Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Friends of Rick Warren - Discussion of MLK Commemorative Service Appearance

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 08:38 AM
Original message
Friends of Rick Warren - Discussion of MLK Commemorative Service Appearance
Friends of Rick Warren from American Leftist

Hat tips to Eli over at Left I on the News and Gaius at Undemocracy in America.

http://amleft.blogspot.com/2008_12_01_amleft_archive.html

From Reuters:

Pope Benedict said on Monday that saving humanity from homosexual or transsexual behaviour was just as important as saving the rain forest from destruction.

"(The Church) should also protect man from the destruction of himself. A sort of ecology of man is needed," the pontiff said in a holiday address to the Curia, the Vatican's central administration.

"The tropical forests do deserve our protection. But man, as a creature, does not deserve any less."

So, it seems that, when it comes to environmental issues and homophobia, the Pope and Rick Warren on the same page. Note also that Rick Warren has also been invited to give the keynote address at the Annual Martin Luther King Commemorative service at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta on January 19th. One can only imagine what the gay and lesbian community in Atlanta, and for that matter, elsewhere, feel about this voluntary legimization of one of the most notorious homophobes in this country .

Indeed, it is one of the most bizarre consequences of Obama's election, an emerging coalition of African Americans, descendants of the civil rights legacy of King, with fundamentalists, identified primarily for their bigotry towards gays and lesbians and hostility to reproductive rights. Interestingly, conservative Catholics remain in the background. Gaius observes that E. J. Dionne interprets it as an effort to generate fundamentalist support for a progressive economic program, but he remains dubious, as do I, and for good reason. Obama is, after all, a banker's president, as reflected by his moderate to conservative economic appointments.

Obama may achieve some short term tactical successes, but, in the longer term, it will be catastrophic. Beyond instigating conflict between African Americans and proponents of gay rights, such a coalition will crash into a brick wall of demography. Americans under the age of 40 are increasingly supportive of gay rights, more and more so as their age declines, and, consistent with such a stance, reject religious fundamentalism as well. Just as Southern Democrats branded the Democratic Party as a racist one for decades, Obama is in the process of staining the Democratic Party with homophobia.

There may be a compelling necessity for such an alliance. If Obama is going to implement economic policies primarily for the benefit of the financial elite, then, he requires something other than class interest to sustain his coalition. Conservative religious and social values, in other words. Hence, he has already displayed his willingness to use gays and lesbians, and their supporters, as foils to buttress his support in Middle America. But, in the end, as Tariq Ali often says in relation to some other superficially alluring, but ultimately impractical enterprise, it can only end badly.

..........

My comments and those of Coretta Scott Kings:

I for one do believe in the 14th Amendment as stated in this abstract which shows the connection between the two groups:

http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/8/7/4/8/p87480_index.html

Abstract:

While the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court to protect African American civil rights since the 1950s, it was first cited as protective of gay and lesbian civil rights only in 1996. This work analyzes the new social construction of gay and lesbian civil rights within the historical context of African American civil rights. I find that such a comparative analysis is key to understanding contemporary debates relating to same-sex marriage, since same-sex marriage policy is richly based upon the historical struggle in U.S. society to recognize interracial marriage. Furthermore, though the complicated hierarchy of legal case scrutiny created in recent decades by the Court seems incompatible with democracy and indicates to us that Fourteenth Amendment values of equal protection and due process cannot be taken at face value in the American system of government, I find that the Court's new inclusion, albeit limited, of gays and lesbians in the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment shows us that the U.S. Constitution can still be a significant and promising source of rights. The Court now understands sexuality, like race, as a fixed characteristic. By constructing gays and lesbians as a legal entity in need of protection, the Court is making it easier for them to challenge discrimination.

AND

Coretta Scott King on Gay Rights

Category: Gay Rights
Posted on: February 7, 2006
by Ed Brayton

http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2006/02/coretta_scott_king_on_gay_righ.php

(snip)

Mrs. King spoke often to gay rights groups and always spoke out strongly for gay rights. In 1998, just a few days before the 30th anniversary of her husband's assassination, she noted the obvious similarities:

"Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood."

She also noted that her husband believed that all struggles for equal rights were bound together and that it was necessary to fight against bigotry in all forms, not merely the form that affected you personally:

"We are all tied together in a single garment of destiny...I can never be what I ought to be until you are allowed to be what you ought to be," she said, quoting her husband. "I've always felt that homophobic attitudes and policies were unjust and unworthy of a free society and must be opposed by all Americans who believe in democracy."

And she pointed out that many gays and lesbians had fought for black civil rights, demanding that blacks return the favor:

"Gays and lesbians stood up for civil rights in Montgomery, Selma, in Albany, Ga. and St. Augustine, Fla., and many other campaigns of the Civil Rights Movement," she said. "Many of these courageous men and women were fighting for my freedom at a time when they could find few voices for their own, and I salute their contributions."

But perhaps her most eloquent statement on the subject came in 1994, again invoking the words of her late husband in support of equal rights for all:

"For too long, our nation has tolerated the insidious form of discrimination against this group of Americans, who have worked as hard as any other group, paid their taxes like everyone else, and yet have been denied equal protection under the law...I believe that freedom and justice cannot be parceled out in pieces to suit political convenience. My husband, Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." On another occasion he said, "I have worked too long and hard against segregated public accommodations to end up segregating my moral concern. Justice is indivisible." Like Martin, I don't believe you can stand for freedom for one group of people and deny it to others."

Coretta Scott King's strong and clear voice for freedom and equality will be sorely missed.

..........

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." MLK - Says it all!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
1. I wonder how many blacks who voted for Prop 8 are aware of Coretta Scott King's position
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellacott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. Many are aware of her position
She also stated in 2004 her position:

"Gay and lesbian people have families, and their families should have legal protection, whether by marriage or civil union," she said.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-03-24-king-marriage_x.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #8
21. Corretta Scott King said it very well,
succinctly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. I know I never knew this until I started to look for the support from MLK...
I found that some of the family are for gay rights, as Coretta Scott King so beautifully espoused, and some are against same-sex marriage. Here is a good link if anyone wants to know more:

http://www.washblade.com/2007/5-25/view/columns/10663.cfm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marimour Donating Member (696 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #1
11. i doubt many are
is not like Mrs. Kings statements get automatically disseminated amongst the black population in the US. I am well educated and more likely to have known about her statements and even I didn't know until after prop 8 passed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellacott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Wow
I knew about her statements and I can assure that many blacks were also aware of her statements long before Prop 8 was even an issue.

We might not be as well educated as you but we do keep up.

What does her statements mean anyway? Just because she had an opinion we are supposed to automatically share that opinion(whatever it is)?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #13
30. Of course Coretta Scott Kings remarks were hers alone and you have the right to yours.
It is with respect and honor of her that I posted her comments for those that had not seen them before. There is a deeper meaning here and I would hope that if you do not see it then you might understand that some of us are just learning of these statements and feel they are pertinent to the civil rights of everyone. As Dr. King said, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellacott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-09 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #30
58. My reply was not directed to you
It is just amazing to me that the previous poster assumed that african amercians were not aware of her views because he/she didn't know AND he is highly educated. I doubt that poster realizes how insulting that is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
17. The black vote is less than 7% of the CA vote. Why are you so curious about it?
Could it be because there was a concerted effort to blame black voters for Prop 8?

We did nearly 10 pts better on this issue than the last time it was put before CA voters this time out with an unprecedented black turnout on November 4.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. I doubt we actually did any better at all
We had at least a 5 point advantage from the fact we were the no side and the wording that prop 8 ended up carrying. Add to that the fact it was a Constitutional amendment and that is likely the rest. A better comparision is to prop 6 in 78. We did close to 10 points worse than that. Our inept campaign was a mess and cost us a race we should have won. The black vote against us was a symptom of that bad campaign. It is pathetic we did worse in 2008 than we did in 1978.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. You've yet to get any of the numbers, dsc.
You've yet to verify "the black vote against us". I give up trying to run it down for you.

Alameda County has 14% black voters and they threw H8 out on its @ss.

What CNN said endlessly all that night didn't happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-09 01:19 AM
Response to Reply #23
44. San Fransisco showed its black neighborhoods
as in the 60's in favor of prop 8. In LA, the map of neighborhoods that voted for prop 8 looks very much like the areas of LA which are majority black. I won't say the poll got the exact number but there is no way in hell we did better than 60/40 in favor of prop 8 among blacks, and we probably did worse. That would agree with virtually every poll conducted about the attitudes of blacks toward gay marriage incidently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-09 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #17
59. Thank you for bringing this point up. I get sick everytime I see
the implication that somehow blacks are responsible for Prop. 8. Pisses me off.

And then what's the significance of blacks knowing what Coretta said? Another implication that we all think the same way on every issue?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
2. something's very questionable about this pope, that I never felt with the last one, also,
there should also be a pretty good demonstration against Warren in GA. on the 19th.

Nothing positive for PE Obama came from bringing Warren to the party & assigning him a high visibility role. The GLBT community was already stinging about Prop 8, and then this fiasco sent us into overdrive against these provocateurs of hate speech & assaults against other citizens by demonizing us as unworthy of rights, and so UNGODLY we cannot go to his church in CA and pray to God with him, thus telling us we're not worthy enough to be Christian. What a judgmental perverted piggy this Warren fella is.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
We are confronted by powerful forces telling us to rely on the goodwill and understanding of those who profit by exploiting us. They deplore our discontent, they resent our will to organize, so that we may guarantee that humanity will prevail and equality will be exacted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #2
10. Well said - I am with you in these feelings and hope the discussion will bring more light to this.
I just found out about this friendship with Martin Luther King, Jr. and Gay Bayard Rustin who Dr. King tapped to organize the Montgomery Bus Boycott and the 1963 March on Washington (Where King gave his famed "I Have A Dream" speech):

By Ramon Johnson
Monday January 15, 2007

http://gaylife.about.com/b/2007/01/15/martin-luther-king-jr-and-gay-bayard-rustin.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #10
42. awesome, thanks for important link! would be good of you to post on MLK JR day. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 09:34 AM
Response to Original message
3. This all just gets worse and worse
my prediction is that we hear a lot of "hate the sin, love the sinner" garbage spewing at these events.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
4. Those who are ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it
And that is what we see. Look at how well the GOP has done with that religionist alliance! That Party is in shreds, and only a fool would try to pattern after that mess.
Warren is a hard core hater. He should be dealt with accordingly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TlalocW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
5. I noticed that Pope Ratzi
Left off the need to save humanity from pedophilia behavior.

TlalocW
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Odd, the defense of reproduction from a Church that prizes celibacy
Mary was a virgin.
Joseph did not know her in the biblical sense.
Their son never married.
One of the chief spokesman on marriage and gays, Paul, never married.
Priests remain unmarried.

So, a group following acquired 4th century Church values, is now preaching about the sanctity of marriage and reproduction, when the planet is teeming with humans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TlalocW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. If you want irony, look no further than the Catholic Church
Homosexuality is against not just God but the natural order according to them.

Well, so is not having sex.

TlalocW
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Natural order was a big hit circa 1933 Germany.
Homosexuals were also persecuted and imprisoned. Some cultural norms are hard to shake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
6. Repig Congressman have already vowed to obstruct PE Obama ecomic plans
and now as POTUS, Obama plans a cross country tour to sell his program.

This is all working out real well. :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
12. Hope this gets read by a lot of people - it is very insightful for the future.
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #12
24. You did an excellent job! This shows how things are NOT changing
The right wing has been playing at divding the progressive/Dem base over cultural issues.

I have heard almost identical words from some here, as one rw hack is quoted as saying in the one link and that was in 2006, under shrubya!

Now under a new PE what do we get? A stronger alliance among the religious right that supercedes party loyalties and unifies in bias against gays and gay rights. That's what Warren's keynote speech means.

This quote is eye opening, from a right winger in 2006.

http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2006/02/coretta_scot...

Coretta Scott King on Gay Rights
Category: Gay Rights
Posted on: February 7, 2006 10:30 AM, by Ed Brayton

Several black ministers have come out against this analogy and argued against gay rights. Others in the religious right have adopted their rhetoric and expanded on it. Concerned Women for America (rw wingers)spokesbigot, for instance, has declared:

"To compare rich, privileged homosexual lobby groups allied with transsexuals and sadomasochists to brave civil rights crusaders - who risked their lives to advance freedom - insults every black American who overcame real injustice and poverty," said CWA President Sandy Rios... "It's time for the homosexual lobby to stop co-opting the black civil rights struggle. The Task Force's agenda of promoting perversion - including public homosexual sex, sadomasochism and bisexuality - would offend the vast majority of African-Americans who understand the difference between God-designed racial distinctions and changeable, immoral behavior."

As the nation mourns the death of Coretta Scott King, it is important to note that she rejected this nonsense completely and argued forcefully that gay rights was indeed the logical next step for a civil rights movement that cares about more than just racial inequality. Mrs. King spoke often to gay rights groups and always spoke out strongly for gay rights. In 1998, just a few days before the 30th anniversary of her husband's assassination, she noted the obvious similarities...





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
16. "Obama is in the process of staining the Democratic Party with homophobia."
That is if Warren is still given that opportunity to speak for him at the inaugural.

It hasn't happened yet; Obama still has a chance to have a neutral person deliver a speech that is not hateful to begin his presidency.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. I'm more worried about the "unity" of the Warren MLK key note speech
as that directly reaches his pudgy, dirty hands into the Dem base.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Well, the GOP did say they wanted to get into Black churches.
They never said how they would do it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #20
25. They have made cultural in-roads that may affect down ticket
Edited on Fri Jan-02-09 05:30 PM by bluedawg12
naturally, PE Obama's place is secure, but down ticket, the vote might be for the most conservative, regardless of party, or simply stay at home?

This is not real unity. This is just same old divisiveness played with different team jersey's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. True.
With The Federalist Society and the divisive religious bullshit, the GOP has actually done more than Howard Dean ever could for down-ticket races.

We may have won the presidency, but we have to stop playing checkers when the GOP is playing chess.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. The best Dems will get is a stalemate.
Repugs are vowing to oppose soon to be Pres. Obama on his economic plans.

What do we get with all this warm outreach to the far right on cultural wars just more wedge issue baiting?

The mystery strategy continues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. The strategy looks more like an "I-got-mine" strategy than anything else. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. That's where leadership would have come into play.
What an opportunity to send the word out, that the old wedge issues are history and to really work on being inclusive to gays, who are over whelmingly Dems and who are the ones in need of a hand up, not a kick down.

Shame. Missed chance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. I think your conversation with ColbertWatcher was very insightful and gritty!
It is so true that "leadership" is going to be needed from here on out - that is what I say in my sig line - "What change - the journey begins." I love President-elect Obama in so many ways - I respect him for dedicating his life to the betterment of mankind, but I also know that he is capable of being fooled by people like Warren who profess to be one thing and are proven to be another. I was hoping that someone like Michael Moore would jump in and do a documentary on him. I wish I had the money to go to Africa and find out just what is going on in the those churches that are using the faith-based money given to them by Bush when Warren went to him and told him to back him for the HIV/AIDS program. This is what I am concerned with - Warren's Dream - I have said it many times on DU and posted the link from Time Magazine but it still doesn't register with most that this man has a maniacal desire to "rule" the world with his global ambition and beliefs.

Right here in black and white:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1830147,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. CW is the insightful gritty one, I just tag along :) The AIDS/HIV program, there's a problem.
For every person that gets treatment six new HIV cases are identified daily.

The experts say we can not treat our way out of this disease, it has to be based on strong infectious disease prevention practices, as well as, pharmacologic treatment.

When PEPFAR, a US federally funded program muscled in on overseas HIV/AID's work, they allegedly did not endorse best practices for prevention. They denounced condoms, allegedly failed to properly educate in safe sexual practices, refused clean needle programs for IV drug abusers, required sex workers to sign some sort of statement denouncing their work before they were given treatment.

That alone, if my readings have been correct, hence, "allegedly", means that taking HIV/AIDS funding and in some real sense pushing secular programs out of the way and subsituting religion based abstinence and marital fidelity as the main focus of prevention and by not maintaining evidence based medicine practices, appear to be contributing to the continued spread of this terrible virus, which, once infected is very difficult to treat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. 1776Forever - Here, I found the PEPFAR thread for you.
The whole article is an interesting read.

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2008/12/19/untold-consequences-rick-warrens-aids-activism

"For all intents and purposes, was a good thing to do," says Jodi Jacobson, consultant for RH Reality Check and the founder and former executive director of the Center for Health and Gender Equity (CHANGE), an NGO that promotes sexual and reproductive health and rights. "But with the entry of evangelical churches, in alliance with the Catholic Church, all funding for prevention became very fraught."

A division of aims within the global AIDS movement between those advocating for prevention funding and those working for treatment access helped draw faith-based groups. Though treatment and prevention are complementary in fighting HIV/AIDS, the entry of religious right activists exacerbated this divide between the two priorities. Treatment access advocates sought out partnership with evangelicals hoping for increased funding and attention for expensive treatment programs. But the faith-based solution naturally brought with it skewed policies that limited prevention options and led to what Jacobson calls the "profoundly ineffective" spending of AIDS money: with $20 billion spent on treatment over the past five years, but six new infections for every person treated. "No one doesn't want people to have access to treatment," she says. "But my argument is about the tradeoff. You can't treat your way out of this epidemic."


But churches anxious to follow Warren's lead didn't want to provide comprehensive HIV prevention services, such as safer sex education or condoms, so they lobbied for PEPFAR funding policy to be interpreted narrowly, creating stand-alone abstinence-until-marriage programs out of the law's 30% abstinence-only earmark. The new faith-based arm of the AIDS movement Warren had energized asked for, and got, a number of obstacles to prevention services: a prohibition on needle exchange programs for drug users; a ban family planning services in Prevention of Mother to Child Transmission clinics; and the anti-prostitution loyalty oath, which required all groups receiving PEPFAR funding, including those that work with sex workers, to condemn prostitution. As with conscience clauses, Jacobson says, this ideological interpretation of PEPFAR became a source of U.S. funding that "allows groups or organizations to avoid having to provide prevention treatment or care according to evidence-based criteria."
....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #33
39. This is why I'm against Faith Based Initiatives. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. You don't give yourself enough credit me thinks! You are right on track here!
I salute you for being so knowledgeable. Now if we can just get more people to join in we will make a difference!

:fistbump:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. Thanks! :) I do have a question for you
:fistbump:

That article you cited:

http://amleft.blogspot.com/2008_12_01_amleft_archive.html

They speculate about motives for PE Obama:

"E. J. Dionne interprets it as an effort to generate fundamentalist support for a progressive economic program, but he remains dubious, as do I, and for good reason. Obama is, after all, a banker's president, as reflected by his moderate to conservative economic appointments."

Regardless of the first premise, the banker's president, etc., do you think that this is a credible motive?

It seems there is no way that an alliance with the social right, will translate into an alliance about the economic changes PE Obama hopes to achieve. They are the opposing party. They have to differentiate themselves in order to have something to run against and to run on?

I am just puzzled (and worried) by this emerging Rickfest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. I too wonder about this and find your question very interesting.......
"They have to differentiate themselves in order to have something to run against and to run on?"

Where does it end? I read an article about PE Obama that said "You wanted a community organizer - now you got one." I think what they were talking about was the effort to bring everyone to the table. I feel that this goes back to the leadership issue. It doesn't hurt to question these motive but they will play themselves out in the next months as the choices are made. It will be something to keep our eyes and ears open too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. True, we can only speculate, next year at this time, we might know.
Good thread. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #32
38. I think there's enough insight and grit for all of us! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. ColbertWatcher you are the best!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #40
41. LOL! I'm not going to argue with you on that! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
18. Thanks for the legal link. As a minority laws regarding gay rights
amy then be looked at either under:

rational basis, intermediate scrutiny or strict scrutiny to determine if there is a violation of civil rights.

I hang my hopes on the law and not slowly changing personal attitudes tinged by all sorts of bias.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jamastiene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-09 12:34 AM
Response to Original message
43. Well, Coretta Scott King was a hero in my mind.
Edited on Sat Jan-03-09 12:35 AM by Jamastiene
I cannot say that about some of the rest of the King family. It seems they have warped the idea of what civil rights movement was all about; equality protection under the law. For what's left of the King family, thanks for the hate, I guess. It's all bullshit to me any more. We'll never get rights with this bunch of hate mongers in power in our government and the one sided/self centered "we got ours, fuck you, gay people" so-called "civil rights movement."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-09 08:12 AM
Response to Original message
45. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-09 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #45
46. I will try and get you to understand the message here.,,,,
You cannot believe what you said if you read the entire post. I am trying to get reason here not hate. This is just a discussion on what the real motives behind Rick Warren are and how some in the country are giving him an honored place to speak from even though he has shown very bigoted and hate filled messages, not only here in the United States, but abroad in Africa.

If you would take the time to read up on this you would find that to be the truth. Warren's churches in Africa not only spread hatred against Gays but also tell women to please their abusive husbands more so they won't beat them! If that is OK with you so be it, but it is not OK with me and others who have shown their courage by posting here.

Here is the link if you want to find out the truth -

Untold Consequences: Rick Warren's AIDS Activism
Kathryn Joyce on December 19, 2008

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2008/12/19/untold-consequences-rick-warrens-aids-activism
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meegbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-09 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. Believe it ...
HamdenRice's been on a posting bender the past few weeks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-09 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. Guess I am like PE Obama - I am trying to get some kind of civil discourse here...
but I know there are some with closed minds that I will never reach. You know the truth is - I hope I am wrong and Warren will go nowhere from the invocation and the MLK speech. But then again, it looks like there are a lot of people like HamdenRice out there. So be it - I tried.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HamdenRice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-09 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #46
49. The OP is simply the worst, most illogical article I've read on DU in months
Edited on Sat Jan-03-09 12:57 PM by HamdenRice
My response wasn't dismissive enough, given the quality of what I was responding to. But let's just look at a few of the stupidities in the article -- nothing you wrote, but the blog you cite to:

1. "Pope Benedict said ...

"So, it seems that, when it comes to environmental issues and homophobia, the Pope and Rick Warren on the same page."

<end quote>

Huh? He quotes the Pope, who is spouting the party line of the Catholic church, and then without evidence says the Pope and Warren are on the same page. Any evidence of that? Any reasoning? It may be true, but can't everyone see the transparent illogic of the free floating smear here?

2. "Rick Warren has also been invited to give the keynote address at the Annual Martin Luther King Commemorative service at Ebenezer Baptist Church"

Duh!

It's a church. They invite other churchmen. Warren is one of the country's leading churchmen. Many churchmen believe strange things -- stuff about kings sitting on thrones in the clouds and the evils associated with good, creative sex and gourmet dining.

It's called religion.

Ebenezer has no doubt had as guests prominent Rabbis and Imams, who, no doubt, believed that the pork chop and bacon tolerant majority in attendance had at the least done something profoundly unclean. But they are churchmen so they unite ecumenically over those things they agree on -- like belief in the Abrahamic god. It doesn't mean that they have formed a "coalition" in favor of strict adherence to Kosher and Halal foods, or in favor or disfavor of anything else.

3. "Indeed, it is one of the most bizarre consequences of Obama's election, an emerging coalition of African Americans, descendants of the civil rights legacy of King, with fundamentalists, identified primarily for their bigotry toward gays and lesbians and hostility to reproductive rights..."

For sheer stupidity, this is hard to beat. So now Obama's election has somehow caused as a "consequence" this "coalition" of African Americans and "fundamentalists"? Oh really? Any proof of that? How did Obama's campaign, which took off in almost all white Iowa, which relied on a network of youthful volunteers of all races, that raised record amounts of money from small donors, and that had no discernible relationship to either the "civil rights" movement or the fundamentalist movement, create this emerging coalition?

News flash: Black Protestant churches are in "coalition" with white fundamentalists because they are part of something larger -- you know, uh, like, Christianity.

But for the dedicated Obama haters, any conceivable smear, that can paint Obama, "teh blacks who are now teh enemy" and the Pat Robertsons of the world into one big happy camp, will work, I suppose.

4. "Gaius observes that E. J. Dionne interprets it as an effort to generate fundamentalist support for a progressive economic program, but he remains dubious, as do I, and for good reason. Obama is, after all, a banker's president, as reflected by his moderate to conservative economic appointments."

Duh! Dionne gets it right, but of course his observation of this stunningly obvious fact is "framed" by skepticism by Gaius. Political analysts have been screaming at Democrats for years that they can peel off the people there is something "wrong with" in Ohio by appealing to their lunch bucket issues, by neutralizing "God, guns and gays" and abortion -- not by actually changing policies but by carrying out a few pious bits of Kabuki theater, like praying with loons like Warren, shooting guns, and paying lip service to the idea that abortion must be "safe, legal and rare."

The breathtaking dismissal of this strategy with the notion that Obama is a "banker's president" even as he launches the biggest, most liberal, most socialist public works employment project since the New Deal reveals the author not to be just wrong, but a blathering idiot.

I could go on and on, but why bother? The piece of garbage in the OP is hardly worth the electrons I've just wasted sending it down the internet tubes to post it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-09 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #49
50. You have a right to your beliefs - My answers follow:
Edited on Sat Jan-03-09 04:03 PM by 1776Forever
Your statement #1.

"He quotes the Pope, who is spouting the party line of the Catholic church, and then without evidence says the Pope and Warren are on the same page. Any evidence of that? Any reasoning? It may be true, but can't everyone see the transparent illogic of the free floating smear here?"

My answer:

Warren and the Pope have both espoused that GLBT do not deserve to be allowed human rights:

Pope remarks: http://www.bruneinews.net/story/445433

Pope Benedict XVI has said the world needs to be saved from homosexual or transsexual behavior.

And:

http://www.americablog.com/2008/12/where-does-rick-warren-stand-on.html

Warren remarks: A Kampala newspaper report on Warren's support of the Lambeth boycott included this paragraph:

Dr Warren said that homosexuality is not a natural way of life and thus not a human right. "We shall not tolerate this aspect at all," Dr Warren said.

.........

2. Regarding Warren's MLK speech: "It's a church. They invite other churchmen. Warren is one of the country's leading churchmen. Many churchmen believe strange things -- stuff about kings sitting on thrones in the clouds and the evils associated with good, creative sex and gourmet dining."

My answer: I didn't say it wasn't their right to do this. My question is why allow someone like this who has been blatant about so many issues that affect others rights, including women's rights, a stage and presence to do so when there are so many other Ministers who are more in line with the Progressive belief that everyone of us has a right to our beliefs. As Dr. King said so rightly: "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

........

3. You quoted "Indeed, it is one of the most bizarre consequences of Obama's election, an emerging coalition of African Americans, descendants of the civil rights legacy of King, with fundamentalists, identified primarily for their bigotry toward gays and lesbians and hostility to reproductive rights...": And asked if there was any prove of that.

My answer: Those were the words in the post I referred to but if you read on about the 14th Amendment and its justification for not only Minority rights, but GLBT rights, it is obvious that this has not come to pass in this moment in time. There is no hatred of PE Obama in my post.

I do see that you are calling this patronizing of Rick Warren with the Black Church and the White Church Christianity. If that is the type of Christianity you believe in then you have that right, but for me as well as Coretta Scott King, this is NOT the type of Christianity that I believe Dr. King believed in, and it is not furthering the brotherly love that Jesus Christ professed in His teachings.

...........

#4. You state: "The breathtaking dismissal of this strategy with the notion that Obama is a "banker's president" even as he launches the biggest, most liberal, most socialist public works employment project since the New Deal reveals the author not to be just wrong, but a blathering idiot."

My answer: This was not my quote, but I do believe we all will have to wait and see what happens in the next months. The only thing I asked for was to keep an open mind and look at the bigger picture. We all should be vigilant in these first weeks and months of this new Administration, not to tear it down but to build it up. Can PE Obama be expected to know everything about every issue? Of course not. He has stated himself he doesn't want "yes" people around him - well in this case I am just proposing that he looks deeper into what the motives are of Rick Warren and what Warren really wants out of this association conversion.

.........

Again as Dr. King said: "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HamdenRice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-09 07:22 AM
Response to Reply #50
51. Blah, blah, word salad. You did not address the central anti-Obama, anti-African American idea
Edited on Sun Jan-04-09 07:23 AM by HamdenRice
of the article:

"consequences of Obama's election, an emerging coalition of African Americans, descendants of the civil rights legacy of King, with fundamentalists,"

That is a blatant lie. You posted it, so I assume you agree with it. So please explain how Obama's election created as a "consequence," a coalition of Africam Americans and fundamentalists?


Can you prove it exists? Can you prove Obama's election created it?

Can't?

There's a reason you can't. It's because the assertion is just a fancy way of saying, as many DUers did after Prop 8, "blacks are now the enemy." And to make them the enemy you have to make up lies like this.

Better you should stick with your word salad, an example of which is provided by wiki:

"Because he makes a twirl in life, my box is broken help me blue elephant. Isn't lettuce brave? I like electrons, hello. Tissues without a triangular head lice be it with controller is the noodle man of ice pops and radio yes thanks. So even with I but he river flow amber rod with it. You know bear mama said just keep boxing."

Actually, wiki's example of word salad makes marginally more sense than the OP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-09 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #51
52. There is a lot of work to do - the statement says a "growing" coalition as referenced here.......
This is a very good argument for GLBT Rights activists to align more with each other. I also gave comments from Coretta Scott King and MLK that you blatantly looked over with your arrogance. You seem very disturbed by the idea of civil and gay rights. Are you prejudice against them? Do you not think working together is a good thing for the 14th Amendment to come to pass for all those that are oppressed? I assume then you do not believe in Coretta and Dr. Kings statements:

Coretta Scott King on Gay Rights

Category: Gay Rights
Posted on: February 7, 2006
by Ed Brayton

http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2006/02/coretta_scott_king_on_gay_righ.php

(snip)

Mrs. King spoke often to gay rights groups and always spoke out strongly for gay rights. In 1998, just a few days before the 30th anniversary of her husband's assassination, she noted the obvious similarities:

"Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood."

She also noted that her husband believed that all struggles for equal rights were bound together and that it was necessary to fight against bigotry in all forms, not merely the form that affected you personally:

"We are all tied together in a single garment of destiny...I can never be what I ought to be until you are allowed to be what you ought to be," she said, quoting her husband. "I've always felt that homophobic attitudes and policies were unjust and unworthy of a free society and must be opposed by all Americans who believe in democracy."

And she pointed out that many gays and lesbians had fought for black civil rights, demanding that blacks return the favor:

"Gays and lesbians stood up for civil rights in Montgomery, Selma, in Albany, Ga. and St. Augustine, Fla., and many other campaigns of the Civil Rights Movement," she said. "Many of these courageous men and women were fighting for my freedom at a time when they could find few voices for their own, and I salute their contributions."

But perhaps her most eloquent statement on the subject came in 1994, again invoking the words of her late husband in support of equal rights for all:

"For too long, our nation has tolerated the insidious form of discrimination against this group of Americans, who have worked as hard as any other group, paid their taxes like everyone else, and yet have been denied equal protection under the law...I believe that freedom and justice cannot be parceled out in pieces to suit political convenience. My husband, Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." On another occasion he said, "I have worked too long and hard against segregated public accommodations to end up segregating my moral concern. Justice is indivisible." Like Martin, I don't believe you can stand for freedom for one group of people and deny it to others."


Coretta Scott King's strong and clear voice for freedom and equality will be sorely missed.

.......

And then there is this article that calls for more unity among the two oppressed groups:

Gay Rights activists should focus on coalition building with minority groups
by duha
Sat Dec 20, 2008

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/12/20/18811/099/738/675561

With the major setbacks with Prop H8, other 2008 state propositions, and Rick Warrengate, I think the best long term strategy over the next 8-12 years would be to focus on building a stronger coalition between the GLBT community and minority communities and activists. I feel like this strategy has not been seriously attempted, and we are all suffering for it.

I think there are several reasons why long term significant outreach would be beneficial.

1. Gay rights issues under perform in minority communities. We don't need to have the millionth dkos diary on whether minority voters could have turned the tide in California or not, but what is clear is that the support for many important gay issues trails other communities. So there is room for improvement. More time and resources spent can improve the overall numbers.

2. There is conflict, and you see it crop up on dkos all the time, about is gay rights a comparable civil rights struggle to the 60s battles, or who has had it worse in recent decades, minorities or gays, etc. These arguments not only foster a divide where there is an either/or aspect to gay issues and minority civil rights issues, but also wastes valuable time and energy. While there were inevitable frictions between minority and women's rights issues, the two groups of activists have worked productively together and I think this was an underlying reason why the democratic party and the progressive movement was able to come back together so effectively after the historic primary candidacies of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

3. The demographic shifts in this country point to larger long term gains made through outreach in the Latino and black community. It's already evident that the younger you are, the more likely you are to support gay rights issues. If effective outreach is made in minority communities, especially the young, the payoffs could be huge down the line.

4. The doorway to reaching Christians is through minority communities. What is most likely a cause of why minority communities do lag in support for gay issues is the subpopulation of church attendees in those communities. There was some analysis on Prop 8/Obama voters on OpenLeft a couple weeks ago. Church issues may make outreach and coalition building more challenging, but I think they can be overcome because of the deep respect for struggles for equality, tolerance, etc in those communities. And I think that foothold into the Christian community will be invaluable down the line because minority Christian leaders can be effective to communicating issues to non-minority Christian leaders.

5. Obama has renewed political interest in the minority community. There are millions of minorities who are now more interested in political issues and changing the country than they have been in their lives or if they are older they haven't been this excited in several decades. Obama's candidacy has involved a lot of rhetoric about us all being in things together, etc. The time is ripe for coalition building.

So I think gay rights leaders should really sit down and map out major outreach pushes in the minority community. Minority faces speaking for the GLBT community need to be on TV more, etc. What strategies do people think would be effective in getting this done?

........

I know you will never see the same view of this issue that I do but where MLK and I agree is this:

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." MLK - Says it all! And I don't care what color he was or I am we are brother and sister on this issue!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-09 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #52
54. differing religions or denominations they may all be - sure - whatever, BUT...
strange bedfellows against GLBT CIVIL rights they sure do make, nonetheless!

There is a serious and growing faction of extremist from all areas of religious backgrounds who are united in their dangerous VIEWS of GLBT people, this was never more evident than the Mormon church and Roman Catholic church being joined in their intolerant thoughts against gays in unison with the black church community - only the densest of people couldn't put the simple facts together to see they each knew they were working towards stopping GLBT people from maintaining their right to marry.


All the hate speech sounds identical - and thus, when each of these differing denominations or religions are aligning up in their vitriol attack of civility towards gays, then you hopefully see how their unity is a threat.


What always made me sick was the ignorance of some people not comprehending that every death of a GLBT by a beating, stab wound, or gunshot was directly caused by an indoctrination of hatred instilled in them at some point. At it's core, it is the same reason why for which every African-American has had the same done to them - ignorant and intolerant views.


Some people take the 'prove it' deal to a ridiculous extreme - in court, when there's evident evidence to lay out a case, a murderer is convicted - it doesn't have to be on video to be obvious! These churches are in unison in their hatred of gays, and inviting an unabashed bigot to give your prayer is a bad choice, regardless of your intentions (no one's perfect) when you're the first black president.


He should have known better - it sends a bad signal that bigots views can't be so disgusting that they would be asked NOT to come to an event because of such mean spirited dispersions, but President-Elect Obama saying he doesn't agree with everything Warren says but still inviting him to give the PRAYER of all things, is no different than him inviting a racist preacher who says blacks are unworthy of human rights, and their marrying is no different than two blood relatives marrying, or a 40 year old marrying a 10 year old - it's unfortunate Mr. Obama doesn't get that - because we would ALL be yelling if he did that (notice that ALL is said there, but ALL OF US aren't as outraged when he invites someone who says the same thing about gays!) I'm sorry for PE Obama that he doesn't get that, and if he does, I'd sure like to know his reason!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-09 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #54
55. It does amaze me that more people don't see the hidden message here..
the what? After this man is given this stage then what? Where will his influence go next? What will his role be in the faith-based money going to Africa? How will it continue his message of GLBT hatred and control of women's issues there? I don't want to be able to say some day down the road, "I told you so!"

Blessings and let us hope the truth does get out before more influence peddling is done!

:pals:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-09 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #55
56. I'm expecting a strong rebuke of him after the inauguration, or I'll be let down because
Warren will certainly think his cozying up to the President will be a great tool to push his fame and goals... Obama should not have chosen him, we know this, I really just don't know how he will salvage this without making a direct rebuke of Warren (not just the "we don't agree on everything" line, if it was a racist preacher, he wouldn't say that, he would say I cannot bring someone like that to my inauguration!)

sigh... we'll never give up though!

:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-09 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #56
57. No - we cannot give up now - it is too important - I don't want the country to get took again
Enough!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-09 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #51
53. I agree with you
This article is just another example of racist BS. Thank you for refuting it as eloquently as you did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC