From the Obama campaign on inauguration ceremony...and Warren...

I'm not surprised. What an asshole.

seeking common ground. Shame he doesn't make the same effort in reaching out to gays.

Joseph Lowery supports Gay Marriage (which Obama does not).

He has appointed several members of the LGBT community to his transition team...and has appointed
Carol Sutley... new Chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality

About Sutley...

Seems like we never see him hanging out with the Exalted Cyclops, but he can always spare some time to cuddle a homophobe or two.

The very fact that Obama won Indiana and Pennsylvania meant that he was reaching out to racists.

The very fact that he tilted Georgia and West Virginia meant he was reaching out to racists. Not just one or two - we're talking entire counties of them.

WHO ARE YOU KIDDING???????????

Which racists is Obama not reaching out to?

It won't help. It is a very volatile issue, and rightly so. I do understand why. I just don't feel that all is lost over this... I think it will eventually be completely forgotten, and that major positive changes will occur for GLBT friends during the Obama administration.

I am not pleased with the selection either, but I do feel like he is trying to bring in people with whom we have differences, with the hope of actually influencing them with positivity, rather than continuing an adversarial stance. During the primary and election, most times I have opposed an Obama decision, he proved me wrong. So I am willing to give a lot of leeway. If Obama takes the right stands on actual issues, then giving a preacher a moment won't be an issue. If he makes the wrong decision when it really counts, then I will be right there with the rest to give him hell.

About the woman who loudly proclaimed, "we're voting for the n**er."

No idea if it's true. But I can sertainly imagine it happening. I grew up around people like that.

Do you have a link btw?

That my own grandmother proclaimed she was voting for "the young colored man". She puts in a conscious effort to not be racist but old habits die hard I suppose. I'm glad she at least voted the right way as did many other people who likely had some prejudices.

elsewhere on the board is if Obama had invited David Duke to have a role in the Inaugural ceremonies.

If he can invite Warren, why not Duke? Surely he doesn't agree with David Duke either, so why not have him along in the name of "inclusiveness" and "accessibility"?

The point is that he's giving a hugely visible platform to a controversial figure. To what end that benefits US, the American People? I doubt this is going to get Warren to change his views any more than it would change David Duke's just because he said some words at a ceremony.

This is one gesture of inclusiveness with which I don't agree.

He's a bigot.

Warren is against abortion even if the life of the mother is at stake.

Warren preaches that the earth was created 6,000 years ago and anyone who says differently is ungodly.

Warren is against stem-cell research.

Warren is demonstrably racist and attempted to stir up racist fears about Obama during the campaign.

Warren lied about McCain being in a "cone of silence."

This is about much more than gay rights.

Doesn't sound good. Doesn't look good.

President Obama, just say NO.

Edited to add

I can see why people are upset, and I am offended by some of the things Rick Warren has said. But one of Obama's core beliefs since the beginning has been that progressives can find common ground with religious leaders who obviously disagree on social issues but may share a commitment to alieviating poverty. Choosing Rick Warren to give the prayer is not an endorsement of his views on gays and abortion, but a statement that we can get beyond those differences and come together on issues like AIDS and genocide in Darfur, which Rick Warren has been pretty good on.

Here's a passage from Obama's 2008 convention speech that I think sums up his approach pretty well:

"We may not agree on abortion, but surely we can agree on reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies in this country. The reality of gun ownership may be different for hunters in rural Ohio than for those plagued by gang-violence in Cleveland, but don't tell me we can't uphold the Second Amendment while keeping AK-47s out of the hands of criminals. I know there are differences on same-sex marriage, but surely we can agree that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters deserve to visit the person they love in the hospital and to live lives free of discrimination. Passions fly on immigration, but I don't know anyone who benefits when a mother is separated from her infant child or an employer undercuts American wages by hiring illegal workers. This too is part of America's promise - the promise of a democracy where we can find the strength and grace to bridge divides and unite in common effort."

I certainly don't agree with Rick Warren on social issues and find some of his statements offensive, but I can appreciate where Obama is coming from. I think his choice of Rick Warren coupled with a civil rights icon who supports gay marriage is emblematic of his approach of trying to bring people together and find common ground.

"surely we can agree that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters deserve to visit the person they love in the hospital and to live lives free of discrimination"

Warren doesn't agree on this.

That is just sad.

He was saying that at a minimum, we can agree that some of the rights that go with marriage should be afforded to all whether or not we support actually allowing gays to marry.

So, who's "we"?

Can you provide a source for that?

The campaign's response is ignorant and offensive!

If Warren is unable to rise above his hatred and bigotry the world will see him for what he is....

I think this is a strategy that Obama has been using for a long time....

Reach out the Olive branch, give them some rope too....it's their choice to man up and work for the good of the country or show their ass and let Americans know who really want's to move this country forward.

He has called most if not all of the Republicans in Congress....same concept, reach out the Olive branch and give them the choice...

It's time for personal responsibility....let's see who's up too the task.

but I am neutral with many preachers. I am not neutral with this one. Bad choice.

Warren doing a prayer at the inaugural is a problem because bigotry against homosexuals is considered socially acceptable in this country on "religious" grounds. In an ideal world such bigotry would be condemned by our political leaders. Unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world and therefore we need to hold our leaders' feet o the fire.

If Obama wants to reach out to Warren then he should invite Warren to the White House and try to persuade him to change his views.

a loving smile on her face, and she is a UCC pastor, not a bigot. She could do a fine job.

For that matter, I can say a lovely prayer too, and would shame no one and can take the time to make it inclusive and loving and heartfelt...and I would not be thinking inside about the hateful queers and how they will burn in hell because they are just like pedophiles and they are horrible nasty hateful faggots...etc etc

This is really what Obama wants? At the very least, this perception? My God, what a stupid move...and to stick with it after the uproar, and issues that offensive tripe of a response, does not bode well.

Way to go Team Obama, a box of hair could have made a smarter decision.

Just those with whom he holds common contempt for certain groups.

Jesus, even Rudy likes gays.

Why not have a MODERATE give the prayer? Why a rabid rightwinger nutcase?

There is no common ground with people that supported Prop 8 or that think that women must be kept under male authority!

with human beings. People do find common ground. I have written emails to the Congressional Inauguration Committee as well as made several postings on Obama's Community website. I am thrilled that he issued a response, and will now, email my response to that response. I know that there are many that will not approve of anything other than this man's being deleted from the inauguration, but I think I might suggest in my email that several other prominent religious people appear with this guy. What do you think of that? Would that be any different, or would his presence negate any sign of a 'we'.

claiming that McCain was in the green room when he wasn't.

There is not one "Commandment" about LGBT, but there sure is one about lying and liars. #9 if memory serves.

and FUCK WARREN.

in office. That being said, it's a slap in the face to the GLBT community and I understand their dismay. I wouldn't mind seeing agents of intolerance not being able get a podium for awhile. We've heard their poison for too long.

Having a intolerant bigot who deeply offends many of your constituents--not only discounting their rights and very existence but by actively campaigning against them--giving the invocation is completely wiped by presenting someone who isn't a bigot at the end.

Shorter Linda: He's going to have someone come and slap you in the face, but at the end he'll have someone there to put ice on it.

Nice.

and I wish they would stop using that rw catch phrase "fundamentally."

If they fundamentally disagreed that guy would not be up there with the invocation before any f*cking ground was reached at all!

Never has- and never will.

Fundamentalists by their very nature aren't interested in reason or compromise. Give them an inch and they'll take a yard.

The only way to move forward toward rational public policy is to marginalize them- and keep them as far away from the reigns of power as possible.

you get elected, you'd stop being all chummy with the most hate filled individuals from the other party and tell them they simply are outrageous in their beliefs and need to stop being judgmental. Instead, you actually PUT the guy in charge of the blessed invocation of your inaugural day!??? It's JUST like McClurkin! Donnie RAN the Obama rally up on the stage as the emcee! And here, Warren is going to do the invocation, it's not like he was merely INVITED as a representative of his church asked to come by the president - no, he's giving this bigot, sexist, homphobic pig a stage to springboard off of, so that the bio of this ass can say, "Gave the Invocation for Barack Obama on Inauguration Day 2008"

:puke:

As I said before, he's acting like the high school kid trying to fit in with the "cool" (NOT!) crowd of dopers...only to end up reviled by both the dopers AND by his real friends, whom he broke apart from in order to be accepted by the dopers.

That's what's happening here. There's only so far you can reach across the aisle, before you're leaning so far that you fall on your face.

Obama's going to learn very quickly, that you can't reason OR reach out to people of this ilk. And that all you'll accomplish by trying to do so, is pissing off everybody else.

What people seem to be missing here is the symbolism of having this guy speak right before the man is sworn in as President. If you think that is meaningless, you're wrong. The people who speak at the swearing-in ceremony, who sit on the stage, who sit in the front row, where they are, everything is very carefully coordinated. If you want to have a common-ground meeting amongst the faiths, do it at a well-publicized prayer breakfast that brings in the faithful from across the platform.

I don't think Obama is a homophobe. I do think they dropped the ball on this one. They are usually much better at this kind of thing, and it's disappointing that they didn't anticipate this response from those that supported them ahead of time.