I'm already feeling a change and it isn't the one I wanted. I'm hearing and reading from others how they're already beginning to feel disillusioned with Barack Obama because of his decision to elevate hate at the upcoming inauguration. I say no way, no how will this victory be stolen from those of us who are looking to this new President to lead this country back to the course we must be on to fulfill our obligations to each other and the world. But just like Obama told us, we can't rely on just his rhetoric, his appointments, and his decisions. We must also participate in the change and with that in mind, I'm looking for like-minded individuals who want to find an organized way to express our outrage during the inauguration about the decision to include hatemonger Rick Warren.
I am very disappointed with the Rick Warren invitation, but I am not ready to write Obama off -- far from it. Instead I want to essentially follow his repeated calls to get more fully engaged. Had this been a policy decision I would not have been as surprised. After all, Obama ran opposed to gay marriage. Instead, and most perplexing, Obama chose to do this -- offend gay Americans and their friends and family -- over a strictly symbolic matter and sometimes symbols can be exceedingly important. This is one of those times. The man was elected because enough voters were swayed by his argument that the time for divisiveness was over. The very survival of the nation being at stake -- so we had to set aside things like the culture wars and deal with the fundamentals of national security, economics and environment. I totally agree with that premise.However, elevating a hatemonger to deliver a prayer on the stage at the nation's big day is a symbol of exactly the opposite: that we're not really setting aside those culture wars. Instead we're lending them more credibility. Just as I would not have expected Obama to select Gene Robinson (the openly gay bishop of the Episcopal Church Diocese of New Hampshire) to deliver this prayer, so I would have assumed his choice would have been any number of clergy who have a far less public profile of the culture war issues such as gay marriage, abortion rights and stem cell research (all actively opposed by Rick Warren).While I hope the invitation will somehow be rescinded, having already made my plans to attend the swearing in, I and many other like-minded citizens need to prepare now for an organized action while the whole world is watching. Rarely will gay activists and their supporters have such an incredible stage to show ourselves and discuss our issues. For those of you who believe that doing anything like this on the occasion of the swearing in of our nation's first bi-racial President could be a PR disaster for us, I disagree. We can be forceful and respectful, especially if we plan this in advance. Those who agree that hatemongers should not be elevated in our society in this way need to have a way to express themselves right then, right there during the ceremony.
Having made my own personal case for organizing, I'd like to hear from others and especially get some ideas on what could be done in Washington at the Mall during the ceremony and/or the parade that follows. I'm sure many of you will write about how wrong this is as a strategy, but this blog is about taking a pro-active stand to speak out at the inauguration, not about debating whether we should be silent. As they once shouted in the Reagan years at ACT UP demo's, "Silence equals death." And this queen is silent no more!
Dear Barack:
You have so admirably stated on a number of occaisions, that you will admit to mistakes when you make them. Well, you've just made your first huge blunder by selecting a right wing Christian Fundamentalist preacher Rick Warren, (who has no respect for Gays, women's rights to choose or science) to preside religiously over your innauguration. This is also a man who believes that the only way to obtain a ticket to heaven is through a belief in Jesus Christ. In otherwords many Americans that voted for you - according to this religious moron - are destined for Hell.
You have not only offended Gays with this choice. You have offended people like myself who supported you because I was fed up with the hijacking of the US by the religious right, their retrograde chauvinism and narrow xenophobic concept of God. This man may appearn more moderate on other issues such as poverty and climate change, but make no mistake, he is simply a "wolf in sheeps clothing". His views on abortion, gay marriage, stem cell research and the "one true religion" (which is his brand of Christianity) are as retrograde as all of his ignorant predecessors.
With all due respect Barack, we, who were fed up with the right wing agenda for the past eight years, can't believe your lack of judgement on this one. This is, after all, "the Civil Rights Issue" of our day. If Rick Warren had the same attitudes about African American Rights as he does about Gay Rights, Women's Rights and the rights of sick people to benefit from stem cell research, there would be no way that he'd be allowed to share the podium on your innauguration.
If you want to reach out to that element of America, there will be plenty of opportunities to do so without giving him the prime spot at your inauguration and offending those who voted for you because of your liberalism and open mindedness.
Yes Barack, its time to admit your first enormous mistake and immediately do something to correct it.
Since the US is home to many religions, if you want to correct this blunder without alienating the Christian Right, I suggest that you consider inviting liberal clergy from all denominations of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddism, Hinduism and others to do a group invocation at your inauguration. That will send a message of American inclusivity to people all over the world. More importantly it will show all Americans that they have an equal spiritual voice in the United States.
It will also allow you to save face with Rick Warren and to let the American people know that you've both acknowledged and corrected your first enormous blunder.
Having created this, my first blog, I had nothing in mind to write. Therefore, I am pasting in a modified version of a response I submitted to another blogger just to kick things off…
We are coming off eight years of having hard-right fundamentalist Christianity as the touchstone of the last would-be theocratic administration. So what is the first thing we will hear at the inauguration of our new president? A hard-right fundamentalist preacher. A preacher who just happened to be at the spear point of the successful campaign to strip California gays and lesbians of their constitutional rights. I am from California. Some non-Californians may not understand that the wounds from the Proposition 8 battle are still fresh and open, and this was like rubbing salt into them. And it is not just a small minority of Obama’s gay and lesbian base here in California that feels this way. If sticks in the craw of every free thinking individual that believed in and fought for those constitutional rights—regardless of sexual orientation. This issue goes to the very core of what our constitution stands for. My wife and I are heterosexuals and I believe there are thousands of other families in this state, and elsewhere, that feel as we do. We are still glad that Obama will be our next president. We don’t plan to take our Obama/Biden yard sign down until after the inauguration ceremony. But I think Obama wants to hear how Americans feel about his decisions, and I’m here to tell him how I feel about this one. He can add this to the aggregate of opinions expressed and do with it as he pleases. Some tell those of us who do not support Obama’s selection of Pastor Warren that we should “take a chill pill”. But tell me this. If he had scheduled a white supremacist preacher, who nevertheless supports the fight against global warming and helping to alleviate the suffering of the people of Darfur, would y’all still be telling us to “take a chill pill”?
We are coming off eight years of having hard-right fundamentalist Christianity as the touchstone of the last would-be theocratic administration. So what is the first thing we will hear at the inauguration of our new president? A hard-right fundamentalist preacher. A preacher who just happened to be at the spear point of the successful campaign to strip California gays and lesbians of their constitutional rights.
I am from California. Some non-Californians may not understand that the wounds from the Proposition 8 battle are still fresh and open, and this was like rubbing salt into them. And it is not just a small minority of Obama’s gay and lesbian base here in California that feels this way. If sticks in the craw of every free thinking individual that believed in and fought for those constitutional rights—regardless of sexual orientation. This issue goes to the very core of what our constitution stands for. My wife and I are heterosexuals and I believe there are thousands of other families in this state, and elsewhere, that feel as we do. We are still glad that Obama will be our next president. We don’t plan to take our Obama/Biden yard sign down until after the inauguration ceremony. But I think Obama wants to hear how Americans feel about his decisions, and I’m here to tell him how I feel about this one. He can add this to the aggregate of opinions expressed and do with it as he pleases.
Some tell those of us who do not support Obama’s selection of Pastor Warren that we should “take a chill pill”. But tell me this. If he had scheduled a white supremacist preacher, who nevertheless supports the fight against global warming and helping to alleviate the suffering of the people of Darfur, would y’all still be telling us to “take a chill pill”?
Funny Star Studded Musical video on Proposition 8 - Jack Black and many more
Hosted on Funny or Die
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/c0cf508ff8/prop-8-the-musical-starring-jack-black-john-c-reilly-and-many-more-from-fod-team-jack-black-craig-robinson-john-c-reilly-and-rashida-jones
JOIN THE IMPACT RALLY THIS SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 15 IN FRONT OF THE COUNTY BUILDINGS, 701 OCEAN STREET, SANTA CRUZ!
The struggle for equal rights continues in earnest on Saturday, November 15, 2008, with anti-Proposition 8 and pro-Marriage Equality rallies slated for every state across the country including California. According to Join the Impact, at least 34 citiies in California will hold rallies at 10:30 a.m. (PST) to conincide with rallies across the country.
Cities in California holding anti-Prop 8 rallies including Bakersfield, Chico, Colton, Costa Mesa, Delano, Escondido, Eureka, Fairfield, Fresno, Irvine, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Moreno Valley, Napa, Oakland, Palm Springs, Pasadena, Pomona, Redlands, Riverside, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, San Luis Obispo, San Rafael, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz, Santa Rosa, Stockton, Ventura, and Walnut Creek.
Check your local listing:
http://jointheimpact.wetpaint.com/?t=anon
Hypocrites
This is to all those people that voted for Barack, fought for civil rights, fought discrimination based on sex, age, race, or religion, but voted against gay marriage. YOU ARE HYPOCRITES!!!!!!! How in the world can you justify denying another group of human beings the same rights you have. Isn’t that what we did with slavery, poll tax, bans on interracial marriage? Oh yeah, I am old enough to remember the uproar from the idiots, morons, and bigot scum on the religious right and social conservatives (KKK) about how interracial marriage would destroy the fabric of society and destroy the world. WRONG again. The world is not flat, the universe does not revolve around you or your precious earth. Get over yourselves!!!! None of us are that special, we are people and that is special enough.
Someone please tell me how two people swearing to love and honor each other in front of friends and family is a threat. You can’t use religion, because I don’t believe in your perverse idea of religion. Give me real world reasons, not what your invisible friend is whispering in your ear. If you don’t like the idea of marrying another man or woman, then DON”T. No one is making you.
And just for the record though it really is none of your business, I am as straight as they come. I am just a human being that believes in the motto “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you”.
The reason for my involvement in a political campaign of this magnitude — the Presidential race 2008, was to convey the message that United States is a nation of immigrants and democracy is truly represented when individual rights of every citizen is honored and valued in true spirit.
While it is a great moment in history to realize the dream of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.,
Whose sacrifice is symbolized with the election of the first African American candidate as the 44th President of the United States in 2008,
It is unequivocally demoralizing to note the outcome of the Vote for Proposition 8 banning “Gay Marriage” and,
The failure of “Touch-Screen machines for disabled voters” in the California ballot and elsewhere –
(Ref. San Jose Mercury News, Thursday, November 6, 2008 Section 2B, by Karen de Sá ).
Like stated earlier, when individuals exercise authority with the voting power in the denial of civil and human rights as demonstrated in the two most tragic results, it is a sad day for democracy.
Nevertheless, my message to all my dear friends and fellow citizens in the gay community and the disabled voters is…
You never quit a half won battle, even if the opposition appears to be strong and forceful in rhetoric but fragile in essence.
It is noteworthy that, this mandate on Gay marriage was bargained in monetary terms by the religious institutions with highly questionable ethics and conduct especially against young children i.e. girls and boys alike.
Such mandate should be challenged again in the court of law for the constitutional and civil rights of all citizens to prevail in the land of justice, that is the United States of America.
Further, much to the dismay of the opposing religious order — this challenge is being remanded with the blessing of the same “Almighty God” inappropriately referenced in the debate as the shield for their orthodox and hypocritical philosophy.
Any democracy is active when disfranchisement of one by another is discarded for common good of all.
Otherwise, it is not a democracy, it is a hypocrisy.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
P.S. For more enticing articles in Politics especially, the recent Presidential election 2008, and other topics please visit www.padminiarhant.com
Stephen Views the News 11/9/08
http://stephenviewsthenews.blogspot.com/
* Republican Shell Game ~ in the guise of conservatism – Most Republican politicos and pundits are cautioning the Obama administration not to go too far left. America, they tell us, is a center-right country. This is a misleading strategy. The McCain campaign had positioned Obama as the most liberal member of congress since, uh, FOREVER. Obama gained a sweeping victory and Democrats increased their majorities in the House and the Senate. Perhaps the Republicans are observing an alternative Universe – the one their simpatico Creationists claim was created just 6000 years ago. This is not to say that all Republicans and true conservatives are religious-right fundamentalists. On the contrary, there are many intelligent and valued conservative principles and thinkers in America that have much to offer our national discourse. Unfortunately, their ideas were so bastardized during the Bush/Republican reign that conservatism lost its meaning. Perhaps it is time to step back from assigning labels and evaluate ideas and policies in terms of their benefit to the common interest and the common good. What is that interest and good?
An examination of Americans’ positions reveals the following: Based on recent polls and studies the majority of Americans do not want to see more restrictive limits on abortion and women’s reproductive rights and they do not want more restrictive measures imposed on gay relationships; minimum wage increases and union rights are supported; stem cell research has a mandate and universal healthcare coverage receives overwhelming support; science is accepted as a valuable and vital tool to advance human knowledge, address illness, spur our economy and enhance the quality of life; Americans emphatically say that the federal government has an important role in ensuring food and product safety and providing oversight of pharmaceutical efficacy; the American people do not want to see the Supreme Court tack far right; the use of torture is strongly opposed; Americans want their government pro-active on energy conservation and addressing global warming; Americans do not want the USA involved in unjustified preemptive war and they desire that the country return to a position of trusted leadership in the world community.
These are Progressive ideas and values. America being center-right is a Republican/Conservative marketing tool and about as accurate as the recently revealed eye-crosser that Sarah Palin believed that Africa is a country. In the pre-2008 election world, if Republicans said something often enough it became conventional wisdom, regardless of the wisdom. If Republican “wisdom” is to continue to move to their convoluted interpretation of the right I welcome their ensuing electoral losses until the attrition ultimately attracts Republican leaders committed to serving mainstream America. The day of single-issue social conservative values is over. Trickle down economics is in the storage shed if not the trash heap. Republican Party genuflecting at the altar of Reganomics has experienced a crisis of faith by the congregation. For the 10th straight month the American work force has lost jobs and there are currently 10 million unemployed in the U.S. Many of those still employed are working at lower-level or lower paying jobs than was the case 10 years ago. Republican/ Conservative philosophy failed Americans economically, militarily, environmentally and socially. Welcome to the 21st Century, even though it is nine years late.
* The politics of Three Card Monte ~ the dealer lost – Leading up to elections this year Republican operatives were filling the airwaves and filing lawsuits across the country raising the fear of voter fraud and the demise of democracy as we know it. The states primarily targeted with “cry wolf” warnings were Pennsylvania, Nevada, Indiana, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Minnesota. Election officials in these states report that there was no evidence of voter fraud within their borders this election, nor have there been in previous elections for that matter. Perhaps the derriere-kicking endured by the Republican Party in the last two elections will inspire them to direct their efforts toward more responsible politicking and governance. Hopefully, the Democratic politicos received this message as well. It has taken an avoidable and interminable war and a crushing blow to the economy for the American people to pay more attention to the politic rhetoric but, in 2008 we did pay attention. Voter fraud was never a real issue and a more informed electorate was one of the deciding issues.
* Gay marriage ~ Straight conundrum – On November 4th three states dealt a setback for gay marriage advocates. I believe that many of those who voted for the setbacks are not necessarily anti-gay or anti-gay rights. They are having a tough time with the “marriage” part. This is understandable. Social change does not occur in flashes. It takes society time to alter long-standing custom and belief. I would suggest to gay-rights advocates that their energies be focused on the principle that same-sex couples are entitled to the same legal rights as heterosexual couples which include employer spousal benefits, hospital visitation rights and adoption rights. I believe that today’s society is ready to accept same-sex civil unions, a legal relationship between two people of the same gender. “Marriage” confuses and exasperates the issue. By advocates concentrating on civil union rather than marriage the anti-gay forces will lose a significant portion of their support, thereby fostering an environment for gay Americans to gain the rights they seek and deserve.
* Post facto, post mortem, post Joe – Senator Joe Lieberman is entertaining joining the Republican caucus upon learning that he may lose his chairmanships on Senate committees that include the very important Homeland Security. Did anyone notice Lieberman’s membership in the Republican Party took place quite a while ago. On one of the most important issues to Democrats, Iraq, Lieberman has voted with the Republicans and the Bush administration consistently. He unconscionably reiterated administration misinformation and spin relative to conditions in Iraq, demonstrating his loyalty to neocon philosophy not embraced by most Democrats and most Americans. He then jumped with both feet onto the McCain campaign giving a major speech at the Republican national convention and appearing next to John McCain on the campaign trail almost as often as Cindy McCain. During the campaign he was a conduit for McCain campaign innuendos against Obama and Lieberman sinisterly questioned Obama’s patriotism. Joe Lieberman donated his soul to the Republican Party and in their company may he rest in piece, a piece that Democrats going forward can do without.
Although Democrats seek a 60-vote Senate majority to avoid Republican filibusters blocking their legislation, I do not believe they need Joe Lieberman. I do not see Republicans voting in robotic unison as they did in recent years. They do not hold the White House, and the totalitarian hold Republican leadership held over GOP legislators is experiencing its wake. Incumbent Republican senators will look to recent voting of their constituents and conclude that the appeal of Bush’s version of Republican dogma and the track record of Republican governance has been rejected. I expect that a significant amount of legislation proposed by Obama and his party is legislation needed and wanted by a significant majority of Americans, regardless of political affiliation. The Connecticut Democratic Party rejected Lieberman in 2006. The Democratic leadership in the Senate should do likewise in 2008.
* The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”
Louis D. Brandeis (1856 – 1941) US Supreme Court Justice (1916 – 1939)
Here in Akron Ohio, My Partner and I waited 7 hours to vote, It wasn't even election day and we waited this Long.
Marriage itself is unconstitutional. The only type of arrangement between people legally from the State is a civil union - period. The State is outside of 'separation between church and state' by regulating the institution of marriage which is clearly a religious act or endeavor. Religions created marriage and it is defined differently by each religion.
Personally, I never understood why I had to go to the county clerks office for a marriage certificate - it seemed so empty. I would rather discuss my marriage idea with a trusted religious leader, go through counseling, get the peer pressure to maintain it appropriately, and have it aligned with my basic beliefs.
The court / State can keep record of civil unions and let the church keep track of marriages. In fact, a person should be able to be married by church law and never get a civil union. A little de-regulation here may be best. A binding contract could be created through the church legally that only the church can dissolve. The State makes it way to easy to get a divorce anyway.
Now, if you are not religious, you really don't care about the church rules. You can just get your civil union and your civil divorce willy nilly as we do with marriages now.
Support Full Civil Unions and Federal Rights for LGBT Couples: Barack Obama supports full civil unions that give same-sex couples equal legal rights and privileges as married couples. Obama also believes we need to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions. These rights and benefits include the right to assist a loved one in times of emergency, the right to equal health insurance and other employment benefits, and property rights.
With more and more states changing their constitutions to define rights to only married couples consisting of a man and a woman. We need the backing and federal protection for our civil unions and partnerships to obtain the same equal rights as any other partnered couple. We supported and gave now lets see some federal action.
According to almost every news source in America, the Democratic Party will win big on November 4. Presidential candidate Barack Obama is far from the only Democrat who will ride into Washington on the coattails of bad feelings for President George W. Bush. Almost every Democratic candidate for office in America, fairly or not, has enjoyed a bounce in popularity by campaigning on a platform of being anti-Bush, or by linking his/her opponent to the "failed policies of the Bush administration". Indeed, George W. Bush has never had a lower approval rating than right now, partly because of the recent financial crisis. But what these Democratic candidates are not doing is reminding people what it is that is so bad about the "failed policies of George W. Bush" in the first place. If the American public remembers that it can't stand that Bush guy but can't remember why, then the "failed policies" will surely be repeated by elected members of the Government. So to serve as a reminder mostly to myself, I've jotted down 33 "failed policies" that I think have made our country worse off thanks to the 43rd President of the United States of America.1) "The United States doesn't torture." Except when it does. George W. Bush vetoed anti-torture bills, watered down water-boarding by referring to it as an interrogation technique (like how rape is just a sexual technique), and flauted the Geneva Conventions time after time when confronted in interviews or press conferences.2) Unfounded wars on sovereign nations. Bad intelligence that should have been ignored about WMD and yellow cake fissile material led to a war against Iraq. The previous sentence was the best-case, most P.C. explanations for George W. Bush's intentions in the Middle East. Speculation abounds as to his real reasons for war with Iraq, most of which would be inconceivable if you told it to anyone eight years ago.3) Secrecy. Over-classification of classified documents.4) The Patriot Act5) Bullying. Bullying of foreign nations for support for the above unjust Iraq war. Bullying of congressional leaders for support. Bullying of the U.N. to pass the war resolution, or else. It's called negotiating when there's a give and a take, and it's called persuasion when there's a well-explained and well-grounded rationale for action. It's called bullying if threats are made and fear is induced in entities that should be our allies.6) Over-simplification of foreign viewpoints. You don't have to be either "for us or against us".7) "Axis of evil". Well so much for negotiation.8) Isolating North Korea to the point that they needed to build an atomic weapon to get any bilateral negotiation with the U.S.9) War on terror. How does one win a war against extremism? You can't kill 'em all. There are always fringe elements in even the most tightly regulated societies, like gay people in Iran, bloggers in China, and terrorists in America.10) Pre-emptive wars. The "Bush Doctrine", I think. Even police *should* have to wait until a crime is committed to detain people. And speaking of detaining people...11) Guantanamo Bay. And more importantly, the lack of trials for prisoners there. (I hesitate to call them "detainees".)12) Oh wait, not "prisoners" or "detainees". "Unlawful Combatants".13) "Extraordinary renditions". They lead to "erroneous renditions" in the absence of the law.14) Over-reaching of executive power to facilitate illegal wiretapping. FISA courts are just not necessary anymore.15) The Alberto Gonzales Department of Justice. Attorney firings for partisan reasons, mealymouthed testimony by most Department of Justice officials including the Attorney General himself on several occasions, the approval of warrantless wiretapping, and the attempted repeal of Habeas Corpus.16) Incompetent "loyal Bushies" like "heckuva job" Brownie.17) Highly competent yet highly evil "loyal Bushies" like Dick "Overlord" Cheney.18) Anti-choice-ism19) Anti-intellectualism20) Anti-Europeanism.21) Right-wing judicial nominees. I'm not talking about Roberts or Alito, which almost any other Republican president would have nominated. I mean all the other judicial appointments to lower courts that add unfounded legitimacy to an extreme right-wing judicial viewpoint by giving high-level careers to cronies. This will lead to future right-wing judicial nominees to the Supreme Court who should have gotten rejected long ago for their lack of objectivity being seen as legitimate. These juditial nominees also nearly tore up the rules of the Senate.22) Federal Marriage Amendment. So glad that one didn't get anywhere.23) Stem cell research. Not so much for the position (federal funds only for "existing" stem cell lines) but for the process of letting the church's viewpoint into a science decision.24) Not signing the Kyoto protocol for anti-UN reasons.25) While we're at it, John Bolton.26) Sabotaging the EPA to the point where entities are now suing the EPA because it's not strict enough in regulating emissions.27) Trying to privatize social security. How's that stock market idea looking now?28) Increasing the national debt from about $5 trillion to about $10 trillion. This riles me up so much, I'm going to need some more bullet points about the budget.29) Tax cuts benefitting the wealthiest of our society at a time when we were finally getting Reagan's debt under control.30) Massive non-mandatory spending increases primarily benefitting the military industrial complex. We've got loads of money for super advanced fighter jets, but we're losing wars against people who make explosives out of pvc pipe and wire.31) Making war spending separate from the budget. This would make sense only if the expenses were unforseeable.32) Not addressing health care at all. Seriously, during a decade in which health care spending rose faster than any other industry, how was health care almost completely ignored by the Bush administration?33) Well, he did address one thing. He vetoed SCHIP.I'm sure there are plenty more policies I dislike, and I know there are plenty more policies that others dislike (No Child Left Behind, immigration). But none of this stuff gets specifically talked about by any of the Democratic candidates. We need to remember this so that we can hold future administrations accountable.
(cross-posted at quibblingpotatoes.blogspot.com)
Go sign the Courage Campaign's letter to President-Prophet Thomas Monson. It takes less than half a minute. It requests that the Mormon Church stop funding the Proposition 8 campaign in California. Particularly in light of the lies being used in their advertising. The more signatures they can get for the letter, the more publicity the letter will generate. This publicity will act in two ways. First, drawing attention to the lies in the the advertisements will embarrass the church. Second, the more Proposition 8 is associated with a single, out of state church, in the minds of voting Californians, the more it will seem like meddling and the less likely they will be to vote for it.
This is a very easy task. You just fill in your name, your email and your zip code. Just go do it.
Have you signed the letter? Good. If you want to learn more and/or do more I recommend starting at this Daily Kos diary. It links to much of the recent news and activity.You can also donate to Equality For All on my ActBlue page or phone bank with the help of No On 8's web tool.
My daughter is 17 and can not vote, but I have posted on my blog an essay that she wrote on why Senator Obama should be supported and how some “Christians” have got it all wrong about him. I’m very proud of her as a father and as a pastor.
Please check it out at http://www.gajohnson.org/gregjohnson/2008/10/voting-for-obama.html . If so desired, you can leave a comment there for her.
Thanks!
Greg Johnson
Brian 1:2 So spake the Fool in prayer before the angry masses on that 11th Day of October 2008, the year of our Lord: "there are millions of people around this world praying to their god—whether it's Hindu, Buddha, Allah—that [Barack Obama] wins, for a variety of reasons. And Lord, I pray that you will guard your own reputation, because they're going to think that their God is bigger than you if that happens."
Brian 1:3 And lo, the huddled mob—rabid with loathing and stricken, like others before them, with a fear of change and leaders of color—praised the Fool with applause. And both were pleased in their ignorance. The fool in question of course is Arnold Conrad, former pastor of Grace Evangelical Free Church, pleading with God at a John McCain rally in Iowa. However, unlike the shrewd fools in literature from Socrates to Shakespeare, this one is anything but wise. For the sake of argument, let's ignore the fact he's a pastor and alleged scholar of religion and give the Fool the benefit of the doubt. After all, an imbecile can't reasonably be expected to know that Hindu is not a god (or even a proper noun for that matter), Buddha isn't a deity either, and neither are prayed to by anyone. Anywhere.
And of course, while any average idiot—except this one apparently—knows Allah is the same God prayed to and worshiped by Christians and Jews, we needn't require Pastor Arnie to understand these or other religions and cultures. Why? Because, despite his Doctor of Ministry degree, that brand of cultural sensitivity and theological understanding is anathema to a myopic and intellectually incurious fundamentalist. The pomposity of this self-righteous dolt notwithstanding, I'm always amazed by proselytizers who pray, prattle and pontificate with the arrogant assumption they know who God is rooting for—as if God has a stake or interest in a particular candidate.
Prayers like Pastor Arnie's are futile of course and as patently absurd as asking the almighty to intervene in the Superbowl. But the obvious silliness doesn't stop so many evangelicals from so frequently contending Republicans are the party of God and John McCain (R-Nazareth) is Christ's personally vetted nominee for President. Their presumption is as comical as their worldview is provincial. My personal hunch is that God doesn't much care about American electoral politics but, if s/he does, I doubt s/he'd be categorically opposed to a Democrat. Barack Obama is a Christian. He was "saved," he was baptized, and he was a regular congregant in a Church of Christ for over 20 years. Besides—from the right to universal health care, nondiscrimination, and racial/gender equality to the eradication of poverty, earning of a living wage, dealing with AIDS and tax relief for those who actually need it—Democrats and their standard-bearers have traditionally favored policies uniquely more suited for and geared towards the middle and working classes and the poor/disenfranchised. In other words, Obama's policies tend to support the very people that the foolish pastor's God named "the Salt of the Earth" in the best-selling book s/he "authored" thousands of years ago. Christ didn't say much in favor of the free market, unprovoked war, assault weapons for "hunting," or tax-cuts for the rich and he was completely silent on those "cardinal sins" of abortion and gay marriage. But he did have an abundance of opinions about equality, justice, compassion, tolerance, forgiveness and love, as well as leaving judgment of others to God and taking care of our neediest brothers and sisters. So frankly, Pastor Arnie, I still don't think God is rooting for either candidate, but if s/he is, given their agreement on the issues, my money's on Obama. I'll give you 5:1 odds on your money for McCain, but I'd call that a Fool's Bet. Matthew 25:40 "And the King answering shall say to them, 'Verily, I say to you, Inasmuch as ye have done it to one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it to me.'"
