Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Gay Episcopal bishop to offer prayer at inauguration event. Activist groups immediately complain that left-handed redheaded transsexual Jewish Kwaanza pastors are being excluded   (fe10.story.media.ac4.yahoo.com) divider line
128
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

786 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Jan 2009 at 3:52 PM (14 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



128 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
Redwing
2009-01-12 3:16:27 PM  
I'm a left-handed redheaded transsexual Jewish Kwaanza pastor and getting a kick out of this headline.
 
Benevolent Misanthrope [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2009-01-12 3:31:12 PM  
Nice. Warren gets the Invocation. Robinson, who was not invited in response to the brouhaha over Warren - no really. REALLY! gets to say a prayer at the Lincoln Memorial, at an "inaugural event."

Uh-huh.

This whole thing gets stupider with each passing day.
 
coco ebert
2009-01-12 3:41:25 PM  
STFU subby.
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2009-01-12 3:45:15 PM  

coco ebert: STFU subby.


media.canada.comView Full Size
 
filth
2009-01-12 3:51:55 PM  
Do they have a student union? I might want to join.
 
Renart
2009-01-12 3:57:44 PM  
Here's an idea: no prayer at the inauguration. I know it's crazy, but it just might work!
 
SusanIvanova
2009-01-12 3:58:04 PM  
First, Obama sells gays down the river by pledging his support to a preacher who repeaedly and unabashedly equates homosexuality with pedophilia. Fine, politics is politics, and sometimes you have to give the ol' heave-ho to unpopular groups who were expecting your support. Then, he turns around and sells out his new friends in the religious right by inviting a gay bishop to speak at some lesser event.

Pro-gay people won't like it, because Warren gets top billing, and this new guy is an obvious token. Anti-gay people won't like it, because recognizing the possibility that gay people can be respectable members of society is anathema to them. And people who don't really care about gay rights one way or another are just going to get confused and pissed off at this circus.

Perhaps Obama isn't the bursting-at-the-seams-with-charsima slick-talking natural politican we've been hearing about?
 
The Icelander
2009-01-12 3:58:55 PM  
Here's an idea: Don't let *anybody* pray at the inauguration.
 
PC LOAD LETTER [TotalFark]
2009-01-12 4:01:46 PM  
SusanIvanova: You sound deeply concerned....
 
Rann Xerox [TotalFark]
2009-01-12 4:02:16 PM  

Renart: Here's an idea: no prayer at the inauguration. I know it's crazy, but it just might work!


THIS.
 
MFL
2009-01-12 4:02:42 PM  
Renart
Here's an idea: no prayer at the inauguration. I know it's crazy, but it just might work!

The Icelander
Here's an idea: Don't let *anybody* pray at the inauguration.

farm4.static.flickr.comView Full Size
 
IXI Jim IXI
2009-01-12 4:05:38 PM  
I can feel myself becoming left- handed! I can feel myself getting the urge to build an igloo!
 
Dr Dreidel
2009-01-12 4:06:00 PM  
Well, shiat. Now I'm confused: do I hate on Oboner for choosing one of the high-profile gay haters, or do I smack down the Messiah for his inclusion of those sodomite abominations?

Or do I act like a rational person (an extreme minority for fark) and assume that this is speechifying realpolitik?

// I got dibs on that band name
 
IXI Jim IXI
2009-01-12 4:06:21 PM  

SusanIvanova: First, Obama sells gays down the river by pledging his support to a preacher who repeaedly and unabashedly equates homosexuality with pedophilia.


Nobody talks about how badly that must piss off the pedophiles...
 
SusanIvanova
2009-01-12 4:08:05 PM  

PC LOAD LETTER: SusanIvanova: You sound deeply concerned....


I believe my politics, especially on gay rights, are fairly well known (strongly pro-). Merely remarking on the fact that on a simple little thing like choosing speakers for his inauguration, Obama is managing to alienate quite a lot of people on both sides of this issue, which is at odds with his reputation for being a consensus-builder who everybody likes.
 
Lumpmoose
2009-01-12 4:12:33 PM  
Enter Bill Donohue, Catholic League, stage far-right:

President-elect Barack Obama says he wants to unite Americans, and yet he chooses the most polarizing person in the Episcopal Church... Obama has chosen a man who offends Catholics as much as he does Protestants. If that's his idea of inclusion, he can keep it.

The irony, we loves it.
 
Mayhem of the Black Underclass
2009-01-12 4:13:19 PM  
Jewish Kwaanza pastor

= head asplode.

I just can't reconcile those three words. I think you need to look up the adjectival form of Kwanzaa that you want to use.

Left-handed redheaded transsexual Jewish Kwanzaa-celebrating pastor, works though.
 
mediaho
2009-01-12 4:13:35 PM  

SusanIvanova: First, Obama sells gays down the river by pledging his support to a preacher who repeaedly and unabashedly equates homosexuality with pedophilia. Fine, politics is politics, and sometimes you have to give the ol' heave-ho to unpopular groups who were expecting your support. Then, he turns around and sells out his new friends in the religious right by inviting a gay bishop to speak at some lesser event.

Pro-gay people won't like it, because Warren gets top billing, and this new guy is an obvious token. Anti-gay people won't like it, because recognizing the possibility that gay people can be respectable members of society is anathema to them. And people who don't really care about gay rights one way or another are just going to get confused and pissed off at this circus.

Perhaps Obama isn't the bursting-at-the-seams-with-charsima slick-talking natural politican we've been hearing about?


What an odd way to interpret being more inclusive.
 
Darconix
2009-01-12 4:13:35 PM  

SusanIvanova: I believe my politics, especially on gay rights, are fairly well known (strongly pro-). Merely remarking on the fact that on a simple little thing like choosing speakers for his inauguration, Obama is managing to alienate quite a lot of people on both sides of this issue, which is at odds with his reputation for being a consensus-builder who everybody likes.


You know his reputation was a bullet point from his political campaign, right? Obama has had zero visibility by the voter outside of Chicago up until now, so not much of a political history there.

As for your concerns, gays already have as many rights as you or I (or just me if you're gay; NTTAWWT). I do think if we want the gay folks to stop being such attention whores we need to stop tossing them bones when they start acting like them over stuff they don't like. Tossing them bones doesn't seem like a good idea to end the behavior.
 
Biological Ali
2009-01-12 4:14:07 PM  
MFL

lol wut
 
LocalCynic
2009-01-12 4:14:51 PM  

Lumpmoose: Enter Bill Donohue, Catholic League, stage far-right:


That nutbar is a Republican first and Catholic second.
 
The Icelander
2009-01-12 4:14:56 PM  
Dr Dreidel: Well, shiat. Now I'm confused: do I hate on Oboner for choosing one of the high-profile gay haters, or do I smack down the Messiah for his inclusion of those sodomite abominations?

Or do I act like a rational person (an extreme minority for fark) and assume that this is speechifying realpolitik?

// I got dibs on that band name

Which one? I see two great band names in there
 
degreeless
2009-01-12 4:16:25 PM  
[image from for-saken.net too old to be available]
 
The Icelander
2009-01-12 4:16:40 PM  
mediaho: What an odd way to interpret being more inclusive.

He's still excluding the people who want pastors to stay out of the damned government.
 
CagedDepravity
2009-01-12 4:17:47 PM  

Biological Ali: MFL

lol wut



Wanting a non-religious inauguration = (Godless) Communism.

\that wasn't obvious?
 
IXI Jim IXI
2009-01-12 4:18:04 PM  
Maybe the two religious guys will get into a slap fight.
 
mediaho
2009-01-12 4:18:10 PM  

Darconix: As for your concerns, gays already have as many rights as you or I (or just me if you're gay; NTTAWWT).


If you mean they have the same right to marry anyone of the opposite sex, just think - if that were expanded, you would have the expanded right to marry someone of the same sex! You wouldn't, of course, just like you wouldn't shouldn't expect a gay person to marry someone of the opposite sex.
 
LocalCynic
2009-01-12 4:18:48 PM  

The Icelander: He's still excluding the people who want pastors to stay out of the damned government.


There's nothing wrong with religious people, even clergy, being involved with government. Some people turn to faith for answers, some to reason, and some to emotion or experience. The problem is when religious people try to turn government into a tool for proselytizing, or at least use their faith as a political football.
 
espiaboricua
2009-01-12 4:19:09 PM  
Since the headline has the word redhead, can we make this thread the first Redhead Thread™ of the year?

Or would that be offensive/unpatriotic/unAmerican since this is, after all, in the Politics tab?
 
Hideously Gigantic Smurf
2009-01-12 4:19:22 PM  
I'm fine with this.

But then again, I believe in compromising pragmatism over idealistic absolutism.

SusanIvanova: First, Obama sells gays down the river by pledging his support to a preacher who repeaedly and unabashedly equates homosexuality with pedophilia.


How do you expect President Obama to heal the rift with the Muslim world if he's not willing to deal with the religious fanatics in our own country?
 
The Icelander
2009-01-12 4:20:46 PM  
LocalCynic: The problem is when religious people try to turn government into a tool for proselytizing, or at least use their faith as a political football.

Like Rick Warren.

And it's also a problem when they violate the first amendment. Like having Rick Warren at the inauguration is doing.
 
Shaggy_C
2009-01-12 4:22:22 PM  
Why did they invite religionists anyways, no one at Woodstock '09 wants to hear that crap.
 
Dr Dreidel
2009-01-12 4:23:17 PM  
The Icelander
Hmm, missed the first one. Was a Communication (note the conspicuous lack of 'S' on the end of that) major in college, so I was referring to the latter (Speechifying Realpolitik). The former (Sodomite Abominations) is all yours, as long as I get an advance DRM-free copy of albums.

espiaboricua: Since the headline has the word redhead, can we make this thread the first Redhead Thread™ of the year?

Seconded.
 
All2morrowsparTs
2009-01-12 4:24:37 PM  
Came for the red head thread, leaving disappointed.

/man, you wouldn't think there was an economic crises going on with all the crying about who is giving a prayer.
 
Lumpmoose
2009-01-12 4:25:55 PM  

The Icelander: LocalCynic: The problem is when religious people try to turn government into a tool for proselytizing, or at least use their faith as a political football.

Like Rick Warren.

And it's also a problem when they violate the first amendment. Like having Rick Warren at the inauguration is doing.


First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,

Is Congress even invited to the inauguration?
 
SusanIvanova
2009-01-12 4:26:02 PM  

Hideously Gigantic Smurf: But then again, I believe in compromising pragmatism over idealistic absolutism.


Agreed. Which is why he probably should have chosen an obscure, little-known pastor who has neither been recently publicly outspoken on how homosexuals are teh debbil, nor has been made famous for being the first gay bishop. Compromise is what makes both sides, if not happy, than at least docile. His actual choices make neither side docile -- quite the opposite, in fact.
 
eraser8
2009-01-12 4:26:32 PM  
I've got an easy solution to all the hand wringing: stop having inaugural prayers. What the fark is the point, anyway?
 
Dorf11
2009-01-12 4:27:50 PM  

filth: Do they have a student union? I might want to join.


Now I understand some of you (besides filth) don't know Sarah Jane...
 
eraser8
2009-01-12 4:28:39 PM  

Lumpmoose: Is Congress even invited to the inauguration?


Not only are they invited; they're (more or less) in charge of it:

Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies (pops)
 
The Icelander
2009-01-12 4:29:15 PM  
Lumpmoose: Is Congress even invited to the inauguration?

The Supreme Court has ruled that the establishment and free exercise clauses apply to all aspects of government, including state and local governments.
 
LocalCynic
2009-01-12 4:29:39 PM  

The Icelander: And it's also a problem when they violate the first amendment. Like having Rick Warren at the inauguration is doing.


I think Rick Warren is an asshat, but his presence there doesn't strike me as an establishment clause violation per se. I don't see it any more problematic than the poet laureate or a singer or dancer making some religious reference.

The question is what the purpose of the prayer is. If the President-Elect has asked someone to offer a prayer for him, then by all means let it happen. That seems to be what's happened here. If, on the other hand, the purpose of the prayer is to affirm some values that are supposedly intrinsic to our government, that's a totally different ball game. In my mind, the bigger problem than an establishment clause violation is that prayer is used as trite political theater, which should offend religious and non-religious people alike.
 
vernonFL
2009-01-12 4:30:11 PM  
My choices to give the prayers would have been 50 cent and the Sham Wow guy.
 
missiv
2009-01-12 4:32:05 PM  

eraser8: I've got an easy solution to all the hand wringing: stop having inaugural prayers. What the fark is the point, anyway?


msnbcmedia4.msn.comView Full Size

Agreed.
 
SphericalTime
2009-01-12 4:32:33 PM  
If Obama is actually at that event, it will be a big enough deal for me to feel that my defense of Obama's pick of Warren was justified.

If not, then I'll be upset, but not that upset.
 
Lumpmoose
2009-01-12 4:32:46 PM  

eraser8: Lumpmoose: Is Congress even invited to the inauguration?

Not only are they invited; they're (more or less) in charge of it:

Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies (pops)


Ah, okay. I thought it was Executive-centric wankery.
 
grimnir [TotalFark]
2009-01-12 4:33:53 PM  
FTFA: Just seeing someone like you up front matters

No. No, it doesn't. Having a gay bishop praying up there, in front of an all-gay audience, with a gay president, gay Secret Service, and a big gay inauguration still wouldn't matter. What matters is action. Symbols and circuses like this aren't worth a damn.
 
Dr Dreidel
2009-01-12 4:34:23 PM  
SusanIvanova: Hideously Gigantic Smurf: But then again, I believe in compromising pragmatism over idealistic absolutism.

Agreed. Which is why he probably should have chosen an obscure, little-known pastor who has neither been recently publicly outspoken on how homosexuals are teh debbil, nor has been made famous for being the first gay bishop. Compromise is what makes both sides, if not happy, than at least docile. His actual choices make neither side docile -- quite the opposite, in fact.

I had a thought, so now all of you are subjected to it.

What if the goal of picking non-milquetoast-y, well-known pastors from both sides of the debate was meant to get US Americans thinking about the divide/debate - to realize whom we're arguing with, and why, and how. If we can tone down the WHAAARGAAARBL enough to actually hear each other, what I hope we'll learn is: Americans are fighting other Americans over whether or not to interpret a famously vague text from the Bronze Ages strictly enough to deprive other Americans of their right to happiness (whether or not said text is a guiding document in their lives), and we argue in the most mouth-breathing, vapid, inartful, fallacious, mean-spirited, and self-defeating way possible.

Step 1 is admitting we have a problem.
 
The Icelander
2009-01-12 4:35:02 PM  
LocalCynic: I think Rick Warren is an asshat, but his presence there doesn't strike me as an establishment clause violation per se. I don't see it any more problematic than the poet laureate or a singer or dancer making some religious reference.

If you read the complaint made by Michael Newdow, having any religious person deliver an invocation violates the establishment clause because that person is acting as an agent of the government.

The worst part is that religious people don't have a problem with politicians faking their religion to look good.
 
Memes Ate My Balls
2009-01-12 4:35:10 PM  

SusanIvanova: First, Obama sells gays down the river by pledging his support to a preacher who repeaedly and unabashedly equates homosexuality with pedophilia. Fine, politics is politics, and sometimes you have to give the ol' heave-ho to unpopular groups who were expecting your support. Then, he turns around and sells out his new friends in the religious right by inviting a gay bishop to speak at some lesser event.


Strongly disagree. Obama will be everyone's president, and I don't feel that letting children eat at the big kid's table changes anything.

After years of being bashed and marginalized by the powers that be, Obama called me an American in his acceptance speech. It was an extremely moving moment. He is acknowledging that the people who hate me are also Americans, and I am fine with that. Shiat, I encourage it.
 
DrZiffle
2009-01-12 4:35:53 PM  
Oh Lord...
Congregation: Oh Lord...
Oooh you are so big...
Congregation: Oooh you are so big...
So absolutely huge.
Congregation: So ab - solutely huge.
Gosh, we're all really impressed down here I can tell you. Congregation: Gosh, we're all really impressed down here I can tell you.
Forgive Us, O Lord, for this dreadful toadying.
Congregation: And barefaced flattery.
But you are so strong and, well, just so super.
Congregation: Fan - tastic.
All: Amen.
 
Displayed 50 of 128 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all



Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

Come for the Total, stay for the Farking.

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.