I don't know or care if Rick Warren is "evil".

His ideas, his philosophy, lead to evil. To be specific, his ideas lead to the acceptance of some people as less than fully human. We know how dangerous that is. And even if some of his ideas benefit society as a whole, those "good" ideas are nullified by his views on homosexuality, women, abortion, etc.

Rick Warren is more dangerous than Pat Robertson or James Dobson or the late and unlamented Jerry Falwell. He dresses up his hateful philosophy in warm fuzzy, quasi new age language. His religion is founded on exclusion no matter how often he preaches differently.

Barack Obama, as many have pointed out, broke no specific promise in having Warren play a prominent role at his inauguration. He broke something bigger: He broke the bonds of human decency. I like and admire Obama, but this was not a minor error. It's not just about a two minute prayer. This invitation confers the patina of legitimacy from the President of the United States on a man who espouses a hateful philosophy. Yes, Warren is already legitimate in the eyes of millions, but Obama's move, only reinforces that sad state of affairs.


There is now a big, ugly stain on Obama's inauguration day. What should have been a shining moment, is irrevocably marked. And Obama did it himself. This was so easily avoided.

Unlike many here, I don't think Obama is doing this because on some level he agrees with Warren. I think it stems from political calculation, but that doesn't really ameliorate what he's done. It still shows a callous indifference. I wish that weren't true. I wish there was some other way of seeing it. I've looked. I can't find it.

To me, this is by far the worst thing Obama has done. The more I think about it, the worse it is. Whatever his intention, when Obama stands with Rick Warren on the podium on January 20th, he's standing with hate, bigotry and ignorance, casting a dark shadow on what should have been a bright day.

Very well stated. However, it has been VERY interesting to watch some here trip all over themselves to parse this situation into "it's not really a big deal."

YES INDEED

:kick:

I've lost a huge amount of respect for a number of posters here who have rationalized this away and attack those who are sick about Warren being on that stage. Boy, was I wrong about them.

I thought Warren was moderate for an evangelical preacher. I knew that he opposed marriage equality, but I'd also heard that he supported increased funding for fighting AIDS, accepted global climate change as being true and advocated for working on changing that. I didn't realize that he actually was no different from Dobson or Falwell until I did a little research- and it didn't take much to recognize how truly awful he is. He's been sold by the MSM as being different from the usual breed of fundies. He's not.

or Falwell in a Hawaiian shirt. (Someone on Rachael's show said this).

He bills himself as a "stealth evangelical."

He knows.

He's not inching toward Warren's views. He's trying to get Warren to use his influence (which is not insignificant) to bring his followers more toward Obama's own views.

The answer that you are looking for is right in front of your eyes. Obama wants to build alliances in order to accomplish the most good that he can.

Would I have invited Warren? Definitely not. But this is the silliest "controversy" that I can recall.

You don't invite a raging racist (let's say, David Duke) in order to "to bring his followers more toward Obama's own views".

"Obama wants to build alliances in order to accomplish the most good that he can." Do you honestly believe having Warren speak will do this?

I am glad Obama is soon to be our president, but this, this act, is disgusting.

No, seriously? Have you paused in the midst of the torch-wielding mob and wondered to yourself, "Could the people who are trying to explain to us what Obama is doing actually know what they're talking about?"

I mean hey, it's a longshot I guess. But maybe - just maybe - somewhere on a political website that hosts what, tens of thousands of people, someone, or sometwo even, might have more a clue than you do?

...No? Thought never occurred to you? Ah well. Continue with the effigy-burning.

"No, seriously?" Have you? Have you ever stopped to think that at one point people thought slavery was justifiable? Were they all correct and the abolitionists were nothing more than a "torch-wielding mob?"

Continue with your strawman.

But we've been over your particular hate neuroses quite enough in the past, Aegis, so, I'll stick to the point.

Who's justifying Rick Warren? Please, inform me. Has Obama said something like, hell I dunno "We chose Rick Warren because he hates fags / niggers / papists / kikes / sluts (take your pick, he's covered a lot of ground!) and so do we!"

Has anyone on DU said "I think Rick Warren's views are justified because..."?

If either case has happened, then I regret missing it 'cause that would be a damn fine place for me to vent the bile from my own spleen. Please, inform me of such an occurrence.

Now you have erected your own fictional construct, your personal universe - Well, you've actually just put new furniture into the one you already had - where somehow, in some way, Obama is saying he agrees with Rick Warren's positions. That's just not the case, however. In other words, you are making shit up.

You want to be pissed at Rick Warren? Go right on ahead. I'll sharpen some goddamn stakes for you and let you have all the fun you want seeing if the fucker actually has a heart.

But, as far as Obama goes? Well, no matter how desperately you want to believe he's sitting in an office having a good maniacal cackle at the expense of gay people, he's probably not. I'm certainly not calling this his sharpest move. But I've seen enough from Obama so far to realize that he more than likely knows just what he's doing. And my guess is, this is his way of telling Rick Warren and his sort that they can either chill out or they can get out.

Not saying it'll work, and I'm not saying this is the best way - or even a good way - to do that. But I do think that's what Obama's trying to do.

"Who's justifying Rick Warren?"

Have you missed the hundreds of threads on this topic?! There have been posts "justifying" having him speak.

"Has anyone on DU said "I think Rick Warren's views are justified because..."?"

Strawman much? That is a rhetorical because I already know the answer to that one. Yes. An example..."Now you have erected your own fictional construct, your personal universe - Well, you've actually just put new furniture into the one you already had - where somehow, in some way, Obama is saying he agrees with Rick Warren's positions. That's just not the case, however. In other words, you are making shit up. "

The only one making up shit here is you. You did it though out your entire post. Making up positions I never said, much less held.

My "particular hate neuroses" only exists in your mind and those like you have their own hate neuroses.

"Justifying having him speak" is different from what you said before - "justifying his bigotry"

Also, telling you that Barack Obama isn't agreeing with Warren isn't justifying Warren's bigotry, either. It's simply correcting your mistake.

And your particular hate issues are smeared all over the I/P forum like shit on an asylum wall. Have a good day sir or ma'am (sorry, I forget which >< )

Keep making things up, if that works for you.

"Also, telling you that Barack Obama isn't agreeing with Warren isn't justifying Warren's bigotry, either. It's simply correcting your mistake." :rofl: How can you correct "my mistake," when I never said such a thing?

"And your particular hate issues are smeared all over the I/P forum like shit on an asylum wall." Project much?

I thought you were stating that people had justified Rick Warren's bigotry here on DU, due to this:

"Has anyone on DU said "I think Rick Warren's views are justified because..."?"

Strawman much? That is a rhetorical because I already know the answer to that one. Yes. An example...

I didn't recognize you were answering your own rhetorical question, and instead thought you were answering my question. My mistake there

I note you still haven't answered it.

Stick with your straw, you have it down to an art form.

I asked you whether Obama had said anything justifying Warren's bigotry. I did add to this by asking whether any DU'ers had.

You squawk about straw men a lot here, but so far, you haven't presented exactly who it is justifying Warren's bigotry, nor examples of how they are doing so. So for all practical purposes Aegis, the only straw man here is the one that you dragged up. And like all straw men, it's in definite need of a brain.

logic and sense. They want Obama's head and they'll have it. You would think Obama himself invented all of the bigotry they complain about.

are the ones who are the victims of the torch wielding mob.

be one answer to the question of why Obama would do this. I agree with your point of view.

...and political opportunism ~ I hope he'll make a statement that he wasn't aware of some of the things Warren had said, and rescind the invite.

face being dumped over the side.

You don't have to STAND for ANYTHING,
AND you get to insult those who do ! :)

The Politics of Triangulation you espouse was tried in the '90s.
The overall gains were negligible, but the cost was horrible.
The "message" of the Democratic Party became muddled and vague, lending credibility to those who said that there was "No Difference" between the parties.

Standing up for marriage equality is silly? Standing up for legal equality is silly?

I hope you're more of an ally to LGBT people offline that you are online, because if you're like this offline too then you're not friend or ally of ours. There are far, far too many homophobic bigots in the democratic party.

Are your rights being taken away, is your marriage being revoked?

:puke:

RL

I guess his sin is that he offends the wrong people.

I'd gladly attend a service in Rev. Wright's church with him in the pulpit ... and would only attend a Rick Warren service as a member of a documentary film crew recording human sewage.

But that's just me. :shrug:

and won't be making any policy decisions in the new administration!

and that's just silly. Try and refute the points I actually made.

Not me. I believe that, as you said, "there is now a big, ugly stain on Obama's inauguration day."

However, my point was simple. Barack Obama will be the president, not Rick Warren. He will make the decisions that effect you and me and everybody else, not Rick Warren.

If I felt Warren holds influence over how Obama thinks then I'd be super pissed, I'd be the first one to take off my shoes and throw them at Obama, but I don't think that is the case. That's why I'm not raging mad and not going around saying "fuck Obama" as so many are. I see absolutely no reason to believe Warren will effect the policies of Obama whatsoever.

I don't like Warren, I don't like what he stands for or approve of what he says, therefore, I refuse to grant him control over my life and happiness.

I wish Warren would not be giving this prayer at the inauguration. I also wish Obama would not be placing his had on the Bible (the original WMD in my opinion) when he is sworn in, but I learned to accept years ago that we don't always get what we want, and that life is not always fair.

So I am not letting this one ugly, unfortunate incident destroy my faith in Obama or my hope for the future.

Sorry, but that's how I feel.

Exactly how I feel.

Heck, I may have to link it next time a rabid ragemonger lays into me for not wanting to impeach Obama over this.

I gave Obama a pass on the McClurkin thing because he was trying to win an election, but there's NO reason to pander to bigots now.:thumbsdown:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=7999325&mesg_id=8005023

Good evening.

gets close to Warren he may be able to persuade HIM to be more inclusive and in doing so he will be able to persuade his followers to be more inclusive. I don't think Obama is doing this as a, "Sistah Souljah" moment. I think that Obama really does care about his GLBT constituents and is hoping to change hearts and minds of those who don't, by gaining their trust.

Cali, I have to be blunt. Right now, the hope, the joy I felt 11/4 night has evaporated for me. I don't feel the same about Obama. Now I'm seeing someone who is pandering to bigotry, to intolerance, to homophobia. That is blatantly what this is. And, even worse, to see people on here laud this choice as some sort of "political masterstroke" is simply excusing this. This is the same thing I felt when Prop 8 passed. I feel like I've been kicked in the stomach.

A lot of people are rationalizing this.

I appreciate your perspective.

tends to ignore effects.

...and 95% of it alienates the left. anyone getting the message yet?

still waiting for change.

More "change" by constantly moving to the right. :(

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpRDiZnebPE

Young Turks video with remarks on Rick Warren's stated views on gay marriage. I hope people will watch it, even the first few minutes.

If the left didn't make such an enormous fuss over his two-minute prayer, nobody would have even remembered that Rick Warren said anything.

to what happens to GLBT people wouldn't.

Those of us who are watching the campaigns to take away our rights would remember. He's going to use this to boost his celebrity and credibility, and it's going to help him campaigns against us. We're never going to be allowed to forget.

For for those of you who don't really care, and don't have to care, you're probably right. It's just a prayer, and then you can go back to ignoring people you don't really care about anyway.

I'm on the left. Where are you?

Is this your fault too, or are you only on the left when it suits you?

RL

Tapping Warren for the inauguration demonstrates that was just so much bullshit. This is nothing more than cynical politics as usual.

No change.

No difference from anything any other poltiician does.

Obama did more than make an error.

He broke a trust.

it's no surprise. Some of us remember McClurkin, and know that this is not exactly new for Obama.

"Unlike many here, I don't think Obama is doing this because on some level he agrees with Warren. I think it stems from political calculation, but that doesn't really ameliorate what he's done. It still shows a callous indifference. I wish that weren't true. I wish there was some other way of seeing it. I've looked. I can't find it."

Exactly.

And this fucker Warren doesn't represent anything that is right. Everything from his bullshit religion to his bullshit opinions on gay people and women are wrong.