"One of the last things our country needs is a White House that has Christian right on speed dial"

from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution

...At the very least, Obama has symbolically abandoned his own denomination, the United Church of Christ, which is at the cutting edge of the social gospel. He has honored the Southern Baptist Convention, which at its core advances a privatized and individualized gospel. These two bodies occupy opposite wings of Christian faith.

Given Obama’s campaign of carefully crafted symbolism, one should not underestimate the meaning of his decision to enlist a Southern Baptist Note: "It's Only One Prayer" Rick Warren to say the opening prayer at the inauguration.

If he is signaling a shift in his theological vision, then his moral vision is devolving.

Let’s not forget it was the leadership of a Christian tradition that privatizes faith that championed the war against Iraq, backed economic favors for the wealthy, opposed addressing climate change and did nothing to push the Bush White House to care for the marginalized in our world.

On the other hand, those who heard the biblical imperative to do justice are the ones who warned against war, criticized tax breaks for the wealthy, advocated for initiatives to address climate change and spoke up for the poor and powerless.

One of the last things our country needs is a White House that has the Christian right on speed dial, legitimizes its leadership and validates its theology.

We know where that kind of theology leads. What we don’t know is where Obama’s theology is now leading him.

http://www.ajc.com/services/content/printedition/2009/01/04/parhamed.html

By Robert Parham
Sunday, January 04, 2009
Robert Parham is executive director of the Baptist Center for Ethics in Nashville.

Amen to that, ABSOLUTELY!!!

:patriot:

:)

"Baptist Unity, My Ass."

The host is a Baptist, too

http://www.stateofbelief.com/show/the-host

and I think Bill Moyers' background is Baptist as well.

I'm so happy to see this.

at Christmas. They view Warren's inclusion as a positive and a signal that Southern Baptists will have major influence with the Obama administration.

I didn't vote for a Republican. I don't want him to act like one.

influence in the government of the US.

I don't want ANY faith to have ANY influence in the government. We really need to start living in a reality based world.

It's so exasperating to me that "mainstream" Christian believers think that Mormon's magic undies or Scientology's space ships are waaaay out there, but believing in a supernatural powers dude who was the product of the rape of a virgin by an omnipotent sky god and who will return any day now to save us all, well, that just makes perfect sense.

talking snakes, turning water to wine, raising the dead, feeding 5000 people with 2 loaves of bread and a fish, etc, etc.

The religious right demands regular results these days. They aren't satisfied with a little rhetoric or symbolic gestures anymore. Hell, a lot of them aren't happy with Bush because he didn't give them everything they wanted.

:thumbsup:

is on speed dial too.

Can people please turn their heads from side to side.

However, if you think juxtaposing Warren and Lowry somehow comes out "even", you're even more of a tool than I thought. Warren is a hard-line bigot whose views in no way deserve the legitimization that his presence at the inauguration will give them. The fact that you are okay with him speaking says volumes about you...but nothing I haven't already read from you before, really.

for the gay community. None. Zero. Zip.

I do, however, have disdain for anybody who has sex in public bathrooms.

I also have disdain for anybody who calls someone a bigot while they're working to secure civil rights.

I immediately came out against Rick Warren and do not think he was the right choice. I have also noted, to DSC as a matter of fact, that NOBODY bothered to say a word to me after all the posts I made condemning the Warren choice.

Now that this has gone well beyond any realms of sanity, which I also have disdain for as I did when this happened with McClurkin, NOW the DU gay community suddenly finds me to bash me again - surprise surprise.

I speak for me.

I did not see any posts from you bashing the Warren choice, and I'd be TRULY surprised if there were any. I will not ask you to post a link, because if I cared enough, I could go look for them. However, I do find it amusing that you were apparently looking to be congratulated for condeming Warren...like that should require bravery on your part.

The question still remains: if you think Warren was a bad choice, why are you deliberately bringing in Lowry to water it down?

and many other DUers as well, when you choose to only notice a part of what someone says. Much like many are only noticing a part of what Obama says, like Warren "being on speed dial" while ignoring all the other progressive Christians who are on speed dial as well. That's not watering down anything, it's called being objective and rational, which is what will be necessary if any gay civil rights legislation are ever to be passed at the federal level. You could personally stand well to learn something from it.

That you don't give bigots a platform to spew their hate unless you really don't give a shit about the fight.

I can see why you don't really get why gay people are so pissed off about Warren, but I'd think that, as a woman, you'd at LEAST be pissed off about Warren's misogyny. Or are you cool with men telling you where to go, what to do, and what you can do with your body? What makes you think that a man that espouses such ideals has ANYTHING worth discussing with a rational human being?

I already said I opposed Warren speaking at the Inauguration.

So why do you turn right around and say that I don't get why gay people are pissed.

You didn't answer my question. What do you think a man like Warren has to say that is worth hearing?

and then turning around and bashing me for what you have assumed.

Why do you keep doing this instead of responding to what I actually say.

Refuse to answer the question while accusing others of not responding to what you've said. I've done this dance with you before. Talking with you is like dealing with a certain someone who's fond of one-line responses that say nothing. He thinks HE'S pretty clever, too.

I'll make this extremely simple for you. If you are against the Warren choice, why are you accusing the gay community of failing to "turn their heads from side to side"? Either answer that honestly, or admit you have no fucking clue, and are just tired of whiny, bathroom-sex-having, gay people.

Especially from you.

I responded to an article about Obama having the fundies on speed dial. Period. I recommended that people turn their head from side to side to see the progressives who are on speed dial - in order that they might find some balance and quit freaking out. Nowhere in there did I say anything positive about Rick Warren - AT ALL. It is only in YOUR HEAD. You need to analyze how often you are actually having a relationship ALL IN YOUR HEAD, and dumping it off on other people and then screaming at them for shit they never said or thought. YOU are the sick one.

And further, you're still sick if you troll for sex in public bathrooms and I don't care what your orientation is.

Do it all the time.

Even if Lowry were pro-gay marriage (which he is not), it would not "balance" Warren. Any number of so-called "progressives" (even REAL ones, not the fake ones) on speed dial would not "balance" Warren. You really need to go back and reread the post where I explained this to you. You do not understand this issue. People are not arguing with you because they don't like you. People are arguing with you because you don't understand this issue, and refuse to be educated. I know you're enjoying your persecution complex, but it is - dare I say it - ALL IN YOUR HEAD.

as a balance on the Inaugural Stage. I am presenting Lowery as a counter-balance to the claim that Obama is courting the religious right at the expense of everybody else. It's not true.

Further, I understand the issues completely. I simply disagree with you. Rather than acknowlede that, you, and many others, have attempted to turn me into some kind of rabid warren loving bigot, and then dump on me as if it were true. YES, it is personal and it has nothing to do with any attempt to educate me because there's nothing to educate. I understand the issue of gay marriage and have since the 80s when I attended my first gay commitment ceremony. I just happen to think the Oregon gay community took the correct approach, protection not perfection. That doesn't make me a bigot any more than it makes the gays in Oregon bigots when they were advocating civil unions.

You need to listen to people. Not everybody who disagrees with you is lining up with the religious right.

You DON'T understand the issue, and you never will, no matter how many separate-but-equal committment ceremonies you attend.

They called their ceremony a commitment ceremony. Not Me. Do you have any idea how brave it was for two lesbian women to even have a commitment ceremony in the 80's? In Montana??

You have some need to create enemies, even where you've actually got friends.

Sick.

You. Don't. Get it.

And I'm done with you. Feel free to further demonstrate your cluelessness with the last word.

Nobody was even talking about marriage in the 80s. Commitment Ceremony was a HUGE step forward at that time. Revolutionary. Especially in a place like Montana.

To come to the point where there are gay marriages in the country, in 20 years, it's astounding really. It took brave people to have Commitment Ceremonies then, so that there are even pockets that have legalized gay marriage now.

*I* get it. I've seen the transition. I know that it will take civil unions in some states before gay marriage will be accepted everywhere. They just overturned the Texas sodomy law for chrissake. Do you really want to wait another 50 or 100 years to even have civil union rights? Why would you do that when so many can have those rights this year? It makes no sense.

I get it. Lots of people get it. And we'll fight to extend equal rights, any way we can, even while people like you label us bigots.

On Edit:

Cute, he calls me a jackass and then I respond in kind, he deletes his remark. So typical.

Bullseye.

Not that I'd expect you to be able to discern the varying things a person says over the course of time either.

You are becoming abusers.

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

The fact that it was written by the Executive Director of the Baptist Center for Ethics only makes it better.

Bush Sr. was the liberal. In doing so, he validated the opposition's economic arguments, and tore up those of his own party.

By reaching out to the Christian Right, Obama is doing the same thing. He's validating their exclusive claim to a religion, and saying that reaching out to religious people means reaching out to people like Rick Warren. It doesn't, and that point would be made by excluding the Warrens of the world and inviting only liberal religious leaders.

what I hate the most about this whole Warren disaster is the idea of giving them any kind of recognition or legitimacy.

They deserve to be kicked to the curb. Nothing less will do.



Cher

being a profligate spender is no virtue

If it means less government spending, fine. That could be a good thing or not. It depends on what you're spending money on. Big government spending is what got us *out* of the Depression, after all.

I'm afraid the term "fiscally conservative" is used as a synonym for Republican economic policies (lowered taxes on the wealthy, slashing government services), and that it undermines the concept of liberal economic policies.

But I'd have to agree with you that Bill Clinton was fiscally conservative. To me he seemed like a moderate Republican on economic issues.

by whiney lefty queers!

Get over it Baptist Center for Ethics!

Bright, Shiny, New Thing.

:hide:

:rofl:

We don't need to "enlarge the tent" with bigots.

Thanks for posting, Bluebear.

We're drifting toward theocracy. It'll come in comfy slacks and a cartigan, but it'll still have the same mailed-fist behind its back.

Religion is a shortcut, more than anything else. It's a shortcut to happiness, it's a shortcut to understanding the world and it's a shortcut to power. The problem is that it has a life of its own, and playing around with it has drastic and unforseen consequences.

Nah, just mere "ceremonial deism", nothing serious.

He had so much political capital and he's not even going to use it.

Welcome to the old world


x(

...Obama has plenty, and he isn't spending it.

That is, unfortunately, the best-case scenario. Worst case, he actually believes that crap.

:shrug:

The Right pandered to these fundies for their $$ only.

I heard Judge Judy say, on Larry King, that because of the economy, people like her - well off people, didn't vote with their pocket books this election. They realized we're teetering on the brink & that McCain doesn't have an economic clue, nor does he care. Still, I was so pissed off I almost threw something at the TV. Four years ago, you greedy fucks were so busy counting your money, that you didn't see or care about the looming disaster of our unregulated financial system. Now that your portfolio is half it's value, you want change. Assholes.

people GIVE them the power.

Positive exposure gives them power.

Treating them like their views are mainstream and reasonable gives them power.

Failing to point out their hypocrisy and bigotry gives them power.

But nobody notices, because we're not on TV.

Patriarchy recognized they and patriarchal religion were going down ...

It's their underpinning --

i.e., it's not GOP which hates women. it's "god" .....

same for the rest of their enemies ...

homosexuals, Jews/Muslims, AA. native peoples ...

and don't forget patriarchal war on nature -- "Manifest Destiny"

Obama is spending his political capital on what, exactly?

Such a great opportunity to slam Obama again for you. Have at it, but leave me out of it.

:hi:

Any criticism or even examination of this man is now "bashing" or "slamming".

Yes, that's what it is all about for me, just looking for oppurtunities to "slam Obama".

It's nothing new. Further... The author of the article clearly has NO bias whatsoever. :eyes:

folkishness is right wing. So what he prays with a Democrat or two, he is right wing.

or was he joining in---???

This article makes the point extremely well: Obama's symbolic use of Warren goes way beyond GLBT rights, and we all should be very concerned about it.

The usage of words like WAY or VERY or EXTREMELY is a clear sign that people are groping for straws. It is a psychological fix to add emphasis where it is not due. Let's all take a time out to cool off. The world is not ending. Have a drink. :beer:

It may ease the pain because you're so numb, but it doesn't change the fact that you've just been run over.

...since the 1950's wingnuts actually infiltrated progressive churches in order to bring them down. Churches that were caring for the sick, standing up for the poor, and taking care of their neighbors. These wingnuts then methodically tore the churches up from the inside, pitting old friends against one another and decimating entire congregations and within families, old friends and communities. They did this by telling quiet Christians that they were "sinners" if they did not wave their arms in the air and scream and roll on the floor, because they weren't 'religious enough." They told Christians that "God loved the rich more" because otherwise why were they so blessed? They said the poor "brought it on themselves by their bad choices" rather than examine the systematic disenfranchisement of the poor, people of color and sexual minorities, as progressive Christians were and still are.

Here is what happened to the Anglican church who were accepting of gays: http://911review.org/Alex/who-directs-infiltration-of-911-truth.html

Here is what happened to the United Church of Christ (Barak Obama's last church) who are accepting of gays as well as active in social justice for over 150 years ( they were/are abolitionists, defenders of the poor, and feminists who were the 1rst church to ordinate women over 100 years ago, etc): http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/53534/

Known as "steeplejacking" it began in the 1950's with the "Communist scare" whose philosophies were around the fear that allowing women to have power within the church or the accepting of gays and other "godless" ways would infiltrate our society and make everyone into a Communist. It continued into the 1980's with what I already mentioned. After decimating liberal congregations in the 1990's, they used their financial and political power to create their mega-churches based on demonizing anything that "reeked" of social justice.

I WISH I could just "chill" and have a drink as you say, but because of these wingnuts, I have loved ones who are demonized and marginalized, thanks to these wingnuts. They are carrying the burden of this society by being the ones who pay the most taxes, are doing the most work, and are the ones standing up even when they are repeatedly knocked down for speaking the Truth, thanks to these entitled religious prigs.

It is time for Barak Obama to speak out against Religious wingnuts and support the Separation of Church and State. It is one thing to speak out for the institutionalization of racism and classism because it is the Truth and to work peacefully to change it. It is another to quell those voices by using religion of any faith to silence what is happening as the wingnuts have done and it happens in other theocratic countries too.

I personally saw these thing happen in my church. Because we were good people, it did not occur to us that good friends would be part of something bigger, it would have been a "conspiracy theory" sort of thing and not imaginable (and most of the ones we knew were not part of it, they just bought the rhetoric). We just thought it was a "natural" thing and had no idea that anyone, especially other Christians or our country, would do such a thing. We were good people as I said, we trusted other Christians (or who we thought were Christians) and even if we had been told it was true, we would not have accepted the fact a few wingnuts, trained to create controversy and sent to do it, were actively attempting to destroy our church and anything liberal ~ which btw many of us believe with all our souls that we were doing the work of Jesus to visit the people in prison, feed the poor, and stand up for people who are born gay.

It continues to this day and it is *not* time to "chill and have a drink." It is time to call these people out and show how their "religion" is only enriching a few and decimating this country!!!!

Cat In Seattle

This is not just happening to churches either, there are other institutions (many of them very right-wing and secretive) which may appear very beneficent and altruistic on the outside, but harbor extremely anti-liberal agendas on the inside. Even something as seemingly innocuous as the Salvation Army is often anti-LGBT.

One of my favorite articles about this phenomenon is the Mother Jones article "Their Will Be Done" which describes how right-wing factions of the Catholic Church have led to an agenda (in the works over decades) that has resulted in the murder of left-wing priests and nuns, all in the name of anti-Communism:

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/1983/07/willbedone.html

These are the forces responsible for 8 years of George W. Bush and look at how much needless death and suffering has resulted, and will continue as a result.

I'm not saying that we should relax our fight for equality, but relax our rhetoric on this website. We are all on the same side here, no matter how stupidly divided we sometimes appear.

I'd bet a poll of DU would say that a vast majority of us do as well. I can't think of a single instance where everyone agreed on everything, but I think that in our arguing if we all as DUers remember that we're on the same side, that we wouldn't get all bent out of shape all the time.

When you are accused (incessantly) of "overreacting" and "false outrage" and "not looking at the big picture" and "ruining it for the rest of us" and "being too stupid to understand what Obama's doing" and "being intolerant of religious freedom" and "making too big a deal out of one little prayer" and "making too big a deal out of one little song" and "making too big a deal out of one little DNC chairmanship" and so on?

How's about a little more support for the people that are actually being oppressed, and a little less understanding for the people who are constantly telling us to shut the fuck up?

"Let’s not forget it was the leadership of a Christian tradition that privatizes faith that championed the war against Iraq, backed economic favors for the wealthy, opposed addressing climate change and did nothing to push the Bush White House to care for the marginalized in our world.

On the other hand, those who heard the biblical imperative to do justice are the ones who warned against war, criticized tax breaks for the wealthy, advocated for initiatives to address climate change and spoke up for the poor and powerless."

Doesn't Warren criticize tax breaks for the wealthy, advocate for initiatives to address climate change and speak up for the poor and powerless? At least on some issues, he does not represent the far right of the Christian right.

"Dear Pastor Rick Warren: Should I pay off my debts or tithe?"

Answer: The Bible encourages us to do both, not one or the other. In fact, I've found again and again that one of the keys to paying off debts is beginning to tithe. It not only brings God's blessing to a person's finances, it also helps them to begin to think more sacrificially, to plan more carefully and to see God's direction more clearly.

http://www.saddlebackfamily.com/home/whatwebelieve/index.html#q_49

Of course, I see tithing as money that is being given to the poor. Deuteronomy 26: 10 "When you have finished laying aside all the tithe of your increase in the third year - the year of tithing - and have given it to the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, so that they may eat within your gates and be filled."

I don't generally equate people with debts to poor people.

The shame is that the megachurches seem to have priorities other than the needy.

paying down a 7% 30 year mortage early vs. a 10% annual tithe could result in a positive cashflow difference of many thousands of dollars.

If you end up richer then logically your sum total tithe could also be larger as well.

snicker

Fish, ya know...

The issue is the separation of church and state, and ceasing to fund "faith-based" programs with taxpayer money.

We are not a theology. We are a democratic republic. On paper, anyway!

When I get past the charm of Obama, my biggest concern all along has been that he's too close to the religious right. We've had enough of religion in government!

side.

but he wasn't and he gave them nothing - and they were mocked in the White House. Perhaps, (and this is the only out I believe it could be, because if this isn't it - I'm concerned he believes what they believe, and I don't want to believe that) he's using them just to have them be on his side while he pushes for liberal progress on everything - we'll find out soon enough - and soon enough cannot happen because I am disgusted that Warren's invited - angered he is at our table - and PREACHING his brand of HATE...

"We know where that kind of theology leads. What we DON'T KNOW is where Obama’s theology is now leading him."

Exactly. Thanks.
quickesst

that's for sure.

of these idiotic articles/posts.

When I married, I asked my mother (a minister) to open my wedding ceremony with a prayer. It was out of respect for her and my family, and an expression of our own religious tolerance rather than an indication of my or my husband's theology.

She didn't hurt anyone but herself that morning in praying for the conversion of us and our wedding party to her faith. One of the kids present asked her daddy if my mom wasn't one of those 'Rabid Christians' she hears people talk about.

This guy Rick Warren is so heady that he'll go down in flames pretty soon -- he's already made a fool of himself on his own website! In my mind the question is how he will shame himself and his church, not when.

So, if you keep to the high road, and treat others as you would be treated, you may better enjoy the hilarity that is sure to ensue.

It hardly seems a mark of respect to invite someone to speak at an event that is supposed to be inclusive who is fundamentally opposed to basic civil rights for some of your strongest supporters.

I'm an atheist and I expect to get exactly *zero* "respect" from Obama.

The non-religious make up 15% of the population in the US and yet have no political representation at all for their point of view.

I agree.

But I still predict Rick Warren's inevitable fall, which makes this particular sideshow more interesting.

:popcorn:

until they eventually destroy themselves?

I'm sorry, but I don't think the world is nearly as just as you seem to think it is.

because of this one episode in what will surely the long (melo)dramatic tale of opposition to his presidency.

Calls entire groups of American Nazis and pedophiles, millions of us. How does that indicate respect for others? Explain your thinking, specifically and in detail. Include please, how you would react if I was to call you by those names. Would you all that respect? Would you?

I'd ignore you. I wouldn't go into histrionics if you agreed to open the Inauguration in prayer or with a flaming baton show.

I wasn't talking about Rick Warren being respectful, but the Obama Team.

It isn't as though there aren't more moderate minsters avauilable. This is outright political pandering for the expansion of his political base at the expense of those who supported him. I am sure this is viewed as a "small gesture" with a big gain. And notice how favorably the GOP has received this?

the GOP receives this, and hopefully his acting like he represents All of America will get something positive done for a change.

So I'm sorry that you think he's being disrespectful to those that Warren disrespects. I can see how you'd think that. I'm glad you can see how others might take the gesture as well.

So, I guess that means we can't have equal rights? Because Obama has to be nice to the half that hates us?

Please explain just HOW legitimizing the view that gays, women, and Jews are less than real people will "get something positive done for a change".

While you're working on that, I'll say this: I don't WANT a President who represents hatred of gay people. I HAD that already. Obama is supposed to represent change. That's what he promised. How is pandering to the religious right "change"?

I don't see Obama legitimizing Rick Warren's ideas. At a stretch you could call it an acknowledgment of their existence.

I guess it depends upon what the meaning of 'is' is.

You can choose to ignore the fact that selecting Warren to speak at the invocation sends a message. Why should you care? You've got yours.

Let's put it another way. What good do you expect will come of allowing Warren to speak? I'm assuming your buying the insulting claptrap thrown out by Obama that this is "reaching out" that will "encourage dialogue" and "build bridges". Just HOW is letting Warren speak going to accomplish ANY of those things?

"HOW is letting Warren speak going to accomplish ANY of these things?"

My thinking is that the text of Warren's invocation will be vetted, if not edited, and it will be Warren's choice to make nice and proclaim some sweeping beneficience in his two minutes, or he'll hang himself with the rope Obama gave him, in the opening moments of the new Administration, and look like a damned fool because he just can't help himself.

I wonder if he *can* behave. (Obama has already shown that he doesn't think preachers are so powerful that he won't cut them loose.)

As for what I got and what you think I got, if I weren't on your side (and really I am) I'd say that the only insulting claptrap I've seen so far today is your message.

But then I just now logged in.

None of that 'voice of reason' stuff, here.

reply to questions and expand upon itself. A voice of reason does not run from questions, but rather welcomes them and seeks them. A voice of reason does not characterize the opposition.

at your own wedding, that's your business. You are not the President of the United States. You do not have the power to legitimize religious assholery at the expense of a large number of people who have been historically oppressed, and who were promised change.

No one cares what you do. We care what Obama will do, because he is in a position to make a difference in people's lives, and so far, has shown zero interest in doing so.

What comes next?

Will Warren be given a place at the health care table and will he be allowed more faith-based monies to be poured into his "dream" of turning Africa, and for that matter the world, into his own little kingdom of "purpose driven nations" like he has Rwanda? Will he be able to continue to spew out nonsense to women to obey their husbands more so they aren't abused by them? Will the hate filled message he is allowing concerning GLBT in his African proteges churches continue? This should not be something we just turn our backs on!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-wilson/warren-endorsed-nigerian_b_153412.html

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2008/12/19/untold-consequences-rick-warrens-aids-activism

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1830147,00.html

...........

And finally this video from Nobel laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu - You have to choose 10 on the bottom to hear him - now why couldn't PE Obama have chosen this man to give the invocation?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2008/02/20/VI2008022001639.html

..........

I put my support solidly with Desmond Tutu - this is the Christianity that I believe in.

we do not need Christian right on speed dial.

It does not escape my attention that the man known as Jesus the Christ comanded his followers to pray only in private, and never in public "as the hypocrites do."
So me and that guy, we say grandstanding is not prayer, and that only hypocrites pretend that it is prayer.
Sadly, Warren and Obama pray in public for obvious politica agendas, as they were specifically commmanded not to. If they followed their alleged faith, none of this would be happening at all. None of it. Those who accept Warren are rejecting a far better man's teachings.
Don't pray in public as the hypocrites do. I did not say that. But it was said, oh yes, it was said.

One of the last things we needed was Barack Obama's table and looking at it finally the reality is the last thing we needed was Barack Obama.

Sorry but that's the way a growing number of people feel. Everyone is at the table except those who voted for him.

are you out of your fucking mind?
:eyes:

I'm not sure Biden would be any better. I am sure nothing is going to change. Despite being promised change. That was and is my only point.

now

Most really do not have any real sense of security at the moment - we are pretty much at the bottom and so where can we go but up? Most will feel lucky if they can go sideways. Bush joked about represented the haves and have-mores. Even some of the haves have become have-nots.

encourage him and Pelosi to honor both 2006 and 2008 voters who

voted for his populist msg --

the voters are unrepresented --

Religious and corporations plus Pelosi/Rahm/Reid-DLC at the table --

One of the last things our country needs is a White House that has the Christian right on speed dial, legitimizes its leadership and validates its theology.


That quote needs to be on billboards everywhere.

:spank:

the religious right will have a seat at the table, it would be politically detrimental to completely ignore them. On the other hand, I expect they won't be driving policy (i.e. sex education, stem cell research, etc.) as they have for the last eight years. We'll know soon enough.

We'll know soon enough.

But by then it will be too late, damage done and all that jazz. :shrug:

I'm pretty sure there can't be much damage before we find out what it really means. And if it means something different than what I have described, I'll be about the maddest SOB on the planet... That said, I don't think Obama is stupid. If his policies continue the Bush approach of ideologically driven positions on stem cells, abortion, planned parenthood, women's rights, civil rights in general, etc., than there's no way he's getting re-elected in four years anyway.

:sarcasm:

for his enthusiastic support depends on CHANGE! he promised.
And we are all weary to sick of LIARS, CROOKS, and and DESPICABLE SCUM
in charge of our government.

The abuses of the past eight years have been clothed in
righteousness, but is in fact a criminal enterprise or insanity,
and it is time for THAT religion to back the fuck up.

He is going appoint judges who want to SUSTAIN roe and not overturn it. We will have a pro-science administration, he came out against prop-8 and the guy doing the benediction at the inauguration supports gay marriage. Lets see out he does on the job. The fact remains that he sets the policy and his platform is the most progressive since Roosevelt.

And yet Barack Obama is not in favor of legalizing marijuana.

Science will take a back seat to politics, just as it always has.

and is not in favor of "gay marriage." And the man doing the benediction at the inauguration is not in favor of gay marriage.

The gays were not only insulted, but easily tossed under the bus with nary a word from the incoming Administration.

LOWERY: Well, I've never said I support gay marriage. I support gay rights and I support civil unions. Like a whole lot of people, I have some difficulty with the term gay marriage. Because deep in my heart, deeply rooted in my heart and mind, marriage is associated with man and woman. So I have a little cultural shock with that. But I certainly support civil unions, and that gay partners ought to have all the rights that any other citizens have in this country.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2008/12/23/shusters-shock-rev-lowery-opposed-gay-marriage-too

and made us all believe he was one of us. Not withstanding the Friday night news dumps when nobody was listening where he gave quietly and offhanded hints to cover his ass which he could call upon later. Folks are damn tired of conservatism and the idiocy it conveys onto all of us. Conservatism has driven this country into near extinction and the folks of this country know it. The moves O is making makes his entire campaign duplicitous. There is no power in the conservative movement left. They waste the space of 22% of the population about half of whom are zealots and are the dumbest percentage on earth. I was shocked to learn O's IQ is 125 witch is pretty standard fare for an Ivy League college grad.
we were led to believe he was the smartest man in the room. That alone is reason to understand why he is turning into a religious and conservative nut in front of our eyes.

I've seen it listed on those online ads as anywhere from 125 to 135, but I seriously doubt any of them have access to his actual iq.

And I seriously doubt *anyone* could get through Harvard Law, plus all he's accomplished, on an iq of 125. Or do you buy into the myth that Ayers authored his books?

(btw, I believe you meant "which," not "witch.")

The Guesstimates, some by professionals, that are all over the net range from a low of 116 to a high of 130; He has been asked to release his IQ scores but has so far not done so....Some of us here are considerably higher than those estimates. I surmise however that with an IQ of 125-130 and with the diligence that O exhibits can appear much higher and can be adequate to most tasks. It is only that the clam (that's claim) has been horned that he is the smartest man in the room and other such cliche's coming from his camp and supporters of which (that's witch) I was one who phone banked and beat the streets for him and I guess when push comes to shove I still am, but with dwindling enthusiasm.

Faith in my fellow man, my community, my city, my county, my country, and our world.

I have faith in our talents, in our intellect, in our capabilities to over come great odds.

I have faith we can progress as a society, that we can defeat cancer, that we can find a way to live long past our current life expectancy.

I have faith ... and it is the kind of faith I wish more people shared instead of the dogma that has held us back for so long.

Ya know ... it could be worse. Obama could have chosen Jack Chick instead of Rick Warren!



Jack chick, the force behind all the little booklets left behind in bathroom stalls for you to find and to convince you to repent!























Jack Chick, below left, as he appears today.



As demented as I thought he looked.

He knows he can't change people's beliefs, but he wants to reach out to all americans and not exclude those who didn't necessarily vote for him.

After all, he's going to be president of White Supremecists, too.

And maybe a career criminal. After all ...

Privledged straighties who tout that "he's got to be THEIR president TOO!" earnestness will never get the comparison, because they choose not to see the reality of discrimination against gay people. To them, we are just whiners who are never satisfied.

Thank god there are some straight people who are actually willing to empathize with gays.

Since Dumbya's administration not only had them on speed dial, they probably had an office in the White House somewhere too.

RIGHT on the money. K&Red! :)

:shrug:

I haven't been on DU in nearly a year. Been lurking this week since I got a new laptop from my awesome brother this Christmas.

I was going to stay a lurker but this one issue has me torqued beyond belief.

I voted for Obama, still have the damned bumper sticker on my car, attended two of four Obama victory parties I was invited to (yes! In Tennessee, even!) and cried tears of relief and joy that night. Just weeks before, I sat with a gay friend watching all of the Democratic Convention we could get - you know, the Convention where Ted Kennedy and Obama spoke of including gay people?

"You see," I told my jaded friend. "There IS a difference in the two parties. You will NEVER hear this kind of rhetoric out of a Republican's mouth."

There were tears in my friend's eyes.

I wonder how he feels now?

Warren was a piss poor choice and I am disgusted with Obama for making it. He had a chance to set an example and instead he is legitimizing a bigot.

All I can say is that I will NOT be watching the inauguration. And my condolences to all of the people Obama has cut deeply with this decision.

It never hurt anyone to accept others for the color of their skin, their nationality, their gender or their orientation. Warren can believe what he wishes about people who are different from himself, but this is a nation of laws, not a nation of Bobble verses, and the law states that no one should be discriminated against. Since Warren believes in discriminating against many of the people who made sure Obama made it to the White House, Warren is a terrible embarrassment as an American.

Obama had his pick of fine, inclusive REAL American clergy. Instead he chose a holier-than-thou mouthpiece for the Right.

I am disgusted more than I can even express here.

That's all. Back to my former silence. I just had to say that for the record....

is more people being divisive. And prejudice works both ways.

Now that I've announced my bigotry, I eagerly await Obama's reaching hand.

Nice touch.

so clearly the officious attitudes of these so-called Warren-type Christians. The writer's position as a Baptist (many of whom are reasonable people and true Christians) Center executive director lends special significance to his editorial comment. Kudos to Mr. Parham. I hope this comment reaches Obama. Would someone with more computer skills than I PLEASE FORWARD IT TO HIM. He needs to see it.

But he can still be a man of faith.

I just worry what kind of faith he does have.

And will it be good for me - a gay man- and our country.O8)

Wouldn't it make sense to use it well?

Seems the most constructive thing to do would be to respond to the new administration's request for our perspective. They want our input. Progressive ideals won the election. Separation of Church and State!! We are done with bigotry and hate.

Ranting in a tiny echo chamber won't have much impact.

The gay community has made our position on the Warren choice QUITE clear. We were told by the Obama team, basically, to shut the fuck up. As we were when we complained about Donny McClurkin.

Obama has clearly demonstrated that he is NOT interested in the views of the GLBT community. He has cemented it into his administration by allowing Rick Warren to speak at his inauguration.

is to sit and continue to yell here on DU.

Because it works so well to backhand all positive suggestions.

Obama will hear from us. Obama IS hearing from us. He is not listening. He does not care.

That will not prevent us from yelling, be it hear on DU, or elsewhere. Despite what the "STFU, gays!" crowd wants, those of us actually IN the fight know that the majority does not empower the minority willingly. EVER. In other words, we will NEVER get our rights by quietly and politely asking for them. The only way we will EVER get them is by loudly and agressively DEMANDING them, until people like Obama have no choice but to capitulate.

Rest assured that the yelling on DU is only a fraction of the yelling you will hear until I have the same rights you do. If you were a decent human being, you'd be yelling WITH me.

too many people, especially on DU, have forgotten what it takes to achieve civil rights. They seem to believe that democracy is ONLY about majority rule. It's too bad that we are considered just another special interest group requesting special favors that, many feel, seem to infringe on others' religious beliefs. How ridiculous that is when the original Founding Fathers understood such tyrannical religious rule all too well.

I'm also a woman, and Warren and his ilk also actively kill and maim women with their gagging women's clinics in the name of the fetus and attempts to criminalize abortion and withold birth control. That is life or death, putting rape and incest above a woman's right to her body and life. OK? But if you'd like the biggest victim prize.... be my guest.

So, keep yelling to Obama and anyone else in a legislative position. Mobilize whoever and whatever you can. Do what feels right.

And quit telling me that I or any of anyone here are telling you to shut up and like it.

My opinion is, find ways to USE the anger. But quit screaming at the people who SUPPORT you. Please.

end of transmission

As I said, no one gets rights by meekly asking for them. And there are PLENTY here on this website who have demonstrated that my rights are NOT their priority, nor, indeed, worthy of consideration. This place can use a lot more yelling, as the vast majority of my gay brothers and sisters can tell you.

You yell EVERYWHERE, and to EVERYBODY. Your allies will understand AND JOIN YOU.

You are free to cower in a corner and hope that President Obama has an inexplicable change of heart and decides to see you as an actual human being. I'll be fighting for your rights in the meantime.

As I said, no one gets rights by meekly asking for them. And there are PLENTY here on this website who have demonstrated that my rights are NOT their priority, nor, indeed, worthy of consideration. This place can use a lot more yelling, as the vast majority of my gay brothers and sisters can tell you.

correction: our

You yell EVERYWHERE, and to EVERYBODY. Your allies will understand AND JOIN YOU.

quite so.

You are free to cower in a corner and hope that President Obama has an inexplicable change of heart and decides to see you as an actual human being. I'll be fighting for your rights in the meantime.

OK. You are better than me in every way. Thank you for this valuable lesson. Keep up the selfless work.

and considering the quality of some of the arguments on both sides, I wouldn't decry the value of this echo chamber compared to other venues.

varies depending on the post itself. Or the pattern of posting in a given situation......

a little hard to explain, but I'm trying to say that it is not DU as a whole that is inherently an echo chamber. It can be used as an echo chamber, however, when one rants to the exclusion of any other input, or continuously imputes hostile meaning that was not intended. But maybe that is the unavoidable side of any think-tank, especially one as large as this.

Don't know if that's clear--I hope I'm getting across what I mean.

some GLBT DUers take it a little far and tend to adopt an either "you're with us or against us" mentatility when attempting to call others on bigotry or homophobia. Sometimes this may be deserved and sometimes it isn't. I do tend to repeat the belief that Obama has exhibited religiously bigoted behavior in order to try and get through to people on this point. I hope that doesn't help make this an echo chamber, but few people bother to respond to this and I don't know if they even see it.

stinky person too.

and I agree with you, and I truly feel most people here agree, that picking Warren looks bad in many MANY ways.... Certainly, no one here thinks he's a good guy!!!

I also agree with some others, that there may be good salvageable from it; this is what I hope for. Remember, Obama is a student of Lincoln. Didn't Lincoln say, "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer." ? Seems like a good idea.

Alsooo, I strongly believe that the uproar and valid anger over this is ITSELF a good thing. It creates energy for change. I try to say this in any post I make on this topic, yet I get misread and attacked by the with us or against us people. The vehement insistence to my face that I am, therefore a hater of gays, a coward, and stupid is irritating. Ferchrissake, I AM GBLT. I just try my best to practice rational thought. Seems rational consideration of various possible perspectives pisses some people off.

and, I agree with you that some posters on this issue are not doing themselves or the movement any favors. I can understand rage, but willful refusal to see that most people here support OUR mutual ethics, that criticism they're getting is being aimed at their individual immature behavior, and their attacking anyone who doesn't mirror their own irrationally volcanic spewing is ..... well, it's unproductive, to try and say it courteously.

I can remember being that over the top on certain issues that triggered my own issues. I think I could even say that I was equally rageful and projecting my own issues onto others, at times. (in my defense, I did do my best to respond to criticism--if I felt it was unjustified insulting, or sexism or whatever, I'd fight back, but if I felt it was appropriate criticism, I tried my best to admit to that in my reply.)...... but I digress.....

Nevertheless, my point is, I was in similar shoes in the past; I can say, it doesn't feel good to be so overflowing with rage. Still, that doesn't give wanton accusers a charity pass, in my opinion. If people didn't react negatively to me, I wouldn't have known I was over the line. It does one good to be called on it, when veering into offensive/irrational behavior, once you're willing to listen.

you are a very understanding person. Few people seem to realize that "the uproar and valid anger over this is itself a good thing" and that "it creates energy for <positive> change". I've seen a whole new generation of people become politically activated and that in and of itself is a good thing.

:hi:

but I don't think Obama will. I think there's a difference between having the religious right on speed dial and just talking to them