[From a list of lessons allegedly learned from the contrversy surrounding Barack Obama's pick of Rick Warren to speak at his inaugration.]
Two, homosexual activists really are out to silence the voice of evangelical Christians. They want Warren muzzled and driven off the platform, and my guess is that they will boo him off if Obama doesn’t pull him off first. Unless cooler heads prevail, we may see the exercise of a heckler’s veto like we have never seen before. Imagine the sound of 4 million people booing in unison, and you’ve got a picture of what may happen at the inauguration ceremony—We have only seen the beginning of this saga. There is just no way left-wing activist groups are done putting pressure on Obama to repent in dust and ashes. They will be relentless until he recants, and make him pay if he doesn’t.
33 comments
Dude, Warren is going to be on a very tight leash. He agrees with Obama on a couple of issues and Obama told him they could work together on those or he could get kicked out of the DC prayer meetings altogether. It's a shrewd political move on the part of Obama, because it puts a chink in the fundie monolith. If a few more fundies start voting for humanitarian aid, equality, and other so-called "Christian Values" instead of for hand-outs to the rich and abortion bans (both of which, ironically, are strongly and specifically condemned in their actual bible), then the fundies will stop being a voting bloc and then we don't have to care what they think about anything.
But letting Warren onto the stage still makes me vomit in my own mouth. Even if I do see the wisdom in letting him have his time in the sun. Giving Warren a spot in the inauguration makes Warren stronger and makes the fundie cause as a whole weaker - that's good sense if you're looking at the big picture. And looking at the big picture is the President Elect's actual fucking job.
-Frank
@Frank: "But letting Warren onto the stage still makes me vomit in my own mouth."
If you ever work out a way to vomit without the use of your own mouth, I'd love to hear it!
And when the inauguration goes off without a hitch, then they'll be back on his presidency. And then when that goes off without the apocalypse, they'll just find a new target, and act like none of this ever happened, thus keeping the delusions going. And most of them, when you point things like that out, will flat out deny it. I know, I've tried.
Edit:
doomie 22 said : "Sometimes I wish I lived in the bible belt" .
Trust me. No, you don't. It's horrible. And someone's going to have to clean all that shit up when their heads do explode. And since I'll be one of the few left, that means me.
Rick Warren is a hateful, demented, POS. However, I don't much care if he gives the invocation. What does piss me off is that the inauguration of a POTUS is viewed as a religious event. Alas, we are too immature as a nation and species to set aside the fantasies of childhood.
I do, however, find endless amusement in stories about fundies who have condemned Warren for accepting the invitation. And I'll be delighted when the supportive words offered by Pat "never met a lie too embarrassing to tell" Robertson make the rounds and his donations go down. Between the two I think we are starting to see a gap opening between the psychotic secular neocons and the pitiful, superstitious, morons they have used to win so many elections.
Obama is trying to throw you a bone, people. Go chew it like a good dog, now. That's it. Shhhh. Shhhhhhh. It'll be okay, now. Good boy!
Most of us will be way to excited over Bush getting the fuck out of power to give a crap who happens to be droning on into the microphone.
We don't want to silence *you* -- we want to stem the overwhelming tide of hatred and bigotry that *comes* from Evangelical Christians.
@rw -- "If you ever work out a way to vomit without the use of your own mouth, I'd love to hear it!"
Same here -- teh pukies taste bad.
Its the fundie version of the First Amendment:
Potentially not allowing a fundie a particular opportunity to use public resources to speak is a violation of the First Amendment, as it "silences" an act of fundie speech which could otherwise exist.
When non-fundies publicly disagree with fundies, this is also a violation of the First Amendment, as fundies are such fragile flowers that the mere thought that not everyone agrees with them is more of an imposition than banning non-fundies from speaking at all.
@ a mind far far away: Ok, you've got a point. I've thought about it and decided that I'd much rather just visit the bible belt on January 21, see the splattered fundy brains and then return to my normal life.
"homosexual activists really are out to silence the voice of evangelical Christian"
I'm not gay, but I'd readily pour concrete down the throats of evangelicals, because they're a bunch of bigoted nutjobs.
Wait.
You mean President-Elect Obama (man, that sounds awesome!) is not a radical, leftist socialist, bent on bringing islam to mainstream America?
Make up your fucking minds already. You have less than a month to go. Imagine how silly you will all look if you can't agree on the evils of Barack Obama.
One of the reasons why I'm such a strong believer in the first amendment, is that the longer you let some people speak, the easier it is to recognize them for being so full of shit.
Let Warren talk as long as he wants. There's no shortage of people on these boards who recognize how full-of-shit he is. We need more people to do the same.....
Fundies defending Obama?
What is this, bizarro world?
And yeah, I don't like Obama's choice of Rick Warren, but I think with this move he's just trying to win a little support from the religious right. Having lots of people believe that you're, you know, the Antichrist, can be bad for PR.
RW is a centrist fundie and most fundies hate him because he is not fundie enough.
It is a joy seeing how these fundies are eating themselves up about this invocation of say 3 minutes max.
Seeing he has made some attempts to "clean up his act" regarding gays, has both sides of the fence criticizing him.
The one thing folk forget is that Obama always said he was not in favor of gay marriage but "was OK" with civil unions. I do not think he has changed his mind on this issue.
You can indeed vomit without the use of your mouth. I don't recommend it.
The pharynx connects not only to the mouth but also to the nose and the sinuses. If your mouth is obstructed or simply closed off with musculature when material is being expelled through the esophagus, that material will either be sucked down into your trachea (that's really bad) or sent up and out through your nose (this is only bad). Hopefully you get the nasal vomit, because that's not particularly life threatening, but since your sinuses are really sensitive and emesis is usually saturated with hydrochloric acid, I can only describe the experience as an "entirely new world of pain."
Which basically comes back to Warren vs. Pat Robertson. Pat Robertson is like vomiting through my nose. Warren is like vomiting through my mouth. I am willing to put up with Warren if it will strip Robertson of his constituency. But it doesn't mean I like the experience.
-Frank
They're frantic about the possibility that *one* million extra people might come to DC; what's this about four?
Also, if, say, Rev. Gene Robinson, the openly gay bishop from the Episcopalian Church, came to speak, I'm sure we'd be hearing from Porno Pete about how horrible it is.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
