Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Warren giving the invocation is a disappointment

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
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 02:52 PM
Original message
Warren giving the invocation is a disappointment
Of course it was not necessary to have a homophobe intrude on this ceremony, but the irony of having a California homophobe is especailly disappointing.

Not only that its not that brilliant strategically. If you wanted to acknowledge Evangelicals it would be better if he were to go to someone like Reverend Richard Cizik (who was a college friend of mine) who has been on the front lines of confronting Evangelicals on their ecological and support for the poor stand. It would be better if he had gotten a moderate conservative from a mainline Protestant Church, people that are much closer to Obama's theological and political position.

If Obama wanted to reach out to a conservative religious leader (even with the objectionable views on civil rights for GLBT) then better to pick someone from a "connected" Protestant Denomination rather than these self promoting ministers who set up their own power structures and are not answerable to ecclesiastical communities.

Having said that there is nothing that Rick Warren can do that will diminish the joy I will experience on Jan 20th.

We should not stand up and turn the other direction or throw our shoe at him. We should politely ignore him.

This day is ours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. it's just another good reason there should be no religious invocation at all at a public ceremony.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrattotheend Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. That should be up to Obama - it's his swearing in
And it's his choice whether he wants a religious leader there, which as a person committed to his faith he obviously does. There's no rule saying he has to have one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #3
16. Is he incapable of going to church on his own time?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #3
23. no, it's up to the Constitution
which calls for the separation of church and state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrattotheend Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #23
27. Right, which would be violated if presidents were not allowed to have their religious leader speak
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Outlawing the convocation would be prohibiting the free exercise thereof, just as mandating it would be considered establishment of religion. I believe school prayer is unconstitutional because attendance at school is compulsory, so students are a captive audience to the prayer. But nobody is required to be at inauguration or watch it on TV. If anyone does not want to attend because of this I'll be glad to take their tickets!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
2. "We should politely ignore him." I have a better idea,
Edited on Wed Dec-17-08 02:57 PM by ProSense
everyone should write to Obama and express their displeasure. There isn't an excuse valid enough to justify Warren.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I have no problem with a good ol' fashioned shoe throwing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. actually shoe throwing has to be considered "new fashion"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Yes I agree with that and should have added that..
My meaning was to do nothing at the ceremony itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ryanmuegge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
5. If you think this is a disappointment, you're going to really hate the next four years.
Edited on Wed Dec-17-08 02:58 PM by ryanmuegge
It's still better than the last eight years of the Cheney administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. no I am going to love the next 8 years

In the last 12 months this is the first real criticism I have had of Obama's campaign or transition.


In this case I just think that his personal association with Warren has influenced his decision.


While of marginal symbolic importance I don't find the invocation speaker to be that significant, this is just an unfortunate choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
6. I wish you would send this thoughtful
piece to http://www.change.gov, grant.

I sent a message yesterday because I feel strongly about Vilsack being chosen for Ag Sec. And, even if he's chosen Obama will know that some of us don't think big ag and monsanto are the best for this country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
7. Why do you hate America? Why?? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AspenRose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
8. Tony Campolo. Barry Lynn. Jim Wallis.
NOT Rick Warren!!!! Unbelievable. :banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
17. Thank you -- JIM WALLIS would have been perfect!
Evangelical, but in a thoughtful, intellectual,
LIBERAL way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
10. With all due respect, the day is not "ours" if this hater is doing the invocation.
I am sickened and I will definitely be writing to Obama. I am a straight atheist resident of California that is still reeling from the sucking chest wound of a law that is Prop 8. Why would Obama want to give airspace to someone who thinks it's OK to amend a Constitution to take away human rights? That is WRONG on so many levels. I'm not yelling at you Grantcart, I'm just venting. This is very disappointing to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Yes it is disappointing


This is still our day, years in the making.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goclark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
12. Warren's the one that lied and said MCCain was in a lock
out place and couldn't hear the questions ~ right?

:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
15. Why didn't he ask someone like the head of Sojourners?
Can't recall his name at the moment, but he's a LIBERAL
evangelical.

Also wish they'd selected Joseph Lowery to do the invocation
instead of the benediction. If they had to include Warren,
give him the end of the "show" -- not the "marquee" slot ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullwinkle428 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
18. Why couldn't he have picked someone like Rev. Jim Wallis?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Wallis

Wallis actively eschews political labels, but his advocacy tends to focus on issues of peace and social justice, earning him his primary support from the religious left. Wallis is also known for his opposition to the religious right's fiscal and foreign policies

"In discussing the 2004 American presidential elections, Wallis said 'Jesus didnt speak at all about homosexuality. There are about 12 verses in the Bible that touch on that question ... here are thousands of verses on poverty. I dont hear a lot of that conversation.'"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
19. Someone suggest to voice our displeasure on Obama's site
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
20. Like a turd in the punchbowl?
That sort of disappointment?

It is disgusting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
21. I'll be at the Inauguration and will turn my back when Warren is speaking
I may be way the hell in the back, but I (and I'm sure many others) will turn their backs when he is speaking... maybe we can wave a sign or two as well.

It's a good chance to embarrass Warren.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. stay warm
(I froze at Jimmy Carter's)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #21
25. Or at least let him know
how much of America feels about his heinous, hypocritical bigotry.

I hope people who are feeling this against warren being at the Inaugeration are writing to http://www.change.gov and letting the one in charge know.

I was passionate enough about something Yesterday to write to "change".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
22. More like shame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-17-08 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
26. I think picking him was a tone deaf move on the part of the JCIC
or whoever that group is that plans the Inauguration, particularly in light of the past McClurkin outrage. I don't think Obama picked Warren but there is a group of people who are eager to paint Obama in a certain light whenever something happens. Nevertheless, I am still elated that Obama will be the new president.

And on a side note, imagine how much more powerful this latest set of objections would be if there had not already been 100s of other outrage eruptions over the past 6 weeks?
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 Thu Aug 21st 2014, 03:58 PM
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