Cesca v. Stranahan: Tonight 10:30pm / 7:30 pm

Two men enter, one man leaves?

Way too cool! Look forward to it! QT

Sweet. Something for which I’ll stay up past my bedtime.

Glad you guys are doing this–this is a very important issue–I really do understand why so many are so upset by this–one of the reasons I truly feel this is a master stroke is it has elevated the issue in a way no other move could have–I also love what Thom Hartmann wrote–that guy is amazing–just started listening to him.

“Two Progessive Perspectives”Isn’t that stretching the truth a tetch?

Of course, the answer to the gay marriage question is already embedded within our Constitution – a Constitution that has at its very core the ideal of equal citizenship under the law; a Constitution that promises its people liberty, and justice, and a union that could be and should be perfected over time.And yet words on a parchment would not be enough to deliver homosexuals from oppression, or provide men and women of every sexual preference their full rights and obligations as citizens of the United States. What would be needed were Americans in successive generations who were willing to do their part – through protests and struggle, on the streets and in the courts, through civil disobedience and always at great risk – to narrow that gap between the promise of our ideals and the reality of their time.

{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{Kyle W.}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}I don’t entirely agree with you, but I agree enough to appreciate your post. Beautifully stated.QT

QTYou can thank P-E Obama for the majority of those words. And Republicants wonder why he gets Abe Lincoln comparisons!

Aw shit. It’ll be available for listening afterwards?

Well you can say that Obama by having Warren do the invocation has opened up dialogue about these issues.But can we talk about something else like how we will have a diverse cabinet with a nominated female Latina for Sec of Labor, a person of Lebanese decent as Sec of Transportation, the fact that Gates agrees with Obama on closing Gitmo, Obama is preparing to reverse a lot of the dumb executive orders of Bush, etc.

Wouldn’t it be great if right after Obama was sworn in, before the speech, he paused for a moment to sign some executive orders?My own little fantasy.

I just caught this. Long day on several fronts. Is the link to the actual radio show when it starts? Or is that just the call-in number? And what Paddy asked: if I miss it with all my bedlam here, can I catch it later?

Wow!A Cesca-Stanahan cage match!

Reminds me of “Point Counter Point?” which ones gonna call the other an ignorant slut?

If this is to be a true VS. competition, you’ll need wrestling-style nicknames.I say you go with Bob “High-Pockets” Cesca and Lee “Hot Lips” Stranahan.

What would you know about Lee’s “hot lips”? Heh? HEH?QT

(QT’s just pissed you didn’t give Bob teh “Hot Lips” designation)

Who said Obama “likes” Warren?I’d say he tolerates the stupidity in hopes of changing his mind!

Changing his mind about what? In case you haven’t heard, Barack Obama is not for Gay marriage. If that’s the litmus test, then I’m a better presidential candidate than he is. Since it isn’t the test, you can all go and thank whatever rock or god you worship. My administration would have found a way to outlaw politcial parties altogether, and …wow! government would ACTUALLY work! You wouldn’t want that. You’re getting what you asked for; another party politician

Tolerance is the key word!

hey thanks for taking all those questions.

I already said tolerance is the word!How tolerant is Rick Warren?

I wished I’d caught that just a bit earlier so I could call in!

(kat’s wrong. I don’t want to know anything about hot lips that I’m not… uh… engaging… So there.sticks out tongue)But for the record – both gentlemen sound like they possess hot lips. Couldn’t pull this up on the hand held, and my laptop takes FOREVER to boot up, so I caught the last 7 minutes. Very fun hearing both of you. I largely agree with Lee (no surprise there) and want to hear the story about AllahPundit (who, for the record, I’d feel better about calling by his whole name, instead of calling him “Allah” which is arabic for “God.”) But anyway, I wish you guys could have gotten an extension – and that I could have called in. Look forward to the podcast of the whole thing later (she said, hopefully!).QT

kansasdem: they didn’t take any…

Obama’s against gay marriage but FOR civil unions. From what I’ve read, Rick Warren is against civil unions too. Obama is more pro-choice than anything. Rick Warren is pro-life. There is a great deal of disagreement between the men – but they found space to respect each other.BTW, Lee especially, you may enjoy this thread: http://www.exisle.net/mb/index.php?showtopic=56190Lots of opinions, mostly civilly shared.QT

WINNAH BY TECHNICAL KNOCKOUT: BOB… HIIIIGH-POCKETS… CESSSSSSS-KAAA! CESCA!I was this close to calling in. THIS CLOSE!

Well, if they’re trying to find a “middle ground” fu-ged-aboud-it!Maybe Obama is trying to bring Warren around to reality!Naaaaah! It just sucks!

At the end of the day what it amounts to is:Warren is the best of the worst! He’s the equivalent of most moderate of the Taliban!

Lee’s most cogent point, I thought, was in attempting a comparison to the attitude of McCain and the Right towards dialogue with one’s enemies (Achmedinijad, Castro, etc.)Where this falls apart is that Obama is not inviting either Achmidinijhad or Castro in a place of honor at a big party celebrating the accomplishment of his winning the election.Having a civil dialogue with an ideological opponent is wholly different than inviting them to a party and having them speak in a position of honor.Bob began to explain, to a degree, why this was a false equivalency, but then pulled the punch either out of deference to friendship or time constraints.Also, I think that the idea that gay equality has been rapid or (relatively) without struggle or incident is objectively false. Riots in San Francisco following Dan White’s successful “Twinkie Defense,” the fact that we know of the words “Gay Bashing” as a phenomenon, the historic suppression and tragedy (and danger!) of being gay in America has been going on for quite some time.People have been gay for as long as there has be America. Before, even. AND been discriminated against.The fact that you’ve only noticed it recently is a question more of your noticing than anything else. I mean, the tree fell in the woods; whether or not you heard it is your issue, not the sound’s.

Thanks to everyone for listening – if you listened to the post show accidental banter, I think we plan to do it again sometime…

Bob, this is for you:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/18/rick-warren-praises-obama_n_152253.htmlThe relevant part:

The Bible admonishes us to pray for our leaders. I am honored by this opportunity to pray God’s blessing on the office of the President and its current and future inhabitant, asking the Lord to provide wisdom to America’s leaders during this critical time in our nation’s history.

This was my opening point, and remains my most salient. One of “theirs” is praying for one of “ours” and acknowledging him. Indeed, this is really a weak statement – we are looking for specific blessings on President Obama. Because this symbol for some will enforce legitimacy.QT

Listening to the beginning that I missed, I want to agree with you, Lee Stranahan on the subject of the friendship of two men.Another point – not only is gay marriage not legal (don’t think it’s a crime) but we ought to note that at one time homosexual acts were criminal acts. One could be arrested for sodomy, for instance. From the standpoint of a Christian minister – it has to look like a watershed – the normalization of homosexuality is just changing the threshhold of normalcy – something they would disagree with. So even if we are indeed saying that Rick Warren is drawing an equivalency (I’ve argued against this position), the fact is – from the point of view of a Christian evangelical minister – taking the long view, it is a watershed that they don’t want moved because the next watershed to be normalized could indeed by child marriage (or a return to polygamy). In fact, polygamy could become a real factor given the rise of Islam as a minority religion in the United States, and the fact that there are still polygamous mormon sects operating. Again the point isn’t to agree – but to understand. Recognizing this as a watershed (I’m sure watershed isn’t the right word, but anyway), what could we on THIS side of the argument say to alleviate that concern?QT

you act like sodomy has to be one guy fucking another guy, you can sodomize your wife you know… in fact there are whole websites dedicated to it.oh and i aint buying the whole gay marriage is a gateway drug argument.

>>Another point – not only is gay marriage not legalIt’s legal where I live…equal protection under the law & all that.

I want to throw my two cents in there, even if the post is getting a little stale by now… Josh hit the mark with his comment above- if you stand for, above all, Unity and cooperation as opposed to deviciveness and bigotry- you really shouldn’t be honoring anyone who has become infamous for bigoted remarks. Period.

Thanks, ceu, for the reminder that it is legal in some places.I think it was Travis who offered me a definition of progressive as being in favor of continual progress. Of course he means progress in a certain direction… but it should be noted that that direction is often the opposite of the direction conservative Christians want. For them progress is society moving in the direction of their moral standards.If society isn’t moving in that direction, what can or should be said to alleviate the opposition?Obama has seized upon a very good framework.QT

hey bob,i live in pa too and i had nearly forgotten rick santorum was previously our senator.as far as im concerned the word “santorum” has clearly been defined by dan savage and will forever remain as such.

Can’t hear shit captain.