Please Give Obama the benefit of the doubt on his choice of Warren.

I'm not happy with the choice of Rick Warren, however, I do understand that Obama does not agree with him on the issues of Gay rights, as Obama does not agree with a lot of people but is still able to be civil or inviting to them. That's what an open minded person does. Banning people from our lives simply because we disagree with them or their values will never bring us understanding and equality. If we want to see change then we embrace the people who disagree with us and try and find common ground or compromise.

I understand that Obama's choice in Warren has upset some people, and I for one hope Obama takes everyone words into consideration and does his best to not just cater to the majority but to EVERYONE.
But on the other side, Let him reach out a hand to Warren, it doesn't change what Obama believes. we should all remember to not be like those ignorant hateful people during the campaign that insisted that just because Obama had associations with Ayers, Wright and others that they felt were "unsavory" DID NOT mean he agreed with them. Nor did it compromise who he is as a person. We need to have more faith in Obama and not expect him to make the choices we always would, nor should he be perfect. Think about what we have for the last 8 years and really think if the choice for some small speech giver is really worth all this anger and distrust in this really good man we all voted for. I'm not begrudging anyone's feelings, I do understand why you're upset, but we need to realize this isn't that big of a deal nor is it a sign that Obama has turned his back on the gay community.

I do however hope that Obama balances out not only the inauguration, but his staff with people from or supportive of the gay community.

Must reach a common ground!

It's been shown that some people that live a hateful lifestyle, such as one of the KKK can be made to turn their back on that way of thinking and embrace a more tolerant lifestyle. Most of these people KKK participants, protesters against gay rights and abortion as well as any sort of intolerance, stems from ignorance and that can be fixed. People are more likely to resist you trying to change their mind about things like this when you argue with them or call them names. But if you befriend them, try to understand them and give them some respect or understanding, even if you disagree, then a lot of the time they will do the same for you and take your words more closely under advisement. This is the way change happens. Not by fighting, but by talking and civility.

I'm not saying it's easy by any means though, I would find it hard myself to try and be nice to someone who found indulging in hate crimes as a fun activity. But unless we grit our teeth and engage them in civil conversation, nothing will ever change. Obama knows this and i'm glad he does as he will have to deal with a lot of people out there that don't like us and wish us harm and this skill he has for showing them respect and understanding will help us more then you can imagine.

You are confused about haters and the merely ignorant. Haters are sociopaths who won't change.

the majority are misinformed or brainwashed by their religion and faith into believing they need to stop people from action they don't approve of.
I will give you that there are sociopaths that just get off on hating people for no other reason them being hurtful and destructive, but it's no where near the majority of the bigots in this country. They have merely not evolved.

Some posters on here are haters. I'm not the one who is naive about this.

You're like a broken record.

that he wants, and maybe it will change a few hearts.

He can negotiate and include them in any meetings that he wants, find all the common ground in the world.

But he doesn't have to shove them in our face UNTIL they have actually publicly changed their minds on a few subjects.

Especially so soon after the person in question went about leading the charge to remove rights from a significant portion of a BIG Democratic state's population. A population that also worked so hard to get Mr. Obama elected to the office he sought.

Rick Warren does.

Big difference.

..one that Democrats would be smart not to rule out completely. They made enough of a difference to deliver Bush two terms he shouldn't have gotten if only Democrats had made an effort to reach out to them. And I suspect many of them are not really bigots and probably would have more in common with Democrats on other issues but often feel ignored or demonized by liberals.

The evangelical community is not all evil-- and to dismiss such a large group of the population does nothing to further our agenda. Ballot measures banning gay marriage passed in every state that had them this year; I think that shows that our base is just not enough to get these big things done. We either reach into theirs and maybe convince them that we don't hate them and that gay rights isn't something scary, or we wait many many years when all the old people die and hope that they don't recruit too many young people.

One of the biggest problems with the NO on Prop 8 campaign was that they didn't make a good enough effort in more conservative areas of California. In San Francisco, they had an event every day but once you get out of the city, their presence was too small. I don't think its good politics or good for our cause if we completely give up on a large chunk of the population.

No on 8 was not well managed in that respect. Mobilizing support in more conservative areas would have made a difference--just educating people that churches can do whatever they want about gay marriages would have helped.

And that, is fucking suspicious to me.

It's in one of these threads -- I'll try to find it.

Please do, I'd like a future reference to use in any discussion about a potentially bigoted decision.

Have I mentioned that I voted for Kucinich?

Fucking bigots. I have no time for bullshit.

Where's the nomination we DON'T have to give "the benefit of the doubt" to, eh?

Christ on a crutch, fundies, Wall Streeters & Clinton re-runs.

But it's important to have balance and to reach out a hand.

He is there for such a trivial reason, he does not represent Obama or his opinions.

wholeheartedly?

but he shouldn't just ignore or distance himself from hateful people. It just fuels their hate. Talking about your differences with respect and civility extinguishes hate and helps bring compromise and change.

I don't need Obama to "talk" about that, nor give him a platform. Thanks, bye.

Obama has nothing to do with Warren's opinions. He asked him there to do a simple prayer, not give him a platform to preach hate.

AND, IT HAS TO AFFECT OUR LIFE. WTF are you defending this shit?

just quietly re-read the sentence

"I have never implied he should invited the klan to burn a flag on the white house lawn"

you had to make a sentence like that about Barack Obama in the course of explaining your own position on this issue...

if you think you're going to get one iota of love out of these people for anyone that's different than themselves... for the spirit of Obama's message

forget it

your sentence proves... they are stark raving mad

absolutely insane with rage... over the line and gone... foaming at the mouth

shit, you can't AGREE WITH THEM RIGHT

there is NO more important thing in their world than THIS ONE THING

is it worth it? really? trying even...

shit I'll get up there and spin right around and make a big show of it my own self

There is no "out of here" for them... they're trapped

This is certainly not MY president - he's the president of the heterosupremacists.

I'm not, but I studied the history of Christianity (rhymes with Hannity) quite a bit.

You know what the purpose of the invocation is? Think about the term...

In the ancient days, it was used a part of a ceremony to call for the actual presence of God. God was supposed to stop whatever he/she was doing and pay attention to his creation for this event that was to follow.

Later (and presently) it is used to invoke the spirit of Godliness to fill the "hearts" of those present, so that all that is done in the ceremony is done in the spirit of God.

From the wiki:

As a supplication or prayer it implies to call upon God, a god or goddess, a person, etc. When a person calls upon a god or goddess to ask for something (protection, a favour, his/her spiritual presence in a ceremony, etc.) or simply for worship, this can be done in a pre-established form or with the invoker's own words or actions. An example of a pre-established text for an invocation is the Lord's Prayer.

All religions in general use invoking prayers, liturgies, or hymns; see for example the mantras in Hinduism and Buddhism, the Egyptian Coming Out by Day (aka Book of the Dead), the Orphic Hymns and the many texts, still preserved, written in cuneiform characters on clay tablets, addressed to Shamash, Ishtar, and other deities.



Hardly a trivial part of the ceremony in question, at least for the religious.

Obama is kissing one of America's biggest homophobe's butt and honoring him for his hate.

I guess the "reaching out" only applies to bigots who hate homosexuals.

So much for the "reaching out" argument. It's transparent and phony.

Obama is all about Obama.

I've seen enough.

I do not give Obama the benefit of the doubt on this one. Rick Warren is a known bigot, and what makes him dangerous is he is a charismatic and powerful known bigot.

If you think about it, the majority of choices out there he could have asked to do this probably are against gay marriage as well, they just aren't as well known as Warren.
Warren is against Gay rights, that makes his ignorant, not necessarily hateful. I still believe this small prayer on such a huge night of so many other speeches and important people will mean nothing in the grand scheme of things.

too. We already suffered through an outrageous political campaign in which millions of gay Americans had to watch our own party candidates demean our citizenship and proclaim support for "separate but equal" marriages for our communities.

Now we have to watch one of the leading spokesmodels of those who amend constitutions to REMOVE our citizenship rights offer a prayer of protection for the marriage segregationalist president.

We overlooked his "civil union" position because the alternative was more-of-the-same crap. But it was an insult to ask me to vote for any candidate who viewed my American citizenship as less than his or her own. And I will not do that again.

Rather ironic, isn't it? The first partial African-American man gets elected president in this country, and he's already becoming known in the gay community as "President 'separate but equal' Obama."

I understand the symbolism, but I highly doubt that Obama thought to himself..."hmmm let's pick Warren so we can send a clear message to the gays that i hate them"
It's just a silly prayer. it's tradition and he might as well have picked someone out of a hat, most of his other choices or religious leaders in general all feel the same way. He had to pick someone, so he did, it doesn't mean what people think it means.

After all, he didn't have to "agree" with him either. Nope - instead, he dissed a community which supported him, DESPITE our reservations about his marriage segregationist mindset, and threw in a bigot who actively campaigned to forcibly dissolve the marriages of 18,000 families. Nice choice.

And, Warren is violenty anti-women's rights, anti-choice, and anti-Science.

why not cheer for the fact Obama invited someone from the other side of the issue to be there and say a prayer as well. I think at the very very LEAST he is showing no favoritism to either side.

particularly when the candidate apparently campaigned under the guise of protecting MY rights. I have increasing doubt that he'll deliver on any of those things, and we'll be given excuse after excuse for the next four-eight years. No thanks.


It is insulting enough that my right to marry is some outrageous heterosupremacist debate topic, but the fact remains President-elect Obama is a marriage segregationist and the gay community made very large sacrifices in order to support a Democrat who engages in a "separate but equal" policy. That should have been sacrifice enough. Now you tell me I should be happy with some other heterosexual minister who supports my rights doing the benediction? WTF?

Oh yes. . .and MY community...20 million of us...are represented by a marching band? Why not just hire some house faggots to decorate for the balls, and then tell us we can't dance? Or just serve the dinners, but we don't get to sit down? Or how about just do all of the heterosupremacists hair and makeup like good little house faggots beggin' the master to maybe throw us a few crumbs?

Heck. . .and all the while, the campaign can run around saying "this is the MOST inclusive inaugeral event EVAH - and just LOOK at the cute homos in their little marching band."

Cool.

You are either clueless or being disingenuous -- which is it?

I'm willing to cut people some slack on gay marriage, as support for that issue has been increasing rapidly. But someone who is opposed to even the most basic civil rights for gays IS a hateful bigot. It's absolutely absurd, and quite offensive, for you to declare such a person "non-hateful." What nerve, if you're not gay you enjoy rights denied gays and have the gall to say opposition to those basic rights doesn't make someone a bigot. What unbelievable nerve.

THAT is his opinion of MY life and American citizenship.

Because he associated with them or defended them or listened to them he MUST be of the same opinion...right?
WRONG. It's already been stated that he does not agree with Warren on the issue of gay rights. Obama even opposed Prop 8.

was between a man and a woman - statements which were used by the PRO-H8 campaign to vote away our constitutional rights. Moreover, Warren himself used Obama's words in his own messages to campaign to destroy the legal standing of our families.

So there's the difference. Obama's position is support for "civil unions." In other words, he's a marriage segregationist. President "Separate but equal" Obama.

Yes Obama has made it clear he is PERSONALLY not for gay MARRIAGE, but he is for civil union. BUT the difference is, Obama is one of those rare people of faith who would not impose his faith or values into federal or state law. That's the difference between him and people like Palin who thinks being Gay is a "choice" and thinks you shouldn't have any rights at all, not just marriage but kids, civil unions, anything, and she would us her position in government to change laws to suit her own religious beliefs. Obama wont. He can believe what he wants, but he knows that it's a personal view and shouldn't be made into law to take away your rights, which is why he OPPOSED Prop 8. I know to you and many other's it's cold comfort and you wish in a perfect world he didn't have a personal issue about gay marriage, but all i can say is baby steps...

I cannot imagine how this effects you emotionally, and I do agree with you that I wish he had chosen someone less vocal about his oppositions to gay rights, but I just wish you could see that this is not a sign of Obama's future plans to ignore or hurt future gay rights. It's just a silly prayer that will have nothing about gays mentioned in it and will really mean nothing when it's all said and done.

and this man is not MY president. Until I see something practical and tangible delivered, I'm not buying the rhetoric any longer. My community has had enough of the outrageous things spewed forth in public about our very lives and citizenship and I will NOT participate in watching one of their largest voices opening the inaugeration of a president I not only supported - but for the very first time donated time and money to a campaign.

I have read the campaigns response to our complaints and it is even more of an outrage. When a candidate tells me he believes in separate but equal and marriage segregation for MY community, but supports "rights" for us, then invites one of the most offensive speakers to open the festivities we helped support, I feel betrayed.

I don't need to be treated like some house faggot by my public officials any longer. If I was a member of that marching band, I'd refuse to participate at all. After all, that really is the only sign that any gays will be "included"...as entertainment.

Eat me.

Nor will it change my opinion. If you wanted to do that, you should come at me with a serious argument with valid points, not snarky insults.

Being intolerant goes BOTH WAYS. It's up to us to be the better people and not engage in the same hateful, destructive insulting fighting antics that others do to solve their problems or make their points.

will not change his choice either.

Sorry if that isn't serious and valid enough for you.

a second chance?

And how is a few staff choice that you disagree with compare to last 8 years. We aren't ever going to have the PERFECT president, but Obama is on his way to being a great one, just let him do his thing and lay off the insignificant choices of who is saying a prayer on that night.

People on here acting like a President Elect doesn't choose his own lineup are on CRACK.

Harry S Truman refused to allow Billy Graham to pray at his Inauguration. Truman also said,"The buck stops here." Obama needs to learn from Truman.

Giving an asshole like Warren this spot only helps to legitimize his ridiculous and hateful beliefs. Far better for someone like that to be ignored if not openly vilified.

If it is you. hahahah

:toast:

Nice to see you here.

:beer: :beer: :hi:

Your profile kinda gave it away, but ya never fuckin know.

But what you should remember is he is not being given a platform to stand up in front of the world and say "gays are wrong!" Warren is just there to say a small prayer and leave. Nothing else. He may not be the best choice, but is THIS choice the one that we all need to be so up in arms about? Is it really that important? Or is what Obama does in office what is really important?

And most people have no idea who this fool is. But Obama knows who he is and he must know of this clown's incredible remarks and how an important part of his base would feel about it. It is a small thing really, just saying a prayer, but since they aren't going to get the BIG thing from Obama or even a medium thing, can't they at least have some small things? If he can't commit to championing full marriage rights, can't he at least reject people that equate homosexuality with child molestation and bestiality?

Of course what he does in office is the most important thing. I'm anxious to see what he does with this cabinet he's lining up.

:thumbsdown:

Yeah, Warren sucks. Lowery rocks.

Is choosing Reverend Lowery, for gay marriage and equal rights for gays, speaking at the end the ceremony "a sign that Obama has turned his back on the gay community"?

I think not.

Obama has no reason to reach a hand out to Warren. If Warren wants to be included, he should reach a hand out to all of us, and repudiate his hatred and bigotry. He is the one who excludes, he is the one who pushes away. He has called abortion a Holocaust, and pro-choicers "Holocaust deniers." He has condemned gay marriage and supported Prop 8. He called for the assassination of President Ahmadinejad. These are sins far more extreme than anything Reverend Wright did or said, and yet Wright was repudiated, and Warren is extended a hand.

I'll give Obama the benefit of the doubt, but his choice of Warren does not give me any room for doubt on this issue. This is a vile man, and Obama insults us all by giving him this honor.

to. To expect them to come crawling to us for forgiveness is unrealistic, especially when they feel they've done nothing wrong, which is why nothing ever changes. It's up to us to take the high road and help the ignorant understand why their views are wrong on the issues of gay marriage or racism. So many of these people are taught it from an early age, its all they know. They don't think they are being hateful bigots, they don't understand how their words and actions hurt others. So why not take the time to show them and i promise you'll see an change.

It reinforces that he's right, to him and to his followers. He will only learn that decent people don't behave like that if his message is repudiated thoroughly and completely. If I want to rehabilitate a thief, I don't reward him for his crime. I punish him, I isolate him, I show him the consequences of his actions. He learns, or he faces a life of exclusion.

David Duke? What if he decides to pull Cheney or Rove into his cabinet. Sorry, you can only compromise so far, and frankly for many people, gay and straight, Obama has reached the limit of our ability to compromise.

Billy Graham was always way more offensive, imo. And scary.

Get a grip folks, it's not like you haven't seen clergypeople you disagree with give two-minute invocations at inaugurals before.

I had a choice between voting for a Republican who didn't believe I was entitled to any goddamn rights not dictated by a cabal of rightwing churches, and a Democrat marriage segregationist who believes my constitutional rights should be separate but (relatively-maybe-kinda) equal.

And we remember Bill Clinton quite well for that heinous "don't ask, don't tell" policy - another insult to our community and my American citizenship.

But fuck no, hell no, and a good old fashioned Crack!Whitney HELL TO THE NAW.

But thanks for your concern.

Obama can eat shit.

back on him? Would you prefer we bring back bush?

I've given him too much "benefit of the doubt" already over his cabinet, and see what a fucked up mess of corporatists, centerists, and DLCers that's turned out to be. I can't give anymore benefit of the doubt, and I really can't compromise anymore.

It's high time that Obama started giving something back to those core constituencies on the left, the LGBT community, the anti-war folks, teachers, small farmers, etc. etc.

He's not only homophobic, but he's sexist and anti-semitic. Prepared to defend that, too?

Warren is a known bigot.

NO

And no I'm not being sarcastic. I mean it. I know this is an issue that hurt and bothers a lot of you and I don't want to diminish your feelings at all. I just wanted to make my point that i believe Obama does not purposely mean any ill will towards the gay community with this choice and that I really feel he will do his best to see that the gay community civil rights movement goes forward. It may not be his top priority, but i never once thought he would ever ignore it or go against it. And also that Warren saying some prayer will get lost on a night filled with so many other great things so why fret about it when there are so many other things out there more worthy of our anger.

In any case I've argued a lot with people on message boards about various issues and mostly it turns into a nasty name calling fight, so I have happy to engage in this discussion with all of you whether i agreed or not, because most of you did so with passion, but not unnecessary insults and rudeness. So again thank you. I wish more threads went like this.

I really really think this was a terrible choice! Warren has a right to his beliefs, but it is not a true Dem's belief! Rick Warren is a small minded person who comes with negative and hateful message for some of our brothers and sisters. I cannot forgive this and hope it is thought through and if Obama and his committee think he must have Warren then he should counter it with someone else that is more acceptable!

I suggested this man:

Rick Warren and Prop 8 -- He Knows Better

by Randall Balmer - Randall Balmer is a blogger for Beliefnet's Progressive Revival, an Episcopal priest, Professor of American Religious History at Barnard College, Columbia University, and a Visiting Professor at Yale Divinity School. He is the author of a dozen books, including "Thy Kingdom Come: How the Religious Right Distorts the Faith and Threatens America" and, most recently, "God in the White House: How Faith Shaped the Presidency from John F. Kennedy to George W. Bush."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/randall-balmer/rick-warren-and-prop-8_b_137908.html

Warren has done a great deal to recast the social agenda of evangelicals to bring it more into line with the teachings of Jesus as well as the noble precedent of nineteenth-century evangelical activism, which invariably took the part of those on the margins of society. Warren is no fan of the Religious Right, and he recognizes that it is inappropriate for people of faith in a pluralistic society to impose their will on others simply by majoritarian fiat.

So that is why I found his announcement on October 23 that he supports California's Proposition 8 so disturbing. Proposition 8, a ballot initiative, seeks to overturn the California supreme court's ruling that gay marriage is constitutionally permissible.

Warren has every right to his views on the definition of marriage, which he insists (not without foundation) is mandated in the Bible. Millions of Americans -- a majority, I'm sure -- agree with him. "If you believe what the Bible says about marriage," he declared on his website, "you need to support Proposition 8."

Warren goes on to note that, by his reckoning, gays and lesbians make up only 2 percent of the population in the United States. "We should not let 2 percent of the population change the definition of marriage."

Warren, a Baptist, knows better. The cornerstones of the Baptist tradition are adult baptism (as opposed to infant baptism) and the principle of liberty of conscience and the separation of church and state. Baptists inherited these ideas from Roger Williams, the founder of the Baptist tradition in America. And, at least until the conservative takeover of the Southern Baptist Convention in 1979, Baptists have always been watchmen on that wall of separation and fierce guardians of liberty of conscience. Thankfully, Williams's ideas were incorporated into the United States Constitution, both in the First Amendment, which forbade a religious establishment, and in the recurring principle of respect for the rights of minorities.

These have been the guiding touchstones of American life for more than two centuries. We Americans have sought, at times better than others, to live up to the principles articulated in our charter documents, especially in safeguarding the rights and the interests of minorities -- though not perfectly, by any means. The scourge of slavery and segregation and discrimination remains an indelible blot, and our treatment of women has been cavalier. But we Americans eventually rise to our better selves and come around to recognize the claims of legal equality for those who, for reasons of gender or race or religion or sexual orientation, cannot number themselves part of the majority.

And if we needed further warrant for this, the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection under law" codified that into the Constitution itself.

Many Americans, myself included, understand the California supreme court's decision (and similar rulings in other jurisdictions) as an expression of that principle, an expansion of civil rights to those who have been denied equality for a very long time. It's not at all at odds with fundamental Baptist principles of liberty and protection from a majoritarian ethic that imposes its standards on the minority.

I challenge Rick Warren, my friend and fellow evangelical, to reconsider his support for Proposition 8. Warren and all people of faith have every right to hold to their religious views about homosexuality. But to insist that those standards must be observed by everyone in a pluralistic society is -- well, it's not Baptist.

Rick Warren knows better.

............

Barack why not let Randall Balmer give the invocation? He is more in line with most of your base!

Sorry, this was planned, therefore Obama's in charge of it.

about gays is if he gets on a road to Damascus and
God has a "come to Jesus" moment with him.

sorry, but it's too late.

Obama has shown a very bad lack of judgment with his pastors.

They could have picked a million different people, not offensive to anyone.
If they want to feel superior or better about themselves by shitting all over gay people, good for them, ain't they just great.

Just don't be surprised and become all whiny about the blowback.

We just find it disgusting that Obama is HONORING him.

By giving him the honor, Obama gets things in return. It's called politics.

--will be more of that crap.

I won't

But I still think his decision to put a homophobic pastor on stage sucks and that it is bad for gay rights. What is politically good for Obama is not necessarily politically good for gay rights.

....because I remember a time not long ago, and not in a far away galaxy, that any criticism of Obama, and I mean any criticism, was met in chorus with demands for tombstoning, racist accusations, many times where it did not exist, and a whole lotta animosity toward any of those critics, no matter how slight, or heavy-handed. Now that EVERY SINGLE THING is not going their way, they have become who they lambasted during the primaries. How appropriate that many of those throwing shit, are now eating it. Thanks.
quickesst

rather then inaugurated. By the way, I don't consider myself in that category.

Is Warren being appointed to a Cabinet post? Will he be a trusted adviser throughout Obama's presidency? Or is he just giving some sort of one-time speech and/or prayer at the Inauguration? If the latter, what difference does it make? Is it worth this much fuss?

Apparently hyper-ventilated outrage isn't just for Freepers any more. Maybe we should save it for something worthwhile. Like that birth certificate!

Your post says alot about you and empathy.

We can all see how well that worked out.

Either he made stupid mistake and should apologize, or it was on purpose and that to me is unforgivable.

It is a shameful choice.

If he were a member of the groups this man's hatred is focused on we wouldn't be here talking about this.

But he isn't gay or female. So having an anti-gay, anti-female activist is not big deal.

Shame on him if he did this to score points.

He needs to fix this NOW.

He's already gotten too many passes on his cabinet appointments and I'm out of favors...

a speech or have an honored role I'll know to take him - and you - seriously.

How many times must GLBT be the ones to give? If it were any other group being asked to compromise their dignity would it be okay to keep asking?