Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

This isn't just about Warren

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 02:53 PM
Original message
This isn't just about Warren
Edited on Tue Dec-30-08 03:30 PM by dsc
Honestly if Howard Dean had won in 2004, or even John Kerry for that matter, and decided to have Warren give the Invocation I doubt there would have been as much problem as has been evidenced now. That is because both Dean and Kerry had solid, public, pro gay and pro choice records and didn't diss gays in their primary runs. I was a solid Dean man. I felt on both gay and non gay issues he was the better candidate. But I never distrusted Kerry on gay issues.

This time around frankly I don't trust Obama. He has very little public record on gay rights. He voted for but never really campaigned for an ENDA style bill in Illinois. He voted against the marriage amendment. He was absent on the votes for both hate crimes and ENDA. In the meantime, his campaign in SC opened with a Gospel concert featuring McClurkin who not only sang but preached about God delivering him from the sin of homosexuality. The campaign then lied about what happened and never issued an apology. Then Obama went months without giving a single, solitary interview to any gay publication, including ones which endorsed him. Finally, after he won the nomination, he reached out to gays to some extent. Gays returned the favor by voting for him 70 to 23. Now, about a month and a half later we have an anti gay reverend named to give the Invocation, no evidence at all that any gays were considered for his cabinet (we had a half hearted look at Ms. Maxwell for Labor but the job was given to a less qualified candidate), and a statement that ending DADT will take over two years. I sincerely hope I am wrong. But all signs point to us being a last place priority for President Obama and Warren was literally the last straw in that. This, coupled with the treatment of those of us with this viewpoint, is why you are seeing these threads and the bitter anger. I hope in several months you all can say we told you so to those of us who feel this way. Somehow I really doubt it.

On edit, no where do I say now, nor did I say any place else that Dean supported gay marriage. You will note that in the paragraph about Obama I don't even mention marriage equality. Warren is anti gay not only for his prop 8 behavior but for his belief in curing us and his unwillingness to permit gays to be members of his church.











Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. He is also more overtly religious than was Dean or Kerry.
Edited on Tue Dec-30-08 02:57 PM by PassingFair
This shouldn't have surprised anyone.

I still believe that Obama was the only
candidate that could have pulled this
election off for the Dems.

On edit:

There is no doubt in my mind that Dean
would NEVER have accepted the "opportunity"
to debate at Saddleback.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Critters2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
63. Interesting. Dean and Obama are both UCC. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #63
65. My impression of Gov. Dean was that he and his wife kept their religious practice fairly private...
... which I appreciate in a politician, frankly. He was born Christian and she is Jewish, and about all I know is that they have managed to blend their lives and that neither of them has converted to the other's religion.

Barack Obama, on the other hand, IS a convert. He's clear in Dreams from My Father that his mother's interest in religion was primarily "anthropological" (which sounds like my own mother) and that he came to the Christian faith and church membership as an adult. Religion and church membership filled a hole in him that I don't think he realized needed filling until then.

So Dean and Obama have different religious sensibilities, as far as I can tell.

Then there's the matter of the times we live in. Until the !@#$% Culture Wars, politicians didn't talk about their religion except in generalities; it was good to be seen to attend church, but sermons were for preachers. Thanks to the intentionally-divisive Culture Wars we Democrats found ourselves on the losing end of a long streak of elections in which religiosity and "family values" were talked about ad nauseum, and Democrats got painted as the party of baby-killing atheists.

So do we want to keep losing or do we want to adapt to the times and start winning elections again? Do we want any chance at all of getting Democratic policies enacted, or do we want to go on dividing ourselves worse than the GOP ever did?

Barack Obama is a young politician with a clean record, and he can talk the language of faith in public when he has to. Thank God he got out of Illinois politics when he did. But as a relatively young politician he's also getting used to what will and will not fly on the national stage. A few more terms in Washington might have taught him greater caution -- but by then he wouldn't have been a young guy with a clean record any more, would he? He might have gotten much better at dissembling, though.

I think I'll take him as he is now, and watch him grow in office. He hasn't even been sworn in yet.

Hekate



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Critters2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #65
66. Dean has always been active in UCC congregations, both in Burlington and Montpelier.
Edited on Thu Jan-01-09 10:43 PM by mycritters2
I once interviewed for a call at the Montpelier church, years ago, when Dean was Lt. Governor. He was chair of the search committee. I was offered the call, btw, but had already been offered a call nearer my family. It would've been interesting to be Howard Dean's pastor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #66
68. Thanks for the info; altho I worked on the Dean campaign I didn't study him the way I did Obama...
... and being way out here on the Left Coast there wasn't a lot "in the air" about the Vermont governor.

How long have you been "pastoring"? It must be a very challenging career.

Hekate


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Critters2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #68
69. 22 years, September 14. Yeah, it can be challenging, but rewarding at times as well.
I do think Dean is quieter about his faith, but he is an active church member.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurityOfEssence Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #1
64. I'm callin' that BAD, not good
Keeping the supernatural out of reality is necessary for a fair and functional government.

Also, feigning moral uprightness by the hoary standby shortcut of religion is not the sign of an honest person.

Besides all that, I simply don't feel that religion is "good". At best it's neutral, and at its worst, it's an excuse for acting badly, a handy set of tools to allow one to screw other people over, and a dangerous tampering with the workings of the mind by holding something that's mere conjecture, guesswork and "hope" up as superior to the causal universe that can be seen and proven.

Unleashing the hounds of certainty NEVER does the majority good.

Cozying up to the entrenched forces of sanctimoniousness brings one to endorse all sorts of uglinesses in the name of the supposed greater good, and ones who do it as a matter of policy are morally suspect. Those who tinker with this fire are either shockingly arrogant to think that there won't be unexpected negative backlashes, and those who do so repeatedly leave themselves doubly vulnerable, since they've empowered the voices of unquestionable intellectual aristocracy. Mr. Obama's played with fire, and there's a fee attendant upon that.

Religions (okay, the MAJOR versions of it) are inherently anti-pluralist, anti-thought, anti-science, anti-change and promote mental illness, misogyny, iron-poor blood, and bad fashion choices. Why are more conservatives religious? Conservatism is the arrogance of certainty, dislike of difference to the extent of outlawing it, hatred of change and an embedded feeling of latent differences of value for individual humans. Religion is effectively the same thing.

The premise that's pervasive in society, even among many avowed non-believers and anti-believers, is that religion is inherently somewhat good. Strip Christianity down to the one single function that mortals are supposed to do in their transient audition of an earthly life, and it's this: save your own ass. Save yourself so you can get patted on the head and hang out forever with the ultimate celebrity while the rest of those losers writhe in all sorts of creative horror. (Presumably, hell is in full view from heaven, or what would be the point?) Think this is a pretty pathetic values set even for a basic fantasy eternity death cult? Other religions are worse. Islam's much worse.

Ah well, at least the deficit will be increased by more faith-based spending...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
2. It's his 3rd go 'round with preacher problems.
Edited on Tue Dec-30-08 02:58 PM by MookieWilson
Hey 'Bam, let Michelle pick the next one, okay?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbieo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I had never heard of Preacher Warren prior to this fiasco with Obama - I'm not religious, I don't
I don't have cable or listen to talk radio. From what I have read at the onset of this mess, Obama did not choose Warren to speak at his Inagural. He was chosen either by Pelosi or Feinsten and Obama approved of the selection. Why aren't these women being chastised along with him???

After reading countless threads about the man I think he is a complete horse's ass BUT what is Obama supposed to do about the choice now?

All I can see is that he is damned if he does something about it and damned if he doesn't. What are his alternatives?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. that is ludricrous
sorry but if you seriously believe that Obama had no part in this selection you are naive beyond belief. It is his inaguration and he chose it all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #6
23. It's a real stretch of logic, isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DRoseDARs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #4
35. Feinstein said pointblank she had nothing to do with it, that it was Obama.
Rev. Wright was slated to give the invocation on the stage Obama announced his candidacy, but was pulled last minute. Team Obama knew back then that he'd be a problem for them and so uninvited him. Yeah, it'd be harder (much higher-profile political drama) but they can uninvite Warren too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #2
45. 'Bam?
uh huh. The primaries are over, but hey, you wanna use freeper speech, go for it, dear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #2
67. Obama had to be publicly scolded by Hillary just to get him to denounce Farrakhan
Then there was his comment about "girlie" dogs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jamastiene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
3. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lamp_shade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
5. Awgeeze
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
7. Don't let facts get in the way of your opinion
Is Howard Dean for or against gay marriage?

He's against it. Look it up.

So Obama has "little public record on gay rights"? Really? Then why did the Human Rights Campaign, a GLBT interest group that many look to for gay rights issues, give Obama an 89% for his record supporting gay rights? Are they stupid or misinformed?

Hey, you're the guy with the answers, so feel free to write them and tell them they were also suckers for endorsing Obama for President based on his record on gay rights and equal civil rights issues.

Supply us with a coherent response by the Human Rights Campaign is wrong in their assessment...

Also, tell us why this is not correct information:

Barack Obama and Gay Rights in Illinois:
Barack Obama supported gay rights during his Illinois Senate tenure. He sponsored legislation in Illinois that would ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Barack Obama in the United States Senate:
Every two years the Human Rights Campaign, the largest national gay and lesbian organization, issues a scorecard for members of the Senate based on their sponsorship and voting on key issues of importance to gay and lesbian citizens. Barack Obama scored 89 out of 100% in the 2006 scorecard. Here's how HRC rated Obama:

Barack Obama on Hate Crimes:
Barack Obama co-sponsored legislation to expand federal hate crimes laws to include crimes perpetrated because of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Employment Non-Discrimination:
Barack Obama supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and believes it should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell - Gays in the Military:
Barack Obama believes we need to repeal the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy and allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military. His campaign literature says, "The key test for military service should be patriotism, a sense of duty, and a willingness to serve."

Gay & Lesbian Adoption:
Barack Obama believes gays and lesbians should have the same rights to adopt children as heterosexuals.

Barack Obama and Gay Marriage/ Civil Unions:
Although Barack Obama has said that he supports civil unions, he is against gay marriage. In an interview with the Chicago Daily Tribune, Obama said, "I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."

Barack Obama did vote against a Federal Marriage Amendment and opposed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996.

He said he would support civil unions between gay and lesbian couples, as well as letting individual states determine if marriage between gay and lesbian couples should be legalized.

"Giving them a set of basic rights would allow them to experience their relationship and live their lives in a way that doesn't cause discrimination," Obama said. "I think it is the right balance to strike in this society."

Sources: Chicago Daily Tribune, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force

http://lesbianlife.about.com/od/lesbianactivism/p/BarackObama.htm



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Who cares?
Outrage is in.

:sarcasm:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. I didn't say Dean supported gay marriage
he didn't. I did say, and stand behind, the fact Dean put his career on the line for gay rights and thus earned our trust. As to the rest, yes he has voted for the bills I said he did (not they don't say he voted to end DADT because as I said he didn't). I don't dispute he has said the right words, it is the actions I wonder about. Oh and the HRC endorsed D'Amato, Smith, and Chaffee so it isn't exactly the gold standard. Again, I hope I am wrong but I see the hand writing on the wall, as you surely would if Hillary had won and didn't name a single AA to the cabinet. I would imagine that you wouldn't take solace in a good rating from the NAACP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. OK, so if HRC isn't the "gold standard" for GLBT issues, what is...
Let's see the list and I'll see who they endorsed for President in 2008.

BTW, what did you mean by "I would imagine that you wouldn't take solace in a good rating from the NAACP."???

Obama has a 100% rating from the NAACP. I think 100 is the highest number that goes for a rating...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. Under my senario with Hillary
her rating is quite good I am sure but you surely wouldn't be taking that as solace if Hillary had named no AA to the cabinet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. I can't tell if you are back-peddling or not...
Obama CLEARLY has a great record with gay rights and CLEARLY has a great record on civil rights issues, including equality for all.

As for Hillary, are you pissed at her because she participated in Rick Warren's AIDS Conference in 2007? Does this pass your purity test?

I'd recommend you actually look at Obama's record and not lie about it. You can trust him or not, but please use a spoonful of truth in your opinion if possible.

As for Dean, he signed civil union legislation when he was governor. Prior to that, he didn't have much of a record on gay rights. It is true, however, that he has nearly identical opinions on gay rights issues as Obama (http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/workschool/p/howarddean.htm).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. that is a total lie
Dean signed a gay rights bill, signed a hate crimes bill before he signed the civil union bill. Those aren't my opinions, those are the facts, as repeatedly documented here. As to Obama's record, I have stated it accurately. He voted for a gay rights bill in Illinios, but didn't campaign for it. He voted against the federal marriage amendment. I accurately reported what he did. You, on the other had, lied through your teeth about Dean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #22
32. Listen, I am on your side...
As for Obama's record on gay rights, you refuse to see the truth. That's your choice.

Your disdain for Obama is based on misinformation. Congratulations.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #32
36. Point out where I am wrong
I will admit that he missed alot of votes for the good reason of running for President. But miss them he did and we are left with a fairly skimpy public record of actual votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. Obama had a stronger record on gay rights than the other candidates you've mentioned
when you look at what he did while in Illinois, that makes it the most clear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-08 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #11
40. Again, get the facts straight. The fact that Obama opposes DOMA,
DADT and supports ENDA are steps in the right direction. Let's wait and see what he does. If he doesn't move the agenda forward, then hold his feet to the fire. But, know what you're talking about before you go down this road.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phx_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
8. FYI. Howard Dean is against gay marriage, but for civil unions
just like Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #8
47. That's Not the Point So Much
As Dean's actions in the 2000 gubernatorial campaign, where he put a Civil Unions law at the very center of his re-election campaign.

Vermont doesn't have a Castro Street or an entertainment industry with concentrated voting clout, and yet Dean put his ass on the line for the sake of fair play.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
10. I disagree with you. I don't think there would have been any mention of it
if Dean, Kerry, or even Clinton chose Warren. I don't like Warren but if he had been chosen for any other guy/gal's invocation, I still would not know who Warren is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hanse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
12. Yeah, it isn't just about Warren, it's about the primaries.
Obama's record on gay rights and women's rights is as strong as Dean and Kerry's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. tell that to the several gay supporters of Obama who have posted
I won't name them as that is against the rules but go to the LGBT forum and look around. If you wish I will PM you with their names.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
17. Don't forget the work he did helping to pass Prop 8

Standing before Rick Warren's audience at the Saddleback debate and announcing to the world his religious views on marriage. This statement was used by Yes on 8 people in ads and robocalls and could very well be what pushed it over the top. Stating that Obama actually opposed Prop 8 is not good enough because his opposition was not nearly as widely publicized.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. So you admit that the proponents of Prop 8 did a better job
of publicizing their side than did the opponents of Prop 8 and you are blaming Obama for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #18
24. Yes they did a much better job and leaders of No on 8 deserve blame as well...

but Obama gave Yes on 8 quite a push by reaffirming his personal religious beliefs at such a highly publicized and watched event. How many $millions would this have been worth to the Yes on 8 people? How much more was it worth to them to use this sound byte in their ads?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. You can't blame Obama for the opponents not getting out the truth.
The opponents seemed to have dropped the ball in other ways.
http://twodown48togo.wordpress.com/2008/11/24/prop-8-town-hall-it-was-almost-a-dismissive-response/

If HRC had won the primary, they would have used her words to support Prop 8 and the opponents would have done a poor job of getting the truth out.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #17
26. Obama should never have participated in that debate
it was beneath him. I found out everything I needed to know about the Saddleback Church then, and I was appalled.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
20. You seem to forget.
Edited on Tue Dec-30-08 03:49 PM by merh


Obama is a lawyer that taught constitutional law. That makes him not only knowledgeable about the constitution, it makes him well aware of how vital the constitution is to the nation's existence.

Did you know that the constitution provided for and protected slavery? That is why the 13th and 14th amendments had to be adopted, to make the slaves free and to ensure that the states would afford them that freedom.

When Obama was asked about a marriage amendment he said he was not in favor of the same because marriage is not defined in the constitution. He is correct and that is a huge distinction, a very important consideration.

That is what folks do not understand, as a constitutional lawyer he knows the constitution and the importance of abiding by it.

He personally may be against same sex marriage because of his religious views but as a lawyer and as the leader of this nation, he knows what the constitution provides and that is equality under the law for all.

And if folks have some suspicion about whether distinctions can be made please keep in mind that there are catholic and mormon and other religious men serving as judges that grant divorces. Their religions may not approve of divorce but they took an oath to follow the law and their state laws do afford citizens the right to get divorced.

Good leaders do not let their religious views interfere with their role as guardians of the constitution. I believe Obama will be that type of leader. I believe you underestimate all he knows and understands about equal protection under the law.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #20
31. What would be great...

is if Obama could publically address Warren and his following by saying that, although he is aligned with them in his religious beliefs about marriage, that he also believes in separation of church and state where it comes to the Constitution and that civil rights come first. I realize that this should go without saying, but it would mean a lot if someone in his position could stress this point directly to the Religious Right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #31
33. that would be great
and who knows, maybe he will.

I think that his publicly saying he was against the marriage amendment during the campaign is a step in that direction.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ronnykmarshall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
21. I will not allow you to ruin this for the rest of us!
I will not allow you to ruin this for the rest of us!
I will not allow you to ruin this for the rest of us!
I will not allow you to ruin this for the rest of us!
I will not allow you to ruin this for the rest of uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuusssssssssssss!!!!!!!!


:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MikeE Donating Member (637 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
27. I'm going to be cautiously optimistic...
but, if things don't move quickly enough, let's face it, with everything that is going on, including the rise in hate crimes, we, the LGBT community, are energized and ready for a fight. I don't think it would be that difficult to organize nationwide protests in June for Pride, (make it part of the events). We should really know where we stand before then, and that will tell us what we need to do and how to proceed.

I am going to wait till the new administration actually takes office and has some time to do things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 05:38 PM
Response to Original message
28. I got suspicious of Warren's motives on AIDS relief
and found this tasty little article, that implies that Warren had a very heavy hand in directing legislation that tied AIDS funding to abstinence-only education and lack of birth control.

So when someone tries to tell you that Warren is a good guy, just point this out to them.



http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2008/12/19/untold-consequences-rick-warrens-aids-activism
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
29. If Dennis Kucinich had tapped Warren to become....
...America's Pastor, I would be every bit as upset.

It is NOT about the person.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
30. Kerry fully supported Massachusetts' version of Prop 8
He came out in support of an amendment that would have effectively invalidated marriages already in place in his home state:

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/02/26/kerry_backs_state_ban_on_gay_marriage/

Sorry, but saying Obama is somehow a special case when the politicians you cite as different have arguably worse positions on gay rights is a little strange.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-08 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #30
37. Yeah. What's with the double standard?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-08 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #30
41. BS
Edited on Wed Dec-31-08 01:51 PM by ProSense
Just because the writer interjected editorial BS, Kerry never said he supported anything resembling Prop 8.

"If the Massachusetts Legislature crafts an appropriate amendment that provides for partnership and civil unions, then I would support it, and it would advance the goal of equal protection," the senator said yesterday, stressing that he was referring only to the state, and not the federal, Constitution. He has said he would oppose any amendment that did not include a provision for civil unions. "I think that you need to have civil union. That's my position," he said Tuesday.


KERRY ENDORSED BY HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN FOR HIS LEADERSHIP ON GLBT RIGHTS

BOSTON – The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) has announced it is endorsing John Kerry for re-election to the U.S. Senate.

"I am honored to have the endorsement of the Human Rights Campaign, one of the savviest, most respected and most influential political, civil rights and human rights organizations in our country," said Kerry. "When you’re in a fight to change our country, you can always count on HRC to be there with you in the trenches, and there’s no better ally in the fight to advance the cause of freedom and equality for all Americans. I have been proud to work with the Human Rights Campaign for close to 25 years now in the U.S. Senate. We’ve fought together to combat AIDS, including our fight this year in the Foreign Relations Committee to lift the HIV Travel Ban, to pass the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act, to end discrimination in the workplace through ENDA, and to work toward the day when same-sex couples are granted the same rights other Americans take for granted. We’ve spent a lot of our energy these last years stopping bad things from happening with a Republican in the White House. We’ve been proud to fight those fights, but I can’t begin to tell you how much I look forward to serving in a bigger, stronger Democratic majority in Congress under a Democratic president so we can wage and win the progress we’ve been waiting for and which the community deserves."

“Senator Kerry has been an outspoken leader for GLBT equality in the United States Senate. Most recently, Senator Kerry’s leadership was crucial to the advancement of legislation to lift the discriminatory HIV travel ban. We are pleased to endorse Senator Kerry for re-election and look forward to working with him on achieving equality for our community,” said Joe Solmonese, President of the Human Rights Campaign.

Kerry has a long record of fighting for equal rights for all gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgendered (GLBT) Americans.

Twenty-four years ago, one of Kerry’s first acts as Senator was to introduce a bill prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. He supports passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and has adopted a nondiscrimination policy for his Congressional offices based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

He is an original co-sponsor of the Hate Crimes Prevention bill, which would extend federal jurisdiction over serious, violent hate crimes. It would also finally include crimes motivated by sexual orientation and sexual identity to be considered hate crimes.

Kerry also introduced the HIV Nondiscrimination in Travel and Immigration Act that would repeal the outdated, misguided provision in the Immigration and Nationality Act, which bars HIV positive individuals from entering the United States, including HIV positive family members, doctors and experts, as well as refugees seeking asylum. This long standing ban against those with HIV only serves to stigmatize the disease and discriminate against those infected.

In 1990, Kerry cosponsored the first Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency Act (CARE)—which represents the largest discretionary federal investment in treating individuals with HIV and AIDS. Kerry also sponsored the Vaccines for the New Millennium Act, aimed at boosting contributions to the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, a non-profit group working to promote development of an HIV vaccine in 2000. Kerry also introduced the U.S. Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria Act, which would increase the federal funding of international HIV/AIDS efforts from approximately $1.7 billion in 2003 to $1.9 billion in 2004. This effort led to the Act’s unanimous passage in May 2003. AIDS activists have characterized Kerry as one of Congress’s top leaders on HIV/AIDS policy.

During the Clinton Administration, Kerry opposed the White House’s “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Policy.” He was one of a few senators to testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee and call on the President to rescind the ban on gay and lesbian service members.

Kerry has repeatedly said that same-sex couples should be granted rights, including access to pensions, health insurance, family medical leave, bereavement leave, hospital visitation, survivor benefits, and other basic legal protections, that all families and children need. He has supported legislation to provide domestic partners of federal employees the benefits available to spouses of federal employees including the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act. He was one of 14 Senators -- and the only one up for reelection in 1996 -- to oppose the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Here in Massachusetts, just last spring, Kerry worked with Governor Deval Patrick and progressive legislators to help defeat a narrow and discriminatory constitutional amendment that would have banned same sex marriage in Massachusetts.

The HRC is America’s largest civil rights organization working to achieve gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality. Altogether, HRC endorsed 14 Senators or candidates for Senate it says will continue advancing the issues the campaign cares about. In 2006, the HRC and its 700,000 members were involved in 200 House and Senate races. Their candidates won 94% of those races.


Kerry has one of the best records in Congress (PDF) and has been one of the strongest advocates of gay rights.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #41
43. I'm sorry the truth hurts
I'm sorry, but Kerry's position is very much in line with California's dilemma. What Kerry was ok with was civil unions. However, he was willing to oppose marriage to the poinbt of amendment. It's there, in his own words, no embellishment required.

California faces a similar decision. The state had domestic partnerships that granted many of the same rights as marriage - the two were virtually indistunguishable - but the Supreme Court said no, separate is not in fact equal. And so it became a ballot issue.

Kerry would have effectively sided on the Prop 8 position. Civil unions or not, marriage is man and woman only, and that's how voters should direct their sentiments.

You can whitewash his position all you like, but the practical truth is that Kerry was very much shielding marriage from the gays in his home state because he figured it'd earn him votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #43
61. "Kerry would have effectively sided on the Prop 8 position." Nonsense. n/t



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-08 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
34. Instead of being glad you have someone that actually values
Law you stay stuck at who you wanted to win. Obama has a good record on gay rights but Warren is suddenly making him a gay basher. Believe what you want. At the end of the day your candidate is not President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-08 01:40 PM
Response to Original message
38. Obama is gracious to a fault.
Or so it would seem. His inclusiveness policy has rubbed many DU'ers the wrong way from time to time. The reactionary rending of garments makes way to a view of the bigger picture.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-08 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #38
42. I called it naivete.
:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #42
58. so have many others
This isn't on-line yet, but the SF Chronicle had an Op-Ed today entitled "Obama, Lincoln, and High Souls" by Donald Van de Mark.

Last paragraph: Of course, Obama's adversaries, including his chosen secretary of state, have called him naive. All of those that demonstrate goodwill toward their enemies are accused of this. But it is only magnanimous leaders such as Lincoln, who deftly wield both hard and soft power, who change history for the better.

Truthfully, the jury is still out in my head on how Obama will do. I suspect I require hard evidence and that can't happen until after 1-20-09. I remain unmoved and unconvinced by the predictions here at DU. The only thing I believe with any certainty is that there are as many reasons to be hopeful as there are to not.

Again, time will tell.

Happy New Year!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #58
60. Lincoln's VP worked out really well, now didn't it
I have to say this focus on Lincoln is scary to some extent. This team of rivals thing didn't work out all that well all the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #60
62. The show starts 1-20-09. Preemptive reviews don't hold water.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #58
70. here's the piece I referenced:
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Obama, Lincoln & High Souls
http://vandemark.blogspot.com/

Much is being made of President-elect Barack Obama’s appointment of powerful competitors to his cabinet. The comparison is to Abraham Lincoln and specifically to Doris Kearns Goodwin’s book, “Team of Rivals, The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln”.

But dare we hope that the comparison goes further? Not just that Obama is secure enough to share power with some of his toughest rivals but that he’s also as magnanimous as Lincoln? Obama does appear to be immune to petty jealousies and resentments – magnanimity’s first definition. But does he live up to the Oxford Dictionary’s three other definitions, is Obama “great in courage… high-souled, lofty of purpose”?

We don’t know yet. But, the telltale signs are good: Simply entering the Presidential race requires courage, Obama’s call to tackle big, long simmering challenges in a bi-partisan way demonstrates lofty purpose. But whether or not Obama is “high-souled” I believe will depend on how he leads -- not just America but the world.

Abraham Lincoln based his political philosophy and his presidency on the fundamental, Constitutional idea that “all men are created equal”. From that flowed a set of governing principles that led inevitably to the end of slavery and the extension of liberty. Equality before the law is so lofty, so high-souled that it withstood monumental bigotry and The Civil War.

What is Obama’s great idea? Change, civil discourse and pragmatic problem solving -- yes of course, but it also seems to be empathy, even magnanimity to one’s adversaries, thus the appointment of Hillary Rodham Clinton as Secretary of State. If Mr. Obama continues to reach out this way he may legitimately be compared to Lincoln. He would gain consensus for real progress halting climate change, reforming healthcare, even overhauling entitlement programs. One can even hope for a true reduction in the terrorist threat because such a President, a person who is magnanimous to our enemies could change minds globally.

Magnanimity is the ultimate soft power, a power that candidate Obama hinted at when he said he would be willing to meet with enemy leaders without condition. This is the kind of courage and lofty purpose that can broker real peace in the mid-east, the kind of high-souled being that squelches the fires of hate that are fanned by Islamic radicals.

Of course Obama’s adversaries, including his new Secretary of State, have called him naïve. All those who demonstrate goodwill to their enemies are accused of this. But it is only magnanimous leaders such as Lincoln, who wield both hard and soft power who change history for the better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-08 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
39. Apparently you don't know anything about Obama's record on reproductive rights
and gay/lesbian issues. Please look at his record. And while you're at it, take a look at BOTH Dean and Kerry's position on these issues and you will find that Obama, Dean, Kerry and Hillary ALL hold the exact same positions.

Be angry about Obama inviting Warren, but please get your facts straight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
44. Obama actually has MORE of a public record supporting GLBT rights than Dean
and much more of a record of speaking out for those rights. Sorry, you don't actually know Dean's record.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #44
46. Those pesky facts do tend to get in the way, don't they. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #46
49. why let facts get in the way of an Obama hate-on?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #46
51. see post 50 cali is totally wrong
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #51
52. And you are trying to twist Obama's record. Yes, he is
boneheaded for inviting Warren. But the smears are over-the-top. IMO.

I'm done, because I don't want to argue with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #52
53. I have asked over and over again
for where I am wrong and no one has pointed out where I am wrong. Obama has had two public votes on gay issues, and I have given him credit for both. I have also stated that he has taken public stands in favor of ENDA and hate crimes on the federal level but the simple fact is he has no record of taking these stands in a high profile way. Dean did. You don't get to make crap up and then accuse others of doing so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #51
55. no, I'm not. YOU are ignorant about the fight for glbt rights in Vermont
and Dean's non-participation on those issues. Thank him for signing advances into law, but no way did he fight for those advances.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #44
50. that is baldly false
Dean signed the Vermont ENDA bill in 1991. Dean appointed both the first gay man to the Vermont House and the first gay judge in Vermont. Before the civil unions bill he made it easier for gays to adopt. He also signed the Vermont hate crimes law. Plus he put his seat on the line to secure civil unions. You are either totally uniformed or lying through your teeth to state that Dean has less of a record on gay rights than Obama who voted for two bills.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #50
54. Please. Howard Dean wasn't interested in GLBT rights when he was gov here
I like dean a lot, but those of us who actually worked on those issues at the state house know damned well that he had little interest in the issues. And that's no secret here in VT. Yeah, he signed ENDA and the adoption law, but he didn't exactly put any of his poltical capitol into supporting those issues. And he sure did NOT put his seat on the line to sign the civil union law. He wasn't running again, to begin with, and he had NO FUCKING CHOICE in the matter. Furthermore, Doug Racine, the Lt. Gov was for marriage, and Dean was staunchly against it.

I like Howard. I'm glad he didn't oppose GLBT rights, but he NEVER fought for any of the advances in GLBT rights that we achieved here in VT during his tenure.

YOU know jackshit about the struggle for GLBT rights in my state. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #54
56. all of those are baldly false
Dean did run again after signing civil unions. He signed in April and ran in Nov. This isn't my opinion but solid fact. According to David Moats, who wrote a book on the subject, Dean singlehandedly saved the civil unions bill when the legislature was about to scuttle it. Again, not my opinion but solid undisputed fact. Even if you discount the adoption, hate crimes, and ENDA as not having spent capital it still would equal what Obama did making Dean still having done more. You have every right to your own opinion but you don't have a right to make shit up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #56
57. I know David and I've read his really good book on civil unions
you're right about Dean running again. He was running against one of the more hapless repuke candidates fielded in the state, wingnut Ruth Dwyer.

And YOU have no right to pretend to know what Dean did in a state you have no clue about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #57
59. The truth is on my side here
you said he wasn't running again when he signed civil unions, but he was. You said he didn't support civil unions legislation when he did. And he actually had two opponents in that election, which matters as he needed 50% of the vote to win, which he barely got.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-01-09 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
48. Bottom line, you don't trust him. Your loss, I'm afraid. I do.
Now I will eject myself from further discussion, knowing this will never ever end well for either of us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
71. That is a good post, dcs. Thanks!
I finding it amusing that Obama defenders are spending a significant amount of energy supporting him by pointing out that other major Dem leaders are on the wrong side of civil rights, as well.

It as though we are supposed to accept Obama's support of a bigot if they can prove that other Dems are assholes, too!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 05:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC