Comments on: The Gay Agenda: Inaugural Edition

By: Erin Stevenson

Erin Stevenson — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 00:36:41 +0000

I have to agree with the other commentors, as reporters/observers, you came off pretty amateurish. Add to that, the omission of Gene Robinson’s Inaugural Prayer and Warren’s very exclusionistic/insulting/patronizing prayer, I find little optimism in the Inaugrual’s Spasmotic Attempt to include Everybody. I know there are serious issues on Obama’s table already, but thinking that in one fell swoop he can begin dialog between such extremes as Evangelicals, the LGBTI Community, Repblicans and other non-denominational homophobes is Very Very Naïve. And I totally agree with Usedalittle’s feelings and observations.

By: Jon Mallow

Jon Mallow — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 19:44:08 +0000

You guys are totally right. I don’t know much about religion or progressive religious leaders. I’m not a religious person.

That said, I am just a video blogger on a website…I’m not running for Vice President, so what I do or do not know has a lot less importance than it does for Sarah Palin.

I found Rick Warren’s invocation today to be pretty offensive and not particularly inclusive, but I guess I could have seen that coming.

In any case Obama redeemed himself a little in my eyes when he mentioned that this country is made up of people of various religious groups and non-believers.

It’s a very hopeful and proud day for our country. I know it will be a bumpy road, but I, for one, am excited.

Thanks for the comments – please keep them coming!

By: usedalittle

usedalittle — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 18:18:32 +0000

Since the Inaugural Planning Committee evidently decided NOT to televise the Robinson prayer, I think both of you need to rethink what you believe the next four years of the Obama administration will entail. I am very angry about the failure to televise the Robinson prayer. It ommission was intentional and undefensible. As a glbt person, I know more about foregiveness than the majority of non-glbt people on the planet. This ommission is unforgivable and Obama should prepare himself to be the surprised recipient of GLBT rainbow shoes at unexpected momentws throughout his adminsitration. UNFORGIVABLE.

By: Warren

Warren — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:40:37 +0000

I’m of a little bit of a different mind set. If in fact Obama or his team picked Robinson after the backlash from multiple groups this is a good sign. It means they got it and responded appropriately. It means they are listening to us, wow hows that for a change. While I agree that picking controversial people can be a problem maybe his play is to build a bridge and force some level of inclusion, only time will tell.

We need to continue to keep the pressure on this new administration on multiple fronts.

BTW, your camera person had major shakes.

By: Morgan

Morgan — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:09:01 +0000

Agreed they could have researched this subject more thoroughly before discussing it through a lot of uh, uh, um um and other signs of struggling to collect thoughts about a topic like fussing with hair and suddenly speeding up stream of speech here and there.
Rev. Troy Perry who founded MCC Metropolitan Community Church, or of Chris Glaser, gay Christian author and lecturer, no mention of them or of anyone else in the gay religion field. She could have been miles ahead “journalistically speaking” having a conversation with one of them or with Gene Robinson rather that with Jon Mallow.

If she could just have a guest like one of these and really researched her topic, and pushed herself out of her anti-religion comfort zone just long enough for this segment, then
I would have been impressed that she was trying to come up with something of an informative and more substantive nature.

And Jon Mallow, it is up to a President-elect whether or not he wants a religious person to deliver his invocation even if you find the notion unprecidented and maybe in your mind “unpalatable”. I just have a problem with Obama’s and Onama team’s seeming lack of good judgement in selecting an antigay and divisive person like Rick Warren when there were others he could have selected.

And Jon, I believe that our founding fathers in the colonial times weren’t avoiding religion all together and that they believed in God and went to some kind of church or church-like meeting if and when they could, but however they just weren’t for laws respecting the establishment of any particular church as a state religion unlike in some European countries of that time and before.

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 06:42:19 +0000

Wow. I have to say this is painful to watch. I like this site. I appreciate what you’re trying to do. But it seems crystal clear that you have little knowledge of the state of religious life, or the Christian church or the progressive Christian church. You both seem to be hemming and hawing about something you have a surface knowledge about.
Next time how about reaching out to people who actually know about these issues? Organizations that could actually hold a knowledgeable and informative conversation about these issues.
Case in point: the fact that neither of you could even name a few good Progressive Religious leaders as alternatives for Gene Robinson is COMPLETELY akin to Sarah Palin not being able to name a single magazine or newspaper she reads.