The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Archives => Politics => Election 2008 => Topic started by: Ptarmigan on December 19, 2008, 12:37:03 PM
-
Obama's next pastor controversy - at inauguration
Thu Dec 18, 2008 6:05pm EST
Reuters
By Peter Henderson
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - President-elect Barack Obama has chosen a pastor who opposes gay marriage as a speaker at his inauguration, creating a commotion over what inclusiveness will mean for his administration.
Obama chose Rick Warren, the evangelical pastor of the southern California megachurch Saddleback, to give the invocation when he takes office in January.
The president-elect on Thursday said that he held views "absolutely contrary" to Warren on gay rights and abortion and described himself as "a fierce advocate for equality for gay and lesbian Americans."
Full Article (http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE4BH7DR20081218)
========================================
The Dems are throwing a hissy fit over this, since he is the polar opposite of Obama.
-
How is he the polar opposite, they both believe and have stated that marriage should be between a man and woman
-
How is he the polar opposite, they both believe and have stated that marriage should be between a man and woman
Correct me if I am wrong, didn't Obama support gay marriage. I know it is Obama's choice, even thought I am not a fan of Obama.
-
The President elects political standing is irrelevant to an Inaugural Invocation. The purpose of the invocation is to seek the Lords continual blessing upon the country and guide and look over the new president of the United States in his stewardship of the country.
I have no problem with Rick Warren being asked to give the Inaugural Invocation. Wouldn't if Al Sharpton was asked. Now if Calypso Louie or someone like that was asked that I could see as a problem.
-
Correct me if I am wrong, didn't Obama support gay marriage. I know it is Obama's choice, even thought I am not a fan of Obama.
Supposedly he said it should be left up to the states, which is a sly way of attempting to make it legal all over the country because of the Full Faith and Credit Clause.
.
-
The President elects political standing is irrelevant to an Inaugural Invocation. The purpose of the invocation is to seek the Lords continual blessing upon the country and guide and look over the new president of the United States in his stewardship of the country.
I have no problem with Rick Warren being asked to give the Inaugural Invocation. Wouldn't if Al Sharpton was asked. Now if Calypso Louie or someone like that was asked that I could see as a problem.
True. I have no problems with Obama choosing Rick Warren. I am just laughing when the Dems throw a hissy fit about it though. Hehe. :lmao: :evillaugh:
-
Supposedly he said it should be left up to the states, which is a sly way of attempting to make it legal all over the country because of the Full Faith and Credit Clause.
.
ok, cool, statewide referendum mandated for every state that hasn't had one already on a marriage amendment to their constitution. if some state's voters (in other words, if it is in the will of the people) approves it, then we can discuss full faith and credit. the votes have to appear for gay marriage first though, and that hasn't happened yet, even in california.