right after the president quit speaking (way past my bedtime). i'm glad i did, and sorry that happened. i agree the community deserves an apology, and would be interested to know why this person was chosen for the honor.

There was also a swipe at women's rights, the things about the sanctity of unborn life, and the right to life without which other rights are meaningless. It was a very clever speech of his, worming his little agenda in.

It reminds me of what made me hate religion at one time - though there aren't very many of his kind around, and much of religion isn't so backward and full of ulterior motives.

can utter anti-gay dog whistles and no one will call him on it.

Agreed, he should not have been part of our convention.

such 'single issues' as they call them, derisively airc, is the best strategy in case we might upset the bigots and the misogynists in the Republican Party. My feeling about those who adopt that position is that they sympathize to some extent with those right wing bigots.

I first began to see this 'strategy' in action in 2004 when on DK, women, gays and African Americans were basically told to 'stfu' because 'we are not going to be dealing with single issue voters in this election', by the guy, a former Republican, who runs that forum. This led to huge meta fights on that forum and the exodus and banning of many women, gays and almost all African Americans.

The creators of this strategy, cowardly as it is, were from the DLC wing of the party. They seemed and still do, to get a huge kick out of telling these progressive voters how little they matter to the Dem Party. They use the 'Big Tent' meme to shut up anyone who tries to make them understand that you do not get Civil Rights for those without them by shutting your mouth, for any reason.

Phrases like 'so you want your pony even if it causes us to lose' etc. were constantly thrown at anyone who stood up for NOT humoring bigots and for taking a stand.

The irony is that those who thought by banning the most vocal of those who believed that the Dem Party should stand up, they would silence them, did no such thing. They were not silenced.

It is the refusal of those who were banned and/or mocked and told to stfu, to do that, that forced this party finally into ending DADT and finally publicly acknowledging the equal rights of all Americans re marriage eg. Had we all listened to these political operatives, nothing would have 'moved forward'.

Yesterday I once again saw the same attempt to shut down complaints about Dolan by falling back on the same old strategy using the same old attacks, 'pony' etc with all the usual excuses for not having the courage to do what is right. They have been proven to be wrong, but old habits die hard.

...Mammon, the favorite object of veneration of the GOP, but from context of course it's clear he wasn't suggesting that.

I did not heard the prayer, though. The talking heads were off and running after Obama's speech, and I didn't want to call up the C-SPAN site.

It's significant that Dolan did not include the swipe at marriage equality in his "prayer" for the RNC. But let's face it - what REALLY pissed the Jesus of the Bible off? He'd be appalled by their blind worship of the dollar...

GOD

Glad I missed it.

I had already turned the channel.

not allowed to attack us, all Catholics would be wildly insulted and not vote for Obama. Yet now, the meme is 'no one would even listen to him'. Have that cake and eat it too, eh?

They treat us like toadies.

In a day or two, the number of millions still watching through Dolan will be a matter of recorded fact.

Perfect.

.. my tv was turned off.

I don't understand why they picked him for a blessing
designed to take a creepy backhanded swipe at
groups targeted for oppression, meaning women and
gays.

Democrats, we are better than this!

Yes, Dolan took a swipe at folks seeking marriage for all and reproductive choice--constituencies who have absolutely no home in the republican party.

But it was a choice that showed in some ways some respect for roman catholics who could be welcome in both parties.

The choice wasn't to respect solid members our base, it was to expand it. The solid parts of the base either get that or as Rahm would say--they haven't anywhere else to go.

This sort of being taken for granted is quite typical of pragmatic politics.

And gals setting up house with gals regularly.

"Homosexual" includes XX as well as XY chromosomes, y'know.


And whatever happened to bisexuals? There are probably more of them than straights or gays.

although in nature, bisexuality seems to be the norm.

I was speaking of nature, natural...animal...world. it's a joke anyway. So let's not go nutso.

male critters are getting their rocks off mostly, not "setting up house"

We are animals.


And, frankly, who cares what giraffes and penguins do? I'm a human.

But really.... I know what you mean. Addressing the "unnatural" baloney.

"They can run, but they can't hide."

bisexuals...some know it and some don't...

is that they are bisexual who feel it, but don't acknowledge it.

Such a sour note after Obama's great speech. Glad most people didn't see/hear it (I was on C-Span and had to shut the website before he finished b/c my blood was boiling within seconds of him opening his vile, hateful mouth.)

was larger still. The various outlets televising the convention all had post speech programming, designed to retain viewers. Even if all the efforts by all those outlets failed greatly and just 10% of the audience sat through the Dolan hate sermon, that means 3 million people at least saw and heard that portion of the convention. For perspective here on DU Fox News shows which draw under a million are said to be wildly important. Less than half a million watch 'Morning Joe' on MSNBC and yet each day DUers go on and on about that show. With one sixth the smallest possible audience Dolan got from the DNC.
'Most people' did not see any of the convention. A huge amount of those who did see it saw Dolan as well. That's just the way it is.

It wasn't a prayer, it was a fucking political speech and it really was a nasty way to end out what was a fabulous night.

...no clue who thought this homo-phobic protector of child rapists closing the convention was a good idea...

There are plenty of churches and pastors that support the LGBT community, I don't understand why they aren't being tapped to give opening prayers. What about the Rev. Gene Robinson? What about a Unitarian minister or a United Church of Christ Pastor?

I don't know what the point of using haters like this is, we will NEVER get through to them.

I do request that people try to separate Christians from these haters. I find it unfortunate when these threads degenerate in to bashing people of faith.

confrontation, and the DNC passed on the debate.

Then you don't have to worry about this kind of thing. Any individual who feels the need to pray during such an event can of course do so privately, on their own, at any time.

I have always though separation of church and state needs to be absolute. There is no reason for prayer to be at the beginning of political events or graduations for that matter. Its pretty damn rude in my opinion to just force a christian prayer on everyone in earshot who may or may not agree or beleive!

Those haters are present because the 'faith community' is comfortable seeing not just hate mongering toward others in the name of their savior, but they are also comfortable remaining silent in the face of that bullshit done in their name. The fact that your concern is that people of faith might face criticism, not that people who face daily legal discrimination were attacked in their name is telling. Dolan bashed gay people on TV as a representative of the Christians, and unless they make it clear that they are not in agreement with him they are in fact agreeing with him. They need to organize, they should have stood up against Dolan last week, but instead they rationalized and excused and laid blame on gay people for defending ourselves from those representing the faith community.

I cant speak for the "faith community" as I don't believe anyone can truly speak for any "community". I am not concerned about criticism at all I just don't appreciate blind anger hurled at me simply because I am a christian. I think EVERYONE has a right to believe or not believe, I am not like some who "feel sorry for those who don't believe" its your choice, no one is better than anyone else, I only know what brings me peace and I whole heartedly wish peace on you and all others.

Yes there are religions that have been criminal to the LGBT community but there are churches that support the LGBT community.

North America

Grace Gospel Chapel, in Seattle. Affirming Pentecostal Church International
Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists
Ecumenical Catholic Church
Ecumenical Catholic Communion
Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)
Evangelical Anglican Church In America
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Episcopal Church (United States)
Friends General Conference
Global Alliance of Affirming Apostolic Pentecostals
International Christian Community Churches
Metropolitan Community Church
Old Catholic Church
Presbyterian Church (USA)
Reformed Anglican Catholic Church
Restoration Church of Jesus Christ (Salt Lake City, Utah, USA) — a Latter Day Saint denomination
United Church of Christ
United Church of Canada
Unity Church
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada

Are there SOME within these denominations that AREN'T open and accepting? maybe, but there are those that are leading by example.

I will tell you a little something about myself because it seems you don't really know where I stand on the issues.

I am very passionate about LGBT rights
I am very passionate about Marriage Equality
I am very passionately against any kind of discrimination, violence or any negativity toward anyone LGBT, and I have raised my children the same way.
We have many gay people among our friends and relatives and one particular friend of my younger daughter who just came out is in a very tough situation with some VERY negatively religious grandparents and a father who will not accept the fact that his son is gay. He is pretty much our foster son, I do everything in my power to try and make him understand how wonderful he is as he is and there is nothing wrong with him. He is a pagan, and I think that is fantastic. We read tarot cards together.

As far as that Dolan thing goes, I didn't realize it was for political purposes. I am not sure how I feel about that. I don't agree that someone like him should be given any more forums to speak his hate speech. I think that in the long run it would have been better to say "thanks but no thanks" and stand by their platform and principals.

So what I meant to say, and I apparently did not express it very well was that like any group of people, I don't like to be victim of a stereotype. I think it might be fair to say that for the most part if someone is a member of DU they are likely to be in favor of LGBT issues. I no more like to be jumped on simply for my faith than anyone does for any one aspect of who they are.

I apologize if I offended you, it was not my intent.

What a mealy-mouthed, generic, kum-ba-ya phrase! Faith: belief in something in contradiction to evidence. People of faith includes all religious believers, regardless of the stripe. It includes Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., Gene Robinson as well as Fred Phelps, Osama bin Ladin and Bryan Fisher. So what does it really mean to engage in "bashing people of faith" when the descriptor is essentially meaningless?

His point is this...

"Who gives a fuck about the people this Dolan dude insulted? LET'S TALK ABOUT ME!!!"

it was certainly not my intent and I beleive I spoke against Dolan. I guess I was nervous about sharing something about myself because like anyone, I dont enjoy being attacked. I never intended to try and steal focus. These are all very serious issues being discussed that certainly dont need distraction. Again, I apologize.

But faith is not always a negative thing, it has done good as well as evil. You certainly have the right to berate people because they have a different beleif system than you, its just something I dont enjoy. I probably shouldnt have said anything and unintentionaly inflamed people. For that I apologize.

No more money for the Obama campaign for allowing this, until and unless there is an apology. No more money for the DCCC or DSCC. I will give my money directly to our local Congressional candidate and campaign for her and our other local candidates.

I'll vote for Obama, but it's the last time I hold my nose for a Conservative Democrat.

but I doubt anyone other than Faux watchers were paying attention. It's too close to the election to give them any ammunition at all and the crazies would never, ever let it go. You know, I have practically no income, but I recently received a refund for a medical overpayment of some kind (no explanation: the check just said 'refund.') So I'll pick up the slack your lack of contributions leaves by doubling my contribution. I doubt my little bit means anything in the big scheme of things, but it makes me feel wonderful. And in the BIGGER scheme of things, one asshole, who practically forced his way in, does not negate in any way the support of LGBT rights from this party.

You do not hate that he was there, you don't care a bit. If you did, you'd be telling us that when you make your donation, you will do so with a note telling them that it is in spite of Dolan, not because of him, that it would have been more if not for the display of bigotry. Instead you are attempting to downplay this attack on your neighbors. A donation is a chance to speak your mind in the language politicians understand, money language. Use that money to speak.

And don't assume that I don't speak out loudly about things I care about and how I do it. Assumptions only make you look foolish.

He was cordially invited.

But the speaker after speaker that went on before him supporting gay marriage did nothing for you?

You have a seriously warped sense of what was important in that convention.

the background to this mess:

Dolan was asked to speak at the RNC. He accepted, and some consevatives crowed. Big deal, right?

Dolan then offered himself to the DNC, saying he wanted to be "fair." We all know that was bullshit, but what should the DNC have done?

Dolan is currently peddling the bullshit that 'religious liberty' is under attack. You saw how the fundys screamed when a god wasn't mentioned in the DNC platform.

So should the DNC have handed Dolan another nail in his cross of martyrdom? Should we have gotten into a public pissing match?

No...you accept Dolan, you make him drag his sorry ass to Charlotte, and as President, you make sure you mention DADT when you know he's gonna hear it. Then you put his ass at the end when everyone is hurrying off to the afterparty.

The repukes and their allies WANT a culture confrontation. Don't give it to them.

Dolan was powerless last night......and his behavior reflected that.

Thank you, I wasnt aware of the whole story.

Dolan speaking at the end of the Democratic convention is very different from Rick Warren giving the prayer at the inauguration in 2008. At the time that Warren was invited to do that, Obama himself had spoken against marriage equality and it was not part of the Democratic plank or a priority of the Democrats.

Today, things are different. Marriage equality - while still a distant hope - is an official plank in the party platform, and President Obama has spoken in favor of it.

So Dolan can rail against it, but he's on the defensive, as opposed to Warren in 2008 whose bigotry was supported by the party at the time.

This is a huge distinction to be made.

If this were still 2008 and the president were publicly against marriage equality, to have another religious fuckwad pour salt in the wound would be inexcusable.

But it's not. This convention was completely different from anything we have seen historically from Democrats in terms of the affirmation of our rights and our visibility. We were the headline. He was the asterisk note nobody paid attention to.

Nice to see you here!

Perhaps one of the nuns we have been hearing so much about.

There were other choices. This was a horrible decision.

This was a pretty big screwup, IMHO. It doesnt take a lot of searching to find catholic clerics who do not have an agenda against the LGBT community.

"Sorry, Cardinal Dolan, we have already selected Bishop XYZ from the ABC Bishopric", was the answer that should have been given.

wanted to be 'fair' Fox News started running with the story.

At that point, the DNC faced a problem...

And let's face it, ANY bishop the DNC would have picked would have given way to the Cardinal.

It's a shit sandwich, no matter how you slice it.

He was very active in the Issue 1 campaign which banned both marriage and civil unions.

That's it in a nutshell.

The thing about Dems is we can get along even with people we don't like.

The Repugs, not so much.

It's the difference between being an adult and being a spoiled 4 year old.

"If you listen to a lot of conservatives, they'll tell you that the difference between
them and us is that conservatives love America and liberals hate America.... They don't
get it. We love America just as much as they do. But in a different Way. You see, they
love America the way a 4-year-old loves her Mommy. Liberals love America like grown-ups." ---Al Franken

I think that Dolan is slime, but I also appreciate msanthrope's point.

Do I long for the day that an atheist can run at or near the top of the ticket, and it be no big deal? Am I 100% pro-equality? Do I think that politicized public prayers are bullsht? Yes, Yes, and Yes. But I cannot envision a better strategy to diffuse this front of the culture war than what the DNC did here. Dolan is now out of the news cycle.

-otus

DNC allowed a RW conservative bigot to speak at a Democratic event, and sacrificed the feelings of the LGBT community and the integrity of the Democratic party in order to appease bullies that aren't going to vote for our team anyway.

The appropriate course of action would have been to politely decline, apologizing, and cite differences in recognition of human rights between him an the Democratic party.

People don't respect spineless wimps, they respect those who stand up for the rights of minorities in the face of aggressive bigoted bullies.

The Democratic party needs to stand up for progressive values when faced with RW aggression and manipulation.

you mean it WAS a sermon? Shock, HORROR! I'm sooooo surprised!

not a prayer, not a blessing.... a carefully written speech.

almost no public prayers are simply "prayers". They always contain sermonizing, otherwise, they wouldn't be done in public.

not prayer, it is sermonizing and God does not listen, for it is intended for human ears. Only hypocrites pray in public according to Jebus, and yet for some reason, Christians like to pray in public and they reject the teachings of Jesus which both forbid it and define it as about human agenda.
Christians do not believe in the things Jesus told them to do, instead they do as they wish. 'But we like to pray out loud' as if the word of 'he died for me' are of no consequence. 'Thanks for the death on my behalf, but fuck your no praying in public bit, that's stupid, so climb down off of that cross and listen to us praying to you. Do as you are told, longhair.'

And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

chose not to make him a martyr.

Just say "Thank you, but we have another pastor or priest we would like to invite." If he acts like a martyr because of that, he just looks like an asshole.

a "Big Fucking Deal."

Do not give the rightwing an issue to galvanize over.

but I would need to see more evidence that the hornet's sting would be worse than the bigot's bite. Thanks for being civil in presenting your views.

If they said no it would reinforce the meme they created that liberals are godless atheist that want to destroy religion....if they let him speak they could split off the LGBT's by the outrage factor.
They always manipulate in this way....they have a strategy for any move.

Barack Obama is elected to represent everyone, even those who do not support our views. I think if we had declined Dolan's offer he'd be out there campaigning against us with the Catholics. It was a tiny bad blip of our convention but most people turned off the TV after Obama left the stage.

Large Catholic voter pool that can swing an election.

Fact.

How?

I don't know the answer to that. Catholic priest + Catholic viewers in swing states = Obama votes, at least in someone's opinion. Best I can figure.

the talk of 'Forward' and then give the podium to someone who wants
to turn back the clock a couple thousand years. Bad decision, whoever
made it.

He makes my skin crawl

...could even be interpreted as a swipe at Obama himself.

He knew the consequences of having the cardinal speak and he went ahead and did it anyway.

He gets my vote, but the money dried up four years ago. No big deal. He won't miss it.

Keep in mind, this was during WWII and news had just arrived that the city of Rome had just been liberated the day before. That news was overshadowed by the next day's monumental event.

D-Day.

FDR addressed the nation with a prayer:

Smart and sensitive. Making humble requests instead of bossing us around "in God's name".He also carefully goes through god to remind folks of the need to be patient for the long difficulties ahead. if only Obama could have worked the God squad on the right into such a deal in regards to the economy.

I think he had some understanding of the many religions of the world, whose practitioners are to be found in the good ol USA. He might could have learnt such a thing in college, which I think he went to.

Then everyone is in agreement..." that was a terrible idea, if only we knew, if only someone said something".

And was doing something else the rest of the time. I'm betting that most people did, too. Dolan shouldn't have been invited. It was a given that he'd take a shot at marriage equality and women's reproductive rights. He certainly lived up to that expectation, apparently. But few heard him. It was a mistake on the DNC's part to let him speak.

Thank you for expressing your concern.

..or even Rev. TD Jakes (with whom I don't always see eye to eye).

Unfortunately, the DNC let Dolan do it. We can't unring the bell. I suspect the decision to let him speak was at least partly influenced by the fact that he's toward the end of the short list of Cardinals likely to be the next Pope.

Do we know if Dolan's comments were vetted by anyone?

I refuse to let Dolan's remarks detract from a brilliant convention. At the end of the day, I know where our party stands on issues of social justice. JMHO.

bigots profiting from hate mongering today. About as bad as Dolan, perhaps worse because Jakes is in aggressive personal promotion business and has no larger organization to check his actions.

Is having him speak at the convention some kind of "good luck charm" because some day his bones might be holy relics?

this 'benediction' it was clearly a speech.

I listened, but with my eyes open (and loved some of the reaction shots of people in the hall...)

Now I wish I hadn't listened. It definitely left a bad taste in my mouth.

at least you admit that you felt obliged to listen, for this attack on women and gay people was disguised as a holy thing.
You should call the WH and tell them you have a bad taste in your mouth about what you heard.

1. Suck it up and quit whining.
2. There was no choice but to let him speak.
3. He has a right to express his views.

I am dismayed to see this travesty minimized.

tell the minority what they can be offended by.

How is priest-on-child pedophilia "respecting the laws of nature and of nature’s God"? But somehow in his fucked-up worldview, not the love between two consenting adults of whatever gender?

As I fully expected, he showed himself and the religion he claims to represent to be morally bankrupt, out of touch with reality, and woefully antiquated and irrelevant.

I was shaking my head the rest of the evening.

He should never have been asked to do this and I agree, everyone responsible for his appearance should apologize.

any negative result of anything they say or do, for their own protect them always. Straights who hate gays, they lie, cheat, libel and other straights rationalize that, excuse it, and always, always help them go forward to attack some more.

I am very angry over his inclusion. I find any rationalization of it weak at best, at worst it is bigoted in itself.

No, I did not. As you do, I note the fact that rationalizations are not in short supply and they are not worth the pixels they use to display themselves.
I do gladly urge straight folks to take action against the bigots in their midst rather than excuse them and allow this shit to continue. Because this is a repetition of the whole 'hate preacher on our stage' thing, which is always excused and rationalized and downplayed and that cycle needs to end and only the straight community can end it.

...far more than his sorry ass does.

And "God" didn't give us institutions of any sort, institutions are man-made affairs, always in flux.

The fool doesn't seem to realize that we're redefining the institution of marriage, or that families come in all shapes and sizes.

Stupid hateful fucker.

Too many of these Catholic priests/officials make me think of what Emperor Honorius must have been saying to himself when the Visigoths came over the seventh hill of Rome. "Everything fine, nothing to see here, la la la la la I am not listening..."

And I'm Catholic.

P.S. No, I am not comparing LGBT people to the Visigoths...only making the point that change is on the way, on fucking horseback, and clowns like Dolan can't or won't see it coming.

So what if the man wants a return to monasticism and really large harems? The early Christian agape (free love) communes are also in that bundle and they were fun.

The thing about him not being all that explicit is the sheer, exploitable joy of making him explicit.

Of course, he just might mean the traditional one man, one dozen altar boys. Who knows?

It's important to ask.

He doesn't have to marry gay couples in NY either. Why is ONE a big problem for him when the other isn't? The church considers BOTH an "abomination". Both groups can be married legally in a civil ceremony. The church doesn't have to be involved in either.

Hipocrite, Dolan.

and Dolan is a perfect example of what I'm "recovering" from.

Zorra, I'm sorry this happened to the LGBT community, with the blessings of the Democratic Party.

Do you honestly believe it's reasonable to expect the Church to turn it's back on God's law? What did you expect him to say?

God got all fussy and bossy only after requiring folks to hold down dawn-to-dusk jobs for the master.

Instead he was a turd in the punchbowl.

He had no "right" to speak at the DNC, but some geniuses thought it would be peachy.

1) "Reason" and "God" do not belong in the same sentence.

2) The topic here is a homophobic and misogynistic religious figure speaking at a political convention that we here call our party.

3) You don't get to personally judge what is and what is not an overreaction on the part of anyone else.

That's what I got.

he didn't use the sarcasm tag, but whatever. Thanks.

I don't think it was.

Thanks, Link.

There are millions of Democrats that belive in God and many of them see things Dolan's way. That is reality.

Same sex marriage and choice are wedge issues for Democrats. Blowing off Dolan would have accentuated that and would not have been helpful. Sometimes you have to accept the fact that not everyone sees things your way. I've made statement "we'll just have to disagree" many times.

in driving legislative policy in a secular society such as ours.

...and if you don't deal with political reality, you will lose.