Gay activists furious with Obama

[Freddie Stubbs]

Source: Politico

Barack Obama’s choice of a prominent evangelical minister to perform the invocation at his inauguration is a conciliatory gesture toward social conservatives who opposed him in November, but it is drawing fierce challenges from a gay rights movement that – in the wake of a gay marriage ban in California – is looking for a fight.

Rick Warren, the senior pastor of Saddleback Church in southern California, opposes abortion rights but has taken more liberal stances on the government role in fighting poverty, and backed away from other evangelicals’ staunch support for economic conservatism. But it’s his support for the California constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage that drew the most heated criticism from Democrats Wednesday.

“Your invitation to Reverend Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at your inauguration is a genuine blow to LGBT Americans,” the president of Human Rights Campaign, Joe Solomonese, wrote Obama Wednesday. “e feel a deep level of disrespect when one of architects and promoters of an anti-gay agenda is given the prominence and the pulpit of your historic nomination.”

The rapid, angry reaction from a range of gay activists comes as the gay rights movement looks for an opportunity to flex its political muscle. Last summer gay groups complained, but were rebuffed by Obama, when an “ex-gay” singer led Obama’s rallies in South Carolina. And many were shocked last month when voters approved the California ban.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16693.html

[peacebird]

this hetero woman is also FURIOUS. This is a HUGE slap in the face to progressives.

[netania99]

7. Me too.

I've been yelling about this since I first heard.

[crikkett]

125. We're not the oppositon anymore - but it's a hard habit to break isn't it?

Relax. We won. Why not have a happy holiday, love your neighbor and all that stuff that sets a good example and gets people on our side?

[unkachuck]

22. "...slap in face..."

....this is just the latest of many 'slaps in the face' we've received....the way we've been treated (less than a repug) I'm beginning to wonder if Obama realizes Progressives did actually support and vote for him....

....you wouldn't know it by his actions....it's gonna be a long four years....

[Frank Booth]

46. You're wrong.

This is bad, but overall Obama's still been good to all us progressives.

[TankLV]

53. BULL CRAP!

He's taken every opporunity to ignore and marginalize us...

He's done us NO favors. Period.

[fjc]

95. You've largely marginalized yourselves.

All I've seen, from the primaries onward, is bitch, bitch, bitch from so-called "progressives".

[No Elephants]

112. I'm centrist, but maybe you have the cart before the horse. Maybe the complaining is bc

Obama has appointed many DLC'ers and even Republicans, but no liberals. Maybe he is not liberal, but shouldn't they have at least ONE place at the table?

[fjc]

122. Yes, one place.

Trouble is, as far as I can see, and most of the responses to this invitation are cases in point, they want "the" place at the table.

[TankLV]

113. Fuck you - asshole...

and I mean that in the nicest way...

[fjc]

121. Thanks for confirming my point.

[marshall]

83. Obama put his cards on the table before the election

No one should have expected him to champion the gay agenda. He said basically the same thing as McCain--that he believed marriage was meant for a man and a woman and he connected it to his Christian beliefs. If you expect something out of him that he is not going to give you are going to continue to be disappointed. Look to the positive and find areas of agreement so that we can move forward in the next eight years.

[No Elephants]

111. Warren is not simply anti-gay marriage, though. He is anti-gay, period. And anti-choice. And anti

Democrat. And anti-separation of church and state.

[AnnieBW]

25. Damn straight (pardon the pun)

I'm str8 but not narrow, and I'm offended that he chose that snake-oil salesman Warren! After that travesty of a "discussion" at Saddleback (where Warren clearly favored McSame), and giving a "Medal of Peace" to *, Obama should be ashamed of himself for inviting him to give in invocation! What about someone like Rev. Wallis of Sojourners? You know, someone who actively SUPPORTED Obama?

[AlbertCat]

40. You know, someone who actively SUPPORTED Obama?

Or how about Richard Dawkins filling in and no ancient superstitions evoked at all.

Still, if we must bow to some mythical spirit, can we choose a more sane and humble snake-oil salesman? Evangelicals are just embarrassing!

[fjc]

98. Dawkins is clearly a bright man.

But on the subject of religion he's as rabid as the people he's spent so much time attacking.

[tkmorris]

131. Perhaps. But he is CORRECT

And that is what matters to me. All opinions are not equal.

[fjc]

132. Yes, all opinions are equal, because they are all opinions.

So far as the ultimate questions go, no one actually "knows" a thing.

[No Elephants]

66. It's a slap to all Democrats. I am a hetero female and consider myself centrist. I am livid.

[JeanGrey]

123. Obama is not a progressive. I am a little taken back at

the attitudes and reactions. "Campaign from the left, govern from the middle" has always been how it is done.

[PDJane]

1. I have to tell you, that was a major disappointment.

I can't stand that character.

[Lorien]

2. Democrats need to stop cowtowing to the whacko fundie hatemongering

minority. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

[Robbien]

84. This action is not cowtowing. It is outright promotion and endorsement of hatred and bigotry

The Democratic Party is painting hatred as its national face when putting this bigot up as the guy who leads the party's spiritual leader.

[MannyGoldstein]

3. This Breeder Thinks This Is Not The Brightest Thing Obama's Done

Disappointing.

[mnhtnbb]

4. I hope everybody attending the Inaugural carries signs telling Rick Warren to go to Hell.

[tblue]

8. Or shoes

[Freddie Stubbs]

87. That would certainly be a classy thing to do

[Deep13]

5. Well, I remember his critics warning us this would happen about six months ago.

I'm still sorry to see it tarnish an otherwise exemplary transition.

[tsuki]

6. First, I don't consider Tricky Dick an Evangelical. He has

Fundamental Opportunist written all over him.

[Riverman]

9. Obama is showing that he is a WIMP!

Renounce these haters Mr. Obama! I am tired of the religiots dictating policies for people who do not subscribe to their fantasy beliefs. Stay out of my bedroom, stay away from the bodies of the women I love, keep your hate and poison to yourselves, don't tell me who to love or marry - in fact get out of my country! Go preach your hate on some god-forsaken island and leave the rest of the hell alone!

[2Design]

10. this is going to far - slapping us for being sane people n/t

[jetphixer]

11. Can't Stand the jerk

This is a slap in the face I'm not gay but i cant stand this guy..We lost 1 fat Evangelical only to be replaced by this one.. In fact i find him an all of the Jesus freeks revolting....

[ClusterFreak]

12. I'm straight and fucking pissed off. n/t

[IndianaGreen]

13. We don't give the Mormon Church a pass for Prop 8, why should we give Obama a pass for Warren?

It is the same motherfraking principle!

[az chela]

50. I agree a thousand percent that this is the dumbest thing

Barack could do and a real slap in the face to all the people who supported him and worked on his campaign.DUMB MOVE BARACK<VERY DUMB

[sarcasmo]

14. Meet the new Boss, same as the old Boss.

[SammyWinstonJack]

85. Yes Indeed! Wonder why some are so shocked?

[bitchkitty]

15. You would think that this country,

having addressed the rights of women, of minorities, the disabled, children, and even animals, would not stand up for a large segment of society and their right to pursue happiness, their right to marry the person of their choice.

Even if one isn't angry, even if someone might be opposed to same-sex matrimony, if they approached it on a purely intellectual level, they would back down. It is inevitable.

The Million American March? It's not just a gay activist issue, it's a civil rights issue for all of us.

[No Elephants]

67. I (hetero) donate and have demonstrated for gay marriage. But Warren is not only anti-gay. He is

against voting for anyone who is pro-Choice. In most elections at every level of government, that is code for "Do NOT vote for the Democratic candidate." Warren also wants his interpretation of the Bible to be the law of the land, much like Bush and DeLay. How ANY Democrat, regardless of stance on gay marriage, could have considered Warren for this honor is well beyond me.

[ejbr]

16. There is no reason for this

unless he believes that progressives are already in the bag and don't have enough integrity to call him on this bullshit.

[Canuckistanian]

17. This is too much

Reaching out to the "other side" doesn't mean endorsing unrepentant haters.

[silverojo]

51. He's pandering with this choice

Apparently not realizing that fundie types will never, ever want to work with him, period.

They won't accept Obama as their president, any more than we accepted Bush. And it's stupid to try to change the minds of people who never will.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

56. He isn't pandering, he is doing exactly what he said he would do while running for president n/t

[Zhade]

59. He said he would consort with hateful bigots?

NT!

[Bodhi BloodWave]

62. no, he said he would reach out and try to find common ground with everybody

I am going to copy part of a post S_E_Fudd made earlier since it explained it well:

'He promised to try and bridge divides and bring people together. Fact is, in order to do that you are occasionally are going to have to deal with people with whom you have a profound disagreement. Warren is despicable on gay rights and on abortion...no doubt about it. However he is making some effort at steering evangalicals toward a greater concentration on global climate change and on poverty.'

Personally i think the best way to convince somebody that they are wrong is by actually talking to them and showing them that they are wrong, its not by avoiding or shunning them even if their views are quite disgusting

[Fearless]

64. Exactly...

Show them that they WANT to change their minds, don't try to force it down their throats.

[No Elephants]

69. Finding common ground with everybody does NOT imply giving Warren a huge honor. Besides, look at

this thread and others on this board about Warren. Are you sensing common ground? Aren't we part of "EVERYone?" There is a huge difference between compromising on issues and honoring this anti-Democratic, Constitution violating pimp to the exclusion of someone everyone could have accepted.

[Ms. Toad]

80. Then find an evangelical leader who is not known

for his or her hatred for my family. Lorence Wenke, for example. (http://atheism.about.com/b/2004/03/09/fundamentalist-su... )

You don't bridge a gap by picking as a bridge someone who hates one bank on which the bridge sits. You pick someone who loves, and can communicate with, both banks. That is what makes a bridge across which the divided camps can mingle.

[Ignis]

118. Yes, let's reach out to all bigots. Let the KKK cater the inauguration!

[Leftest]

126. Even if that means fucking us who put him in office up the ass?

Yeah, that's real bright. Vote for me so I can bend you over and stick it in real deep. Its ok because I have a (D) next to my name.

n/t

[No Elephants]

68. Um, no. He never said he would choose Warren for the invocation.

[Truth Teller]

18. Here's a pissed off straight man too n/t

[Sultana]

19. .

[AzDar]

20. A stupid decision. Why, B, WHY ???

[iamincali83]

21. Im really disappointed in Obama...

oh well it's not like he's going to be in Obama's cabinet. Still im sick of these fundie assholes getting all these passes and coming across as mainstream.

[Vattel]

23. It's even worse than this article suggests.

Rick Warren's church does not even allow gays or women to be pastors. Would Obama have a minister at his inaugeration that doesn't allow blacks to be pastors? No, I didn't think so.

[truthisfreedom]

24. Sigh. You see what he's trying to do, right?

He's trying to appease the conservative right. He's trying to throw them a bone. It's nothing... it's just a sermon. People have a right to their opinions... You can be sure Obama will give equal time to people from all sorts of points of view.

Do you really think this is going to hurt him more than help him?

How about Catholics, huh? What about this:

In the Church’s latest statement on this matter, Pope John Paul II, using his full authority as the successor of Peter, states categorically that the Church cannot — not will not, but cannot — ordain women, now or in the future. The Catechism of the Catholic Church sets it out clearly, quoting the decree Inter insigniores:

Only a baptized man (vir) receives sacred ordination. The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord Himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.

I'm just sayin' we have BIGGER THINGS TO WORRY ABOUT.

[Mari333]

26. so I take it you would support Obama if he invited a Klansman to speak?

same thing.

[No Elephants]

71. Yep. Warren is anti-gay, anti-choice, anti-First Amendment and anti Democrats. TRAVESTY.

[Vattel]

28. I agree,

but it is tragic that sexism and homophobia are still "socially acceptable" enough to get a bigot like Warren a gig at Obama's inaugaration.

[Mari333]

31. small rant

I remember back in the 60s and early 70's when womens liberation was starting to seep into the antiwar progressive movement. Back then, many of the men in the movement were the leaders, and expected the women to 'make coffee' and have sex with them, and thats about it! these so called progressive men were really pissed off when the women started to form their own groups and talk about women's oppression. they would yell at us and scream that we had no right to speak of oppression or womens rights , and to stfu, and stop rocking the boat, and concentrate on the REAL issues and ..go make coffee..
so we split from them and did our own thing. they fell apart soon after that.
the attitude was that women's issues werent important...they were frivolous..issues like RAPE LAWS and VIOLENCE LAWS were frivolous.
pffft.
when I see all the antigay and antiwomen posts and attitudes here, it reminds me of that crap.
rant off.

[No Elephants]

72. Civil rights are civil rights, whether it's women, minorities or gays. But, my objections to Warren

go beyond civil rights. Why in hell should I keep contributing to Democrats when they go totally out of their way to HONOR someone who preaches that voting for anyone who is pro-choice (read Democrats) is against God?

[wellst0nev0ter]

29. How About Throwing Progressives A Bone Once In A While?

He's really stepping on a lot of toes here.

[dflprincess]

36. Given the amount of money and time the left gave to his campaign

this may very well hurt him more than help him come the midterms.

He's thrown plenty of bones to the right, it'd be nice if he'd throw one to the liberals.

[AlbertCat]

43. Throwing bones (my rant)

And indeed....why should the Right get bones thrown at them in the 1st place? They've been the big dog taking bones whenever they chose for 8 years now. They don't "need" any help. They shouldn't be ignored I suppose....even though Dems were ignored for 8 years. Too much tit for tat would just be childish. But must we give them a leg up? Must we dress Repugs up and bring them out on stage to cut ribbons and bless "our" work?

No. Just treat them as the minority opposition party. Hear what they have to say and then take it to heart or ignore it as seems fit. Just leave the Right to do what the opposition party does and stop patting them on the head!

And if they won't work with us....fuck them!

[No Elephants]

70. You've described pandering. There was NO need to do that. He could have chosen someone less

hateful who would have been acceptable to everyone.

[HopeHoops]

27. E-MAIL Campaign Time - No, no, no, and no - in that order. Yes We Can!

[Hekate]

30. Does the Labor nomination mean anything?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Omaha native may be prospective Labor nominee (would be the first openly gay cabinet secretary)

At all?

Hekate

[No Elephants]

115. If it happens, it's great, but one thing does not negate the other. Besides, you seem to want to

make this about gays versus Obama. Being anti-gay is NOT Warren's only problem. He is also sexist, anti-choice, anti-Democrat and anti-separation of church and state. It was a dumb choice. Deal with that.

[benh57]

32. Get over it people

This is meaningless.

He's throwing the fundies a bone. It doesn't affect policy.

Obama is not a religious person.

[RCinBrooklyn]

33. It's time for apologists to drop dead. Obama has shown a pattern of lying and disrespect. Fuck him.

[Freddie Stubbs]

34. What specific lies has he told?

[RCinBrooklyn]

107. Against Fise. Against Offshre drilling. Against Bush Tax Cuts...

Those would be three LIES. I imagine some people will say they are "position changes", but he ran on these items and reneged. It's a pattern of deceipt.

[RCinBrooklyn]

108. Let's be clear: he's angering mor than gay activists with this latest swipe at LGBT rights.

[Mari333]

35. so if he invites the KKK to speak

you are all for it, am I correct?

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[No Elephants]

116. Seomthing is not meaningless just bc you say it is. We don't want hating bigots honored. Get over

that.

[RamboLiberal]

37. Well he finally pissed me off

And yes I fired off an email at the change.gov website telling them what a huge slap in the face this was to all of us who supported him. And for the record I'm straight.

[Lucky Luciano]

42. Is it important that you state for the record that you are straight?

Not just you, but a lot of those who are straight seems to want to make it clear that they are straight. Not relevant if you are straight - this is strictly a basic civil rights issue.

[Nevernose]

47. It has more impact coming from a straight man

At least it should. I'm a thread-jacker, but it's not like the poster you were referring to is biased because of his sexual orientation. If anything, according to conventional wisdom, he should be more likely to oppose civil rights for gay people. Remember that the freedom riders were largely a bunch of middle-class white kids from up North, and probably had a larger impact on the early Civil Rights movement than most of the black marchers of the time.

I'm one of the faculty advisers for my school's GSA club, and I often think that the most influential people there are the straight half of the "Gay Straight Alliance". It's the straight kids who are most influential with changing the attitudes of their peers. Not within the club itself, but within the school as a whole.

In short: don't be so quick to judge. Some of us are insecure, some of us aren't, and most of us are somewhere in between -- but a person standing by your side is a person standing by your side.

[No Elephants]

77. I agree and I posted that civil rights are civil rights, whether we are talking women, minorities or

gays. What's right is right. However, when, say, a rich person fights for an increase in the amound of welfare checks, it can be more persuasive than when a welfare recipient does the same. Ditto a WASP fighting the Mafia stereotype, as opposed to a Sicilian doing the same. Having a very direct self interest in something may be viewed as a bias. It can be harder to dismiss someone who has no direct self interest.

[No Elephants]

91. Meanwhile, on another thread, posters are mocking and slamming the gay posters here for being

upset over the choice of Warren, even though so many of us on this thread said we were not gay. So, yes, there are many reasons to say, "I'm against Warren and pro-gay rights, even though I am not gay." It's not that we are afraid to be taken for gay. I could care less what anyone thinks my sexual orientation is. But, sometimes people forget that this is not an issue that concerns only gays. It should--and does--concern anyone, gay or hetero, who holds human rights for all as a principle.

[Lucky Luciano]

93. ok - honestly was just a question. I was actually neutral on the subject

of whether one should disclose their orientation, but it appears that disclosing is helpful. Was curious of people's thoughts.

[No Elephants]

97. You jusrt asked a question and I just gave you my answers. No worries, Lucky.

[MasonJar]

38. Warren is also anti-choice,which is just as repugnant. I do not get

this decision; it is absolutely uncalled for. Think of all the pro-choice and pro-gay and progressives who worked tirelessly for the Obama campaign and in fact are the major reason he won. Why would he select such an outlandish minister for such an important event? Have Warren later for a minor ceremony, if he is so determined to promote the views of those who opposed him and neglect the feelings of those who worked for his election. I have worried for sometime that Obama is dismissive of liberals in his unsuppressed need to include everyone. Some people do not warrant inclusion by virtue of their own personal animosity to the values of others.

[Proletariatprincess]

39. This is what I feared from the first time I saw Obama.

I couldn't bring myself to vote for him....I voted for Nader. It's the damn religious thing. What is it about Americans and their fanatical adherence to ignorance and superstition and hatred and intolerance in the name of Jesus?
Somebody has to say it...and often...and loudly...we will never have justice and equality in this country as long as our politicians pander to religion in general...christian religion in particular.
I am so sorry to have been right about Obama. I have wanted to believe my friends who said they all play this game to win elections. But early on I saw a quality that disturbed me in Barack Obama: the potential for religious demagoguery that I think is dangerous in this country at this time more than any other. This has sent a deep chill thru my newly quickened optimism.

[subsuelo]

44. why nader over kucinich?

but yeah I hear ya

[Fearless]

57. You feared this the first time you SAW him?

That's a horrible choice of words considering the Prop. 8 debate.

[Zhade]

41. I can't fucking believe this.

We need to let him know this is unacceptable, and get him to dis-invite this bigot.

[Freddie Stubbs]

48. Why can't you beleive this? Do you not remember Donnie McClurkin?

[TankLV]

55. THAT's that assholes name - thanks - I forgot...

I had a feeling this was going to happen...

[Zhade]

60. Fuck off, Stubbs -- now is not the fucking time.

NT!

[Freddie Stubbs]

82. When is the time?

[No Elephants]

117. Now IS the time.

[gorbal]

45. But some of his best frineds are gay-

"Explaining his views about homosexuality and gay rights, he notes, "I don't think that homosexuality is the worst sin," and, "By the way, my wife and I had dinner at a gay couple's home two weeks ago. So I'm not homophobic guy, okay?" "

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050912/kaminer/2

[Mari333]

49. what a total creep!!! can you imagine being married to someone like that?

god, what a nightmare.

[No Elephants]

119. So, is being born gay the second worst sin? The third? The fourth? Please, Rick, enlighten us.

[TankLV]

52. WTF?! THis shit has GOT to STOP NOW! I'm FURIOUS, too!

I've held my tongue, and bashed others for not giving him a chance - but this is really fucked...

FUCK OBAMA!

He's losing me - FAST...

[Fearless]

58. Wow good thing the party isn't represented by DU...

You'd think he was a mass murderer or something...


Did anyone notice the person giving the benediction? You'd do well to check that out too before making such rash decisions. Dare I quote this night: Throwing the Baby Out With the Bathwater Night?

[Zhade]

61. So you're okay with bigots? Would you be okay with a Klansmen speaking too?

How about an anti-semitic Holocaust denier?

[Fearless]

63. I would have no problem with anyone getting up and talking about unity

Or peace and love and all that jazz. If they wanted to talk about antisemitism or so on, I'd say no thanks, that's not where I'd like to go with this, etc. The fact is that he will be reading a prepared remark and I some how doubt that it will include said bigotry. I've made my views clear on why he was chosen in other places, feel free to search them out if you will. It's getting late, I'd rather not repost. Regardless, I don't see bigots I see bigotry. I believe that a person is capable of -- say -- hating gay people (like myself) and yet still want to see the United States unite in peace and love and all that jazz just the same as I believe that I can like and even possibly enjoy the company of a Republican, or a theist, or, dare I say, a straight person, all of whom believe concretely in something vastly different from what I believe in.

[Gen. Jack D. Ripper]

96. I would just like to thank you for your post.

I'm really glad that not everyone is abandoning reason.

[Fearless]

102. You're welcome

[No Elephants]

65. Gay activists are not the only ones who are furious. I am a hetero female and

livid. I am mostly pro-chooice, totally pro-gay marriage, TOTALLY pro-separation of church and state and totally pro-Democrats. Warren is NONE Of those things. He preaches that voting for anyone who is pro-choice is against God. I contribute to elect Democrats and THEY choose HIM to give what will probably be the most high profile prayer of Obama's inauguration?

I still hate Nader from Florida 2000, but I am nonetheless starting to consider going Green.

[FlaGranny]

73. Can no one see the big picture?

Chosing someone like that will have evangelicals and fundamentalists tuning in to the inauguration and maybe, for the first time, they will actually listen to and maybe even agree to much of what he says, and some may even come to accept Presdident Obama

I'm glad the PE is a lot smarter than people here. It is interesting that Warren, if he heard anything Obama said (always including gays in his remarks AND in his cabinet), still agreed to do it - most of those types hate Obama for being PRO-gay.

[No Elephants]

76. Neo theos will NEVER support a candidate who is pro-choice or pro-gay

marriage unless and until they change their their basic religious beliefs.

As far as what you call the big picture, since when giving the honor of the Inaugural Invocation the he only way to dialogue with the hating, condemning religious rightwingnuts? that is one of the highest honors government can bestow on a member of the clergy.

If I choose a member of the clergy to, say, preach at my wedding or my child's baptism, that is about as close as I can come to endorsing what that person preaches today and yesterday, not what I HOPE he or she MAY POSSIBLY preach four years from now. Choosing someone to give the invocation at the most historic inauguration since Washington's is an even stronger endorsement.

Did no one learn anything from the Wright debacle?

No, you can try to build bridges with the far religious right in many other ways, ways that might actually accomplish a meeting of the minds. All this does is honor the hater.

[Bluebear]

78. Good, the fundies can tune in. because I now have NO desire to watch.

[myrna minx]

74. This is a slap in the face. I'm really upset by this.

[No Elephants]

75. Make your

voice heard. http://change.gov/page/content/contact (You can even select the Inauguration category.)

Feel free to contact the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, too. The only contact numbers are for the Rules Committee, which operates the website, but you can contact the offices of one or more of its members: Feinstein (chair). Reid, Pelosi, Stoyer and Republicans Bennett and Boehner.

Please don't simply post about this. At least let Obama's people (via his website) and/or your fellow Democrats in Congress know that you object to having hating, condemning clergy given one of the biggest honors clergy can get from government.

[Ms. Toad]

81. Did that last night. n/t

[No Elephants]

101. Good!

[dyancollingsralph]

129. Thank you for posting how to make my voice heard

I needed to do that!

[Jawja]

79. Obama has invited a religious person

to invoke some mythical "god" at his inauguration?? As an agnostic, I am outraged!! If he seeks to "bridge the divide," he should invite a Druid or a Wiccan or an Atheist instead!

ENOUGH of this pandering to people who believe in Cloud Beings with magical powers!

Seriously, I am sick of any pandering to ANY religious belief for ANY reason. This is Separation of Church and State and there so be NO prayer at a Presidential Inauguration.

[Deep13]

86. Amen to that. nt

[No Elephants]

90. I am not an atheist, but I agree with you. I am for strict separation of church and state. However

if you are going to follow tradition and have an invocation, at least choose someone who is not against voting for Democrats, against separation of church and state, anti-gay rights and anti-choice. Is THAT too much to ask of the Inauguration of the first African American President in our history?

[JerseygirlCT]

88. Terribly disappointing

And despite his explanations, I don't understand this at all. There's no need for this.

[No Elephants]

89. I have not seen or heard any explanations from Obama yet. Do you have a link?

[JerseygirlCT]

92. No, he was just asked a question on TV while

talking about his picks for SEC and Futures Commodity...

Plus, his spokesperson said something last night about it, too. Neither had a great deal of substance, IMO.

Perhaps the spokesperson's statement is out now? I'll take a look for you if I can find the time!

[No Elephants]

99. Thanks. I'll google. The real explanation is fairly obvious, I think. Warren is a best selling

author and has a lot of influence. However, I think Obama and others can try to build bridges to Warrn without giving him this great honor.

[JerseygirlCT]

114. That's where I am, too

I'm all for building bridges, and that often requires actually sitting down and talking with people you disagree with.

BUT... that doesn't require giving them this sort of national attention and the appearance of acceptance. It's just insensitive at best.

He's a really smart guy, so perhaps there really is something here I'm just not seeing, but, boy. So not necessary, IMHO.

[BukaHobbit]

94. Just Building Bridges

Hey, he is just trying to be inclusive. Doesn't he have to be everyone's president?

[No Elephants]

103. Did you forget the sarcasm icon?

[nolabels]

106. .

[slackmaster]

100. The last several weeks have been rough on gay activists

You have my sympathy for the pain you are experiencing.

[crikkett]

104. Warren may be the only evangelical minister he could find who isn't

so very corrupt as to be a national embarrassment.

Think about it...

PS and I hope they insist on approving his statements beforehand.

[No Elephants]

110. Why does the person who gives the invocation have to be an evangelical again? What's

wrong with, for example, a moderate Episcopalian or a moderate Methodist? Even a moderate rabbi?

[crikkett]

124. You know what, IT'S NOT MY CALL!

And I feel effin' fabulous about that.

Have you thought about what news there is that we maybe should be outraged over, instead of this soap opera BS? Prop 8 notwithstanding, I personally voted against it, and I'm happy to support any legal action being taken to overturn/nullify the measure. Maybe call your state legislator instead of the Inaugural Committee. Because I think that's a more productive use of time than bitching about every petty little thing.

Let GO of your bitterness and work for progress. People will join your side if you're happy. Bitterellas drive people away.

Take care,
me.

[No Elephants]

130. I would bet that I worked as many hours and contributed as much to help Obama get elected

as you or any poster did. However, that does not make me idolatrous. I am going to speak up if I see a wrong, no matter what its source. I don't think we do ourselves, our country or any politician any favors by not keeping them accountable.

I think that Obama made a mistake with Warren and I don't think it was an insignificant mistake either. You disagree on the importance of it, but that does not make you correct on that point.

I am expressing my opinion about the issue, both to www.change. gov and on a message board, but without attacking anyone personally or calling any poster silly names or making any assumptions about people whom I know less than nothing about.

Nothing about what I am doing is inappropriate. Both message boards and change.gov are, after all, for expressing opinions. By going personal when your pronouncement is questioned politely, instead of sticking to issues, you, however, do come across as bitter.

[JohnAB]

105. God bliss Obama's choice!

The art of pleasing -Consists in being pleased!-

thank you for supporting our rights and unity of or movement.

we feel a deep level of respect. John

[RCinBrooklyn]

109. CEO of the Inaugural Committee is named Emmett Beliveau. His number is 202-203-1715 or emmett@pic200

[No Elephants]

120. Thanks RC. Not sure which Inaugural Committee you mean. Is he

an Obama staffer?

For those who want more contact info, again:

Obama-- http://change.gov/page/content/contact

There's even an "Inauguration" topic you can select as the subject of your email to Obama.

You may also want to contact the office of Barbara Feinstein, chair of the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, and/or Reid, Pelosi or Hoyer, the Democratic members of that committee. http://inaugural.senate.gov/cmte / That is the Committee that made the announcemtn about the inaugural program, including Rick Warren. (Bennett and Boehner are the Republican members of the Committee, but I think we should keep it in the family. So, if you want to contact them, you're on your own.)

Feinstein Contact Info Page http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction...

Reid Contact Info Page http://reid.senate.gov / (Scroll to bottom.)

Pelosi Email Address [e-mail]

Pelosi Email Form and Telephone Numbers Page http://www.house.gov/pelosi/contact/contact.html

Hoyer Email Page http://hoyer.house.gov / (Scroll to Bottom)

Hoyer Contact Info Page- http://hoyer.house.gov/contact /

[Celeborn Skywalker]

127. Good.

This is the first time I'm genuinely angry with Obama. It's not the end of the world, but it does send an awful signal both to fundies that we're willing to accommodate their bigotry and to LGBT that he doesn't give a damn about their civil rights.

[dyancollingsralph]

128. I just unsubscribed from barackobama.com

I just unsubscribed from barackobama.com. Why? RICK WARREN. He is not just "across the aisle." He actively foments hate.