Rev. V. Gene Robinson openly gay minister to give invocation

[Thrill]

at Sunday’s kickoff inaugural event on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, with President-elect Obama in attendance.

Politico

[MaineDem]

1. Isn't he a Bishop?

This is a good announcement.

[cali]

5. Yes, he is. And a really great guy.

[closeupready]

2. Link? And is this before or after Warren?

?? If true, this is nice.

[Political Tiger]

3. Before

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17340.html

[Bluenorthwest]

12. Two full days before

Not on the same program or even the same day. Gene is not part of the actual Inauguration but part of the many pre-shows. The difference is important, which is why the spin about it. Two non televized days before the main event.

[Political Tiger]

13. The event will be broadcast live exclusively on HBO.

http://dc.about.com/od/specialevents/a/Inauguration.htm

[Bluenorthwest]

34. Excellent!

And by the way, I hear HBO will be opening up to everyone with cable for the events. I'm very pleased that Gene has been added to the events. I really want people to know when he will be there, and frakly I want us all to be really clear that he is not planned to be there on Tuesday, because I do not want people to think he's been bumped when they don't see him on Tues. That would make for more fun times o' confusion.

He's on Sunday. And on HBO, it seems. Sunday I can enjoy without reservation, and that is meaningful. Not perfect, but who or what is?
And mid day Sunday will get many eyes. HBO should be commended. Maybe I'll just pay my cable bill today in their honor!

[Blarch]

15. LOL.

More fake outrage.

Give it up already, you look foolish.

[Bluenorthwest]

20. Not outrage.

A clear statement of fact. The OP wanted to make out like Gene was on the Inaugural program with Warren, and he's not. Gene is a wonderful man and a great addition. But it is what it is, two days before the real show. I am very happy Gene will be there, and almost thrilled to think that he might get to actually speak with Obama about these issues. FYI, I have been involved in Church/glbt dialog for over 20 years. Gene is a great voice, one that I had hoped to see some time back on the Obama train. It is good news, it just is not news of balance on that zero hour platform. It is not 'main stage'. That does not mean I am angry about it, much less outraged. It just means I know when the various events take place. I'd prefer if they were there at the same time, if they must have religious elements. But that is just what I'd prefer. Gene being there at all is much better than nothing, much much better.

What is important about the separate days is that Warren and Robinson will not be together. That is important. I wish they were, on either day, because if we are to expand the dialog with the religious folk, we need that. I am hopeful that the two will engage during the events, and I wish they were to be at any event together, for if Warren must attend, and any good is to come from it, such meetings would be extremely helpful.
Also, many people will want to see Gene on TV, and if they tune in on Tuesday for the main program they will miss him. I want people to see and hear him if they'd like. And that is only possible if they know when and where he is to do his bit. Two days later will not do it. Show time is a very important bit of information, for those that wish to see the show. Sunday is the day for Gene. And to take part by watching, people need to know that.
In addition, if people think he is to be there on the big day and he's not, some will assume he was bumped, and that will make for more confusion.
I see nothing wrong with being clear and accurate about such things as when and where and who. These are just facts, not political footballs. Gene does his thing on Sunday, two days prior to the main event. That is just fact. Some are making the implication that he is on the main event, and he is not. Am I supposed to say that he is going to be where he's not going to be for some reason?
Now how outraged and foolish is all of that? The facts at hand are never foolish, you know. And the facts are the facts. Gene has his time. And it is not Tuesday. It is very good that he will be there, good Obama will get to know the man. In fact, I am a bit relieved to know they are aware of Gene at all. It is good news. But it is the good news that it is, and it occurs on Sunday.
Can you show me where I am incorrect? Of course not.

Edited to remove uneeded slam.

[democrattotheend]

16. The point is, he recognized the anger from the GLBT community and wanted to do something about it

Maybe this does not make up for Warren, but it sends a signal that he's listening and he recognizes that he had to do something symbolic like this. Call it half a loaf, but it's still a lot better than no loaf at all, don't you think?

Hopefully the fact that he obviously felt he had to do something to try to mend fences with the GLBT community means that next time he will be a little more sensitive. I honestly don't believe he meant choosing Warren as a deliberate slap in the face to the GLBT community or the pro-choice community, but I think it was a little insensitive in the wake of Prop 8, and hopefully he will be more sensitive next time.

[Baby Snooks]

17. No I don't...

This is not a "gay thing" and I really am tired of the "gay community" turning it into one along with the media. It may appear to be half a loaf but it is merely the crumbs of the loaf swept off the table to those not at the table.

Everyone who believes in separation of church and state and everyone who believes in equality under the law in this country has protested the inclusion of Rick Warren "at the table" over his views on quite a few things - his views on women and in particular his views on "submission" which open the door to our returning to "chattel law" where judges let men beat their women and their children since after all they all belong to men. And if that's his view on women you can well imagine his views on everyone else. Although honstly his views are pretty much out there for all to see. Including Barack Obama. Who still invited him to the table. And Rick Warren is at the head of the table. I really am trying to keep my "belief" in Barack Obama. But it is becoming harder and harder every time I look at his table.

[Political Tiger]

24. "Rick Warren is at the head of the table"

LOL.

It amazes me that some people have turned, in their minds, this into being the Rick Warren inauguration.

Warren may be "at the table," but it's ridiculous to suggest he is "at the head of the table." Barack Obama is "at the head of the table" and there are other people at this table too, like Rev Joesph Lowery and Bishop Gene Robinson.

Some people look at this "table" and because their minds and focus are so narrow the only person they see "at the table" is Rick Warren. In fact, it's a big table with others sitting at it too, and room for more!

Or maybe people would rather we stay with the George W Bush kind of table, the one where few are invited to sit and those that are must agree with the "head of the table" on everything, where no dissension or other views are allowed?

[cliffordu]

56. After they swear Rick Warren in, maybe I can become the Secretary of

Unrepentanat Trollops.

Hey, it could happen.....

[Bluenorthwest]

39. I agree fully

Read my post upthread. The facts of when and where are facts, and those are important. I don't want anyone to tune in on Tuesday and think Robinson got bumped. I want them to know when and where.
Of course I think it is better than nothing, Robinson is a great guy. I'd say it is better than a half loaf. But it will be better than a half loaf on Sunday, not at the main event. I do not want anyone confused over the time and day. So I ask that people try not to imply that he is on the same program with Warren, because he is not. I'm not even making a value judgement about that. Just saying it is on Sunday, not Tuesday, and let's not play with that and make more confusion.

My take? Sunday mid day is a great TV time. Tuesday's events will be early morning on the West Coast, and many millions will see it on tape, rather than live. I mean Tuesday is the big day, for sure. But Sunday will get plenty of eyes that will be at work on Tuesday. I can see advantages to both days. But the point is, events happen at a time and a place, and that time is Sunday, that place is Lincoln Memorial, live on HBO.
Robinson's presence does not have to be on the same day to have meaning. No one need imply that it is the same day to pump it up. It is just good that he is part of it. It indicates that maybe monolog will be replaced by dialouge at some point.

[dsc]

47. not according to his spokesman

supposedly Robinson was scheduled before Warren was. I tend to believe your theory though.

[flpoljunkie]

60. According to Robinson, the invitation came 'about two weeks ago.'

Robinson has called the choice of Warren a slap in the face. But he said on Monday he did not believe Obama invited him in response to the Warren criticism but his prayer would help ease concerns among gay and lesbians.

He said he believed the invitation, which came about two weeks ago, was made because he endorsed Obama in May last year. The two also met during the presidential primary.

"But this will certainly not go unnoticed in the gay and lesbian community," he said. "It's important for the people to feel represented."

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE50B56O20090112

[closeupready]

31. Okay, thanks. Though I still support those who wish to turn their backs to Warren when he takes

the stage/mike at the inauguration.

[Thrill]

4. Link

http://www.politico.com/playbook/

[whistler162]

9. Let see,,,,

Sunday Jan. 18th Robinson
Tuesday Jan. 20th Warren

Hmmmmmm.....

[NYCGirl]

35. And...Tuesday Jan 20th Lowery

Hmmmmm.....

[whistler162]

67. Shhhhhh.. All must be about Warren.....

ignore anyone else participating in the Inaugural festivities!

[flpoljunkie]

59. Dupe.

[Starry Messenger]

6. That is awesome!

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17340.html

I'm glad to hear this.

[Boomerang Diddle]

7. Thank you President Obama!

K & R!

[eridani]

8. Good news. Indicates that he likely listened to people griping about Warren

I take that as a good sign, myself.

[whistler162]

10. More likely it is that President Elect Obama

has a plan and is following that plan.

[Clio the Leo]

14. Yup. NT

[kwassa]

19. No, I think Obama and his people were caught off guard by his poor choice.

If Robinson had known about it, he would probably not have gone on record everywhere criticizing Rick Warren, which is exactly what he did.

[Thrill]

23. He couldn't have been that pissed with Obama or he wouldn't have accepted the invitation

[kwassa]

27. Robinson interview further down thread.

He is pretty clear how he feels.

[Thrill]

36. Then why come and be apart of it?

[kwassa]

43. read the interview I posted, and read other interviews Robinson gave

he gives his reasons.

[Thrill]

48. Actually I just heard him on CNN. He doesn't feel anything like

some of the people on this board. He's not furious with Obama over Warren.

[kwassa]

50. And who said he was furious?

:shrug:

[Vanje]

63. Obama is the smartest guy in the room. Any room!

He had a preview of the anti-gay preacher problem during the primaries, with that Donnie McClurkin mess.
Obama would NOT make the same mistake twice.

I dont think Obama gets caught off guard.

[Ocracoker16]

22. Obama source said this pick was made before Warren

Check out the quote.

An Obama source said: “Robinson was in the plans before the complaints about Rick Warren. Many skeptics will read this as a direct reaction to the Warren criticism – but it’s just not so.”

[kwassa]

26. It's bullshit. They are covering their asses.

[ruggerson]

29. of course they are - but that's fine

it means they listen and hear.

[kwassa]

32. No, I think it is a great and necessary move.

and I particularly like it as an Episcopalian.

The California Supreme Court last week ruled against three conservative congregations that tried to leave the Episcopal church AND take their property with them, all over Robinson's consecration in 2003. It is a culture war that the conservatives are losing. Rick Warren offered one of those churches a new place to meet at Saddleback in support of their views.

[ruggerson]

38. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4803543&mesg_id=4803543

[kwassa]

44. Exactly!

thanks for the link.

[Captain Hilts]

51. Agree. nt

[donco6]

11. Good news.

Still hate to see that Warren creep anywhere around, but I do like this guy.

If any two people need to talk, it's Robinson and Warren.

[kwassa]

18. Robinson has strongly criticized Warren, and Obama's choice of Warren

Bishop Gene Robinson is a great guy.

His elevation to bishop of New Hampshire in 2003 started off this huge internal cultural war inside the Anglican Communion, but the Episcopal church is standing strong for Robinson and gay rights.

edit to add this interview segment

http://blog.beliefnet.com/news/2008/12/episcopal-bishop-gene-robinson.php

Openly gay New Hampshire Episcopal Bishop V. Gene Robinson has spent the last five years seeking reconciliation with those who saw his election as immoral, unbiblical or, as one Nigerian archbishop put it, a "satanic attack on God's church." (Peter Akinola)
------------------------
Q: You endorsed Barack Obama before the New Hampshire primary. Does his choice of Rick Warren make you second-guess your support for his campaign?

A: No, not at all. I have just total confidence in Barack Obama and I think he will be the greatest friend to the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered) community we've ever seen. This is about the religious person you put in front of the world to pray for the nation and for the new president.

Q: So let's cut to the chase. What's wrong with Rick Warren offering the invocation at the inauguration?

A: I actually have a lot of respect for Rick Warren; amongst evangelicals, he's taken a hit for his compassionate response to AIDS, his commitment to alleviating poverty. He's done some good things. The difficult thing is that he's said, and continues to affirm, some horrendous things about homosexuality -- comparing it to incest, bestiality, that kind of thing. This is not a choice that really represents everyone. This choice was just really, really unfortunate.

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

Q: You told The New York Times that "the God that he's praying to is not the God that I know." What God do you think he's praying to?

A: I think he is praying to a God, at least around this issue, that calls upon God's homosexual children to deny who they are, to deprive themselves of love and intimacy that is permitted every other one of God's children. He's praying to a God who calls on me, as a gay man, to change, to submit myself to the power of Jesus so I can be healed of this `infirmity' of mine.

Q: And how is that different from the God that you pray to?

A: The God I know says to me, just like we hear God saying at Jesus'
baptism, that you are my beloved, and in you I am well pleased. That's a very, very different God. Imagine the difference between a parent who loves you for you who are, and one that says I'll only love you if you change.

[Thrill]

21. And I'm sure there are several ministers who are outraged about Obama

giving Robinson the opportunity to speak.

So what do people want from the guy.

[kwassa]

28. What we want is a progressive orientation.

not honoring cultural right-wingers that have dominated American politics for the past 8 years.

Where is that "change that we can believe in"?

[yardwork]

57. Exactly.

Warren shouldn't have been given that honor in the first place. Reach out to him, engage him in conversation, put him on a panel, sure. But not the honor of giving the invocation at the president's inauguration.

Gene Robinson is the sort of person Obama should be honoring, not because he's gay but because he's a good and decent person.

[Vanje]

64. Yes!

Thank you for putting it so well and so simply.

[xchrom]

30. the difference is that they outraged over robinson just BEING.

or is that too simple for you?

[closeupready]

33. Homophobic ministers? Probably. Obama should dismiss them, and focus on progressive ministers

instead, since bigoted preachers and their congregations are outsiders and should remain so for the duration of Obama's administration.

[ruggerson]

25. Great. More evidence that Obama listens

which is exactly what he said he was going to do. I'd rather have no Warren, but this will get a lot of press coverage and will somewhat ameliorate the impact of Warren.

[phleshdef]

37. LOL. If this is true, a lot of people are looking like fools...

Though I'm sure some will jump to say that this doesn't change anything, that it should be NO Warren or nothing, their way or the highway and other childish rantings.

[ruggerson]

40. The people that are looking like fools are those that

told the gay community and their straight allies to STFU.

Obama listened because there was an enormous outcry against Warren.

[bluedawg12]

42. For some gays can do nothing right. Challenge Obama, support Obama, we're wrong.

It seems that gays are damned if we do and damned if we don't, for some.

It's getting very old.

[Bluenorthwest]

45. How does one tell a fool

from a sucessful activist winning a small victory?
People here who like to use characterizations and name callings ought to check themselves and let us know how their political goals are going. Then they should sit and take notes. The stuff that annoys you so is called activism, and it is being done exactly to the specifications of our new Pres. Wise up and do likewise.

[yardwork]

58. How so? Do you think that inviting an honorable person makes up for honoring a bigot?

As a U.S. citizen first and a lesbian second, I never wanted or expected Obama to invite a "gay" representative to his inauguration. That was the furthest thing from my mind. I'm not interested in the politics of identity.

My objection to Warren has always been that he is not the sort of person any president should be honoring and elevating. His actions and words are those of hatred and disenfranchisement. He's a bigot. We have no reason to honor bigots. Talk to him - sure. Don't honor him.

Gene Warren is the sort of person Obama should be honoring - not because he's gay, but because he's a good and decent person.

Some of you folks really don't get it.

[Political Tiger]

61. The only one being honored on 1/20/09

is Barack Obama.

[bluedawg12]

41. I see it as a good sign and an affirmative statement. n/t

[Thrill]

46. He's on CNN NOW

Saying he is thrilled. Said its great that he gets to do this at the Lincoln Memorial.
Said Obama is doing exactly what he said he would do. Hear everyone. And he would like to sit down with Warren and Obama this week if they all could. Great Opportunity

[firedupdem]

49. I saw that too. I'm glad he will be there and it would be great for

them to get together and talk. Nothing gets accomplished if we don't talk to each other......and sometimes without preconditions!

[kwassa]

52. an Episcopal blog says they knew about this before Christmas

The blog is connected with the Diocese of Washington, but were informed with the agreement that they wouldn't publish the information. It is not clear that Robinson himself knew, however.

http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/faith_and_politics/breaking_bishop_gene_robinson.html

[EraOfResponsibility]

65. so it's not "bullshit" as you said before then?

:eyes:

[kwassa]

66. It might be semi-bullshit

Depends on the timing difference between Warren hitting the fan, and the invitation issued to Gene Robinson.

[BeyondGeography]

53. Excellent news

:thumbsup:

[LaydeeBug]

54. It's a STEP, but not atonement...

Rick Warren is a bigot, and a dominionist. Where is the openly gay guy ON INAUGURATION DAY? A kickoff at the Lincoln is fine, but the stage is where it's at.

[Ioo]

62. Agreed. It is also not at the "Main Event" but a very removed event.

That will not even really be seen.

[Balderdash]

55. I'm glad that Gene Robinson has been included. nt