gay bishop to say prayer at inaugural event

Discussion in 'Politics' started by houtx48, Jan 12, 2009.

  1. houtx48

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,095
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    i think i had more respect for obama if he had stuck to his guns over Rick Warren, now it seems like he is pandering. maybe it's just me.
     
  2. D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,539
    Likes Received:
    1
    houtx48:

    Just you. Obama's trying for conciliatory with the gay bishop. A fine idea. The staunch evangelicals will go ballistic, of course. But so what?

    Jeez, we've reached a point where Obama makes a pleasant goodwill gesture (entirely for the gay community), and he's shot down by some bitchy clique or another. What other american president would have invited a gay bishop to speak at his inauguration??

    No snide comments here! KUDOS to Obama.
     
  3. mindseye

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,685
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    I disagree. A gay bishop would add diversity to a group of straight evangelicals. But Rick Warren isn't merely a straight evangelical -- he's a homophobe.

    There are viewpoints so extreme and offensive that they do not deserve to be represented in Obama's cabinet. He wouldn't name, for example, a cannibal to his cabinet and then ''balance it out'' with a vegetarian.

    Imagine if this were a different administration, and the flap had been over race: Say it were George W. Bush, and he had named to a prominent position an unrepentant bigot who wished to repeal civil rights for African-Americans and who openly expressed the view that sickle cell anemia was a form of divine punishment. Would the fact that he had also named Condoleezza Rice to a cabinet position balance things out and make the former's nomination acceptable?

    I don't think so. The bigot should never have been considered, let alone chosen, in the first place, and selecting a member of the bigot's target group for a different position doesn't make the bigotry acceptable.
     
  4. Industrialsize

    Staff Member Moderator Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    24,329
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,183
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    United States
  5. houtx48

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,095
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    if he was chosen before the flap why are just now hearing about it? goodwill gesture? if you say so.
     
  6. D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,539
    Likes Received:
    1
    mindseye: "There are viewpoints so extreme and offensive that they do not deserve to be represented in Obama's cabinet. He wouldn't name, for example, a cannibal to his cabinet and then ''balance it out'' with a vegetarian."

    -----------------

    Neither evangelical Rick Warren nor gay episcopalian bishop Gene Robinson are part of - nor have been offered a part in - Obama's cabinet.

    They are two dudes giving prayers, invocations, at the presidential inauguration. After that, they go home. They will not influence policy.
     
  7. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    I would like to think that most people would be able to think this way. As much as it sucks to have Rick Warren involved with the inauguration, it doesn't really upset me as much as other people. If anything, I don't think this would be so much of a problem if Obama hired a conservative preacher... just not one that's a blatant homophobe. I mean, Warren is comparing homosexuality to incest. Yet everytime I have sex with my BF I don't feel as if I'm fucking my brother or sister.

    Overall, looking forward going by what I see happening during the inauguration, the one thing that does worry me is how Obama is trying to cater to everyone because we all know that you can't make everyone happy. No matter what you do, someone is going to be pissed off about something. It's good that he's reaching out, but I hope he doesn't try too hard to do that. Just like water and oil, some things in this world just don't mix and he shouldn't try to blend them.
     
  8. D_CountdeGrandePinja

    D_CountdeGrandePinja Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    9,770
    Likes Received:
    42
    It's about time - to hell with the religious right, they are NEITHER - religious or right!!!
     
  9. D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,539
    Likes Received:
    1
    VinylBoy,

    I know Obama's reaching out to a lot of people of differing viewpoints (that occasionally don't mix -- like gays & evangelicals).

    But - goshdammit! - I see this as the glass being half-full, not half-empty.

    Gays have gotten the shaft ever since we started openly coming out of the closet in the early '70's. Obama regularly talks about gay equality (and so does Michelle, who goes so far as to compare the african-american struggle with gay struggle for equality). What other president and first lady speak comfortably about gays & gay issues? (Bill and Hillary do now, in 2008/2009, eight years out of office -- but they weren't so ready to extend their hand to the gay community while in office).


    I'm totally fine with Obama. I have his back. If he wants to be conciliatory & invite a Rick Warren for the evangelicals, I still trust the guy! Gays have never had it so good as now. We need to slow down, remember that there are strong, organized, opposing viewpoints to the homosexual lifestyle, and trust that Obama has our back.

    What the gay movement has got to do is to make sure all homophobic laws are changed and off the books. Man-to-man sodomy (anal sex, even oral) was stilla crime in many states all the way up until 2003 (the U.S. Supreme Court decision "Lawrence v. Texas" changed that, a 6-3 ruling). Things won't change overnight. But we got a guy in the white house that is on our side now. Once the laws are changed (discriminatory laws, marriage laws), the evangelicals can bitch and moan all they want, which is their constitutional right, but then they can't hurt us.
     
  10. mindseye

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,685
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    You're nitpicking the details instead of addressing the point. Obama's given a vituperative homophobe a prominent, even if ceremonial, position in articulating national discourse next week. You don't balance homophobia with a homosexual and make everything okay, any more than inviting a rabbi to dinner along with a Holocaust denier exonerates the latter.

    Thanks for the link, Industrialsize, but I'm skeptical that the unnamed "Obama source" in the article might just be spinning. The New York Times offers a quote by Bishop Robinson himself that couldn't be possible if he had formally been selected before the Warren flap. I believe it's clear from this quote that he had been considered, but not chosen before the Warren flap:
     
  11. D_Rod Staffinbone

    D_Rod Staffinbone Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    858
    Likes Received:
    0
    #11 D_Rod Staffinbone, Jan 12, 2009
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2009
  12. D_Pubert Stabbingpain

    D_Pubert Stabbingpain Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2007
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    8
    I agree with you willtom. I think Obama will continue to reach out in an attempt to bring people together in order to reach a common ground. Problem is that, just as with Clinton having to compromise with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," I wonder what we will end up with Obama.

    As much as "equal rights" for GLBT's has been preached from the Democratic pulpit since the primaries, not only are gay rights not an issue with him right now (maybe in his 2nd term?) due to the economy and MIddle East but also, Obama does not believe in gay marriage and that is what CA's Prop 8 and AZ's Prop 102, etc. were for, to not allow gays and lesbians to to have state constitutionally recognized marriages.

    Obama going with Warren was an attempt to appease the Religious Right and get them to think about stepping on board to begin to listen to him despite the fact that Warren's staged interview with him was, IMO, purposely intended to support McCain and catch Obama off guard and it succeeded in that.

    If Obama wants to fully support gay right's causes, he needs to do it when the momentum is on his side which is now. Politics works by sneaking stuff in and that is how it must be done.

    Realistically though, gay rights, like abortion rights, will be decided in the Supreme Court. If Obama compromises on the next SC appointments, we're sunk. It is still congress that has to approve and getting a far left wing appointment is unlikely.

    As for the reports that the bishop was choice #1, this whole thing sounds fishy to me *however* like you say, these guys are just saying prayers and have absolutely nothing to do with the presidential cabinet nor with any other office. Obama is smart and he knows that and inviting Warren was just a symbolic olive branch of peace to which the far left, mis-interpreted and over-reacted. IOW, who the hell cares who prays, politicians don't really care about religion because politics is their religion. When they go to church, it is only for "show."

    Finally willtom, you look way too young *and* too HOT to have remembered the '70's! That's a compliment dude! :smile:
     
    #12 D_Pubert Stabbingpain, Jan 17, 2009
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2009
  13. LeeEJ

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,471
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    DC
    Maybe because I only got the HRC email -- written & signed by Bishop Robinson -- yesterday?

    Well, even though y'all started this thread earlier last week..
     
  14. kalipygian

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,982
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    alaska
    Here is Gene Robinson's letter, sent to the HRC list:

    Dear X:

    Tomorrow, in one of the most humbling honors of my life, I will deliver an invocation at the first event of the inauguration week.

    Though many of us were deeply upset when President-elect Obama chose Proposition 8 supporter Rev. Rick Warren to speak at his , the fact that he also-a proud gay man-is a hopeful sign of our president's commitment to reach out to all Americans.

    Now it is up to us to capitalize on this moment and ensure that President-elect Obama works for equality.

    Join me in asking Obama to take the next positive step bu supporting HRC's Blueprint for Positive Change-a roadmap for LGBT equality.

    As a gay American, a bishop, and a member of HRC's Religion Council, I was open about my shock and anger last month at Warren's invitation.

    But I now feel it's time to turn the page on that controversy-to come together and tackle the next set of challenges.

    The Blueprint calls for President-elect Obama to sign hate crimes legislation into law, to support a fully inclusive Employment-Non-Discrimination Act, to end unequal taxation of domestic partnerships, and more.

    In the spirit of hope, we ask President-elect Obama to follow this blueprint, and keep his promises.

    Tomorrow I will be blessed to stand at the Lincoln Memorial before the next leader of our great country. His message has inspired countless Americans who have waited many long years to feel represented by their government.

    I owe President-elect Obama the utmost thanks for allowing me to perticipate in such a historic event.

    Whether you're religious or not, gay or straight, please stand with me -declare your support for HRC's Blueprint for Positive Change and ask your friends and family to do the same.

    Sincerely,

    + V. Gene Robinson

    The Right Rev. V. Gene Robinson
    HRC Religion Council

    (received yesterday)

    Edit: this was supposed to start at 2:30 EST, I tried without success to find a streaming source to listen to it.

    Edit again: it is streaming at NPR.

    Edit a third time: the D.C. Gay Mens' Chorus just sang 'My Country Tis of Thee'.
     
    #14 kalipygian, Jan 18, 2009
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2009
  15. kalipygian

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,982
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    alaska
    Text of Gene Robinson's speech. Well spoken, I think. Wonder if Rick Warren is able to be as inoffensive.

    The Lead
     
  16. thadjock

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2006
    Messages:
    2,675
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    271
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    LA CA USA
    can u name an evangelical that isn't?
     
  17. thadjock

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2006
    Messages:
    2,675
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    271
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    LA CA USA

    i agree with most of that, they're not here to influence policy and they're not on the cabinet and i think he's basically just throwing the right wingers a bone, but i'm still wondering how the founding fathers ever squared this christianist tradition with their seperation of church and state line. Even the god line in the pledge of alligence wasn't added until the 50s or something.

    is there a rabbi or a cleric included in the blessing of this event? no.

    so how does this represent government by, for, and of the people if only christianity is represented. i'm catholic so it's fine with me but for a guy who ran his campaign on being so multi cultural and pointing out the diversity of the US, it seems a little christ-centric.

    maybe we have to wait for a jewish or muslim president for those religions to get a place at the table? what's wrong with taking all religion out of politics, i know most people would argue it's impossible, but you can still be a moral person and have values without religion.

    legally speaking all you need is a notary to swear him in, not a single bible or any gay or str8 clergy are necessary.
     
  18. Snozzle

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,436
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    33
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    South Pacific
    Verified:
    Photo
    Here's a video of the invocation. Looks as if it was made on a phone, but the sound is good.

    As far as rabbis or imams go, he doesn't mention Jesus, only God, so he's mainstream monotheistic.
     
    #18 Snozzle, Jan 20, 2009
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2009
  19. kalipygian

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,982
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    alaska
    The founding fathers didn't have anyone recite a prayer at their inaugurations, it began with FDR's second inauguration. They usually attended a separate service in a church afterward.The constitutional oath also does not include the 'so help me god' addition.

    If they are going to have prayer, they so far have just had Christians and Jews, I would say it is way overdue to rotate in some Zoroastrians, Bahais, Moslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Rastafarians, Voodooists, American Indian practitioners, or Witches.
     
    #19 kalipygian, Jan 20, 2009
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2009
  20. kalipygian

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,982
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    alaska
    The Link I posted for the text is to an episcopal site which also has video of it.

    It also says that the live TV coverage of the event did not include it. The responsibility seems to be with the inaugural committee, rather than HBO or MSNBC
     
Draft saved Draft deleted