Could You People Stop Telling Me to Find Common Ground With Fucking Bigots?

[Toasterlad]

Despite what Obama would have you believe, there IS no "common ground" with Warren and his ilk. There is NO POINT at the negotiation where I would say, "well, you're wrong about the bestiality comparison, but I guess you've got a point about the incest comparison."

These assholes ARE ALL WRONG. The opposing view is ALL RIGHT. Sometimes things REALLY ARE that black and white.

Jesus Christ on a jet-powered pogo stick, how do you not SEE that? How far removed from any other life experience could you possibly BE?

Warren is not going to "change his mind" about gay issues. He's damn sure not going to "change his mind" about gay issues through any dialogue with Obama, who's not far behind him on the whole "gays aren't really people" scale. Inviting him to speak, pray, or even APPEAR at any government event is not "reaching out". It is not "opening dialogue". It is not "being inclusive". IT IS FUCKING BASE PANDERING, at the expense of all gay people.

If you have the right to marry the person you love, if you have the right to be present at their side on their death bed, if you are guaranteed to inherit their estate should they precede you, if you can't be legally evicted or fired because of who you sleep with, if you can serve openly in the US Military, if you wouldn't be turned out of your home by your own parents just for being yourself, YOU DON'T GET TO TELL ME AND MINE HOW BIG A DEAL THIS WARREN SHIT IS. You don't get to excuse this Obama decision. And you DON'T get to tell me to find common ground with people who hate me without even knowing me.

YOU DON'T GET IT. YOU'LL NEVER GET IT. But, by God, you could at least TRY to understand. You could at least TRY to put yourselves in our positions. What if YOU woke up one morning and they said your marriage was no longer valid? What if YOU were thrown out of your house, or fired from your job, or disowned by your family, just for being you? What if someone came to your house one day to take away your daughter, in order to place her in someone else's idea of a real family?

We don't expect you to understand. We'd like you to try. But at the very least, we'd LIKE YOU TO STOP TELLING US HOW TO FEEL AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT. Because YOU. DON'T. GET IT.

Note: I have asked the mods if I may repost this thread, as the original was locked for being too inflammatory. I agree with their reasoning, and have tried to be more respectful of fellow DUers in this post. Please show all others the same courtesy if you choose to reply.

[rockymountaindem]

1. I think some people who don't have any contact with the fundies just don't understand

Living here among them in Colorado Springs pretty much my whole life has given me some insight into how they see the world. They don't just disagree with us, or have simple policy differences. Most of them seem to have a higher opinion of dysentery than liberals or the Democratic Party. They have no desire or intention of ever meeting us halfway. I think if you live in New York City or Seattle or Berkeley you just can't understand the level to which they are entrenched in their beliefs. They will never, ever respect our views or admit that they have a single shred of validity.

[Hydra]

I have deeply "religious" family members

And they make no bones about it- they think we are traitors and should be lined up and shot. My Grandmother talked about how "McCarthy was right about all of you." One of my co-workers once remarked that the whole problem with America came from Berkley. These people aren't joking. They'd string us up in a second if they thought they had the support of the state in this matter.

It always amazes me that DUers don't see just how dangerous these people are. They aren't well meaning, they don't like us, and they don't want to fix the world- they want everyone to be like them.

[jhrobbins]

215. I think that on this issue, it is more an ignorance of the situation

than outright recalcitrance about it. SO many straight people never have to consider the dozens (I think it is significantly over 100) of rights that accompany marriage - rights that are immediately conveyed upon the ceremony (civil or religious) and rights that would cost us tens of thousands of dollars to replicate them through legal channels and contracts.



One small for instance - If my partner were to be in an accident and taken to a hospital-I would have to find the piece of paper that he had signed and we had notarized -to allow me to even go in to see him, much less direct any medical procedures. I'm not sure in such a panicked state I could find it.

[silverojo]

235. When my aunt was in ICU, I lied and said I was her daughter

Nobody's going to ask you for ID or anything...just say you're the sister/brother. Works every time.

Legally speaking, a niece is nothing. I couldn't even sue her doctors for malpractice after she died, because only "immediate family" can do so. To hell with the fact that I lived with her for years, and cared for her until the day she died.

It isn't just LGBT people who face these issues (I'm a lesbian, but that didn't apply in this case). Even if gay marriage were made legal today, that does nothing to help other close relationships.

So please don't say straight people don't have to deal with these issues, because they do. It's just that you don't know about their stories.

[Toasterlad]

242. Do You Understand The Difference Between Visiting Your Aunt and Visiting Your Wife?

Do you understand the difference between having to lie about a relationship because otherwise you'd be refused admittance, and having to lie because your relationship is not legally recognized?

[hfojvt]

268. not necessarily a lot

an aunt is somebody you've known your whole life, whereas sometimes people get married after only knowing each other a few weeks. Sam Kineson died in a car accident on his honeymoon. So somebody might not have known a dying spouse all that long. And the bottom line seems to be the same in either case - a person is not allowed to visit somebody they care deeply about. There's a whole lot of shared suckitude there, even if your reason for being denied is somehow worse than her reason for being denied. Plus, she's talking about something that actually happened to her and you are talking about something that might happen to you.

[Toasterlad]

278. I'm Talking About Things That Happen To Gay People Every Day.

With all do respect: fuck her aunt. And fuck you, if you can't see the difference between being denied visitation due to policy that applies to all, and being denied visitation based on WHO YOU ARE.

[jhrobbins]

252. Thank you Toasterlad - and to add one thing; I said SO many, not all

straight people - jeez, this is the way things get going in DU when people take things out of the exact context (in this issue). SOme people just want to be contrarian.

[KittyWampus]

15. You just lumped all Evangelicals and Warren fans into one group. There's a word for that...

btw, the fact that Obama won in some pretty blue states means he peeled off at least a few of these types already.

[rockymountaindem]

24. Wrong

The fact that Obama won in states like Colorado is a sign that the influence of people like Dobson is on the decline. Now is not the time to throw them a public life preserver. Also, I did not lump all evangelicals and "Warren fans" into one group. I said "fundies", aka "fundamentalists". I understand that people like President Carter don't fall into that group.

[robinlynne]

44. No. you misunderstood.

[WVRICK13]

98. NOT QUITE

By being evangelical they have lumped themselves into one group. Get a gripe.

[baby_mouse]

121. "Accuracy"?

[ooglymoogly]

180. He got only slightly more of the evangelical vote than did Gore. nt

[trotsky]

179. I think that is exactly the problem. You nailed it. n/t

[yardwork]

211. I've been thinking about this a lot and I doubt that Obama is naive about this.

That's what is so discouraging to me. Obama is a highly intelligent, shrewd politician. He can't possibly think that this gesture will change Warren's mind or defuse the right wing.

Instead, it looks like a coldly calculating move on Obama's part to signal his agreement with the right wing on the issue of human rights. In return for this, Obama hopes to get more votes, money, and support from the center-right. This is exactly the strategy used by Bill Clinton during his eight years in the presidency. Clinton's decisions to defund food stamps and assistance to poor families and support NAFTA and other trade agreements that hurt U.S. workers earned him popularity and support from the center-right. It certainly did NOT stop the extreme right wing from hounding him. It certainly did NOT stop the right wing from gathering even more power which they used to put the chimp in charge for eight years and launch wars. I believe we are seeing a resumption of the Clinton approach.

I'll be very happy to learn that I'm wrong. I'll wait and see.

[BlueJazz]

216. The Ones I have met truly do seem like they are another Species.

Their thought patterns are so intrenched in Non-science that I have almost nothing in commom with them.

[Norrin Radd]

243. Casey Treat Ministries is headquartered near here in Seattle.

[Hydra]

2. Happy to kick and rec again- reposting my previous message since this may be archive material

You Nailed It
------------------

I've often been disappointed with the people here on DU for blatant stupidity and head in the sand behavior, but I am truly STUNNED at what I've seen in the last fews days.

"Obama is our president. Get over yourselves."

Excuse me? I didn't know that electing a man to office made his decisions beyond question by us "lowly mortals." I thought we left such thinking to the Freepers with their worship of the Bush Administration.

I'm not LBGT, but I know all about having rights taken away. My right are not for sale or trade for political benefit by a person I voted for, and neither should anyone else's be.

HUMAN RIGHTS are a principle of the Democratic party. Not just some humans that we like, not just at times when it's convenient or politically expedient to do so. Either you support HUMAN RIGHTS, or you don't. Which is it, DU?

[jgraz]

14. Just goes to show: Dems are not immune from reptile-brain thinking

All this need for unquestioning submission to authority is not surprising, but it's a little discouraging to see so many DUers falling into it blindly.

[KittyWampus]

20. LOL! the reptiles are the black and white DU'ers who can't grasp the concept of Common Ground

You're either with us or against us.

[jgraz]

22. In other words, "you're either for common ground or you're against us"

Nice. :eyes:

[Hydra]

25. Hmm, let's try your theory out

Common ground:

Torture: We only torture in certain ways?
Nuclear Strikes: We only do it when it's in our interests?
Pre-emptive invasions: We do it with good PR?


Nope. You fail. Bad ideas are not good ideas when we find "common ground"- ie, we throw people under the bus.

[jgraz]

27. Don't scoff. That common ground is coming, at least for torture and treason

And when it does, the same people will be here spewing apologetica.

[Hydra]

30. Holy hell

I think you just made me :scared:

That is an INSANELY frightening thought.

[KittyWampus]

39. You don't even understand what the concept "Common Ground" means as evidenced by your post

Here, let me explain it to you in simple terms:

Common Ground= finding a few common agreed upon causes with people you strongly disagree with on certain OTHER issues.

[Hydra]

46. Ok, lets follow your theory

So we make nice-nice with Warren. We find a few things we can get along with him on. Now what? Does he change his views because he thinks we're great people(I'll be holding my breath)? Or do we tolerate what he does in his spare time because he would make such a great ally(More likely- our leaders are good at caving in)?

See, when you ally with someone, there's this minor problem- you become responsible for all the things they do. That's why I mentioned those "meeting in the middle" things. Even if he softens his behavior, he's still going to be destroying people's lives.

Is this all ok with you so far? Because I'm not seeing where any of this is a good idea.

[hfojvt]

270. that does not compute for me

How do you become responsible for everything a part-time ally does?

Secondly, he changes some of his views, perhaps most importantly, the view that Democrats are evil and must be opposed at all costs. If you are not demonizing him and he's not demonizing you, then he is more likely to listen to your POV even on issues where you strongly disagree.

[Hannah Bell]

51. The guy doesn't agree with DEMOCRACY.

Maybe he likes roses or something, so what?

He's a Dominionist. There's no common ground; I'm not going to buy into a theocracy, nor do I want theocrats given a government-sponsored platform for their views.

[muriel_volestrangler]

119. Then Warren could be a member of an environmental group or something

That's where the common ground is. The invocation at an inauguration is about your overall moral and ethical outlook, and Warren's stinks.

[MNBrewer]

203. Wow.... you really REALLY miss the point.

[Jankyn]

265. I've got a boss who's into that particular definition...

...of "common ground." And that's all very well and good, except that what we're talking about disagreeing over isn't "ground," and it isn't an "issue"; it's my life.

[donco6]

302. Oh, I see.

So we ignore the "gay marriage is just like bestiality" comments, because Warren favors feeding the poor (good on him, I guess).

Hmmm . . . Nah, can't do that.

[TankLV]

125. Let us know when he "dialogues" and "reaches out" to the KKK...

until then - obama and you are all full of SHIT...

[wolfgangmo]

192. Good point

If he is going to reach out to extremists then he should reach out to the KKK, John Birch Society, Al Queda, Black Panthers, Crips Bloods as well as the dominionist theologists.

[MNBrewer]

202. What "common ground" can there be between people who would deny gay people equal rights

The gay people who are standing up DEMANDING them?

That's like finding common ground between the KKK and the NAACP.

[ZombieHorde]

271. They are against us, they openly admit it.

This means that either a) they are telling the truth, and are against us b) they are lying for some bizarre reason, or c) they are too confused to know what they are saying.

[donco6]

301. Are you serious?

Or being sarcastic?

[ScaryBob]

104. No worries --

I think Obama will be the best prez EVER, but I will not be silenced nor stop questioning any move he makes if it isn't for the "common good"!!!!

And Warren surely does have a dark side, duh -- but it's not like he's a cabinet member or anything. And if he can truly help with those Jesus-y things like lifting the poor out of poverty, then the power to him and Obama.

But secretly hoping that Warren shows up in some photos with Ted Haggard!!!!! :evilgrin:

[TankLV]

126. You're only right about one thing - you ARE "scary"...

disgusting...

[LeftCoast]

3. K&R

Too bad most of the 'dialog' crowd won't get it

[Richard Steele]

4. K&R

[stillcool]

5. Is this a re-post?

[Toasterlad]

6. Yes...I Asked the Mods If I Could Repost It Minus The Inflammatory Words

I thought the message was important enough to keep going.

[mudesi]

7. A lot of banning ought to be happening right now

There's nothing like gay rights that brings out the people who ought not to be allowed to post here on DU.

K & R.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

13. I'm stunned

I really cannot believe the stuff I've seen here. I mean, I've been told to "relax," "calm down," and one notable poster assured me that Obama had not chosen Warren simply to piss me off.

How that poster knew that, I have no idea.

And I'm straight.

That everyone here at DU isn't upset about this Warren fuckup is beyond me.

I guess liberals aren't what they used to be.

Shame on them.

[silverojo]

238. I'm more stunned

...one notable poster assured me that Obama had not chosen Warren simply to piss me off.

How that poster knew that, I have no idea.

So you're saying Obama DID choose Warren simply to piss you off? Wow, you must really be important, for Obama to keep you in mind while making his choice. :sarcasm:

[silverojo]

237. You don't ban people based on their opinions

There's enough of that shit going on at Freak Republic. You ban people for breaking rules, NOT for what they think.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

8. I agree! There is ZERO common ground with Rick Warren and his followers.

They don't constitute the other point of view. The constitute a despicable group.

[MazeRat7]

9. Well people love to bitch and everybody has an opinion....

That's just how it rolls.

Peace,
MZr7

[ThomCat]

10. Kick and Recommend.

And absolutely spot on. :applause:

[Sarah Ibarruri]

11. K&R! nt

[Hanse]

12. Did MLK Jr. ever try to find common ground with racists? Hell no.

Did Gandhi ever try to find common ground with the British? Fuck no.

Did Voltaire ever try to find common ground with those he disagreed with? He sure as hell didn't.

[KittyWampus]

21. OMG, it's incredible how DU'ers can totally FAIL to grasp MLK and Ghandi's message

Both of those individuals treated every single human being with respect.

That is where their power and strength resided.

[yowzayowzayowza]

53. I know. Itz mind boggling. n/t

[Hannah Bell]

63. mind-boggling how many people spell "Gandhi" wrong.

let alone paint him as a cardboard saint.

oh, yeah, i remember the march on washington, & the great speech the grand wizard of the KKK made. George Wallace was there to offer up the opening prayer, & Orville Faubus closed the occasion with a rousing version of "onward christian white folk".

christ on a crutch, revisionism, revisionism.

[JanMichael]

171. They did. But, they probably wouldn't have invited the repressive

clowns to an inauguration, other than as guests who were allowed to sample the food.

[Deja Q]

287. Weren't they both assassinated?

(forgive my laxity on history)

[Toasterlad]

23. You're Right. He Didn't.

MLK never once conceded that black people were worthy of any less respect or recognition under the law than white people. He never once granted that his opponent's argument was worth considering. He denounced it for the hate it was.

[Hanse]

29. Then I guess this must be photoshopped.

[Toasterlad]

31. At Which Point In This Conversation Is MLK Conceding That Blacks Shouldn't Marry?

[Hanse]

34. MLK Jr. vehemently disagreed with Johnson's racism.

As Obama vehemently agrees with Warren's homophobia, misogyny, islamophobia, and so on.

In the same way I assume Clinton disagreed with Billy Graham's homophobia and anti-semitism.

[Toasterlad]

37. Obama Has Done Little To Show That He Disagrees With Warren In Any Way

However, the point is that Warren was not invited as a gesture of inclusiveness. He was not invited to start a dialogue. He was invited as a crass political stunt. There was not intent to help gay people. There was no consideration of gay people at all.

You cannot defend this selection, and your attempts to do so are rude to the gay community, and dismissive of the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr, who was an entirely DIFFERENT kind of preacher than the shit bag who'll be praying at the inauguration.

[Hanse]

40. Actually, yeah, he has.

Obama's stated positions and legislative record on gay rights, hate crimes, women's rights, reproductive rights, foreign policy, and any number of other issues shows a sharp contrast with Warrens views.

But that throws a wrench in your anti-Obama narrative, so you choose to ignore it.

[Toasterlad]

52. Not At All. I'm Quite Familiar With Obama's Record.

He's definitely more pro-women and pro-Jew than Warren is (not that THAT'S hard). I'm not concerned about Obama's positions on those issues. He is not on record as saying that women or Jews shouldn't be married. He's got a decent voting record on gay issues in Congress. And he's co-sponsored one piece of pro-gay legislation. He also let a virulent anti-gay preacher emcee a fundraising event for him over repeated requests from the gay community that he choose someone else. His campaign promise to repeal DADT has been pushed back to at least 2010 so he can "study" it some more. He always stopped just short of saying that he'd fight to repeal DOMA. He believes the states should decide civil unions for themselves. And he's letting a virulent anti-gay preacher (a different one) give the invocation at his inauguration.

Obama is pro-gay rights when it's politically expedient, and invisible at best when it is not. He is not interested in serving the gay community. As so many on DU have gleefully observed, he's got "bigger fish to fry".

[Jester Messiah]

229. Bigger fish? No, surely not!

There's only an economy in full retreat with hundreds of thousands about to lose their jobs and health benefits (what few they had), a catastrophic war or two to wind down, and a planet slowly but surely being made uninhabitable. But that's -peanuts- compared to YOUR main issue, isn't it?

I'm not saying the GLBT community doesn't have real and legitimate grievances, but for humanity's sake, get some damn perspective!

[Toasterlad]

233. I Hope Obama Can Multi-Task Better Than You, Or We're In a World of Shit.

Which crucial issue do you think he'll tackle first, since he can only do one at a time?

[Jester Messiah]

245. He's only got 100% to give

Every new issue on the pile that gets n% of his time and resources detracts that % from the available pool. Thus, he has to prioritize.

[Toasterlad]

254. Where Would You Put YOUR Civil Rights?

[Jester Messiah]

258. If I found myself in your position

I'd continue the fight on my own or with my compatriots, realizing that Obama cannot afford to be my ally if he's going to fix the larger problems facing the nation. It isn't as if Obama ran on a gay rights platform anyway; there's no betrayal here. Obama's mandate is to work on the wars, the economy, and the environment. Once those are done, maybe then he can turn his attention to gay rights. Does that mean you have to wait for him? Not in the slightest. So my advice to you is to quit bitching about Obama and get to work solving the problem any other way you can.

[Toasterlad]

261. I Am Not Waiting For Obama, Clown.

I AM working for my rights, as are the rest of my brothers and sisters; real people who don't have the same rights you take for granted. How fortunate for you that you will NEVER find yourself in my position, which is why you are able to so glibly answer hypotheticals about what you would do in a situation for which you are totally unprepared and, I'd be willing to wager, would handle with far less grace than your average gay person. Sadly, for the cause of justice, you will NEVER know what it's like to be denied your rights the way I am denied mine. So you can take your hypothetical advice and shove it up your hypothetical ass.

Meanwhile, back to Obama. I'm extraordinarily well aware that Obama did not campaign on a gay rights platform, and I am not the slightest bit surprised by the anti-gay stunts he has pulled. However, there IS a betrayal. Obama took an oath as a Senator, and he will take an oath when he is sworn in as President, to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. Every time he turns his back on gay people, he violates that oath. As you and Obama share the same low priority for gay rights, you'll no doubt see it differently. But I surely do wish we DID live in a just world, where YOUR rights were held hostage by an uncaring majority. And I wish I was in that majority, and had the ability to grant those rights. Being a much better person than you, I'd actually give them to you, but I'd definitely make you sweat first. Because oh my GOD does your over-privileged ass deserve to.

[Jester Messiah]

263. Your resort to insult marks the weakness of your position.

Also, getting angry at me (or anyone, really) isn't going to improve your lot, so why not take a step back and analyze your situation instead of frothing at the mouth like a rabid dog? I'm 100% in favor of gay rights, so I don't know where you get this "much better person" garbage. In fact, given the scenario you wished for, the irony fairly drips from any suggestion that you're a good person at all. But hey, you're wounded and angry so I won't hold it against you. Merry Christmas and good fortune to you.

[Toasterlad]

275. Shove Your Good Fortune.

I hope that you get EXACTLY what you deserve this holiday season. Especially since you don't have a valid argument to go with your high horse. Address the points I made, and then you might be worthy of discussion.

[Jester Messiah]

288. Had a great one, thanks.

Got exactly what I wanted, spent a lovely day with my wife, couldn't be more satisfied. And I'll bet you're still full of spite and hatred. How's that working out for you?

[Toasterlad]

290. Glad You Were Able To Share the Holidays With Your Wife.

That must make it SUPER easy to piss all over the people who are not legally able to do so.

What a callous tool you are.

[Jester Messiah]

293. And how easily baited you are.

You're like the bull in that old Bugs Bunny cartoon. I wave the red cape, you charge. Head, meet wall.

[Toasterlad]

295. So My Civil Rights Are a Game to You, Prick? What Are You Doing Here?

[Jester Messiah]

298. Nope, I'm 100% in favor of gay civil rights, as I've said many times before.

You, however, are a rage-a-holic twit, and since you're beyond taking any kind of constructive advice I've decided to mock you instead. I find this to be a more entertaining solution than adding you to ignore (the coward's choice, IMHO.)

[Toasterlad]

299. Yes, That's Just What I Need.

Another privledged straight asshole offering me "advice". And if I refuse the benefit of your "wisdom", you'll shift gears and make fun of the fact that gay people don't have equal rights.

What a tremendous advocate for gay equality you are. No wonder you're happy with Obama's choice.

[Jester Messiah]

300. No, that's a straw man.

I'm not making fun of the fact that gay people don't have equal rights. I'm just enjoying your utter inability to restrain yourself or realize when you're making a fool of yourself. You've done nothing but demonstrate the validity of my initial piece of advice, which can basically be summed up as "Don't let anger cloud your judgment." You can't see past your hurt feelings to see that Obama's got a plan that will ultimately benefit everybody (GLBT folk included), and the Warren move is a part of it. You'd rather indulge your rage than see if the plan works, and that's called "cutting off your nose to spite your face", or "shooting yourself in the foot", variously. But now I'm just typing for the love of keystrokes... I doubt you've read this far. You were probably mentally composing your next batch of venom by my third sentence, if you even waited that long.

[Toasterlad]

304. You Made Fun of Gay People Who Do Not Have Rights.

"Strawman" does not equal "facts". Your intention may have been to hatefully attack ME (you know, the guy all filled with hate), but you ended up attacking ALL of us. And thereby proved what was pretty clear from the git go: You don't give a shit about gay people, and are merely enjoy kicking people when they're down.

I'm not interested in how you choose to defend yourself, as I already know there is no defense for your callous assholery.

We will win our civil rights eventually, despite your peculiar brand of "help". I only wish you could be deprived of yours the same day I get mine.

[Jester Messiah]

305. See, again with the spite.

Why do you want others to be deprived of the rights you crave? Why is it that depriving you is bad, but depriving me is good? And you're so sure that I don't give a shit about gay people, but you have absolutely no basis for knowing anything of the sort. I'll spare you the "some of my best friends" line, because I actually only have a few gay friends and we're not close. Still, I'm not kicking "gay people" as a whole, I'm just kicking you. You're the one who saw the mere fact that I am married as an attack. And I'm not kicking you because you're gay; I'm kicking you because you're a rage-a-holic twit. See, I don't know if you know this or not, but your gender orientation isn't a free pass to act that way without reprisal. Might want to tuck that away for future knowledge.

[Toasterlad]

306. Because, Like All Who Oppress a Minority, You Don't Deserve Your Rights, Tool.

And I have all the basis I need for everything I've said. You admitted to "baiting" me with the comment about spending Christmas with your wife. Taunting ME because I don't have the same rights = taunting EVERYONE who doesn't have the same rights, moron. I guess your few, non-close gay friends haven't had a chance to explain that to you. You might try listening to them more instead of the people who are telling you it's okay to tell gay people what to feel, to dismiss their objections to being shat upon, and to not turn on them if they refuse to kiss your big straight ass.

Meanwhile, it's funny that you accuse me of being a rageaholic twit, when you're right there matching me attack for attack. You could have bailed out at any time, but expressing your hate for a gay person was more important than keeping above the fray. Guess there are no mirrors in your house.

And now, no more attention for you. You must be full. Post your last vitriolic bit defending your indefensible gay-baiting, get your last kicks in on me (what a good job you're doing staying above the hate!), and then go find some other poor homo to piss on.

[Toasterlad]

296. Dupe

[Creideiki]

297. "What a callous tool you are."

Hmmm. I'm thinking woodfile, because it's pretty rough, but he might be a plane.

Sorry, I'm starting to envision some of the tools here as literal tools. This one is just another in the series.

[Touchdown]

285. His insults are not weakness. They are a warranted response to your BS.

They are the result of his real justifiable anger at your dismissive patronizing.

You write nicely, but your words alone don't make you reasonable, nice, or rational. Soft tones betray bigotry just as much as vitrol. Nice try though.

[Jester Messiah]

289. Nice try to... what, exactly?

Dispense some advice? All I'm trying to say is that throwing a temper tantrum and acting like the world's biggest douche isn't going to further anyone's cause. For saying so, I get treated like a bigot when I'm 100% in favor of gay rights. News flash dude... telling every straight you meet to go eff themselves doesn't make you a Gay Rights Martyr, it just makes you an asshole.

[kiva]

49. LBJ was the force behind the passage of

the Civil Rights Act of 1965, arguing that only he, as a southerner, could have pushed it through Congress. Johnson has much to answer for regarding Vietnam, but not about his support for civil rights.

[Hanse]

55. Johnson was a vicious racist.

He voted against civil rights during his time in the Senate.

He later changed his mind.

I guess that fucks up the narrative too.

[Hannah Bell]

67. no, he was never a "vicious racist". you're misinformed.

[Hanse]

71. Johnson was as much a racist as Warren is a homophobe.

Maybe you should look it up before you call other people misinformed.

[Hannah Bell]

76. i take issue with "vicious". Johnson's record is mixed.

Before he became a politician he taught hispanic kids & by all accounts was a caring teacher.

In his first campaign he avoided race & got beat by a race-baiter. He then bowed to political expediency, vowing to never get "out-segged" again.

Contrary to what you say, though, he did help pass some civil rights legislation in the senate, even before the landmark bills as president.

In the context of his time & place, he was by no means viciously racist.

Warren has no such ambiguity in his public actions & pronouncements.

BTW, I lived it, so i don't have to "look it up" so much as those who have to rely on revisionist histories. In the context of the times, Johnson was a flaming liberal on race.

[RFKHumphreyObama]

283. I think you may have Lyndon Johnson confused with George Wallace

The anecdote you relate sounds suspiciously like one from George Wallace's biography
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Wallace

It does not disprove your point though. LBJ's record on race relations was chequered and he told different things to different audiences. Nevertheless there seems to be enough evidence to suggest that LBJ was very progressive on race relations for his time. He taught poor Mexican and (I think also) African-American kids before entering politics and this is widely thought to have given him some sympathy for racial minorities. He pushed through some limited civil rights legislation during his term as Senate Majority Leader (although sadly it was much watered down because of his desire for political expediency ahead of a possible presidential bid) but he apparently is credited with pushing the cautious Kennedy Administration further than it initially wanted to go on civil rights issues. Once in office, he pushed through the important civil rights legislation and also social justice programs that benefited minorities and the poor. He fell out with Dr King and some other civil rights leaders over Vietnam but he nevertheless remained progressive on civil rights issues until his death

He was certainly not a vicious racist

[kiva]

74. Don't know where you're getting your history from, but

check it again. Johnson was one of only three southern senators who did not sign the Southern Manifesto, a diatribe against Brown v. Board--the other two senators were Al Gore, Sr. and Estes Kefauver. Though tapes have revealed that LBJ used racist language in personal conversations, his actions in supporting civil rights legislation are evidence that he wasn't a "vicious racist."

[Hannah Bell]

59. lbj - not exactly a racist.

[mopinko]

32. you are entitled to your opinion. you are not entitled to rewrite history.

A man who was completely innocent, offered himself as a sacrifice for the good of others, including his enemies, and became the ransom of the world. It was a perfect act.
Mohandas Gandhi

It is easy enough to be friendly to one's friends. But to befriend the one who regards himself as your enemy is the quintessence of true religion. The other is mere business.
Mohandas Gandhi

Have we not come to such an impasse in the modern world that we must love our enemies - or else? The chain reaction of evil - hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars - must be broken, or else we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

We must develop and maintain the capacity to forgive. He who is devoid of the power to forgive is devoid of the power to love. There is some good in the worst of us and some evil in the best of us. When we discover this, we are less prone to hate our enemies.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

[KittyWampus]

50. thanks for posting that.

[Toasterlad]

58. That Poster Is Actually Being Sarcastic. He's On Your Side.

However, in answer to your post, I'd like to point out that there's a difference between loving your enemies and giving them a public platform to spread hate.

[mopinko]

107. these days sarcasm tags should be mandatory.

i realized when i logged off and went to bed that i had missed that.

but, what would that difference be exactly? no nazi references, please. you can love them, but you just can't tell anyone? you can love them, but as the president, you can't do so publicly? you can love them, you just can't make that official policy?


seriously, this is what has to happen if humanity is to survive. we must put down our hate. we must put down our anger. we must reach a new place of love and respect. or humanity goes up in flames. period.

[Toasterlad]

110. Well, First of All, MLK Jr. Was a Much Better Man Than Me

As much as I admire his philosophy, I don't subscribe to it, and I don't recommend it. I don't love my enemy. I think loving my enemy would make me a fucking sap. And I think my enemy would take my love, wrap it around a ten foot flag pole, and shove it up my ass.

I think what MLK was espousing in realistic terms was that we must speak out against injustice. We must demand our rights (he would recommend we do it in a more respectful manner than I am prepared to do). But we must never acknowledge the legitimacy of the opposing argument. There IS no legitimate reason to hate GLBT people, just as there was no legitimate reason to hate blacks, or women, or Jews, or any other historically oppressed minority.

Find me one instance of common ground Martin Luther King Jr found with his enemies, please.

[Hanse]

162. So is Barack Obama.

:shrug:

[Toasterlad]

169. He's a Much Better Politician Than Me, I'll Grant You That.

I could never kiss the ass of people who actively push hate.

[wolfgangmo]

193. To paraphrase/translate Sun Tsu

To defeat your enemy you must love your enemy. To love your enemy you must understand him. To understand him is to defeat him.

[Toasterlad]

197. With All Due Respect to Sun Tsu...

I've heard more convincing psuedo-philosophy on "Kung Fu".

I understand my enemy plenty without loving them, Grasshopper. They've made themselves VERY clear.

[liberalpress]

264. Gandhi and MLK,Jr were both better men than I...

... yet I try my damndest to love my enemy. It is difficult, it is hurtful, it is, at times, the last thing I want to do. And you are correct, in that more times than not "my enemy would take my love, wrap it around a ten foot flag pole, and shove it up my ass."

That is my enemies problem not mine. I shall continue to return his hate with love for as long as I am able. I shall NOT become him, for what purpose does that serve?

[Toasterlad]

277. Then You, Also, Are a Better Person Than I

If, in fact, you practice what you preach. I'm noticing that more than a few straight people, faced with hypothecial situations of lost rights and unequal treatment, are blithely declaring they'd rise above it all.

Live MY life for a week, and then tell me who you'd love.

[liberalpress]

280. Sorry for your bitterness...

Alas, I am ot always successful at my attempts, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't try. Love and peace to you, my brother. May the new year brings you happiness.

[Toasterlad]

284. And Love and Peace To You, From Those Of Us Who Have to Live in the REAL World.

[Hannah Bell]

201. Look at their actions. The KKK wasn't offering prayers at the March on Washington,

the Brits weren't at the salt marches.

The time for "finding common ground" is after you've bent the bastards to your will.

[MNBrewer]

206. This, from a person with a Klan robed elephant in their signature.

:eyes:

[ZombieHorde]

272. Quotes are fun

It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence.
Mohandas Gandhi

If co-operation is a duty, I hold that non-co-operation also under certain conditions is equally a duty.
Mohandas Gandhi

In matters of conscience, the law of the majority has no place.
Mohandas Gandhi

[silverojo]

239. Did these people react with hysteria against their enemies?

Hell, no. Particularly not Gandhi. Peaceful resistance, y'know?

[SidDithers]

16. Glad you reposted...

the other thread was locked before I had a chance to K&R it :)

So, consider this one Booted and Strongly Suggested.

Sid

[KittyWampus]

17. Congratulations, your method of dealing with fellow citizens is just like Bush's "diplomacy"

when it comes to countries like Iran.

[Hanse]

18. Ouch

[Toasterlad]

26. I Can't Relate.

There are no gay people in Iran, according to their president.

Having to defend your very existence as a human being does not equal two countries negotiating territories and treaties.

[Hannah Bell]

28. No, it's not. Negotiation is not the same thing as inviting someone to make a speech espousing

their ideology at a national ceremony.

No one cares if Obama talks to W, or negotiates with him, or attempts to find common ground.

They object to him being given a position of honor & a platform at a national ceremony. That gives honor to Warren's so-called "eligious beliefs".

E.g. the belief that the US should be run as a theocracy, which is in direct opposition to democracy itself.

[KittyWampus]

42. The Principle that is evident in my analogy is a willingness to reach out and work with those

we disagree with. There has to be a starting point.

So my analogy stands.

[Hannah Bell]

48. it doesn't. there's no analogy.

[jberryhill]

73. I agree with the principle - but you don't understand that the PRACTICE matters

Absolutely, evangelicals need to be influenced, worked with, cajoled, impressed, befriended even - to do the hard work of changing minds.

That does not equate to having Rick Warren speaking at the inauguration.

Gays are NOT ALLOWED to join Rick Warren's church.

Now, let's say a preacher belonged to a WHITE ONLY church.

That's one preacher that needs to be educated. That preacher might do otherwise good things.

But that preacher is NOT to be held up as an example of a man of God before this country.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

81. since when was Warren given time to make a speech espousing his ideology?

He is there to do the Invocation, not to hold a bleeding speech(and i am almost 100% positive that whatever he says has been looked over by Obama or somebody in his team)

[Hannah Bell]

83. prayer, whatever, it's a platform. allowing him on it legitimizes his schtick.

his schtick is theocracy. He opposes the very concept of democracy.

[muriel_volestrangler]

122. I looked up some past ones; Billy Graham condemned the "permissive society" for Nixon

http://www.wheaton.edu/bgc/archives/inaugural05.htm

and 'permissive' is a synonym for 'liberal'.

So yes, ideology can come into it.

[madmadmad]

182. EXACTLY! IT'S AN HONOR A HATE-MONGER IN NO WAY DESERVES.

BUT I'M ALL FOR REACHING OUT TO HIM, PRIVATELY. JUST NOT GIVING HIM A NATIONAL PLATFORM AT THE INAUGURATION. OBAMA CAN WORK ON "UNITY" WITH BIGOTS IN A FORUM THAT DOESN'T GIVE THEM HIS COMPLICIT ENDORSEMENT IN FRONT OF MILLIONS. HE CHOOSE TO ENDORSE THIS FAT FUCK OVER MY RIGHTS, AND THUS IS UNWORTHY OF MY SUPPORT.

[Fumesucker]

33. Not a good analogy..

I have no problem at all with Obama talking to absolutely anyone, Kim Jong Il, The Imperial Wizard of the KKK, Robert Mugabe, Rick Warren, anyone.

I do have a problem with such a person being placed in a position of honor at an historic inauguration.

Therein lies the difference.. Talk is fine, honoring is not.

[KittyWampus]

43. Yes, it is a very good analogy. Some don't like it cause it strikes close to the heart of hypocrisy

on display around DU lately.

The PRINCIPLE is displayed aptly.

A strong leader reaches out to those he might disagree with. And you have to start somewhere.

[Fumesucker]

54. OK, I'm going to ask a question which has been asked hundreds, if not thousands, of times

And I have yet to see anyone answer it.

Why does Obama not "reach out" to the blatant racists?

Put David Duke on the podium for his inauguration?

If "reaching out" to one set of bigots is good and productive, why not do it to another group of bigots?

I'm sure Obama disagrees with the racists, why does he not "reach out" to them by honoring them during his inaugural?

[arthritisR_US]

64. because it's only PC to "reach out" to closeted racists and bigots..you know,

the ones hidden behind the "christian" label.

[MountainLaurel]

77. Because it's not his family losing their civil right this time n/t

[TankLV]

129. Because obama is not Gay, so he dosn't really care...never has, never will...

and because he's already calculated he can THROW US UNDER THE BUS with NO consequences...

and because Gay Persons are the last remaining group that is acceptable to be bigoted against...

[saracat]

175. And women. Don't forget them Warren hates them too as well as Jews!

[wolfgangmo]

194. And fat people.

Don't forget us. But if it makes you feel better being the ONLY victim.

[Toasterlad]

198. I'm Fat AND Gay.

I'd be perfectly happy if the JoP said to me, "Do you take this man to be your husband, Tubby?"

[MNBrewer]

207. Barack Obama doesn't care about gay people.

[RainDog]

56. what common ground would you have suggested for Hitler and Jews?

and, those terrible Jews, you know, being SO UPSET that someone wanted to deny them their human rights, that compared them to beasts... tell me how giving Warren a place at the table is a good thing for people in this nation who have consistently worked to create a better nation while people like Warren have consistently worked to create division, to label others as sub-human. How are his actions different than the anti-semitism of the nazis? - pre- Wannasse conference let's say.

because honestly, the point is the same.

Warren would say he doesn't hate Jews, he just hates their Jewish behavior... and so of course that would be okay. What about the 60s? If you were an African-American in the years after George Wallace blocked the entrance to the Alabama school - would you want him to be the person to welcome Obama to the White House? Personally, I think that would be disgusting.

But you know what really makes me ill?

People are telling liberals WHO CAME OUT IN RECORD NUMBERS TO ELECT THIS PRESIDENT to shut up and let things go on as they have before. That's a recipe for low voter turnout in the midterms because, who cares if liberals turn out to vote when there are so many conservative assholes to kiss?

[arthritisR_US]

66. yep, and it's like we are still not done kissing....grrrr. n/t

[jberryhill]

69. Starting somewhere is not a problem - Starting at the inauguration ceremony is

I have no problem with Obama communicating with Ahmedinejad, Castro, Kim Jong Il, etc.

Ahmedinejad is not going to be speaking at the inauguration.

Castro is not going to be speaking at the inauguration.

Kim Jong Il is not going to be speaking at the inauguration.

Do you see the difference?

[Hannah Bell]

72. it's not a good analogy. bush refusing to talk to a head of state equals

obama not selecting a particular preacher to give the inaugural prayer.

sure, what a great analogy.

[arthritisR_US]

35. as Stephanie Miller would say "thanks for playing really bad analogies" . n/t

[KittyWampus]

45. that's for showing how good an analogy it is, the hypocrites don't like it cause it exposes them

[arthritisR_US]

60. oh goodie, and now a treat from circular logic, n/t

[TankLV]

131. Yep - it certainly exposes obama, you, and all hypocrits on this, doen't it...

let us know when he invites the KKK...

[Starbucks Anarchist]

61. And your method of appeasement is just like Neville Chamberlain.

[KittyWampus]

65. appeasement would imply giving in when it comes to policy.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

68. You don't seem far off from that.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7999325#7999370

You said shunning Warren is an "act of violence" morally on par with the violence against Matthew Shepard. Aside from the sheer stupidity and offensiveness of your statement, how much wiggle room do you want to give people like Warren?

[RetroLounge]

214. Thanks for that link SA

It's good to expose such amazing stupidity.

RL

[leftofthedial]

19. Hear! Hear!

[quickesst]

36. If an absolute truth.....

"Despite what Obama would have you believe, there IS no "common ground" with Warren and his ilk."


...and given that both sides will have an unending source of warriors, the war will continue for generations to come, with each one believing what they do will bring an end to it, only to grow old and watch the next generation take up arms. With no "common ground" possible now or in the future, it is the only possibility that exists, save for the mutual destruction of the human race for reasons I personally wish were addressed with as much urgency as this one. Thanks.
quickesst

[Hydra]

38. Disingenuous post

This war won't continue for generations because with each generation the churches get weaker and people like me say "What's wrong with LBGT people?"

They're fighting a losing battle with themselves in their refusal to grow with time. Obama's support of them, however, is like watering the weed when it was dying- it will sprout up and choke the rest of the garden rather than fading away quietly.

Do you want a world where stoning "non-people" or burning them at the stake is acceptable? Is that where your "common ground" lies?

[Toasterlad]

41. What Was the Common Ground Between Racists and Blacks?

Between misogynists and women who wanted to vote?

Sometimes there is only right and wrong.

You can try and change people's minds, but you never, EVER legitimize an evil cause, by, say, giving the evil representative a place of honor at your inauguration.

[yowzayowzayowza]

62. Vacuous dichotomy.

Racists are not only racist.
Blacks are not only black.
Misogynists are not only misogynistic.
Women are not only women.

The common ground is humanity. "No man is an island...."

Is this a Dick Cheney quote: "...you never, EVER legitimize an evil cause..."?

[Toasterlad]

70. That's Funny. Last I Checked, The Other Side Was Trying Their Level Best to DENY My Humanity.

When you turn gay, you're free to find all the common ground with the hateful bigots you wish, and see how far that gets you. I've already walked that road, and I have no intention of having you or any other less informed individual make me walk it again.

It's not a Cheney quote. It's a Toasterlad quote. You may use it with permission, as long as you use the full sentence.

[yowzayowzayowza]

87. Make a left from Lovers Lane to...

Hate Boulevard. Good luck with that.

[Toasterlad]

115. Oh, Yes. Love Will Cure EVERYTHING. Love Will Make Everything ALL BETTER.

Are there unicorns in your world, Pollyanna?

[yowzayowzayowza]

164. Not suggesting ya don't fight, jus that...

the spirit itz done it makes a difference.

[Toasterlad]

170. It Does Indeed.

The other side is saying that I am less human than they are. I am saying I want my civil rights.

I'm pretty confident I'm on the moral side.

[yowzayowzayowza]

173. And I proudly stand with you.

:fistbump:

[baby_mouse]

134. That observation is poorly aimed, if you don't mind my saying so.

You might try it on Warren?

[yowzayowzayowza]

165. Gotta round for him too. n/t

[Hannah Bell]

79. in the public arena, you don't invite those who head "evil causes" to give the

prayer at your inauguration.

he & obama can go have coffee after to find their "common human ground".

Politically, there is none. Or shouldn't be.

[yowzayowzayowza]

86. Unlike *, Obama is clearly intent on being ...

the President of all Americans including the millions who deny your rights for a variety of reasons, some heartfelt religious and others downright intransigent and hateful. A third of evangelicals already vote democratic despite their religious reservations usually on grounds of personal liberty. A coupla points more of those folks and Prop 8 doesn't pass. But, hey, you ostracizing 'em, calling 'em bigots and treating 'em like evil incarnate is certainly gunna warm the open minded few to your cause. I'm glad Obama knows better.

[Hannah Bell]

88. i said, he could go have coffee afterward.

Seems you don't get the difference between keeping communication open & giving aid & comfort to anti-democratic elements.

He's not just an "evangelical".

He's a dominionist. You know, theocratic state run on biblical principles - stoning, that kind of thing?

Just the person to give the inaugural prayer.

To put someone who's actively engaged in undermining democratic institutions & substituting religious ones - is repugnant.

[yowzayowzayowza]

89. At least he doesn't have a problem with masturbation.

Otherwise, I mite have to seriously reconsider my position.

Millions of Americans have beliefs in his vicinity and reaching out to 'em with inclusion of a relatively generic prayer izn't gunna cost squat. Obama has been quite clear on the policy differences and his speech is likely to make that even more apparent. Itz all symbolic houey anyway, imho. And I dare say if he were to have a collection of such folks over to the Whitehouse the noise from GLBTs would be about the same. "The sky is falling!!! Itz a symbolic meeting!!!! Hez desecrating the office!!!!" GMAFB.

[Hannah Bell]

91. oh, yeah, "millions" of americans favor a theocratic state.

i imagine millions favor a communist state or a second coming of hitler, too.

where is THEIR representation at the inaugural?

It's only a few minutes, & we must be inclusive, you know.

give me afucking break yourself.

[yowzayowzayowza]

93. Obama is more than capable of discerning the ...

political difference between American religious fundamentalists and Nazis/commie sympathizers ... even if you cannot. :eyes:

[Hannah Bell]

97. dominionist = nazi

i hope obama's discernment is better than your reading comprehension

ya silly eyeroller

[yowzayowzayowza]

163. Another Godwin's law victory.

Silly equivalencies aren't gunna get you the rights you deserve either.

[Hannah Bell]

177. i'm not gay. i don't like theocracy.

methinks you don't get "dominionist". it's not just fundie, not evangelical.

it's nazis with bibles making law.

"If Rushdoony and his disciples have their way, democracy will be abolished and a Christian theocracy will be established. A theocracy based on the Bible along the lines of John Cotton's Massachusetts Bay Colony. Rushdoony wrote, "The only true order is founded on Biblical Law. All law is religious in nature, and every non-Biblical law-order represents an anti-Christian religion." (p. 113) He also made it clear that he expects that force will be necessary to impose such order, "Every law-order is in a state of war against the enemies of that order, and all law is a form of warfare."

[yowzayowzayowza]

181. Nor I, gay or fond of theocracy.

I understand this ilk quite well as my diddy, grand-diddy and even great-grand-diddy rite off the boat were southern ministers.

[Hannah Bell]

183. You're failing to take the point. Warren isn't just some minister.

There's a difference between evangelicals, fundies & Dominionists.

Warren & his ilk don't just think theocracy might be a good idea, they're actively working to achieve it. I.e. working to destroy democracy & our system of law. Traitors, in other words.

Fuck Warren, & fuck Obama for giving him a role in the inaugural.

[yowzayowzayowza]

186. Respectfully request link on Warren...

"working to destroy democracy & our system of law" as that would seem to violate his IRS status.

[bluedawg12]

142. The idea of dialogue with fundys was not invented by Obama

It has been tried.

It does not work.

Theirs is a religious argument ours is a legal argument.

[yowzayowzayowza]

167. Didn't say it was. Even if it only ...

1 or 2 in hundred can be persuaded to live in mutual respect of your liberty, how is it in your interest to shut down communication?

A generic Christian blessing izn't much in the way of dialog, more like a nod towards our shared heritage and humanity.

I think all the media exploration of Warrens hateful positions generated by Obamaz selection will ultimately be worth the few moments spent in shared wishes for our new President and country.

I'm glad Obama has set him up & I'm glad we're tearing Warren down. I jus have a problem with the counterproductive fire aimed at Obama and the personal attacks on Warren.

[MNBrewer]

208. Well...

"Racists are not only racist."

When the topic is racism, that's what matters.

Homophobes are not only homophobes, but when the topic is equality under the law for GLBT people, that's what matters.

[yowzayowzayowza]

213. What about when the topic is...

a few seconds spent blessing our new President and country?

[MNBrewer]

220. Especially then

[yowzayowzayowza]

224. Sorry, ya lost me. I don't get your point. n/t

[MNBrewer]

225. If one accepts that this "blessing" is actually efficacious

and there is some thing out there that is listening to the invocation, and, based on what the person doing the invocation says, will implement the requests, isn't it doubly important to make sure that the person doing the invocation isn't a hatemonger?

[yowzayowzayowza]

226. Being agnostic, I'm loath to...

presume what "some thing out there" would think of a flawed human being making a valid sincere "request."

[MNBrewer]

228. Do you question, then, why it's even being done?

[yowzayowzayowza]

230. Afaik itz jus cultural.

:shrug:

[ZombieHorde]

273. How do you bless something?

[varelse]

82. I rec'd the thread

and I applaud this reply as well.

[Enrique]

47. Obama will try to find common ground with anyone

you don't have to support it, but he will do that.

[Hannah Bell]

57. uh, no, he won't.

for example, the solemn occasion won't be graced with a speech from the KKK. Will NEVER happen.

But someone who wishes to substitute theocracy for democracy?

Must find "common ground".

Bull.

[bluedawg12]

75. Equating religious beliefs and political negotiations don't work.

Civil rights is a legal issue and Rick Warren uses religion to justify his hateful message, THAT is why this outreach will never work.

[Deep13]

85. Frankly, I think his religion IS a hateful message. nt

[deaniac21]

78. NO! We must help the Messiah!!

[Hannah Bell]

80. gad, that's about it.

all these folks who "know" obama's hidden heart, his secret intentions, his brilliant hidden strategy.

gag me.

He's letting a spokesman for theocracy & biblical law (e.g. stoning) give the prayer at his inauguration, great suffering Christ!

[Deep13]

84. Reality and irrational superstition just don't get along.

There is absolutely no factual reason to oppose gay equality. Only religious irrationality supports discrimination. Religious people have got to get it through there heads that they have no right to insist that the rest of us live by their god's rules.

As a side note, there seems to be plenty of room under the bus for America's young women too. Warren also opposes reproductive freedom.

[Sandrine for you]

166. Sometimes I'm asking myself if It's not just irrationality but

a certain kind of reason (a old one, an old naturalistic reason)that is behind their opposition about this topic and a couple of more (like the one on reproductive freedom). Also, I think they are protecting this old naturalistic view of the world (who come from Thomas d'Aquin, inspired bye Aristotle), an old kind of "reason" based on categories and stable definitions, because this kind of reason is the last shield of the religion view in general. The religion at all could simply die if people forget that old reason, and adopt the new kind of reason, with his new view on the natural world, the who we belong...

It's a little bit abstract and confused for an expose. I'm not really sure for myself on that. But I can see a pattern in the conservative aspect of the christians leaders in general (The pope, Warren...). And I'm really asking me if they are not fighting, without never tell It explicitly, to protect a very old reason, because if the new one take all the place in the people mind, religion will have no place at all.

I think I will make a post on that in the religious or the sciences lobby.

[kenny blankenship]

90. Is it so tough to compromise? You go under the ground, they stand on top of the ground

There: you've arrived at a bargain and found "common ground" - although one side will probably be enjoying the deal a bit more.

You give a little, you get a little.

[Hannah Bell]

92. They get to speak at the inaugural, you get to...watch them speak from your living room

like a schlub.

You voted, now go back to your tv.

the creepy deal-making "grown-ups" are in charge.

"oh, lookit mrs. o's dress! she certainly has better taste than laura!"

that's the level of democratic participation you're allowed.

[baby_mouse]

94. But but but OBAMAPHORIA! STRONG LEADER! RAECHING OUT!

Or something.

[JohnnyRingo]

95. I just hope the country gets through this speech

4300 kids dead in Iraq, the economy's driving people out of their homes, and a known religious nut is allowed to speak of his imaginary God next month. I'm really torn between my priorities and I don't know what's to become of me.

As an confirmed atheist I think this is the end for my ilk, as Rick Warren has drawn a line in the sand against the unfaithful. If he is allowed to proselytize for his Christ before my Democratic Party he may gain the power for which he lusts, and he may finally destroy us devout atheists. He swears he will.

I expected more from Obama. I thought he would publicly embrace us despite the political consequences by telling the political Jesus freaks to take a freakin' hike. I knew Obama went to church, but I just wanted him to represent me by allowing someone like Bill Maher or Phil Plait to give the invocation.

The believers in a phony baloney God just don't see it coming, do they? They don't know how endangered my lifestyle has become.

Still, I remain somewhat hopeful the political climate may be better for us non-believers than they've been for the last eight years, and I relate to the concerns of your desperate plight as well.

[Mari333]

96. aww c'mon, lets all sing Kumbaya with these fellow americans

Kumbayaaaa my lawd Kumbayaaaaa

[Swamp Rat]

99. k&r

[Le Taz Hot]

100. Great screed but I have to disagree

with you about one thing. President Change isn't pandering to the base -- he's trying to pander to the religious bigots. The base (us) is who he is alienating. This is so typical of triangulating DLC thinking. I smell Emmanuel behind this -- it's classic for him to throw all progressives under the bus. The problem is, President Change seems to be just fine with it.

[Toasterlad]

105. I Was Using "Base" In It's "Low Down Dirty" Sense.

Believe me, I know Obama's not pandering to his liberal base...what's left of it.

[pipi_k]

101. Just for the record...

I don't think I've told anyone to "find common ground" with Rick Warren, or even to agree with Obama's choice of Warren for the invocation. In fact, I don't even recall asking anyone to try and understand why Obama made the choice he did.

Really, people can feel however they want to feel about the whole thing.

But I (and some others who have said much the same things) am sick and tired of being accused of being "against" gays...or of being downright homophobic...just because I can't work up the same level of outrage over Obama's choice of Rick Warren.

I want equal rights for all, and that includes gay marriage, which is legal in my state, thank goodness.

When I point out that it's just a speech and doesn't mean anything in the long run, the reply to that is that it's "symbolic".

Well, the trouble with symbolism is that it doesn't translate to the same things for everyone.

So I'd appreciate not being accused of holding a bigoted point of view just because my interpretation of symbolism doesn't match that of the gay community at large. If it's any consolation, I also don't see the symbolism attached to Warren's appearing on the same stage with Obama The Baby Killer, as he is known to some of the Fundyfruitcakes.

My POV is just as valid as anyone else's, and if I don't see a problem with Rick Warren giving a stinking two minute invocation, then that doesn't mean people have the right to call me some awful things, no matter what their private thoughts are.

[Toasterlad]

106. If You Don't Care, Then Why Bother To Get Involved?

So the speech doesn't bother you. Good for you. Do you mind if the people that Rick Warren preaches against on a daily basis vent their outrage? What possible reason would you have to jump into the discussion and tell us we're overreacting?

You've made it quite clear that this is not your concern. Now act like it.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

102. K&R

[BeFree]

103. OK

I'll stop telling you to work with them to get what you want.

Which then leaves one alternative: make war. Which is something I will not do. So, unless you change your position we have nothing in common, according to you. For I would never suggest you go to war.

See now why stupid-ass absolutes are so f'n stupid?

[Toasterlad]

108. This Is Not a Negotiation Between Neighboring States.

But you are correct. The GLBT community is indeed at war. We didn't start it, we didn't want it, but we're in it. And OUR side is not the side using violence, despite what the Rick Warrens and Sean Hannitys of the world would have you believe. We are battling in our local communities, we are battling with our state representatives, and we are battling with our president elect, who has all too often shown a propensity to turn a blind eye to our suffering.

Like many people, you're equating common ground with discussion. And I mean REAL discussion, not the phony kind Obama is pretending to engender. We can discuss our position with these assholes. We can tell them why we are demanding our rights, and why they have no right to refuse them. But there is NO "common ground" in this argument. We are right, and they are wrong. Should you disagree, I'd be happy to listen to you explain all the correct points of the anti-gay argument. Knock yourself out.

:popcorn:

[BeFree]

111. The common ground?

The constitution.

The United States.

The United States that Obama is the P-E of.

Now, if you keep up with calling Obama a phony, then I have to question your sanity.

[Toasterlad]

113. The Constitution That Was Rewritten To Deny Marriage to Me and My Brothers and Sisters?

That constitution? Or did you mean the consitution of the United States, which DOESN'T say I'm not allowed to get married, and yet, for some reason, I'm still not allowed to get married?

Please save your patriotic hullaballo for the Fourth of July Shriner's Parade.

You are apparently not an oppressed minority. You don't get it.

When Obama does something substantial for me and mine, then I'll stop calling him a phony.

[BeFree]

114. Are you a jackass? lol

Political hullabaloo? The constitution?
I really must question your sanity.

[Toasterlad]

116. And I Must Question Your Intellect.

I said "patriotic", not "political".

Would you mind telling me just how the constitution is "common ground" with bigots, especially when they JUST WROTE BIGOTRY INTO ONE?

While you're at it, tell me the last time you were oppressed by a majority.

:popcorn:

[BeFree]

118. You're right

Patriotic Hullabaloo?
That's even more crazy.

I am oppressed day in and day out. And I realize that gays are especially oppressed, but from your
apparent mindset I can see where you must be blind to that. So be it.

[Toasterlad]

120. I Asked For Examples

Please provide examples of how you are oppressed. Please tell me all about how the coffee machine at your office ALWAYS RUNS OUT OF CREAMER AND NO ONE WILL DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT!

What horrible trials you must face.

[BeFree]

128. You're kidding, right?

You think we are all free? What planet do you live on?

You just want to fight, and I see nothing that we should be fighting about. Go somewhere else and bother someone else if that's all you want to do, cause, see, you already think I am an asshole, like you said last night.

[Toasterlad]

135. Excuse Me...But YOU Came to MY Thread. You're the One That Should Go Away.

If you admit that you are less oppressed than me (which you totally, ABSOLUTELY are), then it seems like you should do the honorable thing and allow me to determine for myself just how pissed off I should be about Rick Warren. Likewise, since you failed to justify Obama's pick, you should stop pretending that he's not a phony.

I didn't call you an asshole. I said that anyone who believes there is common ground with bigotry is an asshole. If that description fits you, so be it. I would never tell you what to believe, I'll only tell you the consequences of believing it.

[BeFree]

151. Really?

Exclude me? Tell me to shut up and go away?

Interesting that you should write this:
"Likewise, since you failed to justify Obama's pick, you should stop pretending that he's not a phony"

Who is not a phony? Is Obama not a phony? Or is Obama's pick not a phony?

Please clear that up as I just had a reply from another poster that tried to clear that up, and now you've muddied it.

[Toasterlad]

156. You Are Some Piece Of Work

You tell me in one post to go away, I point out that you came to ME so YOU should go away, and then you get upset that I told you to go away. Did you take your meds today?

And there is nothing for a rational person to clear up. Bluedawg was right in pointing out that I did not call Obama a phony in that thread, the thread you replied to telling me I was crazy for calling Obama a phony. The fact that I DO believe that Obama is a phony, and said so in a LATER thread, does not contradict Bluedawg's point, which was valid.

[bluedawg12]

158. You said it very well here Toasterlad - he wasn't listening

"We are battling in our local communities, we are battling with our state representatives, and we are battling with our president elect, who has all too often shown a propensity to turn a blind eye to our suffering.

Like many people, you're equating common ground with discussion. And I mean REAL discussion..."

Instead he jumped on the idea of twisting your words.

You know, if someone tells me I have already said something, and twists my words, then, hey sometimes that opens the door...he opened the door for more, he certainly could not see clearly to address your good idea.

There's only so much we can do *sigh*

[mitchtv]

172. You got it right

the poster is a disrupter

[bluedawg12]

157. "Inviting Warren for the invocation is inclusive and leads to dialog"

That argument is a phony because:

Yes, inviting Warren is inclusive.
Yes, it may lead to dialog about things other than gay rights.
However, Warren's position on homosexuality is based on his theology, that is not a gay rights debate position.

Warren has a right to his theology and that's why gay rights is not about debating Churches, Fundy's, Mir*ons, Catholics about their theology.

The gay rights movement is about winning in the Courts and with Democratic allies in passing fair civil rights legislation.

The selection of Warren is a slap to gays in light of Warren's work in passing Hate8 and his presence will do nothing to pass laws fair to gays it may in fact send the message that keep things the same in terms of gay rights.

Perception is reality sometimes.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

205. You don't own threads. Period.

[Toasterlad]

219. Never Said I Did.

I was just questioning the logic of someone coming to a thread I started and telling me to go away. Or are you a little slow as well? I can increase the font size, if that will help.

[TankLV]

132. some assholes will never get it...

you are a prime example...

[BeFree]

136. You wanna fight me?

Forget it. I don't want to fight you. I get what's going down. Warren and his ilk are going down. The only way he goes down is by all of us taking him down. Fundies have had their day. I think we all agree on that, right?

[Toasterlad]

137. They Are Having Their Day on Jan 20th, 2009.

[BeFree]

139. Yep

...the beginning of the end, if I get my way.

Will you help? Can you find common ground with me? Or is it all just bullshit?

[Toasterlad]

141. Are You a Bigot? If So, No. I Have No Common Ground With You.

[BeFree]

143. Am I perfect? No

Do I support the rights of all people, hell yes.

[bluedawg12]

146. Great, then keep gay rights out of religion dominated arenas

and place it back where it belongs with the fight in the Courts and in legislatures.

[PeteytehMawnstar]

231. wow

I very much doubt this man is a bigot, it's very disingenuous to throw that word out like that. You sound no better than the people who want to take rights away.

[ZombieHorde]

274. Name calling and removing rights are very different in my book of deeds.

[bluedawg12]

144. If you want to help gay civil rights - a legal argument

then do not allow it to get on a moral and religious ground.

[TankLV]

247. It would be a waste of time to fight assholes who just refuse to understand...

YOU are a prime example...

[bluedawg12]

140. BeFree: You JUST NOW violated Skinner's new directive - right here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4689492&mesg_id=4689492

"Avoid deliberately misrepresenting or overstating what other people post." - Skinner

"Like many people, you're equating common ground with discussion. And I mean REAL discussion, not the phony kind Obama is pretending to engender. "- Toasterlad

"Now, if you keep up with calling Obama a phony, then I have to question your sanity." -Be free

Toaster lad did not call Obama a phony.

Toasterlad was clearly stating that the idea of inviting a bigot to an honored position was not the same thing as a real discussion about gay rights issues. Toasterlad is correct.

You chose not to reply to that notion, or couldn't, and twisted his words to become incendiary and inflammatory and you claimed falsely that Toasterlad called Obama a phony! You misrepresented the reply right above yours.

And you threw in an ad hominem attack for good measure.

Toasterlad didnt say Obama was a phony, he said the idea of inviting Warren to speak as a form of dialogue was a phony idea, a spin, a rationalization for inviting the bigot Warren.

Your attack on Toasterlad and your misrepresntation of what he said will not dial down the rheotric and is untrue and it evades the real issue: that Warren's invocation is NOT meaningful dialogue about gay rights it is no dialogue at all and as the supporters of this invitation point it: it's only a prayer.

Exactly it is not meaningful and it is is symbolic. A bad symbol.

[Toasterlad]

145. In All Fairness....

I did, in fact, call Obama a phony in a later post. However, your point is well taken in that I did not call him a phony in the thread you referenced.

:hi:

[bluedawg12]

147. That was the post and reply I cited

:hi:

[BeFree]

148. Wasn't deliberate

I see your point.

But you got to admit the way he said it left it open to my reply. But I was wrong, thank you for pointing that out so peacefully.

The passions here do tend to lead to extremes, eh? Am I the only one so misled?

[bluedawg12]

150. No I don't think it led to your reply.

I think you side stepped his point, which was valid.

If PE Obama wants to dialogue with opponents to change their POV, then that is not what we are upset about.

That dialogue has not yet happened, as PE OBama in not in office yet.

It has been tried and I suggest PEO bama has better things to do, such as his job, which is to aid in legislative and judicial changes for gay civil rights not theologically based outreach on our behalf.

We just had eight years of a "Pastor in Chief."

[MNBrewer]

209. Given the huge disparity of opinion and viewpoints about all the points of "common ground"

you listed, how can you posit that there is such a thing as "common ground" on them?

[Bette Noir]

109. This one thing Obama doesn't understand.

As a heterosexual Christian male, he's not one of Warren's targets. He doesn't get to forgive or excuse Warren for sins committed against someone else.

Can someone dig up video of Warren spewing anti-Semitic s***? While half the country still allows gay-bashing, a good kill-the-Jews rant would get Warren disinvited for sure.

[Bluenorthwest]

123. That is very accurate

And in if in fact Obama is attempting to go beyond divisions, he must do so with that which is his own or it will fail. If he desires sucess as depicted by the folks who approve of this choice, he has to put himself and his heart on the line. He is not intercessor, he is President. He can not forgive what was not done to him, and he can not make some magic new way unless he uses that which is his to use.

[Irishonly]

112. At times I don't think there will ever be common ground

I volunteer at the food bank run by the council of churches. The council is housed at my church and we are one of those "liberal" churches. When I work there I have a wonderful time but, and this is a big but, we never talk politics. My feeling is people coming for help would witness a war of epic proportions if we did. We are there to help the hungry families of our area and I don't have a problem with keeping politics out of my work with the homeless and hungry. We need all the help we can get these days.

Cut to Thanksgiving. My sil is evangelical and Asian. She is a literal Bible reader and cherry picks passages. The last fight we got into was whether Gandhi was in heaven. She's one that believes it's her way or hell to get to heaven.

She thought since my family is active in our church we must have voted for prop 4 and 8. She just couldn't imagine that we have gay members in our church, gay friends and that my political activeness would mean that I was doing what I could do defeat both because defeating both would be against God.

After the roof settled back on the house I went off about bigotry. I scared my dogs. I hardly ever lose my temper (last time was about prop 8 also)and I am pretty soft spoken. I had her in tears. I was so mad I had to be told what I said to her-called her a self righteous bigot and an idiot if she wanted to put young girls at risk from abusive families.

Long story short-everyone will work through their anger or not. I have written to everyone I could find about Warren and what a bad choice it is, not that I think it will do any good. I wasn't going to watch but I have decided the TV will be muted during the invocation and the rev will be getting a double one fingered salute. My God has a sense of humor and I don't think he will send me packing to hell. He is kind and loving and isn't thrilled with bigots.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

149. Christ's message is reflected in your church.... not so much in your sil's church.

Thanks for being one of the "good" Christians!

I think 20 years from now attitudes will change, and even though some people will never come around, progress will happen.

[Toasterlad]

154. Agreed. To Me, That Is The Most Infuriating Aspect

Gay Civil Rights are a fait accompli. They are inevitable. It is only a matter of time. AND EVERY LOUSY STINKING BIGOT KNOWS IT. They KNOW they're on the wrong side, and they still continue to put up roadblocks to equality.

Why must we wait? What possible benefit is to be gained from delaying our rights? So society can "catch up"? What ungodly horseshit is that?

Honestly, it makes NO fucking sense.

[earth mom]

117. This is a Civil Rights issue. Obama should know from personal experience just how important it is.

For shame on him. :grr:

[bluedawg12]

152. Winner! We expect the Democratic Party and it's leader to fight for laws

on a legislative and judicial level for our rights.

We did not elect anyone to go out and "fight with fundys" in outreach for our rights. Thanks but no thanks.

[TankLV]

124. THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

Somehow, I doubt the apologists and excuse makers here will ever "get it"...

[LWolf]

127. Common ground with bigots. Common ground with fascists.

Common ground with war mongers. Common ground with corporatists. Common ground with fundamental christians.

No common ground with the left, but who on the left wants to legitimize bigotry, fascism, war, religious extremism, or corporatism?

[Sex Pistol]

130. You people...?

Huh...?

[TankLV]

133. YES - 'YOU PEOPLE" - THE FUCKING APOLOGISTS & EXCUSE MAKERS FOR BIGOTRY & HATRED..."YOU"!!!

[silverojo]

240. Then vote for Sarah Palin in 2012.

If she beats Obama, things will be SO much better for us gays/lesbians, won't they? :sarcasm:

[Toasterlad]

138. Oh, It Was Much Worse Last Night.

Sorry if I offended your delicate, privledged feelings.

[Mark Twain Girl]

153. Oh god, thank you. I can't believe anyone would even try to justify this legitimization of bigotry.

[fascisthunter]

155. The Straight Person is Giving Your Post and Thread a Big Kick

Political loyalty unfortunately skews a person's objectiveness.

[Fireweed247]

159. Thank you!

I suppose we should try to understand and accept how Bushco feels too, they have their reasons for killing and stealing.


And to the hypocritical reverend...
"I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

Judge not lest you be judged you bastard!

[Phentex]

160. kick

required reading :)

[rucky]

161. Thank You!

[greiner3]

168. "there IS no "common ground" with Warren and his ilk"

Not to be flippant, however even hitler, stalin and moa had their common ground; killing tens of million of people. I've seen a couple of warren interviews and that human being (I'm still waiting on DNA results though) is either nuts or in it for the power and money. Which is worse?

[madeline_con]

174. The commonality was not with the sane, however.

I think the poster meant in common with themself, not with other idiots. ;)

[saracat]

176. Amen. No honoring of bigots. Period.

[ooglymoogly]

178. Excellent rant....You cannot believe in the constitution and democracy

and this decision all happily living together. It is oil and water, good and evil, black and white, logic and ignorance. Either you believe in democracy, that all men are created equal etc or you don't. Conferring power on evil and bigotry and all that is anathema to these principals of democracy is evil and that is what has happened here.

[Lifetimedem]

184. We can find common ground on America

may be not about things that are integral to their faith but about poverty and health care and solving the current economic crisis or the war.


Should Obama not be their president?

I have attended churches that would not allow a PRACTICING OUT gay to be a member, they also would not allow a divorced man to be a member or a man that likes a beer with his pizza or that smokes. I even attended a church that did not allow you to be a member if you worked in a store that sold alcohol.

Churches are allowed to decide membership requirements, those requirements do not deny anyone the right to attend services, they simply deny membership (which means leadership in the church as a rule .)

Why would one want membership in a church that would not be open to their life style ?


Barrak is reaching out to the evangelical community. This is a good thing. Evangelicals run soup kitchens, food and clothing pantries, social service agencies, HIV ministries to the sick and dying among other things.

So we have members that do not like what they believe.. Well bulletin,...... they do not like what we may believe . So do we have a divided America now?

We want tolerance from those that do not like or agree with us...but it seems the willingness to allow others to believe and live the way they choose to be part of this administration?

Selective tolerance can also be called hypocrisy !

[Hannah Bell]

185. Dominionists want to destroy "america". They prefer a theocratic, non-democratic,

state with biblical law.

There's no common ground.

[Lifetimedem]

188. And Atheists want a state

without God.


We have had evangelicals and Christian leaders before and we remain a country that has no national religion and still alows you to hate them...

[lostnotforgotten]

196. No - You Are Wrong - Atheists Want Separation Of Church And State

As an atheist, I could give a flying ... what god you pray to.

But dammit, keep your religion out of government!

Lest one forget, this country was founded on the premise of Separation of Church and State.

[Lifetimedem]

249. Who's nose is where?

This was a nation founded on Judeo /Christian principles.

Now you may not like it but Sunday Church services were held in the capital. The Bible was read in all the schools, and Congress always opened with a prayer.Read the founders and you find a belief in God everywhere
Look at the supreme court and you see a varity of religions presented.. all religious people ask is true neutrality

The idea of separation of Church and state in historic context is that the government is to keep its nose out of the church and what it believes and teaches , and not to discriminate based on that

So you are free to not believe, I could care less..but keep your nose out of what churches teach or believe . Keep the Governemnt out of evangelical churches and allow evangelicals to participate in the most historic event in these times.. keep your bigotry to yourself

[Solon]

259. "This was a nation founded on Judeo /Christian principles." Oh really, and what principles are...

those?

The First Commandment directly contradicts the First Amendment. The nation was founded on Enlightenment principles, if it were founded on Judeo-Christian principles, we'd still have blasphemy laws.

Every other principle that this country was founded upon actually, in some way, contradicts Judeo-Christian principles in some way. The Bible lauds kings and monarchy, not Republics, the entire concept of human rights are founded in the Enlightenment writings, not the Bible. The Bible lauds subjects, not citizens, and indeed, the ideas that every human being has some intrinsic value, within their own lives, and should be free to pursue those lives without undue interference from government, or religion, directly contradicts the doctrine of Original Sin.

So please, go ahead, and name a single Judeo-Christian value that the United States was founded upon.

[Hannah Bell]

199. evangelicals aren't dominionists. jimmy carter is an evangelical.

Evangelical = to spread the "good word," not take over the state.

Dominionist goal is explicitly to establish theocracy.

[Lifetimedem]

248. Exactly

[Toasterlad]

189. Do You Honestly Believe This Is About Gay People Wanting To Join His Fucking Church?

I don't give a rat's ass about his asinine church. And I care less than that what he or his god think of me.

The man campaigned (successfully!) to deny me the right to marry. He preaches constantly to his dopey flock that gays are immoral, and therefore inferior, to him and his ilk. He exhorts his sheep to spend money in campaigns to deprive me of my rights. He lobbies for laws to prevent women from making choices about their own bodies. He preaches that Jews are an inherently evil people.

WHAT FUCKING COMPROMISE DO YOU EXPECT ME TO MAKE WITH THIS ASSHOLE?

Honestly, I don't know whether you Warren apologists are just stupid or as much a bigot as he is.

[Lifetimedem]

251. No

The man has a constitutional right to his religious beliefs, he has a constitutional right to select for membership That is separation of church and state.

I expect nothing for or against this man, I simply defend his right to hold a position that may be unpopular and still participate in the functions of government .

What if he was being excluded because he was gay? What if the shoe was on the other foot (as it was for years?)

I can not believe that people that have suffered discrimination now wish to practice it.

We are in BIG trouble as a nation, this is no time to have a war over a prayer that will help engage many Christians in the process of healing this country

[Toasterlad]

257. His Constitutional Rights Should Stop At Denying Me MY Constitutional Rights.

I am not trying to stop Warren from praying to his sky-father. He can get right on down there and handle those snakes and cast his chicken bones and circumsize his oxen and whatever else floats his boat. His mystical mumbo jumbo SHOULD NOT GIVE HIM THE RIGHT TO DENY MY RIGHTS, WHICH IS WHAT HE AND HIS SHEEP ARE DOING.

If you honestly believe that our problem with Warren amounts to religious discrimination, you haven't got ONE IOTA of understanding about what this is all about.

[MNBrewer]

210. Tolerance of intolerance is an oxymoron.

[Confusious]

212. Just out of curiosity,

'Selective tolerance can also be called hypocrisy !'

Are you saying I should tolerant the KKK, nazis, maybe even stalin or mao?

Just would like a little more clarity in that statement.

[Lifetimedem]

250. are you comparing your

church going neighbor to Stalin ?

He killed Christians, as did hitler ...the KKK hated Catholics..

[Toasterlad]

255. Gay People Die Every Day at the Hand of "Christians'

The comparison is totally apt.

[Ysabela]

187. 50 years ago these people were telling us to find common ground with the lynch mobs.

I ain't buying it. Fuck these bigots.

[greeneyedboy]

190. Word. n/t

[Bucky]

191. Oh... Ha!! I get it: "fucking bigots"

I've been looking this thread all day and I just now got that pun. You're a card!

[Toasterlad]

200. I'd Love To Take Credit, But It Was Purely Unintentional.

Kudos to you for "catching" it though. I'm going to tell everyone from now on that "I meant to do that."

[lostnotforgotten]

195. Right On - Obama Brought This On Himself - The Scorn Rests Squarely There

eom

[Bernardo de La Paz]

204. To be blunt: It's easier to find common ground with fucking bigots than bigots who don't fuck.

Sorry for using the language of the original poster.

[Maven]

217. THANK YOU

[valerief]

218. Warren does not believe all (people) are born equal. Our Constitution says we are.

He's anti-US Constitution. He's anti-American. He's Benedict Arnold.

[Dystopian]

221. KandR. I agree. n/t

peace~

[Sander]

222. The Tolerance of Intolerance is NOT a Virtue

There is nothing noble about tolerating bigotry.

[the blues]

223. Shame on Obama. A leader should lead. n/t

[MNBrewer]

227. Obama is NO leader on gay rights issues

He's purely a follower

[Spectral Music]

253. Not even that. Remember "ex gay" Donnie McClurkin?

A real Amityville horror that one.

[paulk]

232. Let me tell you a story

For twenty years I worked for the same company, over a four state area. I worked with a lot of different people in that company over that time - and my favorite person to work with was a fundamentalist Southern Baptist. A no nonsense hard worker, a person who I would trust my life with (and it was a dangerous job), smart, educated, experienced. A really nice guy.

But...

We had endless conversations about politics and religion. Respectful, informative conversations - he on one side and I on the other. He believed that the bible was literal, no evolution, etc. He was virulently anti-abortion. He disliked Jews and Catholics. He absolutely loathed gays. He didn't see himself as a bigot - he saw himself as righteous in upholding his belief system.

In all those years of talk I changed his opinion not one iota.

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


He believed that it was right to use government to enforce his belief system. And that is ultimately what is so dangerous about these people. If the Rick Warrens of this world controlled the government, a lot of people on this board would be in a concentration camp.

And that's why Obama is wrong. These people cannot be given ANY credibility in the political arena.

There is no common ground.

[silverojo]

234. Please don't tell others that they don't understand

As a matter of fact, I do know what it's like. Lots of people know what it's like to have those experiences, because they're not just LBGT experiences.

I'm a lesbian (who practices witchcraft, no less!!), living in a small town. Let's just say I don't go on any dates around here!

I have to hide my Wicca books and everything Wiccan-related, when I call repairmen here to fix something...because if either of my "dark" secrets were to be exposed, God knows what these people would do to me. If I had a child, that child could be taken away from me, because the courts aren't too fond of Wiccans.

Gay marriage? Oh, yeah, I could marry a woman around here, even if it was legal...NOT!

As for evictions, my family was evicted in the dead of winter, despite paying the rent on time...simply because the landlord let the house go into foreclosure. So yeah, I know the feeling of that, too. So do a lot of straight people, for that matter.

My family never kicked me out for being a lesbian, but let's just say we don't talk about it very much. I came out when I was a young adult, but I don't think they've really faced it. Get real, though...there was a reason I never dated boys in school! Still, nobody talks about it much, and I don't force the issue. Teens get kicked out of homes for many reasons, not just because they're gay.

You're acting as if only gay people experience all these bad things, which is utterly untrue.

It's also baffling, how so many people here seem to think that gay marriage will be the answer to everything, that society will accept us, and we'll live happily ever after.

WE WON'T.

Many of us will still have families that either don't accept, or outright hate, the fact that we're LGBT.

Not all gays and lesbians can move to big, liberal cities, where they will be accepted. (And even at that, there are troglodytes looking to beat up gays in those cities, too.) Sorry, I'm not eager to let my car (or house) get vandalized or fire-bombed by rednecks, religious fanatics, or both. Do you think legalizing gay marriage will help with ANY of this?

Do you think the resulting divorces (and there will be divorces) won't be as messy as those of straight people? Alimony, child support, the whole heartbreaking mess.

I'm not saying we shouldn't get married, I'm just saying that there's a lot of bad that comes with the good, and people just aren't thinking rationally about this. I'm also saying that no law is going to force society to accept us. What good is the right to marry, if you can't get married for fear of your property or even your life??

Finally, the whole question will be moot if our country plunges into a depression. It's hard to get married if you're too broke to buy a wedding license, because you had to spend what's left of your cash on food and shelter.

I'm not saying gay marriage is a bad idea. I'm just saying that it's not the answer to everything, as so many LBGT people seem to believe.

I'm royally pissed at what Obama has done. And of course, it's pandering--that part's pretty obvious. I'm hoping Obama can do well with the economy and other social issues. I know it won't assuage the hurt the Warren choice has caused, but we need to focus on ALL the issues. I've never liked any of the religious people he's been associated with. I'm sick of ALL the Dem politicians who blather on about "faith". But I support Obama's economic policies, and hope they will work for America.

For now, gay marriage is a battle at the state level...a battle which needs to be fought calmly and firmly. Shrill hysteria turns off the "average" people we need to help our cause.

It also alienates us from each other, as DU has shown in the past few days. Whatever people think about Obama's choice of Warren, it's not our place to TELL people it's a black-or-white issue. Obviously, it's not, or there wouldn't be so much disagreement here.

However, what we SHOULD be doing is uniting, for the long road ahead in making gay marriage legal. Let's agree to disagree on the whys and hows of what Obama did, and accept the fact that what he did was wrong. There's no need to harp on it continually, to the point of annoyance. He's wrong! End of story! Fuck it, and focus on the state-by-state battle for gay marriage.

Because if we continue to turn on each other, we're doomed to failure on all issues, not just gay marriage.

For gay marriage to work, we need acceptance. And acceptance isn't achieved by screaming and yelling. It's achieved by making your point calmly and politely. As the old saying goes, you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

And you don't win a war by obsessing over the loss of one battle, either.

[Toasterlad]

241. I Have Absolutely No Idea What Point You're Trying To Make.

I at no point said that gay marriage would solve everything. I listed a host of terrible things that can happen to gay people that would not be fixed by gay marriage. I understand that gay marriage only means that gays would get married, an understanding shared by pretty much every thinking gay person.

If you're a lesbian who believes that a heterosexual can understand what it's like to be gay because they could be evicted if their landlord goes into foreclosure, you're a pretty strange lesbian. You do understand that all the bad things that can happen to straight people can happen to us, PLUS many bad things can happen to us BECAUSE WE'RE GAY. You get that, right?

I don't care that there are people who don't think it's a big deal that Obama picked Warren. I just don't want them telling me it shouldn't matter to ME, which is what they've been doing for the past two days. If it's not a big deal to you, fine.

IT'S A BIG FUCKING DEAL TO ME.

[lelgt60]

246. Is it not OK to discuss with you whether it should be A BIG FUCKING DEAL?

That's not the same as me telling you it's not. It obviously is right now. That's a plain fact, not opinion.

But, why not listen to others who might not feel that way. What's wrong with trying to change your current thoughts?

BTW, this is a devils-advocate type question. I also think it's a BIG FUCKING DEAL. I'm not gay. But. I am Jewish. There's no point in flaming me, because I'll get enough of that when I'm in hell.

[Toasterlad]

256. My Current Thoughts Don't Need to Be Changed Because I Am Right.

If you disagree, please explain all the valid points of the argument against gay rights.

I understand that you are playing devil's advocate; however, sometimes issues really ARE black and white.

[lelgt60]

260. Yes, but that's how I feel about most of my thoughts as well.

Of course, even as a devil's advocate, I can't come up with any rational arguments. There is the one that says "It's not our world, it's God's. I can't explain why he makes the rules he makes, but being homophobic is one of them, even though he also made homosexuals. C'est la vie. Oh, BTW,...this is an all loving God".

I did get an interesting explanation from a homophobic religious person: The reason why Prop 8 is so important is that without it, the state of California was going to require that homosexuality be taught in schools as a good "choice" to make. So, what's interesting about this old statement? This: clearly even the homophobic understand that simply eliminating equal rights for homosexuals on general principles is not right. They have to have a "better" reason. There has to be some damage done by homosexuals to them, or they can't justify their own discrimination. So, they have to make other things up that homosexuals are doing to them. Maybe you already realized this. But, I'm a little slow.

[Toasterlad]

262. And If Your Thoughts Were Not Bigoted, YOU'D Be Right.

Meanwhile, while I see where you are going with the school analogy, it is only one of dozens of lies and half-truths the religious have concocted to deny gay people their rights on a supposedly secular level. You would be correct in assuming, however, that none of them are really "reasons".

[Redstone]

236. What you said. A heterosexual can no more speak for a homosexual than a

white person can speak for the experience of a black American.

I have your back.

Redstone

[and-justice-for-all]

244. Warren is a bigoted hatemonger who can go fuck himself...

I would care so much if this piece of shit spoke if there was some balance...like say, Dan Barker(for the nonbelievers), Ellen or some other prominent Gay Activist/supporter.

[alarimer]

266. Some "ideas" are just plain wrong.

I could tell you I believe the moon is made of green cheese and I would be indisputably WRONG. Obama says he wants a diversity of ideas. Well, that's all well and good but what about ideas that are simply wrong? Bigotry is WRONG. It is not just a difference of opinion. If Rick Warren said about minorities what he said about gays, he would certainly not be speaking at the inaugural.

[xchrom]

267. kick

[Orsino]

269. Even if common ground can help them see you as fully human?

I'm not gonna tell you how to feel, what you must do, or that it would necessarily be successful, but common ground sounds like a good basis for most relationships. I'm sure as hell not going to imply that the onus is on you to work around their failing.

Yeah, their particular view in question is all wrong. I have to believe that finding other things to share with them might be helpful. But I'm kind of naive that way.

[Toasterlad]

276. Do You Honestly Believe That Anything Could Be Done To Change Warren's Mind?

If so, you ARE, in fact, naive.

Note: Warren = thousands of religious, bigoted assholes.

[Orsino]

279. That's an extremely narrow view...

...which ignores the whole alleged point of the Warren invocation. It's not just Warren we would like to change, and he's only there because he is a focus, a leader. Obama already has changed a few minds--a little--simply by selecting him, and the sight of them together onstage will help change a few more.

Obama hasn't presented this as a panacea. It's not. It's a symbol of what might be, and it's a powerful one. It is a mixed message that we hope will encourage more cooperation.

[Toasterlad]

282. You Can Choose to Believe the Official Spin If You Wish

But until you produce one of these "changed minds", I'm going to continue to recognize this move as the crass political pandering it truly is.

No minds will be changed by having Warren speak at the convention, except for those of a few more GLBT people and their allies, who've had Obama's disregard for our community shoved in our faces once again.

[Orsino]

294. I'm not believing or repeating the official spin.

The Warren pick doesn't mean what the Obama camp says it does--or doesn't. Warren onstage with Obama means a lot more--and less--to many different people, many of whom are having their minds changed in ways unintended by Obama or Warren.

I won't tell you how GLBT people feel about it, if you won't try to tell me how everyone else does.

[noamnety]

281. Maybe we should use Warren as a role model for finding common ground.

For instance, he finds gays to be immoral hate mongers and won't let them be a member of his church because they don't meet his definition of Christian. But he has still reached out to find common ground with them ... despite his differences, he lets them donate to his fake charity that "cares for the sick" by paying to print his book.

I think that's all Obama is asking of us. We compromise just a little bit on the equal rights - we get some limited rights, and in return Obama will ensure it's done in a way that allows him and his spiritual mentors (and their followers) to continue to discriminate just a little bit, and feel good about it. It's a win-win situation, no?

(I'm gonna try this without the tag and see how it goes. :) )

[Deja Q]

286. Well, I think sleeping around with every hot-looking person is stupid, selfish, naive and risky.

As for blindly equating BGLT people to pedophiles and the other usual stereotypes, he's utterly wrong.

Now, how can I convince him he's wrong? By shouting like a toddler (and likely getting nowhere as a result), or by demonstrating I too have morals and (amongst other things) can keep my zipper up to prove his stereotypes wrong? Not exactly a hard decision. For me, anyway.

I'll keep to doing the latter.

[Toasterlad]

291. It's None of Rick Warren's (or Your's) Business Where My Zipper Is

My legal rights should not be contingent upon Warren's definition of morality.

You and your spiritual leader Rick Warren are free to believe anything you want about gay people. However, you should not be honored for your twisted views.

[RandomKoolzip]

292. Did you catch a Sexually Transmitted disease once? You certainly love posting about

STDs, or alluding to them elliptically. Maybe the one you got traumatised you and instilled an obsession with other people's sexuality. In fact, the whole sex=disease theme seems a bit like a motif with you. That's unfortunate and tiresome.

And you should fucking know better than to equate non-hetero intercourse with civil rights, which is what the GLBT community is fighting for. They're not fighting to fuck, they're fighting for basic human rights. Matter of fact, your second paragraph is really insulting and reductive. Maybe the zipper you should be pulling shut is the one on your lips, dude....

[donco6]

303. WTF are you talking about?

I have a partner and we are monogamous. Not that it's anyone's business. Are you saying we don't deserve rights because some gays are promiscuous?