Double Standard

I wish I was a better writer. I wish it were easier for me sometimes. I’ve had the idea for this post for some time now, but I’ve found it to be a difficult one to actually write. So I hope that there is at least a modicum of clarity in what follows.

Barack Obama’s selection of Rick Warren to say the invocation at the inauguration infuriates me. Why does Obama want to reach out to someone as intolerant as Rick Warren? But more importantly, why is Barack Obama himself demonstrating intolerance?

Obama talks very often about wanting to be all inclusive and wanting to listen to all sides, even the far right. This might be a good thing. I have my doubts about it and only time will tell if it will be a good thing. However, Obama is off to a bad start. He talks about being all inclusive, but he is not. Obama goes out of his way to reach out to the far right, but he has not demonstrated the same courtesy to the far left. In fact, he has gone one step further and denounced at least one spokesperson for the far left. Progressives, along with the non-religious are being ignored and banished while people like Rick Warren are being elevated to positions of stature, both real and symbolic. Just looking at how Obama has treated two very politically different people demonstrates the point I am trying to make. Obama has severed all ties to Jeremiah Wright and fallen over backwards to embrace Rick Warren. You would think that Obama was George W. Bush here. The politics of Jeremiah Wright are actually quite close to the politics of Noam Chomsky, and to my own. Why has Obama chosen to ostracize this part of the political dialog? Obama is a liar. Every time he says something like “I will listen to you when we disagree. And most importantly, I will open the doors of government and ask you to be involved in your own democracy again" he is lying. He slammed the door shut on Jeremiah Wright and locked it. He has locked out progressive and non-religious thought. Hell, he has even locked out religious progressive thought. Will he ever listen to the ideas of someone like Noam Chomsky? Rick Warren is no progressive. His politics are very far to the right. Obama is a hypocrite. He is too much of a right leaning centrist. He places the game of politics before all else. Unfortunately, this is probably the only way he could have been elected. I don’t imagine he would have won if he had not denounced Jeremiah Wright. Embracing Rick Warren, however, is simply going too far.

If there is one thing that infuriates me, it is exclusion. The politics of Bush/Cheney is all about exclusion. Their great efforts at secrecy prove this. Their great efforts on the part of the rich at the expense of the poor and middle class are also strikingly exclusionary. The religious politics of Rick Warren is all about exclusion, even though he is supposed to be the prince of inclusion. His efforts to diminish the civil rights of gay people proves this. Jeremiah Wright did not exclude gays from his church while he was pastor. Exclusion hampers and suppresses equality. I thought the United States was supposed to be all about equality. The fact that Obama has excluded Jeremiah Wright simply so that Obama could have political gain infuriates me. How can Obama exclude the extreme left, embrace the extreme right, and then claim that he wants to wants to listen to all sides? Hypocrite!

Where is the "change" that Obama talks about? Who exactly is he referring to when he says “I will listen to you when we disagree.”? It certainly is not Jeremiah Wright. Like so many other politicians Obama doesn’t seem to want to listen to gays, atheists, and progressives. Where is the "change" in that?

Why is Obama “outraged” and “saddened” by Jeremiah Wright and not “outraged” and “saddened” by Rick Warren?

Noam Chomsky and Jeremiah Wright talk about things that most Americans don’t want to hear about. They talk about our imperfections, things that desperately need fixing, things that too many Americans either don’t know about, or don’t want to know about. We desperately need this kind of dissent and criticism. I am “outraged” and “saddened” by Barack Obama.

Obama may be better than Bush, but don't we deserve more than that?

God's Blessing

From Religion versus religiosity by Paul Campos:

Choosing somebody like Warren is an insult not only to political progressives, but to religious believers (and especially politically progressive religious believers). It trivializes religious belief -- which I would bet even most of Warren's biggest fans will recognize as well, thus eliminating any supposed political advantage to be gained from this nauseating little exercise in pseudo-ecumenical posturing.

I’m OK with thinking that this is an insult to religious believers. I agree, and I think that it is a good thing to point out. But I do have a question. How do you trivialize something that is already trivial?

So Help Me God, Rick Warren Is Being Sued

Actually, Rick Warren and a bunch of other people are being sued.

From Atheists suing to remove religion from inauguration by by Trina Hoaks:

A lawsuit if being filed today in the District of Columbia, according to an article on the Friendly Atheist Web site, to ban religious ceremony from the inauguration. As I have expressed my disdain, more than once, over the fact that religion is included in this governmental ceremony, you can imagine how pleased I am to see someone taking action to end it. My only lament is for the fact that I am not a part of it.

It is difficult to anticipate how this will turn out, as attempts like this one have, in the past, failed. But, make no mistake, just because they have failed, that doesn’t mean they weren’t valid complaints.

Because the US is predominantly Christian, madness like this is supported and allowed to continue. As per usual, lawmakers and politicians allow their politics to be influenced by their religion – which they absolutely should not do as they are supposedly legally bound not to do so. Hopefully, they will wake up once and for all and do what it is they are supposed to do… defend the law of the country.

Let's Leave God (And Rick Warren) Out Of It

Why do we even have an invocation at inaugurations? Obama could prove he is the man who believes in “change” by getting religious ceremonies out of politics. It seems that all of the reporting on this focuses on Warren not liking gays. He also doesn’t like atheists. I didn’t vote for Obama so that he would bend over backwards for the religious right. The religious right has had too many “voices” in politics recently. It doesn’t need another. Rick Warren already has a very powerful forum in which to voice his opinion. Why is Obama giving him another one? If the religious right is going to have a voice in politics, then America won’t ever come together without gays and atheists having a voice in politics as well.

I wonder why Obama didn’t pick Jeremiah Wright?

From Obama defends choice of pastor for invocation:

President-elect Barack Obama on Thursday defended his choice of a popular evangelical minister to deliver the invocation at his inauguration, rejecting criticism that it slights gays. The selection of Pastor Rick Warren brought objections from gay rights advocates, who strongly supported Obama during the election campaign. The advocates are angry over Warren's backing of a California ballot initiative banning gay marriage. That measure was approved by voters last month.

But Obama told reporters in Chicago that America needs to "come together," even when there's disagreement on social issues. "That dialogue is part of what my campaign is all about," he said.

Obama also said he's known to be a "fierce advocate for equality" for gays and lesbians, and will remain so.

Read the rest here.

From Warren Says Candidates Have to Believe in God:

KING: Rick Warren is our guest. Rick, let me ask you a couple of Rick Warren questions. OK?

WARREN: OK.

KING: Does a person have to believe in god to be president?

WARREN: I would say so. I couldn't vote for a person who was an atheist, because I would think -- I think the presidency is a job too big for one person. I would think there's a little arrogance that says, I don't need anybody else. I could vote for someone of different religions than mine, but I don't know that I could personally vote for somebody who denies that we need somebody greater than ourselves to help us.

Let's take a moment to reflect and remember how much God has helped out George W. Bush.

I agree with PZ Myers:

Obama had a chance to set a non-sectarian, progressive tone at this event, and he has chosen to kow-tow to the wretched evangelical movement.

The Wall Tumbles Down

With each passing day I become more and more disappointed with Barack Obama. Why did he agree to this interview with Rick Warren? Can we please get the religion out of politics? Especially the evangelical kind!

If only I could vote for none of the above. We need better candidates!

From Faithiness For President? by Susan Jacoby:

What does it mean to you to trust in Jesus Christ? What is your greatest moral failing? A Martian tuning in to the broadcast Saturday night from Pastor Rick Warren's Saddleback Church might be forgiven for concluding that Senators Barack Obama and John McCain were interviewing for a job as assistant pastor rather than running for the presidency of the United States. Obama apologized once again for his teenage drug use. McCain apologized for the failure of his first marriage. Confronted by one of God's televangelists, both candidates sounded like naughty, penitent little boys. Do you think that this event will set a precedent and that future presidential candidates will feel the need to subject themselves to a "faith test" administered by self-appointed representatives of religion?

Read the rest here.

The Cone Of Silence

From McCain protests NBC coverage by Mike Allen:

Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) campaign manager Rick Davis asked Sunday for a meeting with Steve Capus, the president of NBC News, to protest what the campaign called signs that the network is "abandoning non-partisan coverage of the presidential race."

Davis made the request Sunday in a letter that is part of an aggressive effort by McCain to counter news coverage he considers critical.

In this case, the campaign is objecting to a statement by NBC's Andrea Mitchell on "Meet the Press" questioning whether McCain might have gotten a heads-up on some of the questions that were asked of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), who was the first candidate to be interviewed Saturday night by Pastor Rick Warren at a presidential forum on faith.

Warren told the audience that McCain was being held in "a cone of silence" so he wouldn't hear the questions, which were similar for both candidates.

Warren referred again to "the cone of silence" when McCain came onstage, and the senator joked: "I was trying to hear through the wall."

Mitchell reported that some "Obama people" were suggesting "that McCain may not have been in the cone of silence and may have had some ability to overhear what the questions were to Obama. He seemed so well prepared."

Read the rest here.

What Wall?

It scares me when politicians are all too willing to play the religious card. This only serves to give Rick Warren more power and credibility that he doesn’t deserve, especially secular political power.

From A new-style evangelical pastor ascends the political stage by Jane Lampman:

Bestselling author. A Southern Baptist minister who breaks the conservative mold. Touted by some as the likely successor to Billy Graham.

On Saturday, pastor Rick Warren, author of "The Purpose-Driven Life," will do what no one else has yet accomplished: bring the presumptive GOP and Democratic presidential nominees onto the same stage to discuss their views.

It's a sign of religion's importance in the 2008 presidential campaign. The event, back-to-back one-hour interviews at Mr. Warren's California megachurch, will be broadcast live on CNN and streamed on the Web. It also represents the emergence of a new style of evangelical leadership on the national stage, which is not tied to a single party and has broadened its social agenda beyond that of the religious right.

Read the rest here.