First of all I am in full agreement that gays should have all the rights that other people have, including marriage. I do not feel that heterosexuals are superior to gays in any way. And I have never in my life said anything demeaning about a person for being gay.
Does that mean that I fully appreciate their feelings about the discrimination that they face? Of course not. I think that I have a reasonably good idea, since I know what it is like to be discriminated against, but I don’t claim to fully know what it is like to be in their shoes – though I would like to have a better understanding of it.
About people who are against gay marriageI do not believe, however, that everyone who is against gay marriage is an anti-gay bigot. By the same token, I don’t believe that everyone who is “pro-life” is an anti-woman bigot – though I am pro-choice; I don’t believe that everyone who is in favor of the Iraq War and occupation is a warmonger who hates Iraqis – though I am passionately against that war; and I don’t believe that everyone who is against universal health insurance takes pleasure in seeing other people suffer – though I believe that everyone should have the right to decent health care.
One explanation that I sometimes use, in my own head at least, to explain people who hold views that are adamantly opposed to mine, is ignorance. Think about it. DUers are, on average, not only much more progressive/liberal than most other people, but they are also on average much better informed. I believe that ignorance explains a great deal. Actually, we are all ignorant to some extent. Consequently, we ALL hold at least some views that are wrong, simply out of ignorance. Some people who have been repeatedly
told that legalizing gay marriage will ruin their own marriage or destroy civilization actually believe it. If I believed that, I’d be against gay marriage too. Some people who have been repeatedly told that we have to fight the Iraqis over there, or else they’ll come over here and kill us, actually believe that. No wonder they are against withdrawing our forces from Iraq.
Consider racial prejudices in the days of slavery. Even Abraham Lincoln, who was very much against slavery, a great President, and a very empathetic and intelligent human being, believed that black people were inferior to white people. Why? My explanation for that is ignorance. The great majority of white Americans in those days were woefully ignorant about black people. It is my belief that there is nothing that better helps to overcome prejudices than exposure to the objects of one’s prejudices. For, exposure to the objects of one’s prejudice helps to cure ignorance. And look how far we’ve come with respect to racial prejudice in this country over the past 200 years.
This does not mean that I excuse that kind of ignorance. We should all work to overcome our ignorance. An ignorant nation is a nation that is likely to tear itself apart, and it is one that is susceptible to tyranny. And some people are willfully ignorant. It is not a black and white issue – there are many degrees of ignorance. But still, I think that there is a distinct difference between someone who holds different views than mine out of ignorance and someone who holds different views than mine out of hatred and bigotry. And I always try to give people the benefit of the doubt – until they show me that they don’t deserve that benefit.
On Obama’s choice of Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at his inaugurationI am disappointed that Obama picked Rick Warren to deliver the invocation. There are several things that I have been disappointed with Obama for. Initially
I was unhappy about what I considered his denigration of the Democratic Party in his book, “The Audacity of Hope” – which is a big reason why he was not my first, second or third choice for the Democratic nomination.
I compared his relative lack of emphasis on fighting poverty unfavorably with that of John Edwards. I am disappointed whenever he puts what I consider to be too much value on “
bipartisanship”. I was disappointed when
he spoke of escalating the war in Afghanistan. I was very disappointed
that he voted for the FISA bill (HR 6304) that I believe greatly injured our Fourth Amendment. And I
was very unhappy that he said he was considering going back on his campaign pledge to reverse the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy. I am more upset about some of these things than I am about Obama choosing Rick Warren, not because I don’t care about gay rights, but because I consider some of these things to have longer term policy implications than picking a speaker for a two minute speech, especially since it seems unlikely that Warren will voice his bigotry during that speech.
Yet despite all this, I still worked in Obama’s campaign, I was thrilled when he was elected, and I am still hopeful that he will have a very productive presidency. The fact of the matter is that, despite all my criticisms of Obama I also see many positive things about him, which
I have voiced many times on DU.
So given all these somewhat contradictory views towards Obama’s actions, how would I sum up my views towards him in general? That is not easy to say. When I’m feeling relatively good towards him I tell myself that the actions with which I most disagree do not represent the real Barack Obama. I tell myself that it is necessary for him to do or say some of these things in order to establish credibility with “Middle America”. I tell myself that it will be necessary for him to “give in” or compromise on some important issues, in order to be able to deal more effectively with other issues. After all, that is what politics is all about.
But at other times I become exasperated by some of these things. Sure, it is necessary to compromise. But it is also necessary to lead. I don’t want a President that will go too far in accepting the status quo, just in order to maintain his credibility and get re-elected. Sometimes Presidents need to or ought to take risks. That is what leadership is about. Most important, a President needs to
address and combat the ignorance of the American people – by educating them – rather than
pander to it.
ConclusionObama’s rightward leanings have bothered me more since the election – simply because there appears now to be less need for them. Yet, sometimes I think that I’m unrealistic to think that he could suddenly move leftwards following an election (though usually I think that he has actually moved rightwards).
Though Obama’s selection of Warren doesn’t bother me as much as some other things he’s done, still it is upsetting. Why select a politically active bigot to give an invocation at your inaugural address? Is that really necessary in order to gain the approval of “Middle America”? And most important, what does this say about the way he’s likely to govern?
But the truth of the matter and the bottom line is – and I really hate to say this – that I really do not know how Obama is going to govern. Maybe some of his actions that I most disagree with will turn out to be motivated by tactical concerns, meant to position himself to accomplish really great things. Maybe he’ll get us out of Iraq, give us our first truly universal health insurance system in our history, close down Guantanamo while arranging to try all our remaining “War on Terror” prisoners in a court of law, end torture, steer us out of a depression, and make progress towards improving gay rights as well. If he does all that, his picking of Rick Warren to give the invocation will seem quite minor by comparison.
In other words, my opinion of Barack Obama is very far from settled. I plan to criticize him when I disagree with him and praise him when I like what he does. But my opinion of him really won’t begin to solidify until he at least begins his Presidency and we start to see some results.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
