First, I read that Obama has defended the choice of Rick Warren to give the invocation at the inauguration. Yeah, let's not be "disagreeable" just because we "disagree." By that logic, of course, we could ask Hitler to be up there on the steps with Obama--because even though Obama would (presumably, anyway) disagree with Hitler's ideas about race and heritage, hey--we wouldn't want to be disagreeable! or partisan! Oh no -- can't have that!
Then today, I read this item about how 66 of the countries in the United Nations supported a UN declaration decriminalizing homosexuality. The French put forth the "declaration" when they realized they didn't have the votes for a "resolution"--good for them.
Was the U.S. one of those 66, you ask? Why, of course not! President Chimpy would never support equal rights for all Amurkans, much less people all over the world! According to the Times article, "The United States refused to support the nonbinding measure, as did Russia, China, the Roman Catholic Church and members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference." It's so good to know we're voting with those progressive "human-rights-first!" outfits like Russia (which is as we speak returning to totalitarianism) and China. Oh, and we're on the same side at Pope Ratzy (who just loves teh gays!) and an Islamic group (those guys love... to stone us gays in the streets).
Yeah, we're really setting the standard for enlightened and tolerant social policy here: "opponents [of the declaration] criticized it as an attempt to legitimize pedophilia and other 'deplorable acts.''' Because all we gays are pedophiles and deviants! Hide your children!
Many people have blogged about how disappointed they are that Obama would support Warren's giving the invocation. When I read about it, however, I realized it was just another in the long line of disappointments and betrayals we gays have endured from democratic presidents. Back in the 1992 election, Bill Clinton wooed us with his promises of overturning the military ban on gays. What happened once he got into the White House? "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Thanks for the kick in the nuts, Bill!
Now, after gays supported Obama (even though many of us never believed he was as tolerant of us as others claimed) and helped get him elected, he throws this shit in our faces and tells us not to complain, to be agreeable.
Once again, thanks for the kick in the nuts, Mr. President.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
As I said during the Clinton years, I'd rather have a president that disappoints me rather than one that disgusts me.
I share your feelings about the Rick Warren badness. Right now, it's posturing and not policy. Let's see how Obama does when it actually counts.
I'm so glad Chimpy is on his way out. Not soon enough for me, however.
Say, dguz, please make sure you visit my blog today. There's news there you will be interested to learn, and it's happy, nothing-to-do-with-politics type news.
I'm so upset about the Warren thing. I'm all about inclusiveness, and I think that it's time that the left reaches out to people of faith. But this man compares gay marriage to incest and pedophilia, and he shouldn't be given the most important platform any religious figure will receive in the US in 2009. I really feel for all of you who supported Obama with the hope that you'd finally have a President who supported human rights; as disappointing as it is for me, I know it must be really upsetting for you. I'll try to see Matty's point for now; let's see how he is in the trenches.
By that logic, of course, we could ask Hitler to be up there on the steps with Obama
I'm telling Godwin on you!
I can't disagree with what Matty Boy said on principle, but his choices (this, Vilsack, even the good ones like Chu) tell me at least a bit about the man.
Obama wants to invite everyone to the table? Fine. Make them EARN it. Warren hasn't earned anything but heaping piles of scorn.
Matty Boy--I'd like to share your optimism, but it's getting harder.
Enc--no kidding. And THANKS!
CDP--I supported Edwards, then Clinton, and then Obama--but I still felt bitter about his attitude toward LGB people. I think Obama is making a BIG mistake in letting this asshole be anywhere near him.
Randal--exactly. Just because you have "a point of view" doesn't make that point of view any less crazy and bigoted, and common sense says Obama should've realized this asshole would polarize the country all over again. Dumb dumb move. Hopefully not indicative of future moves.
Christopher--Fucking ridiculous. I don't understand why Obama is doing this at all.
Matty Boy pretty much summed up how I feel about it. This is symbolism - and it is very bad symbolism I agree - but actions are what counts. Let's see what decisions he makes when he finally becomes president and then we can judge him by his actions. However, as someone who abhors the beliefs represented by Warren and his ilk, I am very disappointed in the choice.
However, as I've said elsewhere, this is the whole reason we have separation of church and state - we shouldn't have an invocation at all before the inauguration. Whoever got picked for the job would be repellent to somebody. The whole religion thing is the problem and we have got to get it out of our government.
Obama should have had the Dalia Lama rather than Warren. At least the Dalia Lama has a decent human rights record and models love and compassion.
First of all I don't understand why there's even a tradition of pastors giving an invocation at the inauguration. It's not a church service; what about separation of church and state? I don't think there's anyone Obama could have picked that would have satisfied everyone, but I agree the choice of Warren is upsetting.
Now I've forgotten what I was going to say.
Grumble. Grumble.
Damn, I'm irritated.
GRAVES: I like Chu, Holder and Craig. That's it.
I am out of words on this one.
It sucks.
hard.
That was just so disappointing. I guess he does have feet of clay after all.
it has all been said here --- matty and maui sum up mine...
i cannot figure out why we have this in a secular state --- i would love someone to finally tell the religious nuts to basically fuck off once in awhile - that they dont control everything, including the inauguration.
until this country rids itself of the churches when it comes to law/legality/rule of law/govt - there is not one iota of hope
and since we know that will never happen.... do the math
The douchebag is going to be the keynoter at the King Day commemorative services here in Atlanta, BTW.
Once I found out how much Warren pissed off his evangelical buddies by accepting Obama's invitation, I was okay with it.
Besides, the guy Obama selected to do the closing prayer is pro gay marriage, etc.
Let's see where this goes. This is interesting. And please don't use Hitler as an example, anytime. It weakens your argument. There are far more good examples to use. Jesse Helms for instance. I just sayin'
I have it on good authority that Hitler is actually dead, although there are rumors that his brain has been transplanted in South America.
I think I would've phrased it "what, is Pat Robertson too busy or something?"
I agree with what Mauigirl says regarding symbolism. The problem is that we understand the message all too well, despite Obama's attempts to spin this as an example of tolerance.
Warren's POV may be shared by a heck of a lot of Americans. That doesn't mean it's right and it doesn't mean we have to put up with it.
Harumph.
Post a Comment