Sat, Nov 21, 2009
EURweb |
| Click here to post your comments. |
|
Name:
TGen
Comment: Gay mafia wins again, one of the few groups whose protests actually bear fruit. Personally, I don't understand why BO decided to go so far in that direction, a gay bishop? Why not just a preacher who doesn't demonize gays like the gay community thinks Rick Warren did? There are some tolerant straight preachers, you know. This makes his administration look schizophrenic. But oh well, who cares what the Black folks think? Our protests ususally fall on deaf ears. *Still wondering if the pres-elect has heard about the cold-blooded murder of that Black guy from the BART security guard.*
|
|
Name:
McNasty
Comment: 'Gay rights advocates saw the move as a way to compensate for Mr. Obama’s decision to give the Rev. Rick Warren, a prominent mega-church pastor from California who opposes same-sex marriage, the high-profile role of delivering the invocation at the inauguration next week.' I hope they're happy - I'm happy that he won't be part of the main event and I hope Obama is gonna get his as.s in check and stop responding to all these groups. Sometimes you just have to accept things as they are.
|
|
Name:
McNasty
Comment: TGen Obama just can't do right in your eyes can he?! I would also like to know why you think the president elect should be looking at local individual cases instead of at the big picture. The guy in san francisco has local authorities working his case and failing that - there is the state of cali as back up. Black folks that think he doesn't care should be on the front row fighting the good fight because thats the only way you're going to figure out that it is each individual with that particular thought that doesn't care.
|
|
Name:
McNasty
Comment: Besides that bushit been in office 8 years and has had a number of horrific slayings in the black community during his time - he didn't address any of them either. Did you have the same expectation and comments for him?
|
|
Name:
TGen
Comment: McNasty: "Did you have the same expectation and comments for him?" Absolutely. But the difference is some think Obama shouldn't receive the same scrutiny for some reason. *Shrug* Re your other comments. I'll concede that BO probably handled this in the best way he knew how, which doesn't say a whole lot really, just that he seems to have a proclivity for trying to appease people who protest--if they're not progressive or Black, that is, who he basically takes for granted I guess azzuming they'll always be in his back pocket (which is probably true for most, just not for me). It's all good though, he can only be who he is. I've just come to learn that he is more a mediator than a leader. Leaders make decisions and move on. Mediators want everyone to like them, constantly question themselves, have dinner with idiot right-wingers who are wrong about everything, bring in political enemies to lead their adminsistration, etc. This is okay, just as long as you know what you're getting. I now know and there's not ish I could do about it except be more skeptical next time.
|
|
Name:
musbdherbs
Comment: This really doesn't show he's a "reaching across the line" sorta guy. It only shows that he makes covers up bad political happenings..with more political happening. Any POTUS would do that. He shouldn't have invited Warren in the first place. It means that Obama will make the political move first. Then after he offends people...cowtow. Howbout not making such silly political moves in the first place to save yo azz face. Not always about doing the 'right' thing w/him.
|
|
Name:
McNasty
Comment: So basically you're saying that bushit was a leader?! He made decisions and moved on - just ask the thousands and thousands of parents who's kids boots were sent back to them from iraq and afghanistan! A mediator ain't so bad either especially in this racial climate. I think you got too used to bushits giddyup politricks but you're gonna have to sit back put your feet up and relax - be patient. The best has yet to come but whether it does or not Obama is still the best man for the job and trust and believe not all of us are gonna be happy with every little thing he does.
|
|
Name:
BlackEye
Comment: Bottom line and what gives me comfort is know that in reality, there's no such thing as a gay bishop. Throughout the Bible, Old Testament and New completely condemns homosexuality as not only a sin, but an abomination (=utterly digusting) to God. And thoughout His teachings, Jesus always says, the Father and I are one and in complete agreement. So, there can't be a gay bishop, just like there can't be clean poop.
|
|
Name:
musbdherbs
Comment: 'Nas...Obama does seem more of a med/conciliator than leader at this point. It may turn out well but w/o order there is chaos and Obama has invited chaos of the worst kind into his view for a perfect america where there are no ideological lines or political parties. BlackEye..*scratching head* You can be gay. You can be a bishop. You can't be gay and a bishop? [insert confused look here]
|
|
Name:
Watch_and_Learn
Comment: "So, there can't be a gay bishop, just like there can't be clean poop."
LOL!!! So true, so true! We serve a God of order, so why would God oppose homosexuality and then call a homosexual man into church leadership??? In the Bible some subjects are as as blatant as night & day so there's nothing else to it.
|
|
Name:
TGen
Comment: McNasty, yes, Bush was a leader of many, namely the dumbazzes in Congress who gave him a blank check to do whatever he wanted. As evil and stupid and anti-American as he is, say whatever you want about him, dude got whatever he wanted, period. It would be nice to have someone with courage like that on the other side, but whose intentions are more honest and righteous. Think MLK, Jr. or someone like that, someone who led with vision, didn't capitulate at every protest (Vietnam comes to mind), but who was unwavering when he knew he was right. Getting along with people is great and even necessary in some instances, but that's only when there's room for negotiation. Imo, there is no room for that now. Dems have spent 8 years negotiating with the devil. What's needed is someone who's firmly on the opposite side of Bush and doesn't feel like he has to apologize for being so. But that's in a perfect world, in which we are not.
|
|
Name:
McNasty
Comment: ' say whatever you want about him, dude got whatever he wanted, period.'
It was too high a cost to pay and it didn't benefit the masses. TGen we are never gonna get the complete package in a president - no such thing exists. While no one will willingly admit it there is a bit of an on the job learning experience associated with that office and prayerfully there will come the day that Obama says it and sticks to it and has no more interest in appeasing these whining groups and we don't have to wait for the world to be perfect.
|
|
Name:
McNasty
Comment: Musb maybe his strategy is to put the controversial people of his choosing out front because he reps them as well as anyone else. Who knows his strategy - but until he does a bushit (choose either of them cause they both fukked up) I'm gonna give the man room to do the job I elected him to do without second guessing his choices. There musb a method to his madness!
|
|
Name:
ss69054
Comment: And the beat goes on!!!! I hope he doesn't start compromising to certain groups. Just can't have that Prezzie O. Either they accept or reject. You can't please everybody's demands.
|
|
Name:
musbdherbs
Comment: TGEN..AMEN to that! Fk outta here w/that "I need to reach out to republicans too." You are a democrat president Obama..not a republican president. Political parties exist for a reason so stop trying to recruit the entire country to be a member of the "Obama party." It's almost arrogant. You got 53/4% of the vote, more than any president in recent history...stop trying to ghandize shyt. 'Nas, U don't not need 75% of the country behind u to govern. U only need competant people who believe in ur vision and willing to fight for the cause. Him putting controversial people IMO out front is him feeding his own ego. Fk an ego..govern w/wut u have.
|
|
Name:
musbdherbs
Comment: And I'm also giving him room. the entire country is giving him room. But what I won't do is 4-years from now decide that 4-years after the fact is the appropriate time to complain. We criticized Bush folk for not speaking up sooner. That person will not be me and fk a damn leeway..lol
|
|
Name:
McNasty
Comment: I hear you Musb but check this - he isn't even in office yet so I'm afraid you're gonna have to wait a minute.
One of the things I said from the beginning is that we put people in office and then don't check what they do. Then they end up with some negative story in the news and if its printed here - here is where we come to come to complain! In working Obama's campaign I realized that it is imperative that we not leave any one of them that we elected to their own devices but I will be damned if I get up in arms over his choice from the inaugural program. When it's over this dude will ride outta town flying his rainbow flag and the other cat will go back to his church and parishoners - see - it really ain't that serious.
|
|
Name:
musbdherbs
Comment: 'Nas..on the real...even once he gets in office, the next talking point will be, "give him time" then it will be "well lets c how his first terms pans out" So it will alwways be an excuse that pushes the "criticize Obama" goal post back a bit further. I'm not upset about the inaugural program but I do understand others who are upset over the divisive rhetoric Warren has recently used against homos. It even offended me..just not enuff to protest. People have their own "pet issues" they are concerned about. IMO, if there's real reason to cry foul..then cry foul...lol
|
|
Name:
mandinka_99
Comment: I have to pose the question: Those who disagree with homosexuality ... what have they lost because Obama is allowing this gay bishop to do an invocation at the Lincoln Memorial? I see a dangerous trend in the thinking of Black folks nowadays. Some of us are so far removed from the time when WE were alienated and ostracized and demanding acknowledgement by the powers that be ... that we can't relate to no other group out on the margins trying to get to where we Black folks "think" we've arrived.
|
|
Name:
BlackEye
Comment: mandinka_99, God created Blacks. Satan created homosexuality.
|
|
Name:
JustTellingTheTruth
Comment: At the end of the day, the straight man's prayer won't carry any more or less weight than the gay man's prayer. Prayer is Prayer. Both will receive the same air time & will be received for the benefit & blessing of God's word. It's as simple as that. Nothing to debate about there. Now, let everbody say "AMEN" and move on................
|
|
Name:
BlackEye
Comment: The only prayer a gay man can prayer that would carry as much prayer as a straight man's prayer is the prayer requesting forgiveness and salvation from homosexuality, but then you would have to give up the love that you have developed for the demon that has attached itself to you, which you love so dearly.
|
|
Name:
BlackEye
Comment: Correction: "carry as much weight as a straight man's prayer"
|
|
Name:
dakoolestkat
Comment: Wow Blackeye. I guess gays are just the scum of the earth. Why doesn't God just kill them all off **sarcasm**. There is no big sin or lil sin in God's eyes...just in OURS!
|
|
Name:
queeniebunz
Comment: I don't think Blackeye is articulating the point very well or maybe I am misunderstanding it. But I will give my perspective as a Christian. In the Bible being gay is wrong. Period. There is not leeway. In the Bible sex before marriage or with someone else's spouse is wrong - period. In the Bible stealing, killing, lying, worshipping idols is wrong - period. That said, having a gay church leader is like having an "openly shacked up" church leader or an "openly womanizing" church leader. Christian people would object to both as people like me object to an "openly gay" church leader. All of this is wrong according to the Bible. That said, I have no ill will towards gay people. I have known a few over the years and I know life is very hard for them. If anything I feel for them because their plight is a difficult one. However, I'm not going to say that I agree with the lifestyle because as a Christian I do not. Someone could call me a gay basher or whatever but I'm not and I know I'm not. I have always believed "love the sinner, hate the sin" and it applies here. I have done a lot of the things I mentioned above and I don't in any way claim to be perfect. However, I know they are wrong and I try to do better and I would never say what I did was right just because I was doing it. I also would not flaunt any of my sins as gay ministers do. That is what it is - flaunting it. You can disagree with me if you like but I think being a gay church leader is ridiculous. What does it mean to be "openly gay"? - sex before marriage? shacking up? sex with the same sex? - all problematic in the Bible. How can you teach the Bible when you are openly going against it? Do openly gay church leaders ignore the parts of the Bible that denounce their lifestyle? That is the question I would have for this man if I could meet him - "How do you reconcile your religion and teaching of it with the lifestyle that is directly opposed to your religion?" I actually asked this of a friend of mine who "switched teams" and she said she didn't have an answer but that it was an issue for her.
|
|
Name:
musbdherbs
Comment: QB..based on what you said..it's impossible to be gay and a christian. That's interesting and doesn't seem like the appropriate position for any christian to take...determining who's a christian vs. who's not that is. IMO being a christian should involve a personal relationship w/god..something not subject to the judgment of people like you and I. when you start to dictate what some1 else's relationship of understanding is...then you are going against what you preach..as a christian. Of course unless you can have sex b4 marriage and still be a christian.
|
|
Name:
queeniebunz
Comment: >Musb - uh uh. That's not what I wrote AT ALL. The only man who never sinned was Jesus Christ. Anybody else - sinner. What I said was that I find it problematic for a gay person to be a church leader. And, I am most definitely NOT determining who is a Christian and who isn't. You are right. That is between you and God. I've never said otherwise. What I did say was that it is difficult for me to understand the rationale behind being a gay church leader - get that - I said church leader and not gay Christian.
|
|
Name:
musbdherbs
Comment: U said 'christian' people like u would object to a gay church leader. There are churches across the nation where it is known about the sinning of the church leaders. They don't wear their "sin" on their sleeves and I can't imagine that homo church leaders would either. So i don't understand ur point about flaunting nemore than I would understand some1 criticizing a fat azz pastor for flaunting his/her gluttony. I don't doubt that Christians would have an issue w/it but that only applies up to a point. Most 'christians' pick and choose which part of the bible they will adhere to. Do openly christian..christians ignore parts of the bible? Yeah they do and that's when they'll bring in the "subject to interpretation/old testament..new testament" foolishness.
|
|
Name:
queeniebunz
Comment: >Musb - and in those churches across the nation you speak of they need to check themselves and make the corrections. Here's one for you. I too think it's HILARIOUS (in a sad way) that the nominee for Secretary of the Treasury blew off paying his taxes in the amount of $34,000 for a few years. I believe he did finally pay them but the damage was done. It's ironic and not a good example, to say the least. I mention that because I know you relish any criticism of Obama so I'll give you that one - it's a major boo boo. That said, I feel the same way about whoring pastors, trustees who steal church money, sneakin creepin deacons, gossipping choir members, etc. They need to be corrected and in many cases removed. I don't understand your comment as it relates to me. I'm very consistent in my views of Christianity and church mess. I would not listen to a female minister preach at me about being abstinent before marriage if she's waddling around 6 months pregnant with no ring on her finger. And I've known one like that. Ridiculou. Again, not a good example. I had a church acquaintance/associate (just to the left of being a friend) preach at me about premarital sex. I wasn't even having sex! I wasn't even dating. Then the next year, she AND her teenage daughter were both pregnant at the same time with not a wedding ring between them. Can we say hypocrite??? LOL I don't like hypocrisy and I definitely don't like blatant hypocrisy. So yeah, church folk are not in any way perfect and I'll be the first to say that. Hell, if a church was filled with perfect people, they wouldn't let me in the door...
|
|
Name:
musbdherbs
Comment: lol...Nope ur wrong. I think the criticism of Geigner not paying taxes, while warranted, is much ado about nothing. It is some'n the campaign should've known about but IMO not a big deal. I'm more concerned about the possibilities when you have a SoS's husband taking in foreign contributions. Had it been a republican...dems would be up in arms.
|
|
Name:
fresh8
Comment: the bible is not a real book because if their was a God he would not allow and gays to be leader so how can a gay bishop tell you anything thing about sin, let everyone do whatthey went there is no rules so kill lie get someone else husband there is no rule in this world if you went it take it or be it they are building a towel again they are as 1 and the dirty of this nation is so nasty and now gays with rights what a wrong move at lease when the white people runned the world they did not let the gay people run nothing now the devil have all the power evil is here for real
|
| Back to Top |
| Click here to post your comments. |
| Back to the Article » INAUGURAL EVENT FEATURES GAY BISHOP: Obama asked V. Gene Robinson to deliver the invocation at the Lincoln Memorial. |
|---|
...
