Skip to main content

UPDATED:Separate but Equal: A Token Pat on the Head for the LGBT Community at the Inauguration

UPDATE: Just to make it clear there is no love lost whatever between Gene Robinson and Rick Warren (and to further accentuate the rather cynical diviseness instead of some chimerical, open-minded psalm to diversity on the part of Barack Obama), here's Rick Warren offering Saddleback Church as a new home to those worried about Gene Robinson and his infestation of queers in the Episcopal Church. (Oops, sorry Sunlit Uplands. Was using the word queers too coarse for you?) Take it away, Rick:

... [The Episcopal Church has] already considered me an adversary after partnering on projects with Kolini, Orumbi, and Nzimbi, and writing the TIME bio on Akinola.

But since last summer... I’ve been on Gene Robinson and other’s attack list for my position on gay marriage. ....[Our] brothers and sisters here at St. James in Newport Beach lost their California State Supreme Court case to keep their property.

We stand in solidarity with them, and with all orthodox, evangelical Anglicans. I offer the campus of Saddleback Church to any Anglican congregation who need a place to meet, or if you want to plant a new congregation in south Orange County.

[h/t Waldo]

We now take you back to the original post:

HuPo reports that openly gay Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson has been invited to give the opening prayer at the Sunday, January 18, pre-inauguration event at the Lincoln Memorial.

Many liberal commentators, having been previously been left without much of a comeback to protests by the gay community, have grasped this face-saving move as new evidence of President-elect Barack Obama's political acumen. Local reaction among our liberal friends is to suggest that Obama is Crazy like a fox.

Some fox. More like the naked emperor grabbing for a jock strap.

I understand that Robinson could not afford to turn down this invitation, but his comments about Rick Warren are instructive:

Robinson said he would love to sit down with Rick Warren but believed that the California pastor has "perpetrated lies about the gay, lesbian and bisexual community."


This is, frankly, nothing but more than a Separate but Equal patting on the head of the LGBT community. It says, You're good enough for a side show, but for the main event we're sticking with the guy who is anti-gay and anti-science, who thinks people get cancer because of sin.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I had the same impression, I was just surprised how long it took for them to find someone to fall for the political ploy.
Delaware Watch said…
It's pure tokenism, plain & simple.
Brian Miller said…
So much for the "acumen" of the Obama political machine. Heh.
Bowly said…
Steve +1, DelLib +0, which makes the score something in the neighborhood of a jillion to zero.
Anonymous said…
Allow me to give some insight, since I do respect your opinion. When I read the story my first thought was that Warren was going to be pissed because he'd be sharing the spotlight with a gay bishop, that from this moment on whenever anyone spoke about prayer at the inauguration they wouldn't be focusing solely on Warren. I thought of all the uncomfortable questions Warren was about to be asked, and savored watching him squirm trying to appease his base while simultaneously moving into the "mainstream."

My thoughts were on Warren's reaction. How will he handle this situation? Can he make everyone happy - especially followers who will expect him to speak out against Robinson? If he does speak out what happens to that mainstream appeal he so desperately seeking? If he doesn't speak out what happens to his flock's devotion?

None of this means I was happy with the Warren pick, nor does it allow me to dismiss everyone's comments. You all have extremely valid points - which I agree with and should have included in my hastily written (narrowly focused) post.
Delaware Watch said…
Frankly, Pandora, I could care less about Warren's reaction. I think it's irrelevant to the only matter worthy of our care: viz., what is the message being sent to homosexual Americans by having Warren offer a prayer at the Inauguration.
Brian Miller said…
And Gene Robinson, let's not forget, was a bit of a patsy for Obama during the Dems' nomination fight (and the election).

Having one of your apologists show up on stage is hardly "reaching out."

And let's not forget all the nonbelievers (or nontheists, pantheists, multitheists, etc.) who also get locked out of the process.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...