Rick Warren to give rousing anti-Gay invocation.

I mean, what other reason could Obama have chosen him for except to announce that he will bring sweeping anti-Gay policies to America?

I'm sure that's what this Warren things means; That Obama has declared war on the GLBT community.

Given the outrage, there's just no other possible conclusion.

Unfortunate that you still think fit to put it here.

:puke:

and play the "contrarian," does he?

And gay-related threads never miss an opportunity to condemn people out-of-hand.

Sell you shit somewhere else--everybody here knows exactly what your little game is.

That, and the fact that you need to misrepresent my positions only proves that outrage is more important to you than reason.

Where did I EVER defend this guy?

I didn't.



I'm defending the Democratic President Elect on a Democratic message board where people are trying to convince others that this pick must mean that Obama is anti-gay. That's simply neither rational nor reasonable.


If my trying to be rational is a 'game', then maybe you need to learn the rules to it yourself.

He just deleted it from GLBT and reposted it here.

I have no problem with people expressing outrage, but answer this question;

Are you so sure that this pick means Obama will establish an anti-gay agenda?


Look, all the hand-wringing and wild speculation on 'what this MUST mean' is just that; speculation.

As I've said before, I plan on being rational and not judging Obama until he actually does something to curtail or hinder the pursuit of equal rights.

I think the Warren pick might have been insensitive. If this Warren character is as horrible as everyone says he is, then it was a bad choice. But for crying out loud, it doesn't make Obama a homophobe.

I'll wait for Obama to do something homophobic before I start the witch hunt. That's all.


Oh, and witch hunting makes me :puke: too.

Picking a homophobic, sexist, anti-semite just "might" be offensive?

Oh boy.

Obviously Obama deliberately slighted them when he picked Rahm Emanuel... and that was a position in the administration!

Oh, wait, NOW I get it! Obama was just trying to piss off his new chief of staff by picking Warren!

That must be it!


Do you really not get what I'm saying?

If you can interpret this choice for the invocation to be a deliberate insult, then you pretty much have to look at all his other picks and realize that Obama just hates everyone.

Right?

Please... just think about it.

:eyes:

condemnation of Obama over this pick is weak right now.

When He actually does something to screw with people's rights, I'll be all over him. Until then, is there any chance we can wait for him to actually become President before trying to get him impeached?

Just a thought.

And we sure saw what happened then. A rousing endorsement of that "ex-gay" shite.

And you had to make an effort to post it there before you deleted it.

It looks like someone is itching to rub salt in some wounds.

So, it must have been deliberate, eh?

What's it like to know everything without ever asking questions?

That is why there is such outrage.

Richardson, Clinton, FISA, etc.

I agree. If the guy is as big a jerk as some are making him out to be, then sure... he really doesn't deserve to be there.

It's just really disappointing watching people I care about lose their minds over this.


So far, I've been called a 'homophobe' for the horrific crime of asking not to be labeled a 'homophobe' just because I've suggested this isn't a one-issue nation. I don't have much tolerance for irrational hysteria because it's just not constructive.


What reasonable thing, aside from letting Obama's people know how disappointing this is, should we do?

Call for him to step down?
Is this enough to convince anyone that Obama has an anti-gay agenda?


Some of the outrage is reasonable, but some is just ridiculous.

the threat and influence of people like him affects the lives and well being of others.

A couple years back I was berating a gay DUer for not wanting to out gay Republicans that pushed an anti-gay agenda. I made the exact same point you just did; these people must be exposed for the damage they do to the lives of other.

I got an earful then too.

It's not 'offensive' to me at all, and I fully agree that choosing Warren shouldoffend people.

What I don't agree with is the conclusion that Obama has done this to deliberately slap the GLBT community in the face. If he has, then we'll know after he's been president for a while.

It's just too premature right now to go ballistic and call for his resignation.

preacher he could invite instead

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=100204&mesg_id=100204

should be rescinded.

I just can't believe that the choice means Obama has declared war on the GLBT community.

is right. :eyes:

Warren was a bad pick.
Much of the outrage is justified.
Some of it is just foolish.

I will never be 'sensitive' to irrational outrage no matter how much my failure to do so outrages people.

the GLBT forum to do it. he thrives on moments like this to go after us.

You're the one 'coming into GDP'.

I go to threads on TGP. If TGP is full of anti-Obama threads because picking a guy like Warren is supposed to represent the end of equal rights in America, then I point out how ridiculous that is and defend Obama.

Welcome to Democratic Underground.


Want to try and have a rational discussion? Then tell me just what this pick actually means and I'll likely agree with you. Unfortunately, most of the hysterical folks around here just want a fight.

Which one are you?

and renounces his opposition to same-sex marriage.

How about that? Deal?

You can pick up the phone and try to convince the Reverend to do that, ok? Thanks so much.

I would gladly (as well as effectively and thoroughly) crush anyone in a debate on SS marriage.

Convincing a Bible-thumper is another feat entirely.

If I succeed, you'll be the first I report back to.

Deal.


Meanwhile, why on Earth would you be 'giddy' about it otherwise? I'm not you and even I think the guy's an idiot and the pick was wrong. No one's asking you to be 'giddy' about anything.

I'm not that shocked though.

Democratic leaders (like Barack) are generally supportive of gay rights- but there are limits. They have to remain electable. It's not right, but it is a reason for something like this. I don't know if this is what Barack is doing, but it seems like it.

I have a lot of sympathy for gay people over this. They can either stay with the democrats, whose leaders have made it clear they are not 100% behind full equality or vote republican- who just hate gay people altogether.

Maybe that's the problem with the two party system. People have to accept the lesser of two evils.