not going to justify my civil rights work for ALL nor the fact that I've been the victim of hate crimes. I get it. I'm sick of it. Nothing will stop me from trying to end it. And since I see this move as one way to end it in the long term, I'm OK with it. I'm not OK with the man's ideas, but I'm jolly good OK with beginning the end of the fundy rule.

I also get the hurt, anger and emotion. Not for a moment have I thought it shouldn't be there and doesn't need and deserve airtime. It's the right thing. The way of the world sucks in many ways -- and it never seems to stop. GLBT community has suffered blow after blow recently and it would have been great for him to dis-invite this guy as a gesture or symbol...but that would be a really emotional and not long term strategy thing to do -- and Obama isn't an emotional guy. Sometimes that's going to hurt, but other times, like when we DON"T invade a foreign country without cause, it's going to work wonders for us.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

14. you said it better than I. Thank you.

[CitizenPatriot]

26. you're support is appreciated

It's hard right now...and I chastise myself for even presenting my thoughts right now, knowing how painful this is for many on this board. I've been told in my personal life that I suffer from being too logical and analytical, so I've done a lot of reading and empathizing in the last few days. I know what this must feel like and it breaks my heart.

Then, my next thought is, what can we DO about it? And yet the process of grieving takes time and compassion...

edited to add: no, I don't think I said anything better than you did....this is an important discussion that takes all of us with our different ideas and approaches.

:toast:

[crispini]

17. "politically he feels some obligation to deal with Obama"

WTF? He's a PASTOR, not a senator or a representative, for Pete's sake. Please tell me exactly how reaching out to him is going to help get anything passed.

[CitizenPatriot]

25. What will it take to get Prop 8 overturned?

What will it take to get the majority of Americans to support the kind of legislation we need? Why did Prop 8 pass?

The fundys GOTV. Who did they persuade, since they as a group weren't large enough to elect their girl?

Prop 8 taught me that it will take more than just the liberals who voted for Obama. The centrists who voted for him, and who knows, a few fundys who have a change of heart -- that's who it takes. That's how he got elected. SOME people in this country were soothed by the Faith Forum thing. They are some of the people I never thought would vote for a black man, let alone a liberal. Remember when he did that forum and the majority here thought it was a mistake? It worked in many ways to get him elected by those centrists. Do you not want to play ball with the crazy terrorists who are trying to destroy you? I don't either. If I could find another way, one that was effective, I'd be all for it. Don't think I don't dream of re-education camps.

Warren has a large following. I know some of the people who've read his book and think he's great. They also voted for Obama because they found McCain's campaign sickening. Who are these people? They're centrists. Can they be swayed? Many of them can. They are swayed by the feeling of balance, which is symbolically represented (to them) by the appearance of someone like Warren. They will be more willing to hear arguments regarding things like marriage for all once they've convinced themselves that Obama isn't a "crazy liberal". It's maddening, I know. But that doesn't make it go away. The fundies are not going away. They proved that again last night.

One thing is for sure, if we PUBLICLY shun them as people, we close the door to their hearts and minds. Look at the Taliban and how they GREW after our "Operation Freedom" occupation. I know it SUCKS. I know it's trafficking with the devil. But strategists have written about how to disarm terrorists, which I think the fundies are, and it doesn't happen by a show of force. Quiet force, a carrot, bait, you have a better chance.

We need to shun their ideas while including them as people. Does this make me sick? Yes. Don't confuse my argument with how I wish things were. Tell me how else we can get things like Prop 8 to fail at the booth? Tell me how to disarm these people? If you have better ideas, I'm open to it. Believe me.

What I can't stomach is another Bush legacy -- fundies infiltrating our government and pissing on the constitution. I liken them to the Taliban, and as such, am applying the same concepts the strategists I respect have written and talked about. Better minds than mine.

[crispini]

28. Ok, well, nobody will ever convince me that Warren himself will change his mind.

I get what you're saying about being inclusive, and I agree. That stuff is helpful to building larger coalitions. Gestures aimed at "Mary Moderate" and "Joe Christian" are not necessarily a bad thing. But people who think that Warren himself is going to come out tomorrow and be all gay-friendly are just delusional.

But I also think the anger on this board is justified and necessary, and I hope it spurs us supporters of the GLBT community and their fight on to more direct action. Change comes from the people, not from Washington, and we have to hold the Obama administration's feet to the fire.

[CitizenPatriot]

30. I agree with you 100%.

The anger is absolutely justified, and given the major hits the GLBT community has taken, it would be a miracle if this didn't enrage.

I responded to you below thread re changing the fundies and Warren. Again, I agree with you 100%. I'm not expecting change there. I keep my eye on the dominionists at all times. We can never forget what they want and what they are capable of. Their beliefs are an enemy to justice and they are gunning for us all.

[crispini]

16. I cannot believe all these pie-in-the-sky posts that say that we're

going to "transform" Warren by getting him to meet a few gay people. You guys don't know any REAL fundies, do you? They have settled on a "love the sinner, hate the sin" message, and that's where they're going to stay. They firmly believe that they can condemn people's homosexuality and denounce it as wrong and still "love" that person as a person. They're good with that, and that's where they are going to stay, because they, for pete's sake, are FUNDAMENTALISTS. They do NOT believe in the Bible as allegory -- they believe in the LITERAL truth of EVERY WORD of the Bible and they are incapable of seeing the contradictions (because they certainly eat shellfish and wear clothes made of mixed fibres).

Honestly. Grow up. There may be "political" reasons for Obama to embrace Warren, but the idea of bringing about some kind of transformation of his fundie views by being nice to him is just ridiculous.

[babylonsister]

18. How about some tea?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x409822

[crispini]

24. That's a great story. But it's kind of different.

I was a Peace Corps volunteer, okay, so I know all about building bridges, and the power of very small things to make big changes in people's lives. What I'm saying is, that when somebody bases their opposition to gay civil rights on the Bible, they always have an easy answer for disrespecting gay people, no matter how much outreach you do, or how much cognitive dissonance you may cause in them. (Edited to add-- they don't even see it as "disrespect!")

In fact, I bet Rick Warren would be happy to meet and befriend gay people -- his church has an AIDS outreach ministry, doesn't it? But, no matter how much it would hurt those same gay friends of his, he would keep right on saying things like, "My Bible teaches me to hate the sin, but love the sinner," and stuff like, "You have a heavy cross to bear, being gay, and I will pray with you that Jesus helps you carry it," and so on. And when pointed out exactly how much pain his attitude causes, he would say, "I know it does, but the Lord teaches me that we must be strong in our righteousness and cleave to the narrow way. And I must speak the truth -- the Bible teaches me so, even if the Lord is a harsh master."

I know these folks, ok? They may be very, very nice, but they're not changing just because they sit down and have a cup of tea with you.

[CitizenPatriot]

29. I'd have to agree with you here

certainly not all of them...but enough of them. I've dealt with some of these folks, too. Empathy isn't a value they push.

To me, it's about appearances, which is very political. And yes, you're going to get a few converts from that...but the change comes by disarming them of their hate fuel and getting the centrists to vote your way because you're so damn reasonable. Machiavellian? Perhaps. But it's war.

I also don't want to become what I hate by virtue of my hate. But I'm under no illusions that they are going to reciprocate a kindness. They always want more.

[riderinthestorm]

47. So you "know" fundies but are still pushing a " get along" message?

These folks will never get along with gays and lesbians. Never. I've just moved from 25 years living in Wheaton, IL - Billy Graham's spiritual home - Wheaton College. Home to more fundy nonsense than you have EVER experienced on a daily basis. There's no compromising with these people. Their first question is "what church do you go to?" Not, "hi, my name is Becky, how are you doing?"

Obama MUST know this. And still he chooses Warren. These people don't understand disarming - they only see black and white. "Gays are sinful. Gays are bad. There is no reconciliation with the gay agenda. Gawd hates gays."

Obama has only given this group a forum, a platform. Yes, he's just sanctified their hater-in-chief so now they can freely hate with impunity.

You can try to spin this as just an "appearances" thang, but it's not. And trying to spin this so pleasantly means you haven't actually dealt with real people who have been turned out of their homes for being gay, fired for being gay, denied custody rights for being gay etc. etc. People like Warren fuel that hatred. Fuel the craziness against gays in ways that manifest themselves in ugly and real ways. I work at a homeless shelter and there's nothing ideological about it. It's about warm clothes and beds and jobs and getting children into school. Warren's spew makes ALL of that 1000 times harder.

Forget pie-in-the-sky platitudes, this really IS war and your bullshit about being "reasonable" is crazy.

[CitizenPatriot]

66. you are wrong

You don't even know me or what I deal with everyday. How dare you make blanket assumptions?

I live in fundie world in the deep south. I have relatives who are preachers. Don't lecture to me about fundies.

I never suggested or said that anyone should "get along". Please don't put quotes around something I never said, as it implies that you are quoting me.

I don't appreciate being told what I write is bullshit, especially by someone who is showing zero tolerance for any position but their own.

I work for overturning Prop 8 but I happen to have a different point of view on the Warren matter.

I have a pony in this horse, too, and it's called my uterus, so don't act as if I couldn't possibly grasp what is at stake. Their number one issue? Abortion. No help if your life is in danger by a pregnancy.

Being intolerant of anyone else's thoughts and making assumptions about who they are and what they've experienced isn't helpful. I'm quite aware of the many injustices facing the GLBT community.

I've seen quite a few injustices in my life, as well.

I'm not "spinning" anything, but you've taken my words for quite a ride.

My thoughts are hardly "crazy", and in fact, many political strategists are saying similar things.

Are you always this charming or is this your special way of telling me to stop giving a shit?

Enough.

Edited to add: you may have not realized that my post was a continuation of a conversation upthread, wherein we talked about bringing the centrists over so we could get Prop 8 overturned. That is where my reference to appearing to be reasonable came from. I was suggesting that we as liberals appear reasonable to the centrists because we were open to Warren, hence they might be open to our message. Please refer upthread before responding.

[riderinthestorm]

46. I wish I could recommend a post but yours sums up everything for me. Excellent insight. Thanks! nt

[peace frog]

22. It is ridiculous

Warren will not budge from his fundie beliefs, but he expects Obama to bend in the spirit of *post-partisanship*, you betcha.

[NWHarkness]

19. Here we go again

Another straight person telling gays what is important to gays.

Remember Donnie McClurkin? We were told that having him speak at the Obama rally didn't matter, because, after all, he was only saying a prayer.

And when the time came, he used the platform to spew his anti-gay propaganda.

[slackmaster]

20. AMEN! How about discussing a MUCH BIGGER ISSUE on LGBT rights...

U.S. won't sign accord decriminalizing homosexuality

By David Crary
2:00 a.m. December 19, 2008

UNITED NATIONS —

Alone among major Western nations, the United States has refused to sign a declaration presented yesterday at the United Nations calling for worldwide decriminalization of homosexuality.

In all, 66 of the United Nations' 192 member countries signed the nonbinding declaration – which backers called a historic step to push the General Assembly to deal more forthrightly with anti-gay discrimination. More than 70 U.N. members outlaw homosexuality, and in several of them homosexual acts can be punished by execution.

The declaration, co-sponsored by France and the Netherlands, was signed by all 27 European Union members, as well as Japan, Australia, Mexico and three dozen other countries....

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2008/dec/19/1n19un233951-us-wont-sign-accord-decriminalizing-h/?uniontrib

[CitizenPatriot]

27. Exactly...I posted about this last night.

More utter BS from the clown. So disgusting and embarrassing!!! This IS an OUTRAGE.

We are in good company though (sarcasm). We voted with china and russia and the catholic church. Nauseating.

[leftofthedial]

21. Neither Warren nor his followers (or their predecessors for the last 1500 years)

show the slightest sign of "coming to terms" or realizing "how cruel that message" is. Not the slightest.

Kumbaya ain't gonna happen with the fundie fringe.

I'll put you down in the "just get over it/shut the fuck up" camp.

[immoderate]

33. The maneuver is not to turn them around. I agree that won't happen.

Don't get fooled by the false choice fallacy. See my post just below.

--IMM

[immoderate]

31. A most excellent rant.

Warren will not change his mind, but this could file down his fangs a little. Ignoring or confronting him will not.

If you allow game analogies, you don't have to convert your opponent to your side. You just have to maneuver him "out of position" enough to enable you to score. That's the way I see this.

I am not gay, but I have many reasons to be sympathetic. I am an atheist, and I see Warren as a superstitious snake oil grifter. I get pissed every time I think of him.

But this is part of a larger strategy. As I said in another thread, it's time to "aim high." I learned that in driver's ed a long time ago, and it works.

--IMM

[leftofthedial]

42. how will this "file down his fangs"?

I see just the opposite as a more likely outcome.

Every time the left compromises, it moves the "center" even farther to the right. We know with 100% certainty that Warren and his ilk won't budge.

[immoderate]

62. I think it makes it a little harder for him to be the leader of the opposition.

He cannot be as reflexively opposed to Obama if he participated in his inauguration. It won't reverse him, but it puts him off by a step with those of his base who are purists. Instead of coming right down, he will have to think a bit.

I'm using a football analogy. You won't get the defense to come over to your side, but if you get a player to hesitate, you open up a lane. I don't agree that this shifts the center to the right. Indeed, it could have the opposite effect.

--IMM

[IndianaGreen]

34. Rick Warren supports Ken Starr's efforts to invalidate existing gay marriages

This is an ongoing outrage, not just a one minute prayer in which Warren will invoke Jesus and thus offend Jews and non-Christians alike.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

35. Indi, would you rather have

a) absolute silence on GLBT issues
b) complaints (like here) about Warren's presence and message
c) MSM start to cover GLBT issues because of Warren
d) a slow, but constant and consistent education of the sheeple who have been ignorant about GLBT issues, simply because of our society's history and the unfortunate impact of religion upon it.
e) John McCain as president

Frankly, the conversations started by Warren's selection for a once in a lifetime event for all of us cannot be anything but good. Because with conversation, we have the opportunity to raise the eyelids of people, many of them for the first time in their lives. Instead of being ignored, insulted, beaten, attacked, or thrown out of jobs, stores, homes and even families, the issue of homosexuality might finally become a topic of conversation. Just a century too late. Still, better now than never, and better to have the conversation than not.

[IndianaGreen]

36. You can't have a conversation with people beholden to irrational beliefs

How can we talk about the science of climate change to people that are convinced that man and dinosaur coexisted on Earth 6,000 years ago?

[Scackmgackm]

38. Why this is a big deal

Any culture that tolerates hatred towards a group cultivates an environment in which violence towards that group is possible and acceptable, or at minimum unsurprising.

Therefore, to allow a rabid anti-gay bigot to participate in the Inauguration is to make the statement that Rick Warren's views are acceptable, or at minimum forgivable.

If you are a gay person, you are all too aware of the truth of my first statement; this makes the second statement unacceptable. I am a straight ally and I recognize these two truths quite readily...because I have made it my business to get to know the gay community and to attempt to learn about the issues they are faced with. That, I believe, is a journey that anyone who wants to call themselves a "Progressive" needs to take...or you lose your membership card by default.

I know Obama is a religious person...but if he truly wants to foster an "environment of understanding" then he needs to put his religion in its proper place - away from his political actions. He, of all people, has the responsibility to recognize that government must be a secular public activity which protects the right of all Americans to privately practice their private, religious beliefs - but he's allowing his own religious nature to tarnish an event which is too important to be tarnished.

Perhaps he still doesn't realize how much is riding on him.

If he is just playing politics with this and trying to "reach out" to the Evangelicals, shame on him...but that would speak to what many of us on the social left said during the whole primary campaign. Obama is just another politician. No one should be surprised when he does things like this.

A lot of people projected onto Obama what they wanted him to be, which is by his own admission how he rolls politically. Those bubbles of illusion will always be bursting as Obama begins and conducts his term as President.

[IndianaGreen]

43. The irony is that Obama's denomination, United Church of Christ, supports same sex marriage

Obama is out of step with UCC. Why?

[Lucian]

39. Obama ran his campaign based on change...

and picking Warren (a known bigot) to lead the prayer isn't change at all. In fact, it's more of the same shit from the last eight years.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

41. depends on your perspective.

the other side's, the Darth Side, idea of reaching across the aisle usually involved a fist, a knife or a gun.
Our effort to reach across the aisle is open handed.

[FreeState]

82. One does not need to sacrifice principle to reach across the isle

want to reach across the isle? One on one interpersonal meetings are great - in fact they are one of the few ways to change peoples minds. Giving honor to a known bigot of a severly maligned minority is not reaching across the isle. Its pomp and pageantry at the expense of civility and common decentcy.

[GeorgeGist]

44. Oh, contraire ...

Obama deserves this swift kick-in-the-ass, otherwise he'll take it as a sign that he needn't give a damn about those who elected him; including heterosexual atheists.

[stillcool]

48. you don't understand...

It is not about Rick Warren, California, or Prop 8. It is about Obama. Nothing more, nothing less.

[last1standing]

49. Always nice to see a heterosexual tell us GLBTers how to live and think.

n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

51. Warren will come to terms with his homophobia and realize how cruel that message has been.

You are clueless and your post is insulting. If you think there are too many posts on this issue, might I suggest not starting another one?

No of course not, there are just too many posts you disagree with on this issue, but you feel free to post another 'no bigee' post. Yours is not original, although your clueless claim that "It may not happen in a month. But it will happen. Warren will come to terms with his homophobia " ranks up there with several others who have opined that this embracing of bigots is some sort of clever stratergizeration that will just suck the bigot right out of those nasty folks.

Ugh. This debate ain't going to end if we keep getting this sort of OP.

[PurityOfEssence]

52. I say we just sacrifice a sheep

Why fiddle around with pantywaist modrin religifying; let's satisfy the urge for real and go flat-out primitive.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

53. I like that idea!

[McFadden]

84. Not this one, you won't

[No Elephants]

54. It's not about the prayer. It's about honoring this particular pastor, And it is a big deal.

[matcom]

61. no, it is NOT about 'honoring' a pastor

it is about inclusiveness of PEOPLE. even people who do NOT agree with one another. it is about trying to heal a nation.

it is NOT about Warren nor is it policy.

[pecwae]

65. So, it'd also be fine had the choice

been StormFront's Pastor Thomas Robb? Somehow I think such inclusiveness would also be rightfully repulsive.

[No Elephants]

68. Wrong. Giving the invocation at the most historic inauguration in this nation since

Washington's is a huge honor. Inviting Warren as a guest might have been inclusiveness. Having him give the invocation is an honor. If you cannot see that, we just have to agree to diagree because the honor could not be clearer to me.

[jonnyblitz]

69. you think a president allowing a pastor to speak on a

momentous occasion such as this isn't honoring that pastor? Have you heard what this pastor believes? you think it is imperative to be inclusive of the homophobic bigots this neanderthal appeals too? holy fucking CRAP, the Obama KOOLAID must sure be some potent stuff because it FUCKED you up in good shape. your "healing a nation" comment is bat shit fucking INSANE also. do you think the pastor of Aryan Nations, if he would be allowed to speak, would be conducive to "healing the nation" ? you are fucking NUTS and it shows how much you really care about gay folks despite your bleatings to the contrary. this crap is happening right on the heals of Prop 8 passage which is pouring salt on our wounds but what do you care, YOUR marriage isn't threatened. so FUCK YOU! :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

[Two Americas]

79. it is the opposite of that

"Including" a person who preaches excluding others is not "healing" anything nor is it "inclusive." The wounds are worse now, not better. Bashing the wounded ones, as though they are at fault, only makes it worse.

There is something so illogical about this - defending including an excluder, and then trying to exclude the opinions of all who disagree with that, and then calling it "inclusiveness" and "healing."

There are two common, and malicious and false messages here.

"We are trying to create an illusion of healing, and you battered people are spoiling that illusion."

By that logic, were it nor for poor people we would not have a poverty problem. Were it not for people of color, we would not have a racism problem.

"The people we are including want to exclude you, but watch your step. If you object to that and spoil our inclusiveness we will join them in excluding you."

Support for persecuted people is therefore conditional upon how they behave and what they say.

We are including people, and any who object will be excluded for being opposed to inclusiveness.

[immoderate]

64. Rubbish. The whole event is to honor the new president.

Warren is there to honor Obama, not the other way around. It's Obama's day, and Warren is a prop, a bit player. If I were to be harsh, I'd say Warren is the tool here.

--IMM

[No Elephants]

70. Rubbish right back at you. It is not either/or., Ask any clergyman in the nation if he or she

would not have been honored to have been invited by the PE to give that invocation. Until we spoke out, the invitation gave the appearance of legitimizing the views of that anti-Democratic, anti-Constitution, sexist homophobe. I could not be prouder or happier that people are speaking out.

[immoderate]

74. I see your rubbish, and raise you a landfill.

Seriously, though, (and with apologies for the rubbish remark) I fully agreed with you at first and I was hopping mad. And in most of my subsequent statements about it, I called Warren something like "a superstitious snake oil grifter." And maybe I'd rather he not have been picked for this. But it cuts both ways. Warren is a POS, and that is being talked about. He has been forced onto the defensive. His dark side is being exposed like never before.

My attitude here is one of withholding judgment. Whether this move is good or bad remains to be seen. I don't think this takes anything away from GLBTs. That's done. They have already been injured. This in itself does nobody any harm. One could say it widens the forum for expression of discontent, and broadens the playing field for the ultimate defeat of those dark forces.

It is just possible that Obama has made a subtle and sophisticated play here that may accrue to our benefit. Does this make Obama, or anybody else, a homophobe? I think not. It opens the discussion, and I think the conversion can only go one way -- our way.

--IMM

[Two Americas]

78. not true

Warren is not honoring Obama. He is taking advantage of an opportunity. We are all being dragged to him, he is not coming to us.

[immoderate]

83. Gimme a break!

I don't think there's any doubt whose "party" this is. Warren is a bit player.

It is my contention that Warren will take a loss. Almost all of his publicity from this is negative. His appearance provides an opportunity for protest that will accrue to our benefit. But I guess we'll have to see what happens afterward to know who's right.

--IMM

[Hepburn]

67. Wrong.

Warren is a homophobic bigot who helped champion discrimination against gays ~~ Prop H8. He stands for everything I detest. The asshole does NOT belong on a public forum in an event that is supposedly the apex of the push for change.

JMHO

[No Elephants]

71. Hepburn, when you're correct, you're correct and you are

abolutely correct.

I add only that homophobia is not Warren's only bigotry, nor is bigotry Warren's only massive shortcoming. He is no friend of voting Democrat, no friend of separation of church and state, no friend of reproductive choice, no friend of women who want to be clergy (or who don't want to subnit to their husbands). And that is just off the top.

[Hepburn]

75. Thank you....

...so I will change to: "Equal opportunity bigot." If someone is not Christian, straight, male, etc., he is feels that they have no rights.

Wow...how in the hell should someone like this be on a national platform which represents ALL OF US!?!?!?!?!

Sad, huh? :cry:

[MadHound]

72. If you don't understand the sort of image and symbolism this invitation projects

Then you are sadly blind to the nuances of human interaction. What is happening, in the kickoff to one of the most celebrated presidencies in a long while, is that an acknowledged bigot, homophobic, anti-woman, anti-semite is being allowed to utter some of the opening phrases in this event.

The symbolism of this is clear, that the LGBT community is still going to be considered second class by this administration(despite the pious platitudes that Obama mouths, he has also stated that he is not in favor of gay marriage rights). He is, essentially, throwing a large segment of the constituency that got him elected under the bus. It is a crime that Obama thinks that he can callously play politics with civil rights, it already has made a mockery of his administration.

And for what? Having Waren up there for this prayer is not going to impress the people to whom Obama is directing this gesture at. They will see through it for the pandering political act that it is, and they will reject it out of hand. This invocation will not get Obama one single vote from the rabid fundie right wing, nor will they let up one iota in their rabid opposition to him and his policies.

So Obama has sacrificed his integrity by making his inauguration a cheap political stunt, and he's not going to even get the benefit that he was wanting. Instead, he will still be blasted by the fundie RW and now he has alienated the LGBT community and those who support them.

Obama has displayed a remarkably tin ear on this one, a tin ear as to how the RW fundies would react, a tin ear on how this would play among his supporters, and a tin ear on how this would play out with the LGBT community and their supporters.

It is a horrible political move, but most importantly, it is an atrocious way to address the issue of civil rights and to set the stage for his administration.

[Two Americas]

76. objection

The more people try to defend this, the more radicalized I become on the issue. I object to this ongoing attempt to isolate and marginalize the GLBT folks here, characterizing them as different and other, as aliens, who are merely selfishly arguing for "what they want" and somehow hurting the rest of us, or hurting the "progressive" cause, whatever in the hell that is anymore. That is what is being presented by the people defending this choice in various ways - a set of assumptions that when taken together are the underpinning and foundation of the extreme religious right point of view - that gays are a special interest group, who have an "agenda" they are trying to force onto the rest of us. The we get the usual the usual "don't get me wrong, I agree with you BUT..." which then leads us down the path of reading and considering endless "reasonable" and "practical" arguments against the very thing about which we are not supposed to "get people wrong." This thinking cripples and weakens us. Too many Democrats have perfected the art of taking both sides of every issue with that little word "but."

People say "don't get me wrong I agree with you" at the beginning of a statement in the hope that they will not be held to account for what they say after that.

As I wrote on another thread, I don't stand with the GLBT community because I am gay, or because they are. I stand with them because they are human beings, and because I recognize that I am as well and understand what that means. I don't speak out against bigotry because of the group being targeted, nor because of whatever pretext is being used to target them, I speak out against bigotry.

The religious right bigots want us to look at the people who are being targeted for persecution and abuse, and judge them - do we or don't we support "their cause," how they should or should not be "advancing their cause," how important it should or should not be, when we should get around to it. In other words, some annoying group is bothering us, working against us. The right wingers say that "they" are interfering with God's plan. We have people here saying that "they" are interfering with Obama's plan. But in a profound and disturbing way, and in practical political effect, the two arguments are identical.

This is all for the purpose distracting our attention away from the haters and onto the targets of the hatred. But the haters are after all of us. Many here are arguing for throwing a few sheep to the wolves, in the hope of saving themselves. They say that this is the "practical" way to save the entire flock, but is anyone here truly at peace with that line of reasoning? Must not our commitment to justice and equality start with each individual, with each of our fellow human beings who is suffering, who is being targeted for persecution and abuse, regardless of he pretext being used? I am not willing to turn my back on one person, let alone millions, for the sake of some imaginary supposed greater cause.

There are debates going on here comparing the struggles of the Civil Rights movement to this struggle. Are they the same? Which one was more important? Which one was more difficult? This, again, focuses our attention on the victims and not on the persecutors and their arguments. It is the persecutors, and their methods and rationalizations for persecution that are the same. That is what is important. The haters are after all of us. Comparing victims serves the persecutors.

Many are talking about the partisan divide in the country, about the need to "heal" that divide so we can "move forward." We then see those who object to being mistreated as the problem, as the cause of the divisiveness. If "they" would just go away, or be quiet, then we would not have this divide, and the divide is in the way of progress, they say. In other words, we are to believe, the problems are the fault of the abused, not the fault of the abusers. We are told that this builds "unity," and that inviting all in to the hen house - fox and hens - in a necessary prerequisite for any and all progress. I believe that this is a deceptive and dangerous doctrine.

As Lincoln said in similar times -

"Our cause, then, must be intrusted to, and conducted by, its own undoubted friends -- those whose hands are free, whose hearts are in the work -- who do care for the result. Two years ago the Republicans of the nation mustered over thirteen hundred thousand strong. We did this under the single impulse of resistance to a common danger, with every external circumstance against us. Of strange, discordant, and even hostile elements, we gathered from the four winds, and formed and fought the battle through, under the constant hot fire of a disciplined, proud and pampered enemy. Did we brave all then, to falter now? - now, when that same enemy is wavering, dissevered and belligerent? The result is not doubtful. We shall not fail - if we stand firm, we shall not fail. Wise counsels may accelerate, or mistakes delay it, but, sooner or later, the victory is sure to come."

He is talking about unity that is the exact opposite of the unity people are proposing when they defend Warren being welcomed in - unity that is based on principle and an unwavering commitment to justice, not an expedient and superficial unity that requires some to be left out in the cold, and not a unity that gives the enemy an honored seat at the table.

What does the word "gay" really mean to Warren and his followers? It is a label to put on people, a way to separate them from the flock, to isolate them, to diminish them, and then to use as an excuse for justifying and rationalizing mistreatment and abuse.

I will wear that label. I declare myself to be an undoubted friend to our GLBT brothers and sisters in the struggle for justice. My hands are free, my heart is in the work and I do care for the result

From this day forward, I am gay.

[saracat]

77. Sorry this is OUR inauguration. This belongs to the nation and we the people are

the nation and this nation was not founded on the principle of including bigots. ( I realize one could argue that slavery was defended and women had no rights and the forefathers were rich white men) but the point of the constitution was to ensure rights for ALL and we have come a long way since them. A pastor who would deny those rights to many Americans ought not to be welcomed anymore than anyone who proposes racism as a philosophy. The reason is that this ceremony does belong to ALL of us and he is preaching hate and exclusion.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

85. one COULD argue? how big of you.

Considering that the Constitution spells out in great detail the rights of slaves, slave holders, and how to count them as almost human for the purposes of congressional representation. Geez, thanks for the permission that we COULD argue that slavery might have been defended.

You are making a huge mistake in logic. You claim that our nation was not founded on the principle of including bigots. Really? Where in the articles of the constitution does it ban bigotry? Do any of the bills of rights ban it? How about the later amendments? Show me article and section, please. I really want to learn this part of Con Law.

You are wrong. The inauguration is not yours. It is not mine. Frankly, it is not even the people's. It is Barack Obama's and he can choose whoever he wants. If he happens to be broadminded enough to set out a branch to the crazies on the religious reich, that is his prerogative.

But to define this inauguration as being limited to people who have no bias, racism, or hold other views that offend you? sorry, but you are wrong.

[dbackjon]

81. Fuck that. Until I get equality, I will never let go.