E.J. Posted December 18, 2008 Report Share Posted December 18, 2008 Anti-gay pastor chosen to deliver invocation at Obama's inauguration by Nick Cargo The blogosphere is aflame with the announcement that a controversial Evangelical pastor and marriage equality opponent, Rev. Rick Warren of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California, will be delivering the invocation at President-elect Obama's inauguration in January. Saddleback also hosted a question-and-answer forum with Obama and then-competitor Senator John McCain (R-AZ) in August. "This is a horrific insult to the thousands of LGBT Americans who worked to elect Barack Obama president," said Oxdown Gazette's Teddy Partridge, "and the millions of LGBT Americans who voted for him." Read the rest HERE Link to comment
DesDownunder Posted December 18, 2008 Report Share Posted December 18, 2008 And thus we do await the election of the first openly gay president. Link to comment
Graeme Posted December 18, 2008 Report Share Posted December 18, 2008 From the New York Times article on the same subject: Linda Douglass, a spokeswoman for Mr. Obama?s presidential inaugural committee, said the upcoming ceremony would be the ?most open and accessible? inauguration in history and defended the inclusion of Mr. Warren.?Clearly, the president-elect disagrees with him on issues involving the LGBT community,? she said. But Mr. Obama has consistently stressed the need to ?seek common ground with people with whom we disagree fundamentally.? Ms. Douglass noted that the benediction, or closing prayers, would be offered by the Rev. Joseph E. Lowery, a civil rights icon who has expressed support for gay marriage, and that the Lesbian and Gay Band Association would march in the inaugural parade, the first time such a group would do so. There's a direct statement that the present-elect disagree with Mr. Warren on LGBT issues. Also, the fact that the Lesbian and Gay Band Association is marching could be construed as an insult to Mr. Warren. You can spin things many ways. A choice for a pastor to server a single function, and having another pastor who has the opposite views doing the closing prayers, isn't necessary an indicator of how things will be. Link to comment
DesDownunder Posted December 18, 2008 Report Share Posted December 18, 2008 From the New York Times article on the same subject:There's a direct statement that the present-elect disagree with Mr. Warren on LGBT issues. Also, the fact that the Lesbian and Gay Band Association is marching could be construed as an insult to Mr. Warren. You can spin things many ways. A choice for a pastor to server a single function, and having another pastor who has the opposite views doing the closing prayers, isn't necessary an indicator of how things will be. It would be my hope that inclusion of disparate representatives is a deliberate ploy by Obama to ?seek common ground with people with whom we disagree fundamentally.? We will have to wait to see what that actually means for acceptance of people of divergent views. Tricky, to say the least, but if it can be achieved, the world might just become a better place. Link to comment
JamesSavik Posted December 23, 2008 Report Share Posted December 23, 2008 Son of a bitch! Sold down the river before he even takes office. Who didn't see that coming. Link to comment
captainrick Posted December 23, 2008 Report Share Posted December 23, 2008 Alrighty, I posted the following link in the thread I started "OK Peoples ..." but it also is equally relevant in this one, and I want as many as possible to read it. --- That includes you James, I think you will like it. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-ostertag...w_b_152717.html Link to comment
Richard Norway Posted December 23, 2008 Report Share Posted December 23, 2008 I don't think we've been 'sold down the river' yet. Politics is not an 'all or nothing' activity steeped in one groups wants, but rather in reality. The reality is that we're not the only group in a diverse America, and I'd like to think that Obama is a much more asutute politician than I might have previously understood. Link to comment
DesDownunder Posted December 23, 2008 Report Share Posted December 23, 2008 Methinks it is too soon to judge the man, Who acknowledged mistakes would be made, On the way to getting it as right, As his good intentions proclaimed. Obama's predecessor had 8 long years to give us the hell of his good intentions. Surely we can give the new guy until at least a few months after he is inaugurated. Seriously, let's 'give the bloke a fair go,' as we say in Oz. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now