2 Comments

1. Eduardo  •  Dec 18, 2008 @9:00 am
   

   Why is this the first time queer activists have raised a stink? From the article, “Obama has also said he opposes same-sex marriage on religious grounds.” Why would queers ever think that he supports us in any way other than superficially? He’s not Harold Washington.

   I think it just points to the fact that people voted for and supported Obama based on what they wanted him to represent, rather than what he has stated.

   (Report comment)

2. Ken  •  Dec 18, 2008 @9:20 am
   

   Eduardo has it right. He just isn’t that into you.

   Obama is a disappointment on issues like these because, frankly, I think he’s full of shit when he says he opposes same-sex marriage on religious grounds. I think he’s chosen that position because it’s the safe ground and it polls well. I suspect that a politician of his talents could have won even with a pro-same-sex-marriage position, and that he could have used his formidable abilities to re-position the way the issue is discussed. But he took the safe path. That’s a disappointment.

   But choosing Rick Warren is a disappointment of a different color. For someone as plugged in to political culture as Obama and his team, it seems almost a deliberate insult, or a deliberate signal of moving to the center, a sort of positively spun Sister Souljah moment.

   My Bible study group read Warren’s “Purpose Driven Life.” While it had some interesting insights, I didn’t really think it lived up to the hagiographic hype. And now Warren seems to be tacking steadily to the political right as well as the cultural right, positioning himself to be a Robertson or Falwell type of figure, albeit perhaps some with somewhat more polished manners. The appearance on Hannity points to that.

   I, personally, make it a practice not to dine with people and call them friends to their faces if I am going to compare them to child-rapists later.

   (Report comment)

Leave a Reply