Along with millions of other people, I plan on braving the cold, the crowds, and the security checkpoints to witness Obama take his oath of office tomorrow.
And despite all the logistical obstacles, I'm really looking forward to it. Well, everything but Rick Warren. Which is why this letter to Savage Love struck a chord:
I'm going to Barack Obama's inauguration in Washington, D.C., on January 20. I've spent eight years, one month, one week, and one day waiting for this. (But who's counting?) However, I am looking for suggestions for a respectful way to protest the participation of Rick Warren. [...]While my friends want me to throw shoes, that ain't gonna happen. Ideally, I'd like a peaceful, gracious way to protest Warren's participation that won't undercut this great day, a way that can be picked up (and publicized) by folks on the Mall. Any suggestions?
The first thing that came to my mind was how Washington University students expressed their opposition to Phyllis Schalfly's speech at their graduation. As Schlafly stood up to speak, thousands of students turned their backs on her in silent protest. It made for a great image -- they literally turned their backs on her hate-filled rhetoric and anti-feminist bullshit.
It's probably too late to organize this sort of widespread effort now, but how amazing would it be if thousands of people on the National Mall tomorrow turned their backs on Rick Warren? I know that at least I'll be turning around when he stands to give the invocation.
Alternatively, Dan Savage suggests:
[...] borrow a page from those long-suffering gay Catholics. To register their displeasure with the pope's revealing obsession with gay sex, gay marriage, and gay shoes (the douchebag wears Prada), some gay Catholics wear rainbow sashes to mass. Perhaps folks disappointed by Warren's participation could coordinate a similar sartorial protest? Everyone wear a button with that rainbow-striped version of the Obama logo? Wave little rainbow flags during Warren's remarks? Head to the Mall in nothing but rubber chaps?
What are your protest suggestions?
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Turn your back on Rick Warren.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/11459
"in nothing but rubber chaps"
They secretly like that sort of thing.
Rainbow flags. After that, live well.
i would assume that most of us reading this read other left minded blogs and news sites. could everyone take 15 minutes tonight to make sure this idea is spread around? i've already posted it on blogs and emailed it to friends who are attending. please do the same. :)
We've seen the 'turn your back' idea on some other blogs in the last week or so, and we've also seen the idea of waving a rainbow flag (either with your back turned or not) while Rick Warren is speaking. So these ideas are making the rounds, and hopefully we'll see some evidence of it tomorrow.
I really like the rainbow flag idea. I'm not going to be anywhere in the area, so I'll have to see how that goes. I think it will be interesting to see what people do.
I have been suggesting we turn our backs on him for a month!
I hope it's catching on. Thank you so much for bringing it up.
I think it is a respectful way to show that we do not support that specific portion of the inauguration.
Yah, I've heard about this idea for at least a month, it's been advertised on Air America and NovaM too. Most likely there will be quite a few people turning their backs, and if you go with a group, I'll bet some will join you if they see you do it.
Now now...
Obama only picked Warren because Fred "God Hates Fags" Phelps was already booked for heckling funerals this week.
Now now...
Obama only picked Warren because Fred "God Hates Fags" Phelps was already booked for heckling funerals this week.
I like this. I'll probably do it.
The problem with rainbow flags is that they might get confiscated. You aren't allowed to take any sort of sign in with you and some guards might construe a sign that way.
Er, construe a flag that way.
I assume the main bone of contention here is over the issue of gay marriage, correct? I have seen people say that Warren hates gays because of this issue. That is not where I have a problem. Anyone can think whatever they want about someone else.
Barak Obama has stated that he is against gay marriage and yet I have only seen people discuss throwing negative vibes at Warren during the inauguration. I would appreciate if someone could explain this to me. Thank you.
Rick Warren's offensive rhetoric extends far beyond his hateful comments towards the queer community.
However, since you addressed his opposition to same sex marriage specifically, the issue is less that Warren "thinks" something, or whether he should be able to "think whatever he want[s] about someone else." To pretend that we're policing his thoughts is ridiculous. Rick Warren played a prominent role in passing Proposition 8 in California. It's not just that he thought or said something, but that he ACTIVELY CAMPAIGNED to pass the measure that is possibly now going to invalidate my marriage. But yeah, I guess I should just suck it up because he should be allowed to think whatever he wants.
For the record, I will be sending plenty of irritated vibes toward Obama this coming week. His stance on same sex marriage is inexcusable, but he didn't actively campaign to dissolve mine, so I'm slightly less concerned. Actions speak louder than words in this case, for me at least.
Pledge to the Rick-a-Thon. It's not as visible as turning one's back, but it's more than just a symbolic gesture.
I think we should respect Obama's choice and listen to Warren. This whole event has little to do with Warren, and disrespecting him as a speaker is more of a affront to President Obama than to Warren. This is more so about the president showing that it is about us Democrats and left thinkers being able to be a much more inclusive administration than what the Republicans did 00-08. Tolerance people, tolerance!
Disagree with the man at his services, his gathering, or at any of his events, but he is going to speaking about Obama tomorrow, and I sincerely doubt that he's going to be spewing any hateful rhetoric. Needless to say, if he does say anything offensive, (verbally) light him up.
He already has said offensive things. He doesn't have to say offensive things from the inaugural stage in order to pass some test of sufficient offensiveness. Part of protesting Warren is protesting Obama's choice of a specifically offensive public figure at inauguration. In that sense I suppose it is an affront to Obama, and I see no reason why Obama should be handled with kid gloves to begin with.
Reaching out to Warren is not about tolerance. You can never have tolerance by trying to build bridges with intolerant people. All this accomplishes is an acquiescence by the Democrats to the offensive positions of conservatives in the spirit of "inclusiveness." Well let me tell you this: it doesn't include ME.
It is ironic and unnecessary to grant "tolerance" towards those who refuse to show the same respect to sexual minorities.
This isn't just an annoying "issue" disagreement. This is about denial of some peoples' human rights. I'm tired of that fact getting swept to the side in favor of "working together."
As Margaret Thatcher, a noted conservative (interesting...) pointed out, when you stand in the middle of the road, you get knocked down from traffic on both sides. Maybe Obama should be willing to pick a side of the gay rights road. Then at least I'll know when he's acting based on principle rather than pandering.
When one allows a bigot to speak at one's inauguration, one must expect that some people won't be happy about that and that many will exercise their right of free speech and protest in one way or another. Though I am not an Obama supporter, I think he's easily smart enough to figure that out and easily has a thick enough skin to handle it. Furthermore, I frankly don't see why anyone owes him the "respect" of tolerating a bigot. And FURTHER furthermore, I don't see how turning your back on someone is intolerant. You aren't stopping them from saying what they have to say, you're making a symbolic statement about them and their message. If the bigots just wanted to make a symbolic statement (you know, instead of legislating their hate into law) then maybe we wouldn't have this problem in the first place.
I would say that if you are either a lesbian or gay man lucky enough to have a partner, or at least a dating partner[ or maybe one willing to perform the role]; as soon as rick warren comes on the stage to give his " blessing"; turn to your partner right then and kiss! that alone would be making a statement!
I know it is sickening how Obama chose this so called " christian" asshole to do his invocation after prop 8 was passed with his [warren's] help. but I guess he is just trying to show that we can all live as " one big happy" and come together as a nation despite our differences?
being the "token transwoman" in my own town, I personally do not even feel a part of the fairly-conservative town I live in made up of mostly married heterosexuals. and so, I can't really understand Obama's logic as to how we all are fixing to come together as one nation, but I surely have to applaud him for trying to make this so, I guess.
I agree with cherylsass (great username, btw)...anybody in a same sex relationship, (or you could even do this with a date, friend, associate or anyone that you are comfortable with)...As soon as the invocation starts, grab your partner and start kissing. I love it!
You know, I don't really buy the whole "inclusiveness"/"everyone's invited under the big tent" excuses as a reason for inviting Warren...by having Warren there, you may be including right-wingers (and bigots), however you are doing this at the cost of pushing out LGBT people (and many women too). The obvious message being sent to us queers, is that we're expendable and unimportant-and certainly not deserving of equal treatment. I don't really understand how Obama gets so much praise by the media and supporters for how "gay-friendly" he is. Personally, I don't feel that Obama is "gay-friendly". In fact I would go so far as to say that he is "anti-gay"...the reason is simply because, he opposes gay equality. When you oppose gay equality and/or endorse separate but "equal" policy for gay people (note that "separate but equal" is inherently UNequal) than the underlying message being sent, is that gay people are NOT equal, and shouldn't be treated as full citizens/human beings. So I don't really understand, how can this attitude be described as anything but anti-gay!
Yet, it always seems that I get many people really offended when I explain my opinions on Obama and gay-equality. They reply with things like "stop whining", "stop accusing people of being homophobes/bigots", and "just be happy with how 'gay-friendly' Obama is compared with past presidents". Again, I just don't see the Obama administration as supportive of gay equality. However, I would gladly eat my words if he proved me wrong, basically though, I'll believe it when I see it.
As Rachel Maddow said on her show after playing a clip of an Obama speech with him saying "I am a fierce defender of gay equality" to which Maddow replied "hmmm...except that you're not".
I strongly agree, and the sad thing is that I've been accused of being racist for saying so.
Dan Savage points out that "turning your back on Rick Warren" would likely be taken portrayed by the Christian right as an attack on "prayer itself," but I think his ideas (rainbow buttons/clothes) are just as easy to spin as "LBGT support of Obama's choice of Rick Warren" which is even more painful. I say turn your back for Rick Warren!
The Pope doesn't wear pradar btw. For instance his shoes are made by a cobbler from Novara called Adriano Stefanelli. And of coarse, having the Pope is a DB quote is just horrendous... and once again, you've alienated your Catholic readers. Good job.
Did anyone see what was done and if it was visible? CNN didn't show much of the crowd while Warren was speaking.
Did anyone see what was done and if it was visible? CNN didn't show much of the crowd while Warren was speaking.
Thanks for blogging about this Ann.
I was on the mall this morning during the inauguration, along with 5 queer friends. We all turned our backs while Warren spoke.
As far as I could tell we were the only ones around us who did, but it felt like an appropriate response.
I turned my back on the TV monitor in the used bookstore where I watched and picked a book on erotic comics off the shelf to read. I figured it was doubly appropriate b/c Warren would probably object to the reading material. Unfortunately, I objected to it, also, being the usual portrayal of women as objects and of hurting women and them loving it. Oh well.
I was pretty creeped out when the woman next to me recited the prayer along with Warren. Displays of religion weird me out anyway, but the fact that she was praying along with Rick Warren made it downright creepy.
Since I was just in our University Center watching it from in amongst the tables, I merely picked up a book and started reading.
It seems hypocritical to cheer and support Obama but then turn your back on a guest speaker.....that HE chose and invited. If you have a problem with Warren being there, take it up with the person who PUT him there.
Why is it all or nothing? It's entirely possible to support some, but not all of Obama's decisions and opinions.
Be fair, nothing visible happened that registered protest, silent or otherwise; despite the very audible booing for Bush. I'd say his reception from the crowd before his speech was, at kindest, very lukewarm; but I'm very disappointed that nothing happened.
I agree that it doesn't have to be all or nothing, and it is perfectly acceptable to reject a speaker invited or promoted by an institution you are part of, cf. Ann's example of the Phyllis Schlafly graduation protest.
I rather hoped that someone's pink ballet slipper or rainbow-striped flip-flop might make its way on stage.
I turned my back on the tv screen in my high school, while my econ teacher (by day, sunday school teacher by.. well... Sunday) prayed along with Warren with his eyes closed, which, yes, creeped me out too.
I know I'm not the only one who felt uncomfortable when Obama was giving his speech. Everytime he claimed that everyone is equal I had to stop myself from rolling my eyes. Ugh.
Yeah, going on and on about freedom and diversity while yet selecting a speaker with that kind of baggage smacked of double-speak to me. I understand that Obama is trying to make inroads with the opposition, but I was still disappointed, nonetheless.
ugh! i wish i read this before i ventured down to dc. the past few weeks i have talked with a few freinds about this very idea. and when the moment came....i just stood with my arms crossed.
oh well.