Rick Warren to give inaugural invocation

[Truth Teller]

Source: CNN

President-elect Barack Obama's swearing-in ceremony will feature big names like minister Rick Warren and legendary singer Aretha Franklin, the Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies announced Wednesday.

Warren, the prominent evangelical and founder of the Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California, will deliver the ceremony's invocation. The minister hosted a presidential forum at his church last summer that challenged both Obama and Arizona Sen. John McCain on a host of faith-related issues. Warren did not endorse either presidential candidate.

His public support for California's Proposition 8 — the measure that successfully passed and called for outlawing gay marriage in the state — sparked the ire of many gay rights proponents, who seized on a comment in an October newsletter to his congregation: "This is not a political issue — it is a moral issue that God has spoken clearly about."

...

Read more: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/17/rick-warren-to-give-inaugural-invocation/

---

Anti-choice and anti-gay. Totally unacceptable.

[Renew Deal]

1. Correction:

Anti-choice and anti-gay. Guys like Warren are hardly "pro-life."

[Truth Teller]

4. Good point - edited- thanks n/t

[Ian David]

49. Rick Warren is a boot-licking bully. He may just take his lead from who he thinks is most powerful.

It's possible that his lips will be transplanted from Bush's ass to Obama's shortly.

AND that those lips will start endorsing a more inclusive, Obmalistic phulosphy.

[Myrina]

2. Whoa. That IS disappointing.

:(

[sarcasmo]

66. So much for Change.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

3. This is a joke, right?

Rick FUCKING Warren?

OK, I can see Aretha, for sure.

But that miserable, self-important prick delivering the invocation?

Well, President-Elect Obama, you just fucked up your first fuckup.

[Truth Teller]

6. I guess Pat Robertson wasn't available? n/t

[Tangerine LaBamba]

10. I'm furious

This is so wrong from so many angles.

I thought Obama was selling his soul when he agreed to that ludicrous sit-down with Warren during the campaign. But I understood that you have to embrace everyone if you want to win. The exchange was offensive, Warren's self-important, asinine questions an embarrassment to our intelligence.

He's so smarmy.

Now, this?

I am fucking furious. This is a picture of Obama bending over for the fundie rightwingnuts, and I don't like it. Yeah, yeah, I know all about "bringing us together," but I don't want to be part of anything that includes this fucker.

Jesus, what a drag.

[Truth Teller]

13. I'm with you

It's beyond the pale. The man actively worked against the civil rights of gays.

It is un-phucking-beleivable.

[Sex Pistol]

30. This is kind of a small thing to be furious about--don't you think?

I don't know much about Warren, but I can't imagine Obama doing something to deliberately upset people.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

34. "... small..."?

How do you think you have any right to decide what I get furious about and what I embrace?

Take your judgment and have your own reaction. Mine is of no concern to you.

Who said he did it "deliberately"? You do add your own gloss to a simple fact.

I wish you luck in your continuing effort to order your thinking and improving your reading comprehension.

[Sex Pistol]

41. Sounds to me like Obama is ready to move forward. On the other hand,

you are stuck in the mud somewhere back there before 11/4/08.

Like you said, it is a simple fact. So, lighten up, if you do that, you will live longer.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

54. Bite me, honey............

Unsolicited analysis from a stranger is worth the very thing John Nance Garner used to characterize the office of the Vice President.

You really have no idea what you're talking about, but, that's all right, because idiots like you have value, too.

Now, go spread your brilliance where it might be appreciated. Your shower is a good place to start.

[Sex Pistol]

59. You're right. I fail to see why this is such an overwhelming, devastating and shocking issue.

And I don't have the 3rd grader mentality that it would take to consider it.

[Truth Teller]

81. So progressives have "third grade mentalities"?

Interesting comment.

Promoting a man that works to deny civil rights is something to be upset about.

[Sex Pistol]

108. No, progressive implies that you have advanced beyond the 3rd grade.

On the other hand, third-graders can have a very limited ability to respect the choices that others make.

[No Elephants]

37. Who said Obama chose him with the intention of upsetting people? What an odd way to put it.

Pint is, Warren's a bad choice, no matter what Obama intended.

Warren is a neo theo, which makes him objectionable to a lot of believers and non-believers. And, when he invited Obama and McCain, his "cone of silence" somehow failed. McCain had the questions in advance. Further, Warren made it clear that he could not vote for anyone who was pro-choice. (Read, I am NOT voting for Obama, whom I just screwed on national TV.)

On self-respect alone, Obama should not have invited Warren to give the invocation, even apart from Warren's controversial views. Surely, there is someone more acceptable to a wide range of believers than Warren.

[Sex Pistol]

44. It may or may not be a bad choice. I will judge that based on the outcome.

But if you let little things like this upset you, you are going to blow a gasket when you see what happens next.

If I were you, I would seriously consider investing in a defibrillator.

[No Elephants]

46. To what outcome are you referring? You expect Warren to change? It's a bad choice.

[Sex Pistol]

56. Like I said before, I don't know that much about Warren.

But, this nation is facing some very serious issues and people ought to demonstrate some maturity when it comes to stuff like this.

[Zenlitened]

57. "I don't know that much about Warren."

And yet, here you are proclaiming what is and isn't -- or shouldn't be -- important to other people.

Who are you, Joe the Plumber? Empty head, big mouth. Yeah, tell me more about The Way Things Are.

What an idiot. :rofl:

[Sex Pistol]

64. Joe the plumber...? Don't know much about him either.

What I do know is that the display of immaturity in this thread very revealing.

I also know that if I don't expect too much from politicians, I will not be disappointed to the point where I am unable to discern what's important and what is not.

:)

[tomg]

90. You mentioned that " this nation is facing

some very serious issues." I couldn't agree more about that point, but one of those serious issues is the denial of civil rights to the glbt community. Rick Warren's invitation to give the invocation, while seemingly a small issue, sends a very loud and clear message to that glbt community that in the interests of "reaching across the aisle" they have to "take one for the team." I have not criticized any of Obama's cabinet picks or any of his policy decisions as of yet because that is akin to criticizing a coach for making his starting lineup before the game starts. This is different. This is a personal decision that President-elect Obama has made as to the person he wants to deliver the invocation at his inaugural. It is a heavily charged and resonant symbolic decision.

Frankly, I hope he chooses Adrienne Rich as his inaugural poet. Now that would be something.

[Sex Pistol]

104. When I'm a guest at an event where an invocation prayer is given, I seldom remember the name

of the person delivering the prayer. On the other hand, I never fail to realize the true meaning of the event itself. The inauguration of Barrack Obama is the focal point of this event. Unfortunately, the irrational and bad-tempered reaction by the glbt folks could spoil a day that has been too long in the making.

You made some valid points, and you made them in a manner that that is unusual around here. You also made reference to "take one for the team." I think that the seriousness of the problems this country faces will require many of us to take one for the team in the coming years.

The question is: Will the selfish outnumber the unselfish or will there be enough people willing to put their petty differences aside and proceed with the restoration?

[No Elephants]

106. Are you implying that we disabling government from dealing with the economy

or the WOT if we voice opposition to the PE's honoring an Un-Americanb bigot? If that is your position, it seems dramatic (she understated as politely as she was able).

I am simply expressing an opinion about a speaker. Martin Luther King was MUCH more disruptive to this nation while it had big problems in Vietnam and around the world and domestically. So, how selfish do you think he was?

Speaking of selfish,I don't waant to make this just about gays bc, for me, it is much broader than even that. However, I have always had a right to love and marry whoever I wanted without any condemnation from any source. That is a pretty basic right. I was able to grow up taking it for granted. I did not feel any pain or shame when planning my wedding. My parents, siblings and other relatives, no matter what their religious beliefs, did not boycott my wedding or shun me for the rest of my life. I did not repulse them simply bc of the way I was born. Etc.

That stuff is pretty basic, as basic as riding at the front of the bus. I think everyone should have what I had. I don't think they will, though, if a President Elect, especially this one, honors the likes of Warren. If that makes me selfish in your eyes, I can live with that a lot easier than I can live with Warren's homophobic sermons and best selling books.

But, as I said, it's broader than that. He is against anyone pro-choice holding any public office ever, against keeping church and state separate, anti gay people, married or not, and sexist. Of course, some wonen and radical Democrats also did their best to disrupt the status quo during the same period as manyAfrican Americans were doing the same. So, being a woman and a Democrat who wants to see Democrats elected, maybe I am just being a petty selfish bitch after all. Civil rights. The American Way. Pffft. Let's get to the REALLY important stuff.

[Sex Pistol]

107. I have no quarrel with people expressing opinions about Warren,

but I am unable to comprehend the ferocity and viciousness of some of the opinions expressed. I have clicked on Warren a bit and I discovered that I have quite a bit to disagree with, but he also seems to have provided inspiration to some people. He has obviously made a respectable impression on Obama and as a result, Obama has reached out to him.

This is what Obama wants, it is his choice. And I wish that people would just respect his choice.

[girl gone mad]

75. Johnny would not agree. n/t

[Zhade]

86. This is a slap in the face of Obama's GLBT supporters.

It tells us that he embraces a bigot despite that bigot's support of stripping away our rights.

[Sex Pistol]

88. Nonsense...No one is embracing a bigot and no one is stripping away anyone's rights.

However, there are those who like to exaggerate.

[Thorandmjolnir]

96. I would say youre embracing someone's views

if you have him do the invocation at your inauguration for PRESIDENT!

Kind of send the message that this is the guy you want to bless your biggest accomplishment, don't you think?

[Sex Pistol]

109. When Obama sits down at his desk in the oval office, he is going to have his hands full.

If I were him, I would want someone to say a prayer for me too. :)

[Thorandmjolnir]

94. You don't have to imagine,

he just did it!

[onehandle]

5. Where's the Atheist invocation?? Equal time! Equal time!

Yeah, I know the outrage will be about Warren doing the invocation.

I just couldn't resist.

}(

[mzmolly]

17. We should follow Warren with Bill Maher.

:P

[No Elephants]

38. the only alternative to an atheist invocation is a guy who does not believe in separation of church

and state?

[AspenRose]

7. NOOOOOO!!!

Jim Wallis! Jim Wallis! Or Barry Lynn! Or Tony Campolo!

Oh, this is disappointing. *sigh* :-(

[musette_sf]

Deepak Chopra would have been good

[noonwitch]

97. Yeah, but he probably wouldn't do it for free.

Deepak lectures are not cheap.

[JetCityLiberal]

8. This is disappointing

Enough slamming gays and lesbians and women's rights to their bodies.

Not happy with this one PE Obama.

Ugh...

[MineralMan]

9. On the other hand, it will be fun to watch the

fundamentalcases go "WTF?" President Obama will do as he pleases...never mind who give the invocation. But the fundies will be all puzzled and shit. Well, more than usual...

[Bodhi BloodWave]

16. the most amusing freeper post i've seen sofar on this topic would be this

NormsRevenge

Geez...the False Prophet swearing in the Anti-Christ...how nice.

30 posted on 17. desember 2008 20:16:04 by ravingnutter


Seems to me like a majority of em are tossing him to the lions

[MineralMan]

20. Ah, yes...now Rick Warren will be anathema to the

fundiwingers. Gone over to the dark side he has, in a manner of speaking.

Cause confusion among the rabble, it will.

Note the screenname of the freepist. :bounce:

[Bodhi BloodWave]

22. my personal view on this

Even if i strongly dislike Warren i am willing to wait and see how he acts at the ceremony before possibly raging against him, after all he could surprise us all(as unlikely as that is).

Then again i am somewhat in Obama's camp in regards to that people need to talk with those they dislike no matter the topic since the only way to progress as a whole is to teach teach understanding and equality. Ignoring somebody or showing the same hate back solves nothing and only prolongs the problems(be the topic racism, gay rights, death penalty, and a myriad of other things)

And yes, its nice to see some of the freepers are actually smart enough to give themselves an accurate username :silly:

[MineralMan]

23. I'm waiting to see what President Obama does before

I make any judgments on his Presidency. The Inauguration is just a ceremony, and has zero effect on policy. I'm sure his speech will be general in nature, too. Then, on January 21, 2008, his actual work will begin. Then I will begin watching what he does. For now...I'm just waiting.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

27. smart stance to take i think

even tho i am not an American i am quite hopeful on the Obama presidency. Admittedly some of the choices for his cabinet has made me scratch my head trying to figure it out but in the end he is the boss and they will be following his agenda and not their own(while I'm sure most of them have their own agenda I'm just as sure that if they act counter to Obama's then they will be looking for a new job before long)

[No Elephants]

51. No, the Inauguration is NOT just a ceremony. It is a highly symbolic occasion and what Warren

symbolizes is offensive. No one is saying Obama's Presidency is doomed. We are saying this was a bad choice for the Inauguration.

[MineralMan]

72. I don't disagree.

It is a symbolic thing, and the choice is puzzling. But not everyone is just saying that it "was a bad choice." Several people are saying much, much worse.

I like to consider the alternative. In this case, the alternative would have been so much worse that there is simply no comparison.

As I said, on the 21st, Obama will begin enacting his policies. We shall see what happens then. One prayer at a symbolic event is a ridiculous thing on which to hang an opinion of Obama's position.

You may disagree. That's what makes politics.

[No Elephants]

42. What Warren does at the ceremony is not the point. The point is that he tells his congregation not

to vote for anyone who is pro-choice, which covers Obama-Biden and just about every other Democrat, religious or not. Why would ANY Democrat want Warren to give the invocation?

[semillama]

93. Wait a second

Does Free Republic actually misspell the month in their date logs?

[Bodhi BloodWave]

102. thats actually not a misspelling

Its the norwegian word for December, not sure why their site used my country's word for it tho

[semillama]

103. What, they can't use a decent 'Murkin spelling??? n/t

[No Elephants]

39. Can't we puzzle them in some way that does not pander to them?

[musette_sf]

11. write to change.gov

and let the Obama team know your thoughts on this insult to gays, women, and scientists. Slick Dick Warren needs to be investigated for violations of separation of church and state, not honored at OUR Inauguration For Change.

[FiveGoodMen]

12. What could one say that Obama doesn't already know?

He apparently just doesn't care.

[Truth Teller]

14. Make voices heard

He may not know how outrageous and hurtful this is to so many.

[FiveGoodMen]

15. I hope you're right, but with every new choice he makes, I increasingly feel we've been had.

[No Elephants]

43. Yes, we can make our voices heard. Yes, we can.

[No Elephants]

40. It's an insult to the Constitution of the United States. Let someone who honors

separation of Church and State give the invocation. For pity sake, this guy has said he could never vote for anyone who is pro-choice, which means that he does not vote Obama-Biden or for any Democrat. Crap! Why are Democrats gluttons for self-inflicted wounds?

[liberalmuse]

18. You've got to be fucking kidding me?

WTF is this asshat doing anywhere near the inaguration? Sweet mother of fuck, I think that did it. My head just exploded. Mr. fat, gay-hating white guy. Jesus fucking Christ, what an atrocity. I can think of a million people who would be better fit to give an invocation than this piece of shit.

[musette_sf]

33. well said

[asjr]

19. Invocation? Why? That pokes

a finger in the eye of everyone who believes in separation of church and state.

[dbackjon]

21. THIS IS MY OFFICIAL FUCK YOU TO OBAMA

Since Obama just told me "Fuck You"


And Obama is going to be different from Bush HOW?

[noel711]

24. Say WHAT????

I was hoping like he'd ask ME to do the invocation.....

Maybe he's trying to appease...
but... maybe he's trying to get away from the
loud mouthed, liberal, liberationist theologies...
but... still...

Rick Freakin' Warren?

I'm still trying to swallow that one...

[Are_grits_groceries]

25. I had taken my teeth out for a while.

I knew I was going to be kicked in them again.

I have watched all the appointments. I have said to myself, let's see what they do.
That really is the crux of the matter whether I agree with them before or not.

This is different. He didn't have to pick someone who was against Prop 8. That is a major poke
in the eye to say the least. I wasn't expecting him to choose someone who was openly for it.
I didn't think he would want to poke that side's eyes out either.

But why did he have to poke my eye?? Or the eyes of all gays. I really, really don't understand this.
Not at all.

I'm sure people will tell me it's a political calculation. On just that one extremely important idea,
couldn't he have at least remained neutral.

[MineralMan]

26. Giving the benediction at the Inauguration is

The Reverend Joseph E. Lowery

At:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Lowery
you'll read:

In 2006, at Coretta Scott King's funeral, Dr. Lowery received a standing ovation when he remarked before four U.S. Presidents in attendance:

"We know now there were no weapons of mass destruction over there. But Coretta knew and we know that there are weapons of misdirection right down here. Millions without health insurance. Poverty abounds. For war billions more but no more for the poor!"

Conservative observers claimed his comments were inappropriate in a setting meant to honor the life of Mrs. King, especially considering Mr. Bush was present at the ceremony.<2><3> None of Mrs. King's family has objected to Lowery's words.

Now, I have no idea what Lowery's position is on gay marriage, but his credentials on civil rights are impeccable.

[musette_sf]

32. here we go again:

civil rights as regards gender: shut up, it's "not the right time yet".

civil rights as regards sexual orientation: shut up, it's "not the right time yet".

this has been going on for years and just when we thought we might have a voice, it's the same old thing: shut up, it's "not the right time yet".

[No Elephants]

50. No. I said pre-election was not the right time. This, however, IS the right time. www.change.gov

[MineralMan]

76. Are those Lowery's positions?

Or are those your imaginings of what his positions are?

[musette_sf]

83. i was not implying those were Lowery's positions.

i was commenting on this part of your post:

"Now, I have no idea what Lowery's position is on gay marriage, but his credentials on civil rights are impeccable."

in my mind if you support civil rights and equality for all, then there is no need to even SAY "I have no idea what his position is on gay marriage". it would be a a non-issue.

and to separate the two, as if "civil rights" and "gay marriage" are two different things, sounds to me like the same-old same-old "it's too soon, it's not the right time, don't rock the boat" that has gone on for years.

that being said, to have a "pastor" :puke: who openly opposes civil rights, as a speaker at this inauguration, is wrong in so many ways.

[dbackjon]

35. Lowery is generally very good on gay rights.

[MineralMan]

73. Thanks. I really didn't know his positions on that.

[No Elephants]

45. And that has what to do with Warren?

[MineralMan]

74. Warren's a dick. Did I praise him?

I'm not talking about Warren. I'm talking about President-elect Obama and an inauguration. What were we all talking about here? I thought it was the inauguration. Is the benediction not as important as the invocation?

I'm sorry, but Warren has nothing whatever to do with Obama's policies or decisions. He's saying a prayer. Hell, I'm an atheist, so I pay no attention to such things in the first place.

[Truth Teller]

82. The headline looks like it's out of The Onion

It's unreal.

[Political Tiger]

28. "the Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies announced.."

So I wonder if Obama had input on this or is this just some committee that gets together and decides the lineup?

Maybe we shouldn't jump to conclusions and get mad at Obama just yet.

[Political Tiger]

29. I looked it up:

Joint Congressional Committee
on Inaugural Ceremonies

The Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies (JCCIC) plans and executes all Inaugural activities at the United States Capitol, including the Inaugural swearing-in ceremony of the President and Vice President of the United States and the traditional Inaugural luncheon that follows.

Upon passage of a concurrent resolution, the JCCIC is established and the members appointed. The Vice President appoints Senators and the Speaker of the House of Representatives appoints House members. The JCCIC is usually comprised of the Senate Majority Leader (at the time of appointment), the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Majority and Minority Leaders of the House of Representatives.

http://inaugural.senate.gov/cmte/

http://inaugural.senate.gov/index.cfm

[No Elephants]

63. Link to the names of the members of the Committee (chaired by Feinsten) is

http://rules.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=CommitteeMembers.Home Some of the best known Democrats on the Committee include Inouye, Schumer, Reid and Durbin.

The website also has phone and fax numbers for contacting the Committee. Don't be shy!

Phone and fax numbers page http://rules.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=AboutCommittee.WelcomeMessage

[No Elephants]

71. Sorry. Too late to edit my prior message, but my prior post named the wrong Senators.

The Senators on the Joint Committee on Inaugural Cermonies are Feinstein (chair), Reid, Pelosi, Stoyer and, from the Pub side, Bennett and Boehner.

[No Elephants]

52. Do you believe that the Congressional Committee on Inaugurations does not consult with the PE before

announcing things like this? And why is a committe of a Democratic Congress choosing someone who tells his congregation not to vote for anyone who is pro-choice? In almost every election at every level, that will translate to "Don't vote for the Democrat." But, thanks. I'll make sure to contact the Committtee too.

[Marie26]

31. Oh, barf.

I think he also thinks Catholics, Muslims, Jews & the unsaved are all going to hell. Not exactly "unifying" or a "change" either from the evangelical dogma of the past 8 years.

[enlightenment]

58. And that it is the JOB of government to take out

'evil doers' everywhere - so the US should invade Iran.

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2008/12/04/warren-stopping-evil/


This is the wrong choice on just about every level. Disappointing but unfortunately not surprising.

[Marie26]

85. Especially in regards

to LGBT rights, unfortunately not surprising at all.

[Doremus]

36. WTF?

There are no words for this.

No, wait, I just thought of some:

Bullshit! Total bullshit!!!

If this administration's purpose is going to be to appease the RW and insult liberals, I want out NOW.



:nuke: :nuke:

[MarinCoUSA]

47. Obama: deft, shrewd, political. Warren: asshole

Good for Obama. But I thought the way Warren punk-ed him in the interview was disgusting.

[Mari333]

48. Letter to Obama, Human Rights Campaign, on Rick Warren

http://www.hrc.org/11793.htm

[amb123]

53. People For the American Way 'Profoundly Disappointed' that Rick Warren Will Give Invocation

People For the American Way President Kathryn Kolbert responded today to the news that Rev. Rick Warren of Saddleback Church will deliver the invocation at the presidential inauguration of Barack Obama:

It is a grave disappointment to learn that pastor Rick Warren will give the invocation at the inauguration of Barack Obama.

Pastor Warren, while enjoying a reputation as a moderate based on his affable personality and his church's engagement on issues like AIDS in Africa, has said that the real difference between James Dobson and himself is one of tone rather than substance. He has recently compared marriage by loving and committed same-sex couples to incest and pedophilia. He has repeated the Religious Right's big lie that supporters of equality for gay Americans are out to silence pastors. He has called Christians who advance a social gospel Marxists. He is adamantly opposed to women having a legal right to choose an abortion.

I'm sure that Warren's supporters will portray his selection as an appeal to unity by a president who is committed to reaching across traditional divides. Others may explain it as a response to Warren inviting then-Senator Obama to speak on AIDS and candidate Obama to appear at a forum, both at his church. But the sad truth is that this decision further elevates someone who has in recent weeks actively promoted legalized discrimination and denigrated the lives and relationships of millions of Americans.

Rick Warren gets plenty of attention through his books and media appearances. He doesn't need or deserve this position of honor. There is no shortage of religious leaders who reflect the values on which President-elect Obama campaigned and who are working to advance the common good.

http://site.pfaw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=media_2008_12_people_for_disappointed_rick_warren

[No Elephants]

55. Possibly, for the long-term good of the Party, Obama is trying to begin to cut into the stranglehold

the Pubs have on the wedge issue neo theos. You know, the noveau theocrats who want their pastor's particular interpretation of the Bible to become the law of the land? But, even if that is Obama's motive, Rick Warren is the wrong choice.

[lisa58]

60. unacceptable

[Skittles]

61. LOL

it fucking kills me how so many DUers are shocked by this - it's no surprise to me, not at all

[The Sushi Bandit]

62. FUCK RICK WARREN

AND THE PERSON(S) WHO HIRED HIM!!

HIS TYPE IS RUINING OUR GREAT LAND.

[Hulk]

65. The guy is a sleaze bag.....but I'm not going to lose sleep over it.

Granted, this isn't my first pick. But hey.....he could have invited Reverend Wright to spite the right wing nut cakes. So, it could have been worse.

This piece of shit, warren the great, is a despicable sack of horse shit, but then, let's see what P-e Obama does with the appointments that matter. This one obviously means very little, other than he's just another religious nut that thinks all gays are going to hell and he has a cushy pillow to the right of Jesus Christ reserved for him in heaven. Just another hypocrite down here on earth.

Poor choice, but means nothing.

[No Elephants]

92. You are mistaken about not meaning anything. Can you think of a higher honor that

Obama could confer on a member of the clergy than to have him or her give the invocation or benediction at the most historic inauguration since Washington"s? It's tantamount to a seal of approval.

Have you already forgotten how the right claimed that having Wright marry you and baptize your children was tantamount to endorsing his sermons? Well, think how much more significant this inauguration is than even a wedding.

This is very heavy symbolism and symbolism means a lot. If you don't think so, recall the swastika, the image of Christ on the Cross or a burning cross. Just symbols. Riiiight. Just like the Constitution is just words.

[antimatter98]

67. Remember this rule: What you SEE is what you get.

Seeing is believing.

Not: Believing is seeing. (which is what the campaign was about)

Watch what Obama DOES, not what he says (or said).

To paraphrase/update Harry Truman:

When you are hit over the head over and over by the same person, and they
keep telling you it was your imagination, as they hit you again, what
will you do? Keep standing there?

[Doc Martin]

68. Why Choose a Polarizing Figure to Lead a Prayer?

[IndianaGreen]

69. A homophobe and a misogynist. Way to go Big O!

I suggest we throw our shoes to this motherfraker when he gives the invocation to his white male god.

[MountainLaurel]

105. If he were an open racist, he'd hit the trifecta n/t

[Divine Discontent]

70. shameful, and shame on Obama until this is changed - hope it will be - see my OP in GD:P. eom

[elehhhhna]

77. This is a joke, right? Will McCain be listening form his limo again?

[Doctor_J]

78. Oh, man. This is starting to suck

:wtf:

[Doctor_J]

79. Oh, man. This is starting to suck

:wtf:

[KamaAina]

80. Wonder how possible Labor Secretary Mary Beth Maxwell feels about this?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3649623&mesg_id=3649623

*-she's openly gay, and would be the first out gay Cabinet member.

So on the same day he makes GLBT history, then slaps them with the back of his glove. :eyes:

[knixphan]

84. Boo

:puke:

[varun]

87. Why not have some pro gay evangelist do the invocation?

I am forgetting the name, but some evangelist recently resigned because of his support of gay marriage. Why cant he do it?

[JCMach1]

89. Totally unacceptable, why not just have Pat Robertson?

Total f'ing bshit...

[underpants]

91. He is willing to come out the closet to do this?

Oh was I not supposed to mention that?

I really don't care. Invocations are a waste of public time in my book.

[Zuiderelle]

95. Thanks Obama, for at least making it clear how little your regard the gay community.

Brilliant. Just fucking brilliant.

[No Elephants]

99. Hey PelosiFan. Pelose is on the Committee that announced the program. Make

your voice heard.

Contact Obama. http://change.gov/page/content/contact

There's even an "Inauguration" topic you can select as the subject of your email to Obama.

You may also want to contact the office of Barbara Feinstein, chair of the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, and/or Reid, Pelosi or Hoyer, the Democratic members of that committee. http://inaugural.senate.gov/cmte/ That is the Committee that made the announcemtn about the inaugural program, including Rick Warren. (Bennett and Boehner are the Republican members of the Committee, but I think we should keep it in the family. So, if you want to contact them, you're on your own.)

Feinstein Contact Info Page http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactUs.Home

Reid Contact Info Page http://reid.senate.gov/ (Scroll to bottom.)

Pelosi Email Address [e-mail]

Pelosi Email Form and Telephone Numbers Page http://www.house.gov/pelosi/contact/contact.html

Hoyer Email Page http://hoyer.house.gov/ (Scroll to Bottom)

Hoyer Contact Info Page- http://hoyer.house.gov/contact/

[rolleitreks]

98. Oh shit! Didn't realize he was the fucking idiot who ran the presidential forum stupidity! n/t

[RCinBrooklyn]

100. CEO of the Inaugural Committee is named Emmett Beliveau. His number is 202-203-1715 or emmett@pic200

[Zorra]

101. Obama's policy of "inclusion" sanctions stupidity, ignorance, and intolerance.

Sure, it's OK for morans, RW wackos, and neo-nazis to disagree with him. This is America, and they have a right to their opinions.

But when these opinions become actions, innocent people suffer the consequences.

Honoring destructive individuals is never the right thing to do.