Obama | Homosexuals - Page 2

Exactly, you can understand the decision. Doesn't mean you still can't be disgusted by Warren. But it doesn't mean that Obama just "sold out" gays.

Maybe Obama plans on using Warren as a human shield in case someone takes a shot at him? Just speculating.

But, seriously, while I hate Warren like cancer, I'm still in Giving-Obama-the-Benefit-of-the-Doubt mode.

From the Time article:

This guy is in some sort of stupidity frenzy. Calling Obama a bigot renders the term meaningless.

Ugh. Bitch all you want - he's got four years to prove one of us right.

First of all, stop slagging "Liberals". This is a small group of whiners. I'm pretty sure a lot of us here, defending Obama, would consider ourselves Liberal.

Also, see the comments from a few weeks ago about Obama making smart moves about his cabinet. Can you people not see what he's doing? He's got right-wingers, who were ready to start up the hate machine full-blast, defending him against the left. They're fucking putty in his hands. The more the left complains, the more the wingnuts start reflexively defending Obama, if grudgingly. And the inevitable "Obama is turning America into Gay Muslim pot 'n' abortion land" narrative gets delayed and diluted. I don't think it's just Obama, either--I think a lot of lefties are engaging in, essentially, concern trolling. "Oh no, Bre'r Obama, don't throw us in that briar patch!"

I'll worry about Obama's secret conservative agenda when he starts contributing more to it than just empty gestures.

Alright, you convinced me with that middle paragraph. Still hate the shit out of Warren though, but I'll grit my teeth and think of bunnies while he delivers the prayer.

Most likely becuase

1) he knows the history. Clinton supported having Gays in the Military (offically) and it helped sink his first term and helped "Family Values when I'm not screwing around on my wife" Newt Gingrich to lead a Republican resurgence in Congress. He (and we) do not need a replay of that.

2) I seriously doubt Gay Rights is Obama's highest priority right now. Not off the radar mind you, but there is this little problem of a world side Depressin looming

Egocentric.

Plus, I'm pretty sure Warren isn't going to go up, prayer in hand, then pull another, unapproved script from his sleeve and go, 'Ha! Got you fuckers!' and start railing on the gays for what? 30 seconds during his prayer that will be forgotten in a month.

Do you read what you type or do you just prattle aimlessly?

Rick Warren is not the poster boy for the Religious Right you guy seem to think he is. I would say that the Hard core Neocons Hate Warren as much as anyone does. Warren is not on the right, at most he is in the middle.

Middle, Left, Right...hate is hate and intolerance is intolerance. Political affiliation means nothing when it comes to bigotry. I don't excuse anyone from that junk just because we may share common goals or political values.

What I'm saying is, there are just 24 hours in a day, there is only so much politcal capital available, Obama (hell any politcian) has to establish priorities. And for the next 4 years, the overwhelming priority is an economic problem which could spiral downward into a Depression. That's not a wobbly leg

Ok, so now you are at a place where you think anyone who agrees with Obama is "giving him a pass becuase he's Black"? Becuase Obama hasn't fallen into lockstep with your agenda?

FYI Obama has included Gay rights in quite a few speeches including his victory speech Nov 4 and his acceptance speech at the Democratic Convention. Are these negated becuase he wants to have one paster say one prayer at his inaugeration?

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You don't SERIOUSLY believe this do you? You're just trying to win an argument at this stage surely.

Those people would be incorrect. According to the Washington Post, 70% of black voters in California cast their ballots against Proposition 8.

That article was terrible. People complaining about this are missing the forest for the trees. Obama won liberals over, it's a rather shrewd move to try to bring in the other 49% of the country by showing them you respect them and are willing to listen (while doing it with a tolerable figure like Warren). Frankly, decisions like this show what a brilliant politician Obama is, and until his policies start reflecting the views of Rick Warren I'm not concerned in the least that he's some kind of bigot. I don't think people are appreciating what a tall order he has as President, and the considerable public support he's going to need to make the tough decisions necessary to get us out of the messes we're in.

No see, cause when some people were supporting Obamas calls for change and togetherness what they really wanted was their kind of change dealing with their personal agendas and that the togetherness they were in support of only brought them together with people who agreed with them.

This whole thing was settled on the first page when Overlord "pointed out" Obama's religious affiliation.

Which, I guess, none of the people complaining knew about beforehand.

Whether that's true or not, it's not wrong for gays and their supporters to push him to be better on gay rights. People aren't going to wait around until we have another Republican president to make waves. He's a big boy. He can handle it.


So, because Obama is religious, that means he had to choose Warren?


Discussion about Warren from Anderson Cooper's show
Segment on Warren from Maddow's show

I'm not sure what position you're taking on this, but I hope you're not implying that simply being religious = being anti-gay, as Overlord was.

This apparently needs pointing out every time the issue comes up, but take a look at the percentage of religious people in the U.S. Do you really think that the 16.9% of people who are religiously unaffiliated or refused to respond are solely responsible for any strides forward that homosexuals have made thus far? If the numbers alone don't do it for you, how about this breakdown of the same survey?

In this other, earlier survey, Pew found that, while the majorities in most major U.S. religions weren't tolerant,

So, no. This whole thing wasn't "settled" when Overlord pointed out Obama's religious affiliation. If you're into the Venn diagram thing, consider that the circle for "Americans with anti-gay sentiments" is contained almost entirely within the circle for "religious Americans". But that circle for "religious Americans" is much bigger than that, overlapping with circles for "gay-tolerant Americans," "gay Americans," and even "gay rights activist Americans."

And please don't try to argue this on the basis of majority - as in, well, most religious people hate gays, so they're all responsible. This whole issue is about the rights of minorities (and homosexuals constitute a smaller minority in the U.S. overall than the minority of pro-gay rights believers within most given U.S. religions), so let's be consistent.

Sorry to complicate things with facts and figures; carry on with the generalizing.

DaveB punches you in the face with stats and I like it.

Simplified.

How exactly does "not all religious people hate gays, and some are even gay, themeslves" translate into "we're bigots, and we like it"?

Saying all christians hate gays is as intellectually bankrupt as claiming all black people like watermelon.

Lets stick to facts and not turn this into the ganging up on any one group, regardless of who they may be.

The President-elect would not approve.

Oh and Dave - god damn I have some serious man-love for you sometimes. Thanks for the blast of sense.

I wasn't...and I really didn't read his post that way -- I sort of applied my own filter to it, I suppose.

I meant that Obama's 'very careful' position on gay rights is not surprising considering his religious background and status as a politician.

I won't weigh in too much on the Christians=hate gays discussion, other than to point out that it's a tough debate to have when their own leaders say things like .

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,471426,00.html

While I can certainly see the choice of Warren as a shrewd, calculated political choice, I also see it as a poor selection on the grounds that it does not represent change (more like embracing the status quo).

My leader (at least for the next couple of months) has said all kinds of crazy shit, and he even came to be my leader via an electoral process. Rick Warren can make no such claim on behalf of his "followers."

ETA: Whoops - I assumed that quote was Warren's, not the Pope's. Even still, the Pope doesn't necessarily represent the viewpoints of many Catholics any more than Bush represents the viewpoints of many Americans (in fact, the Pew study says that Catholics tend to be far more accepting of homosexuality than evangelicals and other Christians, despite what the Pope may say).

Yeah, that's pretty much where I stand, too. I understand why the choice was made and I don't think it says as much about Obama's stance on gay rights as much as it does his emphasis on political expediency, but I really wish he'd gone in another direction on this.

On the upside (which doesn't quite offset the choice of Warren, admittedly), much-loved Wisconsin Rep. and lesbian Tammy Baldwin is going to be an honorary co-chair at the inauguration.

Please note, I should have added the following disclaimer, yes I know that not all people follow their leaders (which is why I just said it's a tough debate, one that I am not even tempted to begin).

I just really wanted to post that quote without opening another thread.

"Other co-chairs include basketball coach Craig Robinson..."

Yes!



Oh wait...its this guy...

But wait just one minute. If all people do, indeed, like delicious watermelon, and all black people are a subset of all people, then it follows that all black people like watermelon.

Indeed, "delicious" things are by definition liked.

Frank, your rhetoric teacher would be proud of you. Not because you clearly understand how syllogisms work, but because she was a member of the Klan.

So, so proud.

That's beautiful.

Here's an actually thoughtful piece on the matter.

(Still off topic. Sorry.) Y'know, my jokey post actually pointed up a phenomenon I don't understand.

How did watermelon fall under the rubric of "stuff black people like," anyway? I mean, everybody loves watermelon.

Watermelons originated in Africa I believe.

Here's a link to a very good Op-Ed piece at the NY Times, regarding Obama's selection of Warren.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/op...h.html?_r=1&em

Ehhh, I'll post the article too.

Rest of the piece is located at the link above.

Judd posted a link to the same piece above. I agree with Rich; the choice says more about Obama's approach to strategy than his personal policy toward homosexuality. Whether that strategy reflects a cocky and solely symbolic pragmatism or a naively optimistic attempt to achieve compromise with Warren's followers is pretty hard to say. Whatever the motivation, it does feel like a mistake, though.

Ah. I didn't know that.

Well, we're all forgetting an important fact here, John Cloud is fucking moron

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_p...-standard.aspx

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090107...gays_newsmlmmd

Gay NH bishop to offer prayer at inaugural event

♥♥♥