To Mr. Obama From Your Newly Gay Constituents

"I cannot sit here idly by in Atlanta and not be concerned about what happens in Birmingham." -- Dr. King, 16 April 1963

The news of your choice to honor Rick Warren with the privilege of delivering your inaugural Invocation -- a day that so many of us worked for with every wit, penny or hope we had -- has caused more pain and sadness than you can imagine. Because any invocation that issues from Rick Warren cannot be an appeal to a higher power's blessing but a conjuring of the basest spirits plaguing and dividing the American people.

While you may be right that the American people and in particular, that your supporters are "noisy, diverse and opinionated', Mr. Obama, civil rights are not an opinion. Civil rights is not one side of a balanced disagreement and it was saddening beyond expression to hear you frame the rightful and widespread recoiling from your choice in this way. Contrary to the headlines, it's not only the gay community that has been hurt by this choice to showcase Warren. It is also women like me who believe our choice is inherent and who seek to safeguard it for our daughters. It's also those of us who will never countenance anti-Semitism no matter the fount, and especially those of us who will never agree to the idea that there are some people in our society who are not fully human and so, whose life and dignity are somehow available as a bargaining chip in political negotiations.

The GLBT community has been made, unfairly, to bear the brunt of the opposition to Mr. Warren. Warren is a Dominionist, an extreme ideology associated with white supremacy, with homophobia, with anti-Semitism, with misogyny and with the intrusion of radical right wing religious views on our secular democracy. If the repudiation of Mr. Warren and his views is being labeled "gay" at the moment, then anyone who supports the Constitution and equal rights must also be gay by that measure. Mr. Obama, it seems that as people of conscience, many of us are all proudly gay right now.

"This is our time". At some point soon, we will come to the understanding that "social conservatism" is a euphemism, code for "public discrimination we still accept". Because "social conservatism" has nothing to do with conservatism or with civil society. It is an implicit packaging of a group of bigotries that we as a nation still allow to pass as acceptable in our democratic society. "Social conservatism" is a rubric that allows racists to face the light of day and to openly pray for harm to come to women and to gay people. We accept that these bigotries are fanned in radical churches much as anti-American sentiment is fanned in radical madrasas. We accept them to be broadcast in public, too, just as open racism once was. The agency that a woman has over her body or that a gay person has over their life are now both more commonly accepted targets. To our shame, we have normalized these hatreds and accept them as "social" and "conservative" when they are anti-social and destructive.

I cannot know why you chose Warren but, with respect, it cannot be as a credible gesture of unity. The authoritarian right reads all such gestures as surrenders and surely you know that. Reaching out to Warren and all he stands for (all that he advocates, anyway, in his cottage industry of division and disrespect) is to reach out to discrimination and so, to exclusion -- the antithesis of the purpose you describe. One of the very particular delights in your candidacy was a pleasure in your nimble intelligence, education and sweeping empathy. It's exactly because of such bright promise that seeing you embrace this destructive man and hearing you invoke "inclusion" is particularly painful. How can it be our moment when the man you choose to hail an Almighty advocates against the human dignity of so many? Adding that negative man to our national celebration is clearly subtraction, not addition.

It may be that the American people have for once surprised even you, Mr. Obama. It may be that for once, we're a little ahead of your estimation in our appreciation and in our respect for our fellow citizens and so, can calmly and rationally tell you: Rick Warren cannot possibly represent us well enough to summon any greater spirit of peace and strength and unity from his toxic, public positions of opposition and aggression and division. Especially not on the one day every four years when we yearn most to cohere as a people. I hope coming to know we're a little better than we seem to be, noisy and diverse and opinionated as we are, is not an unwelcome surprise to you.

On the night of your election, you reminded us that what we had achieved was only a chance to effect change. While you seem to be saying the goal is to bring us together, trading political cover to discrimination cannot result in unity. On the contrary, it's the premature precluding, the closing off of our hard won chance. That surely is the old politics that you so often dismissed on the stump. As Dr. King said in a letter you might recognize, "I must affirm that it is just as wrong, or perhaps even more so, to use moral means to preserve immoral ends."

May you see the wisdom of that affirmation anew so all Americans can share the joy of your inauguration on that so long awaited day.

Yes they do. Kick and rec.

Thank you.

an insulting attempt to pander by Evil Liberals who think right-wingers are too stupid to see through it.

I went through the Rapture Ready Boards today--the above was the main consensus. They don't give a shit about "connecting" with us, or "uniting" with us. They think that they have a fucking Holy Mandate to destroy us and everything we stand for, and theocratize America in the process.

There is no truce with unreasonable, insane people.

I guess we should encourage Obama to get rid of them? He could do it y'know.

Or, he could go right to their leader and attempt to get Warren to change his mind and be more of a true Christian?

Choices: make war, or make peace. We know what those idiots want, what do we want?

What's yours?

Be diplomatic. Sit down at the table and use Judo to defeat them.

I guess you can't have a discussion.

I'll even be fine with making peace when I think they're ready. But I don't think they are.

Although I have always found it interesting that he rocks the Hawaiian shirt and goatee look. Somewhat confused are we, pastor?

Gosh, now I'm being told what I know.

Fuck that.

Everything changes. Everything. Warren is not some stone cold inhuman robot. But what he is is a hypocrite, like so many other self styled Christians. He can be shamed. He will be shamed, sooner or later.

Should we humiliate him further by nominating him for next year's Nobel Peace Prize?

It would have been enough to do what you say you want to do by just inviting him to the Inaugural.

His coming to the inaugural has launched a movement that will, in the end, bring him down. But only if those who see through his sham make it happen.

Some of you will see it through, others I have my doubts about.

Would have been to tell him that Bishop Robinson or Rev. Mel White would give the invocation with him.

That would have been making an impression, and there'd have been no honorable way for Saddleback Rick to object.

an invocation. Obama's choice is very hurtful. HE SHOULD KNOW BETTER, but doesn't.

honoring someone is not the same as challenging them in a discussion. It's more like Obama is saying: "I look to you for spiritual guidance, in this New World Order".

From what planet are you?

Remember, Obama was called a Muslim... was hell, he still is. So he asks this leader of the fundie church to say a prayer for like 2 minutes, and some people think he's now going to be taking spiritual guidance from him?

Fucking wacked, dudes.

of giving the Invocation.

I don't mean to pick a fight with you, BeFree, but that is the implication of that particular invitation.

A 2 minute babble and he's gone over to the Saddleback?

Well, hell, that explains a lot. If folks really believe that Obama is joining the Saddleback, then hell yeah, I'd be upset too.

But don't worry, Obama is just using the hypocrite to burnish his image with some folks. Remember, his longtime preacher Rev. Wright? The God Damn America guy who we all kinda agreed with? Obama's not gonna stray far from that.

But it's on top of all the non-progressive Cabinet appointments(mostly corporate types and DLC'ers, with progressives given Labor as a bone), plus all the unneeded post-election rightward policy tacks(we were reassured that the rightward stuff would STOP after the election, and we had a right to expect it, since no further tacking was needed AFTER the votes were in).

And it's not just Warren on gays. It's also him on choice, on Jews, on women.

Why is the progressive wing of the party being continually asked to know our place, to be silent, to wait, to take everything on trust? We were an equal partner in this victory and ever since the election Obama's team has treated us like the plague.

I could understand this pattern of behavior if we'd squeaked in by two electoral votes, but we won by eight million. Why can't the new team accept that the party doesn't have to work from a defensive crouch anymore?

What the hell did we do to deserve all this contempt?

Why should we settle for what we're given?

It's not like we're to blame for anything.

Hard to argue against.

But..... we are such a fickle bunch no sane poli would count on us for very much. As it is we've much to prove, like not desert him like we did Carter. Something we are already doing to Obama at -30 days.

The pattern is one that is a solid governing stand: Get as many supporters as you can as quick as you can to make the moves necessary to get us out of the hole we are in.

And, reality sucks, but where else are we gonna go?

Than the future DLC'ers had done by McGovern in '72, or would do by Mondale in '84 or Dukakis in '88(not that the latter two were actually all that liberal but progressives unfairly get blamed for their failures and their defeats were used to justify kicking us in the teeth all through the 90's).

It was Reagan's "arms for hostage" deals that cost Carter the election, not anything the liberal wing of the party did. And even if every John Anderson voter had voted for Carter in '80, he'd STILL have lost.

Are you saying we were obligated not to support a primary challenge to Carter to be entitled to respect by the party now?

And really, what, in this day and age, does the PROGRESSIVE wing have to prove?

Are we obligated to back the bad Dems unquestioningly and the bad Dem policies unquestioningly in order to have a tiny chance of getting progressive stuff in the far, far future?

Why should so much more loyalty be expected from us than from the RIGHT wing of the party? Why are they free to say what they want and leave anytime, but we're obligated to be "team players" no matter what?

We're not that insignificant, and the American people don't hate what we stand for THAT much.

We're entitled to be treated with equal respect to the DLC.

We've always been right about major policies. And no we get no respect. Why should we when with 30 days to go before he even gets seated, we are abandoning him? You think it's not being noticed that we are abandoning him?

And frankly, the reason we are jumping just isn't good enough, not for me or most other solid democrats who don't have the pleasure of this board.

and trying to change it.

Dissent is not desertion.

in his appointments and in not asking for testimony of economists before formulating the final bailout measure. And we've objected. You're twisting things around.

What you're asking for is simply not humanly possible. You're saying that in order to be taken seriously by the soon President, we have to keep silent about our most strongly held political convictions, the very convictions that motivated our strong opposition to McCain/Palin, and support without comment the President-elect as he restricts access to him to the very people that started the economic disaster avalanche we citizens are suffering from. You're saying it's humanly possible for someone who denies their best understanding of what is important to somehow be taken more seriously than someone who maintains their integrity and sends up a flare when our ship of state approaches an iceberg.

Other than that, we're irrelevant. They care about power, that's all.

and the media is already hyping him as the next Billy Graham, some sort of religious liason to the White House. If not a spiritual advisor, then I don't know what else to call it.

n/t.

"Should we humiliate him further by nominating him for next year's Nobel Peace Prize?"

Ask him to change his position on all things Biblical and he won't budge.

God's Law or Man's Law? You know what he's going to pick.

I do think, hope whatever that DCBob may be correct and that Obama hopes to make inroads to some of his (Warrens) followers, not Warren.

Obama has admitted that this is a political quid-pro-quo of sorts, for the invitation he got 2 years ago.

He is not going to alienate his 'maintainers of his lifestyle' because of civil rights.

I wouldn't say that people never change. It takes a lot of racial hatred to join the KKK and recruit others to join. And yet Byrd has become a latter day champion of civil rights.

Don't give up hope for anybody.

and O'Reilly, you can't even really tell what they really believe. They spout their hatred for money, big money.

It seems like it would be easier to turn a mercenary bigot who is just in it for the money than a bigot who is getting nothing of worth out of it other than stoking the fires of their own hatred.

only money. Rick Warren is worse than a plain bigot. Regardless of his true principles he chooses to fan the flames of hatred for money.

Warren may find after the inauguration that it's more profitable to change his tune. In that case Obama is offering positive reinforcement as a way to change bigotry. Here's hoping something good comes out of his plan.

but he's also a bigot. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Sid

in a nutshell, oktoberain. The people DON'T want to "connect" or "unite" with us. All they want is to destroy us and theocratise the US because they feel that God is on their side. You don't bargain with these people because there IS no bargaining with madmen.

n/t

I do *not* want to reduce being gay to a metaphor and I want to be able to show how discrimination also affects ALL of us. That's the writing problem in this thing. It's still under construction but I had to write out the draft to be able to see it outside of this thick head.

As one who grew up among extremist evangelicals, I think those who have not had the experience, find it easy to believe that these rabid people can be turned around.They are hate addicts who always smile and parrot their leaders, professing to love the "sinners". In fact , they love violence,IMO. But they are reined in by their "leader".Warren and his ilk enjoy their power and the money it brings.

Thank you, anitar1.

you are not correct. They can change. Prejudice is learned and based in inaccurate ideas, beliefs, as well as lies. People are not born evangelical, they are born into evangelical families or convert. It is not a biological disposition. I have not always been successful. Some who I have tried to change have not changed and eventually I decided to spend my time on others. However, it is possible that those who I did not have success with might change in the future. It is very difficult and time consuming to get them to change because they must leave the evangelical community. Therefore, asking them to change their ideas about gays is asking them to turn their backs on family and friends. Many times, we are talking about people in rural, isolated, area's and they must leave their home towns as part of this change.

Characterizing all evangelicals as loving violence and being addicted to hate is just as ignorant as the things I hear them say about the gay community. Your beliefs about them are stereotypes based upon the limited interaction you have had.

I am so tired of hearing people say that we can not reach out to the religious right and change them, specifically their ideas about homosexuality but additionally other idea's also. These idea that they can not change are so obviously false. History is filled with examples of religious organizations, and other organizations in general, who have changed. Additionally, some of those examples reflect changes larger than the change we desire. For example, it was a wide spread phenomena that a host of religious communities thought that witches existed and these communities subsequently murdered people. But, information (especially science) changed the way they think. So, if those communities changed and stopped killing people, then evangelicals can change. They will change. Societies and humans are always slowly changing. Not fast enough for me and you of course, which is why it is easy to become pessimistic.

I have changed three evangelical people, one male and two females. All were over 18 years old when I began trying to change them (legal reasons), one took over 2 years and the others took less than a year. The male turned out to be struggling with his sexuality and is now a proud gay man. One of the females is a now an activists and flaming feminist. Put a couple books in her hands that led to some serious militant tendencies, which always pleases me. All have re-newed a relationship with their families who have excepted that their kids no longer believe what they taught them. One has remained religious, two feel betrayed and are not currently religious.
I helped them get out of their communities and establish themselves somewhere else. I told all of them that they owe me big-time and they must repay the debt by doing for others what I did for them. Multiplier effect.

I have had successes in rural Illinois and rural Mississippi. Thats right, Mississippi. I have encouraged others to do the same and their successes include rural Iowa, Georgia, Oregon, and Utah. Considering the networking capabilities of blogs. This site could facilitate the sharing of tactics, stories, etc.

I must admit to failure more than success, but that only motivates me. And yes, it is my failure. Each time I try I learn something new about the process and recognize mistakes I have made. I urge you to start reaching out to those with prejudice feelings about homosexuality. Don't start with the entrenched hardened evangelicals, begin with the soft bigots and work your way up. It takes a lot of skill and commitment to "crack an evangelical" and I have noticed that multiple failures and no successes makes people stop trying. You will probably fail the first time. Know that going into it. You will eventually get to the point where you can identify people who are more or less likely to change and you will find that transitional points in a persons life are good opportunities (going to college). Your first success will change your life.

It will, as it always is, not the poli's, but us who change the world. The actions of one are important. If a straight male can do it, you can too.

Are some of them nasty/hateful/selfish people? Yes. Are some of them purposefully manipulating people? Yes. Both of these truths help me change someone. Eventually, there will be a time when the Evangelical community is punishing them for something, and I, the one they have treated poorly, respond with understanding and assistance. This is what I refer to as a "golden lecture moment" about love, tolerance, acceptance, and understanding.

Is what I do very emotionally, financially, economically, socially, and physically dangerous? More than you know. Do I get mad and call them every name in the book? Yes, and some that I have made up. Never to their face, but I call up the three I have changed and vent. Do I feel like stopping sometimes? Yes, all the time. Have I ever took time off? Yes. Why do I continue? Every time I speak with the one's I have helped their personal, social, psychological, and emotional health encourages me. Of course we are very tight and they thank me all the time as their lives are now full of excepting, supportive people.

What you need to understand is that most are victims. No child asks to be born into a family that teaches them beliefs that lead to social and cultural isolation and low-self esteem. Many of the women have issues with sexuality and depression that usually require counseling. They are victims of emotional abuse.

how is it relevant? You don't change hateful, bigoted people by saying to them, in effect "Your hateful thoughts and your bigoted attitudes are perfectly acceptable, and we'll prove it by honoring you". That's the issue here and that's what Obama is doing, instead of coming out and telling Rick Warren that he is just simply wrong about issues that decent people should have no disagreement about.

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

on their sleeves to show solidarity with Jews who were compelled by the Nazis to do so during the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands.

just Gay constituents, but anyone who cares about civil rights, or the right to choose, or just scientific common sense.

I love the "newly gay" twist. I will proudly declare myself "newly gay".

Thank you for writing such a wonderful piece!


sw

lol

Obama needs to read this.

!!!!!

AMAZING.

K/R

HIGHLY recommended.

because I can only rec this once myself.

Well said!

and feel behind the curve. But, thank you and onward.

Every day I come here and read something about this issue from the heart and that makes so much sense. This is one of those times.

...I can't agree that the authoritarian right reads all gestures as surrender.

I continue to believe the correlational approach is the best way forward. And a lot of the reason I believe that is because of the personal experience with my authoritarian right parents and their gradual 15 year move to the activist left.

Aside from that one point that got me thinking, that was very well written. And I've become much more opened minded to the well written criticsm of Obama's mistake once I had a chance to clear my head.


EDIT - oh yeah, that gets a recommend for the sake good discussion.

sorry, the syntax screams at me!

other than that: right on, sister!

lol

Thank you!

Are really, very TRULY gay:



(It's surprisingly hard to find decent "Munchkin Coroner" images online).

My goose bumps have goose bumps.

Can anybody find the "I'm Gay" high school auditorium scene from "In and Out" and post it here? I've been looking for it and this is the first time that scene makes sense.

(For anybody who hasn't seen it, it's an homage to the "I am Spartacus" scene from, of course, SPARTACUS).

If any can read this and STILL think Warren is in any way an acceptable choice, there is something very wrong with them.

SO VERY WELL DONE.

You've got the Right Stuff, lady. This is something that should be read aloud.

Thank you. Recommended.

coming from my toughest crowd.

Thank you.

because, most of the people I know who are supporting the removal of Warren for the prayer are Straight, not Gay!

It's as if my Gay friends are just defeated and tired of arguing - it's time for someone who's NOT Gay to stand up for us!

P.E. Obama, as Rev. Sharpton said, homophobia needs to be addressed - and as MLK JR said, using moral belief to justify immoral outcomes is wrong wrong wrong!

I hope he hears us loud and clear - and at the LEAST says he believes Warren's comment are BIGOTED, not just that he disagrees with him on some issues - but that his views on several subjects are BIGOTED and hostile.


Amen!

courtesy of a formal response from the new president.

Recommended.

k&r indeedy.

And, I told him to make it a special comment.

It is THAT good.

It is truly eloquent. I think you are absolutely correct. We are a better people.

have problems they do not wish to examine.

Wonderful post. K&R

Excellent work.

Expressions like yours are why.

my dear, you nailed it.

I hope we can get this published somewhere.

This is the authoritative voice on DU on the subject.

can save some time lol

Excellent......just excellent

It's clear that writing is your calling.

lol

I love you guys so much.

Buenas.

Simply beautiful.

I like the phrase as all one word. Newlygay. Ha, proud to be one.

I like that, Newlygay.

yours is the best.

Thanks for posting.

There are a few here that fancy themselves as DU's unofficial byline columnists, who love to expound (and take stands) on the hot topics of the day. Except for the Warren Fiasco, it seems.

Your OP is what I was hoping to read from them, but after reading yours a second time, I think your OP was better than they could have ever dreamed of writing.

I'm proud to give this a K&R.

is a mystery to me.

of the Minority from the Tyranny of the Majority. Therefore, I stand with the Minorities, as Gandhi said to the effect: A person who stands against injustice is a Majority of One! I hereby declare that I am Gay, I am a Jew, I am a Muslim, I am Black, I am a Woman, I am disabled, I am a Child - Pass it On.

It is simply beautiful the way it is.

Obama needs to read this. It would give him something enlightening to read on his two week stay in Oahu.

You done great, Beth!

Thanks for this incredibly astute post.
You covered it girl. You really covered it.
I am so damn proud of you. Someday I'll be
able to write like that.

sfexpat2000! You have covered all the reasons why Rick Warren should never have been invited to give the Invocation, and why he ought to be dis-invited. Giving Rick Warren public attention and a chance to gain more followers will not unite America. You do not get bigots to change their minds by giving them national attention. Thank you, sfexpat2000, for saying what needs to be said!

You said it better than I ever could, sfexpat. YES!