Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Poll

Why did Sarah Palin resign?

Personal scandal
 5 (17.2%)
Probable indictment
 7 (24.1%)
Just plain craziness
 3 (10.3%)
Looooong lead up to 2012
 4 (13.8%)
Something else
 2 (6.9%)
Some combination of the above
 8 (27.6%)

Total Members Voted: 29

Author Topic: The Thread on Politics  (Read 420577 times)

A.

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 15712
    • View Profile
Re: The Thread on Politics
« Reply #7540 on: December 22, 2008, 09:26:02 PM »
Yes, the previous comments seem to be going in circles.  I was talking about the movement as a whole.  I'm not saying that this is necessarily a non-issue, but I am saying that I don't see what good extended and widespread protest will do unless there is some plan to utilize the discontent for some larger purpose.  Say Obama comes out tomorrow or next week and takes Warren out of the schedule.  Would that be a major victory for the LGBT?  I don't think so.  Yet, taking Warren out would end most of the conversations I've seen.

naturallybeyoutiful

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1258
  • Everything is everything
    • View Profile
Re: The Thread on Politics
« Reply #7541 on: December 22, 2008, 09:44:58 PM »
[And you took the words right out of my mouth because I was just about to make the parallel of this point regarding the decision to have Warren do the invocation.  Warren was chosen because, quite frankly, there's an invocation to be given and he is a pastor.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe that Warren is going to take to the stage and start spouting anti-gay sentiment for 60 minutes.  He's been asked to come, give a prayer, and sit down.  Now if I am grossly underestimating the extent to which Warren's speaking engagement will exist, then I'll be one of the first to sound the alarm b/c for an event like this, it wouldn't make any sense to do anything that departs from giving an invocation.


But this whole controversy speaks to 7S's point, which I think we're going to have to come to terms with which is there will be times when Obama's administration will have to do something that will be unpopular with the Democrats/Black Community/Minority Community/Liberals/etc.  I, for one, am ok with that as long as our interests are being looked out for.  I don't expect Obama to make every executive decision from the viewpoint of the black community.  That's ok.  But I can guarantee that there will be many folks within the black community, democratic community, etc. who will be up in arms over the next 4 years over some issue when an Obama policy departs from our ideology/interests.  I think people's expectations sometimes are a little unrealistic.

In the great words of the Rolling Stones "you can't always get what you want..."


but you get what you need.


ITA!!!!!!!  I totally support the decision to tap Rick Warren for the invocation.  ymmv
Harvard Law: What, like it's hard?

Eugene Young

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 538
    • View Profile
Re: The Thread on Politics
« Reply #7542 on: December 23, 2008, 12:19:28 AM »
Honestly, I don't see what all the hullaboo is about. This is straight out of Preident Obama's M.O. He's always given people he didn't agree with a platform. In fact, that trait was a big part of what got him elected EIC of Harvard Law Review back in the day. He was able to bring people who didn't agree together. Not only that, he pretty much laid out his platform in The Audacity of Hope. It doesn't even take a real critical reading IMO. If you read that, you wouldn't at all be surprised that he picked Warren. In fact, you could almost argue that you'd be surprised if he hadn't invited him.

But I agree with 7S or whoever it was - the lesbian and gay community have bigger fish to fry at this point.

7S

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2647
  • Self-determination.
    • View Profile
Re: The Thread on Politics
« Reply #7543 on: December 23, 2008, 12:46:43 AM »
My problem with The LGBT movement is that they want to equate their efforts to the Civil Rights Movement, but expect change to come from the top down. It didn't happen that way in 60's and it probably won't happen now. Obama is probably the most gay-friendly president we've ever had and I believe it only works to galvanize Christians around this homophobic pastor when we appear at odds with Obama over Warren. I just think there is a smarter way to respond to this.

this is the credited response

Prop 8 was not a "top down" effort.  It was a matter decided by a state court and then overturned by a slim majority of the people with the active, lucrative participation of religious leaders like Rick Warren.

No one expects Obama to walk into the White House on day one and sign something that legalizes gay marriage.  We just don't expect to have the concept of our civil rights publicly degraded by even a tacit veil of presidential legitimacy.     

If you're going to juxtapose this criticism of Obama (national politics) to Prop 8 (state and local politics) then I think it is pretty safe to say that gays want change from the top down.


[And you took the words right out of my mouth because I was just about to make the parallel of this point regarding the decision to have Warren do the invocation.  Warren was chosen because, quite frankly, there's an invocation to be given and he is a pastor.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe that Warren is going to take to the stage and start spouting anti-gay sentiment for 60 minutes.  He's been asked to come, give a prayer, and sit down.  Now if I am grossly underestimating the extent to which Warren's speaking engagement will exist, then I'll be one of the first to sound the alarm b/c for an event like this, it wouldn't make any sense to do anything that departs from giving an invocation.


But this whole controversy speaks to 7S's point, which I think we're going to have to come to terms with which is there will be times when Obama's administration will have to do something that will be unpopular with the Democrats/Black Community/Minority Community/Liberals/etc.  I, for one, am ok with that as long as our interests are being looked out for.  I don't expect Obama to make every executive decision from the viewpoint of the black community.  That's ok.  But I can guarantee that there will be many folks within the black community, democratic community, etc. who will be up in arms over the next 4 years over some issue when an Obama policy departs from our ideology/interests.  I think people's expectations sometimes are a little unrealistic.

In the great words of the Rolling Stones "you can't always get what you want..."


but you get what you need.


ITA!!!!!!!  I totally support the decision to tap Rick Warren for the invocation.  ymmv

I'm sorry, but no. I'm not upset over Obama inviting Warren, but let's call Warren what he is...a hateful and un-Godly homophobe.


Yes, the previous comments seem to be going in circles.  I was talking about the movement as a whole.  I'm not saying that this is necessarily a non-issue, but I am saying that I don't see what good extended and widespread protest will do unless there is some plan to utilize the discontent for some larger purpose.  Say Obama comes out tomorrow or next week and takes Warren out of the schedule.  Would that be a major victory for the LGBT?  I don't think so.  Yet, taking Warren out would end most of the conversations I've seen.

Exactly. Let's talk about that fact that in some 30+ states you can still be fired for being gay. Warren is a non-issue when compared to that. I'd like to see gays going to some of these homophobic churches en masse and "sitting-in."
It is easy to change the language of oppression without changing the sociopolitical situation of its victims.

Miss P

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 21337
    • View Profile
Re: The Thread on Politics
« Reply #7544 on: December 23, 2008, 05:08:37 AM »
I am content to sit this one out (Cady has my feelings on the matter locked down) except to add the following --

Prop. 8 passed in part because its supporters were able to make Obama's closeness to Warren and stated personal opposition to same-sex marriage look like an endorsement of Prop. 8.  Yes, Obama was in the midst of an important presidential campaign and kept his opposition to Prop. 8 quiet.  That didn't help.  Maybe he now feels freer to unambiguously align himself with LGBT causes.  But still, don't underestimate the ability of folks to take this as en endorsement of Warren's beliefs.  It's already an obvious slap in the face (indicating, as it does, that gay rights issues are a matter of personal belief while other rights issues are matters of societal commitments), but it's probably worse than that. 

As some of you know, I have posted elsewhere that I don't really care very much about this issue.  I just want to be clear that voicing one's opposition to the selection is perfectly legitimate as long as it's neither the beginning nor end of one's political engagement.  Alci, I think, asked what good could come of the protests.  If they force Obama to distance himself from Warren's homophobia, they will have at least prevented a repeat of the misinformation during the battle over Prop. 8.
That's cool how you referenced a case.

Quote from: archival
I'm so far from the end of my tether right now that I reckon I could knit myself some socks with the slack.

A.

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 15712
    • View Profile
Re: The Thread on Politics
« Reply #7545 on: December 23, 2008, 06:46:54 AM »
If they force Obama to distance himself from Warren's homophobia, they will have at least prevented a repeat of the misinformation during the battle over Prop. 8.

Has he not already done this?  And if he is forced to go a step further and "renounce" Warren (and thus take him off of the schedule), would that not use up a great deal of political capital with the President-elect (and others) that would be better spent on other areas?

Whether or not we think it should be, this is a political issue.  Sure, voice your discontent.  "Man, the LGBT community is mad over this.  Sorry guys.  I'll reiterate that I'm against his homophobic views, and I'll make it up to you soon, OK?"  But pick your battles. "OK, you guys raised a bunch of hell and forced me to renounce Warren.  That's not what I needed, and it was embarrassing.  I think I'm done with you for a while."

mugatu

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 22183
  • I'll show YOU pacifist.
    • View Profile
Re: The Thread on Politics
« Reply #7546 on: December 23, 2008, 11:01:53 AM »
If they force Obama to distance himself from Warren's homophobia, they will have at least prevented a repeat of the misinformation during the battle over Prop. 8.

Has he not already done this?  And if he is forced to go a step further and "renounce" Warren (and thus take him off of the schedule), would that not use up a great deal of political capital with the President-elect (and others) that would be better spent on other areas?

Whether or not we think it should be, this is a political issue.  Sure, voice your discontent.  "Man, the LGBT community is mad over this.  Sorry guys.  I'll reiterate that I'm against his homophobic views, and I'll make it up to you soon, OK?"  But pick your battles. "OK, you guys raised a bunch of hell and forced me to renounce Warren.  That's not what I needed, and it was embarrassing.  I think I'm done with you for a while."

my google search pulled something like that up, i guess. (bolded)

it's a tricky position.  I'm not entirely sure what type of thought went into this selection.  generally the Obama camp has been quite discerning in their selection processes.  Warren's selection doesn't, for instance, seem to remove a desire the other side would have in "but, but...we WANT a homophobic pastor for the invocation!"  Obviously, such a desire could not be fulfilled explicitly. 

I'm frankly surprised that they let anything this obvious cause a disruption, unless they were also using it as a metric for action.  (In essence, how vocal is the gay camp going to be if we might operate at cross purposes or will they still be Obamafans?  They may have gotten their answer...and used a means that has the least political ramifications of getting it.)  However, that's quite a bit of smoke and mirrors.  I just can't quite come up with a good reason otherwise.  Surely there must be some other minister who does good social work and manages to avoid spewing hate...

eta: I forgot to add I don't think rescinding the offer is an appropriate move (politically). 
Let me show you Derelicte. It is a fashion, a way of life inspired by the very homeless, the vagrants, the crack whores that make this wonderful city so unique.

They're break-dance fighting.

7S

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2647
  • Self-determination.
    • View Profile
Re: The Thread on Politics
« Reply #7547 on: December 23, 2008, 11:28:09 AM »
also, lost in this discussion is how offensive it is to atheists that any religious figure has been invited to give an invocation.  how offensive!

participatingggg.... jk
It is easy to change the language of oppression without changing the sociopolitical situation of its victims.

LadyKD

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1297
  • And so it began..
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: The Thread on Politics
« Reply #7548 on: December 23, 2008, 11:41:35 AM »
I would love to see more outrage as well.  I'd love to see allegedly benevolent, Godly houses of worship called out on their hate and their ignorance.  Let's start with the Mormon church, which for decades preached that racial discrimination was God's will, decided God's will was wrong when they were going to lose their tax status because of it, but now feel that God's will compels them to pump millions of dollars into secular social campaigns. 

I totally understand that, comparatively, the Warren situation isn't as big a deal as some other issues.  But, just sitting back and being OK with the decision makes it that much easier for people like Warren to perpetuate homophobia.  It makes it that much easier for idiots like naturallybeautiful to go on believing they're right, or justified, or informed.  If you sanction, overlook or choose to include - just to show you're open minded - even a little bit of that trash, you, by association, sanction an environment in which some people think it's OK to belittle, or fire, or bash someone for being gay. 

That's exactly my problem with this: morons not understanding Obama's intentions, reading it as something to be praised as part of their homophobic campaigns.  Sigh.     


First off you are the idiot. And your last few post have been wayyy too Bushy..for me.  Look I am no Obama fan..frankly all politicans have pissed me off..but this particular move by him I actually like. If you are going to change the atmosphere in this country..to one of tolerance(NOT ACCEPTANCE) tolerance..then it starts by including and listening to the opinions of even those you do not always agree with.  If you feel so strongly about it then I suggest you gather yourself a bunch of boo-birds and on January 20th you and your fellow protestors make some signs..and when Warren begins to pray you boo and hiss and chant all you damn like. That way you make your voices heard about your disapproval of his choice.  Simple solution for a simple mind.

Natural I know you can defend yourself..but frankly I think the difference of opinions in our world are what keep us going.

7S

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2647
  • Self-determination.
    • View Profile
Re: The Thread on Politics
« Reply #7549 on: December 23, 2008, 12:57:21 PM »
I would love to see more outrage as well.  I'd love to see allegedly benevolent, Godly houses of worship called out on their hate and their ignorance.  Let's start with the Mormon church, which for decades preached that racial discrimination was God's will, decided God's will was wrong when they were going to lose their tax status because of it, but now feel that God's will compels them to pump millions of dollars into secular social campaigns. 

I totally understand that, comparatively, the Warren situation isn't as big a deal as some other issues.  But, just sitting back and being OK with the decision makes it that much easier for people like Warren to perpetuate homophobia.  It makes it that much easier for idiots like naturallybeautiful to go on believing they're right, or justified, or informed.  If you sanction, overlook or choose to include - just to show you're open minded - even a little bit of that trash, you, by association, sanction an environment in which some people think it's OK to belittle, or fire, or bash someone for being gay. 

That's exactly my problem with this: morons not understanding Obama's intentions, reading it as something to be praised as part of their homophobic campaigns.  Sigh.     


First off you are the idiot. And your last few post have been wayyy too Bushy..for me.  Look I am no Obama fan..frankly all politicans have pissed me off..but this particular move by him I actually like. If you are going to change the atmosphere in this country..to one of tolerance(NOT ACCEPTANCE) tolerance..then it starts by including and listening to the opinions of even those you do not always agree with.  If you feel so strongly about it then I suggest you gather yourself a bunch of boo-birds and on January 20th you and your fellow protestors make some signs..and when Warren begins to pray you boo and hiss and chant all you damn like. That way you make your voices heard about your disapproval of his choice.  Simple solution for a simple mind.

Natural I know you can defend yourself..but frankly I think the difference of opinions in our world are what keep us going.

I won't cosign on everything Saxby said, but I will say that I am well beyond the point were I regard people who believe that being gay is some sort of deficiency as simply having a difference of opinion. If you believe that women are inferior, you are a sexist. If you believe that certain races are inferior or superior, then you are a racist. If you believe that gay people are somehow inferior to heterosexuals, you are a homophobe. There is no amount of religion or opinion that can wash away the fact that you (no one in particular) are, in no uncertain terms, a bigot.

With that said, I still think that the fight is not with Obama. It is like Obama is doing what he politically can to actually ensure equal rights for gays, despite what you want to call it. However, if there isn't a grassroots movement willing to work to change the opinion on the ground, then we will forever be at a stalemate.
It is easy to change the language of oppression without changing the sociopolitical situation of its victims.