- ‹ previous
- 1891 of 8832
- next ›
More on the Rick Warren Wrangle: It's Not About Gay Marriage
On Friday morning, I was on the CBS' The Early Show to talk about the Rick Warren controversy. Opposite me (via satellite hookup) was Robert Jeffress, a Baptist pastor from Dallas, who was billed as a friend of Warren.
Asked by Harry Smith to explain why gay and lesbian outfits and progressives were upset by Barack Obama's decision to hand Warren the invocation slot at the presidential inauguration, I noted that it was good that Obama has an inclusive approach toward political and policy debates, that he should make common cause with Warren on issues like poverty and climate change, and that it was wrong for him to grant Warren this high-profile platform because Warren's anti-gay remarks--he recently compared homosexuality to incest and pedophilia--are insulting to a large number of Americans, particularly many who worked long and hard to bring Obama to the White House. It's one thing to sit at the table with Warren and discuss how best to alleviate poverty; it's another to enhance his status.
When Jeffress had his chance, he went on about how it was unfair to slam Warren as a hate-monger because of his fervent opposition to gay marriage.
Gay marriage? Who said anything about gay marriage? Not me. I had pointed out that Warren's big sin had been to equate gays and lesbians with loathsome pedophiles. Is that hate-mongering? Some people might see it that way. But I was not going to judge Warren on that front. His words speak for themselves--and for him.
Jeffress, I'm guessing, realizes that his side is on more solid ground when the issue is gay marriage, not gay rights. Much of the public does seem to be opposed to gay marriage, but each year Americans are becoming more tolerant and accepting of homosexuality. Not Warren, though. He and other fundamentalists who despise homosexuality (hate the sin, right?) are on the losing end of a generational shift in the United States. Consequently, they are clinging to the gay marriage issue as a lifeline. And that's why Jeffress quickly tried to redefine the issue. They want to keep attention focused on the altar, not acceptance.
By the way, Jeffress last year made some news of his own, when he proclaimed that GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney was "not a Christian" because "Mormonism is not Christianity. Mormonism is a cult." He has also called Islam and Hindu false religions.
So here's a question: would Obama consider inviting Jeffress to give an invocation at an official event? I don't believe he would, for that could rightly be considered an insult to Mormons, Muslims, and Hindus. Which brings us back to the original matter: since Warren goes beyond arguing against gay marriage to denigrate gays and lesbians as the moral equivalents of those who engage in incest and pedophilia, it is a slap in the face of gays and lesbians for Obama to award Warren this prime plum. He should have selected someone who, when it comes to morality, is more inclusive.
This was first posted at www.davidcorn.com.
Photo by flickr user All About You God used under a Creative Commons license.
The following is a posting I did at Chang.gov.
==============================
I, too, am quite surprised at your selection of Pastor Rick Warren to give the invocation at your inauguration, and not for the apparent reasons. This is a new beginning for you Mr. President-Elect, and a lot of people and events; there is no need for this kind of controversy out-the-gate: there will ne plenty opportunity for that. This is a celebration?so, let's celebrate!
You have a tremendous opportunity to acknowledge another African-America is more suited for this opportunity and his accomplishments fit very well in your theme of change?and you know him. Chaplin Dr. Barry C. Black (Rear-Admiral Retired), the 62nd Chaplin of the United States Senate, served in the U.S. Navy for over twenty-seven years, ending his distinguished career as this country's 1st African-American as the Chief of Navy Chaplains.
I am not a Politian, but I understand what pundits are saying about, "Picking your fights", and "?using political capital?"
Again, President-Elect Obama, congratulations on your election, and May God richly bless you and your Presidency.
Warren's ideas are borrowed from Marx. Marx condemned the sexual freedom advocated by Fourier and Saint-Simon as a relapse into a "bestial" state of "universal prostitution". Engels condemned homosexuality among men of ancient Greece in two separate passages of The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State, describing it as "morally deteriorated", "abominable", "loathsome" and "degrading". Marx apparently shared Engels' views, writing that "the relation of man to woman is the most natural relation of human being to human being" and describing the author of a text promoting sexual freedoms as "that queer prick" ("Schwanzschwulen"). According to the socialist writers Hekma, Oosterhuis and Steakley, Marx and Engels saw any form of sexuality outside of a monogamous heterosexual marriage as a kind of degeneracy fostered by capitalism, which could be cured by socialism. According to Engels, "natural moral principles" would flourish in the socialist future, when (heterosexual) "monogamy, instead of declining, finally becomes a reality ? for the man as well, and homosexuality would simply disappear.
August Bebel's Woman under Socialism (1879), the "single work dealing with sexuality most widely read by rank-and-file members of the SPD," was even more explicit in warning socialists of the dangers of same-sex love. Bebel attributed "this crime against nature" in both men and women to sexual indulgence and excess, describing it as an upper-class, metropolitan and foreign vice.
Watching the Saddleback debate, it was fairly obvious to me that Warren had packed the house for McCain and probably coached him as well. Despite that, Obama came out ahead, except in the eyes of a few die-hard Repugs. So maybe Obama is trying to show there's no hard feelings, or maybe put Warren on notice. Keep your frienndly enemies even closer, and in the light where you can see them
"He has also called Islam and Hindu false religions."
double check your noun formation
Seems like Obama could have invited a group of clergy to say a short prayer. Why aren't Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, mainline protestants, or catholics represented?
Or even better, why not just skip the invocation completely. Aren't we a pluralistic society that has a government that doesn't recognize any one religion over another?
Warren's repulsive views are not just limited to discrimination against gays. He also is an anti-abortion creationist, so he's against women's rights and scientists, too. (Imagine how Obama's lesbian high school biology teacher constituency must feel right now!)
Rather than picket, yell or boycott the inuaguration, I urge all attendees to quietly sing "We Shall Overcome" throughout the invocation. (Pete Seeger's version available on youtube.com.) Thousands of voices of hope can drown out one voice of bigotry, even if it has big amps.
The Constant Weader at www.RealityChex.com
Thank you for not letting another god-damned fundamentalist use the "marriage" dodge. I only hope you called him on this during the interview (even if you did, I'd rather fall over dead than watch CBS).
These wackos believe that there are angels and demons fighting in the air all around us right now. I'm not kidding! When you start really reading all of the bullshit that fundamentalist christianity shovels on it's believers, it almost starts sounding like scientology. How about instead of talking to some sky ghost, we invite someone to give an inspiration speech. How about that lady who was the oldest black woman to vote this year? I would love to hear her perspective. How about someone who marched on Birmingham for the most basic of civil rights, never dreaming of the day they'd witness a black man inaugurated into the office of the president. How about anybody but an irrelevant white male bigot who is going to marginalize a huge portion of the crowd by his mere presence. Oh wait, that's right. If we don't play nice the Christians will start shouting "persecution" again.
Awesome. It's not like our government's ever really represented us anyway. Why should I expect them to start now.
Rick Warren might be a good pick as it will bring the Evangelical religion out from under their rock into the open where they can be seen as the hypocritical nutballs that they are..
This is politics and government, not the afterschool club. Obama needs this to appeal to conservatives, to appeal to conservative district congressmen and red state senators, to get their support for his projects passed through congress. If he doesnt do this, you can kiss any chance of gay marriage goodbye.
Try some political foresight, and dont forget that morality in politics can only be an overarching theme, not a micromanager.
Exposing half-baked Christians is good. Mainstreaming anything in America tends to neutralize rough and cruel edges. The lesson from the story of the emperor's clothes only works if he is paraded before a wide audience. We need to remember our new president is a constitutional law professor. He speaks eloquently of the dynamic, progressive Constitution and makes clear the "heart" of the document. Mr. Obama directs our attention often to the "beating heart" of America. The generational efforts at perfecting the ideals laid out on paper so long ago!
Why do these arseholes think it's all right to subject a secular nation to public invocations of Xtianity every time they get a chance?
To hell with all the pastors at government events. It's unfortunate that Warren gets his 15 minutes of fame from a "progressive" like Obama. He IS a hatemonger.
But the bigger picture is that there is a tacit assumption by officials in the US government to include prayers in public events. That's NOT what the founders wanted, it's NOT what I want, and it's a damn shame that I have to listen to a bunch of pious jerks spewing fairy tales during public events. I shouldn't have to.
-Wexler
What's next? this was pure naked political pandering. For eight years the far right has run rough-shod over this country. Did they EVER reach out to anyone but themselves? I understand Obama's desire to bridge the divides, but this was a bad, bad move. If President Obama realizes even some slight benefit from this, then who or what is next. who gets kicked in the teeth next? Gays are probably the most vulnerable group in this nation, politically. Its really tragic that Obama has pandered to the far right at the expense of supporters who realll need HIS support.
He should be held accountable. His transition office and website should be flooded with demands that he distance himself from Warren's views...IN HIS INAUGURAL ADDRESS.
I think it's unfair to say that Rick Warren equates homosexuality with pedophilia. In the clip provided, he is talking about the prevention of pedophiles marrying children, of one man marrying multiple women, and of one man/woman marrying a member of the opposite sex.
His point is pretty obvious... if you support marriage as only one man, one woman, than anything which is not that should not be allowed. It's not that they are equal, it's that he has a sort of "no tolerance" policy on the matter. If you asked the TSA "do you approve of flyers bringing large pocket knives on planes in carry on luggage," they would say no, and they would also say "we also don't approve of bringing baseball bats, handguns, or automatic rifles...".
Dave, would you go and write a post that "omigod! the TSA equates automatic rifles to small carry on knives! what fools!"
This post really disappointed me... I expect so much more from you guys
you are being ridiculous. you guys can believe what you want to believe.
McCain absolutely outperformed Obama at the faith forum, and the notion that Warren "packed the house" and coached McCain is inane. Wasn't it just months ago that the controversy was McCain had supposedly listened to the interview in his motorcade radio? How could Warren coach McCain if he was late to the freakin event??
you are ridiculous
His point is more than obvious, ehboy. Feel free to read this transcript WHICH HE ADDED HIS OWN CORRECTIONS TO.
"The issue to me, I'm not opposed to that as much as I'm opposed to redefinition of a 5,000 year definition of marriage. I'm opposed to having a brother and sister being together and calling that marriage. I'm opposed to an older guy marrying a child and calling that marriage. I'm opposed to one guy having multiple wives and calling that marriage.
BELIEFNET: Do you think those are equivalent to gays getting married?
Oh , I do."
http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/2008/12/rick-warrens-controversi...
Go read your golden boy's own words. He goes on to "clarify" further, but it doesn't get any clearer than this:
"BELIEFNET: Do you think those are equivalent to gays getting married?
Oh , I do."
Now, you might personally believe those views which you ascribe to Mr. Warren, but he thinks that two men (or women) who lay together are no different than a brother who lays with his sister.
He is just another fundamentalist bigot, and if anybody wants to start a pool on the date of his own sex scandal coming to light, we can find an internet gambling site to take us up on that.
"and the notion that Warren ... and coached McCain is inane"
"that word, i do not thin it means what you thin it means"
Note to Obama: I have blocked all the calls from your fund raising people which come in twice daily (still). I donated money to your campaign because I didn't like the Christianist view of the Bushies that government should tell people how to live their lives. I won't be sending you anymore money.
But what is this "Prime plum" really? It's a fifteen minute speech from the bully pulpit that's all. Obama's taking the heat for selecting this man, and I think he knew he would, so the question is why did he select him in the first place?
The only plausible explaination is that he is attempting to unite us by emphasing what we have in common. After all, he's going to need some of those Fundamentalist Christian Republicans on board if he is ever going to get us out of the tailspin we're in.
My point is there are bigger fish to fry than the selection of Rick Warren for a short speech. Fish such as global warming, the economy, the wars, and a thousand other monumental blunders of the Bush Administration.
"loathsome pedophiles" Your adjective imputes volition on the part of pedophiles, when increasingly science is discovering neurobiological impulses that compel such behavior. And although pedaphilia is unacceptable behavior (b/c it is not victimless, like consensual sex among adults), the solution demands a health approach, not demonizing.
Actually, as freethinkers, we were represented early..by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison and others. If our early American history was taught more and the principles of our founding documents more explained and referred to accurately in the media, we would recognize the greatness and relevance of its principles and turn back the tide of ignorant religious bigotry.
from the donker...
"and the notion that Warren ... and coached McCain is inane"
"that word, i do not thin it means what you thin it means"
google search "define: inane"...
results:
devoid of intelligence
Lacking sense or meaning; silly
vacuously or complacently and unconsciously foolish
One that lacks sense or substance
I think I know exactly what it means. And the notion that McCain was coached by Warren in the faith forum is lacking in sense or substance.
PS- I know it's easy to attack me because I am the one standing up for the pastor, but I'm not some GOP cheerleader. I supported Obama, even made calls for him. I just happen to try holding take a much broader view of the world than 99% of Mojo commenters.
I agree-- skip the stupid invocation. We are a pluralistic society. NOT a Christian one.
The fundamentalist Jeffress was right about one thing. Mormonism isn't Christian. Just as Islam is a Nestorian Christian heresy, Mormonism is a Calvinist Christian heresy. Neither actually qualify as Christian, the Mormons have Smith and Islam has Mohammed. The cult point is arguable, although it can be seen as valid too. Just take a look at the other LDS groups involved in the forced marriages of children and polygamy, and the refusal of Salt Lake City to do anything about them.
As much as I HATE the idea of agreeing with these subhuman freaks about anything, they have a point here.
I think Obama is trying to play nice, even with the fringe of right wing religious types, because he was elected to be president of everyone, not just those of us on the left. I think it's admirable that he's trying to include everyone. I personally wish he hadn't asked Rick Warren to be on stage with him, and I would have done it differently, but hey, it's Obama's party, he can do what he wants. He told us he would include everyone and now he's doing it. Good for him. We don't have to like every choice he makes but it is helpful to recognize what lies behind what he does.
The "Not Them AGAIN!" factor:
Gays don't have to raise families so they have a lot of money and a lot of time on their hands to spend ramming their sexuality down the throat of the rest of society.
A lot of people are getting disgusted by all that and are turning against them, not because of their sexual preferences (which is nobody's business but their own and should remain that way), but because of their activism and social over-representation. To hear some of them talk about their agenda, you'd think they had fought some bloody war of attrition, as if they had managed to survive Ypres or Passchedaele or something.
Hell-oooo?
Marriage rights for gays in a court of law is fine with me. In a court of law, killers get off on technicalities, financiers who ruin the lives of millions of honest hardworking people get off with light sentences in la-la land penitentiaries. A court of law is a moral cesspool. They can marry dogs and cats to cadavers and chain saws for all I care.
But gays hoping for a white wedding in the Catholic church will never see that day. The Catholic church is, except for a few short lived and long dead gnostic movements, the original Christian church and will never let that happen.
I'm sure gays can find some so-called Christian sects to marry them. I'd suggest The First Church of Mickey Mouse Apostle; or The of Latter Day Tele-Tubbies Church of Plasticine. Warren doesn't want to marry gays, but he might change his mind. They should just keep nagging him. Who knows? And more importantly: who cares?
Meanwhile, for all its faults, Rome will never allow such ignominious travesty of matrimony to despoil its rites.
And where did "gay" acquire a capital "g" anyway?
Come off it!
Spitfire
Hey Spitfire, you don't "have to raise a family" either. No matter what your priest tells you. I'm getting up into my 30s and my girlfriend and I will only ever have the cats (and her dog) and the VW's. I couldn't imagine bringing an innocent soul into this hopeless world. That doesn't mean, however, that I want the kids who do exist to have to grow up in bigotry and hatred.
"But gays hoping for a white wedding in the Catholic church will never see that day. "
This is where you idiots drive me insane. The argument isn't to force churches to perform same-sex marriages, simply to let those who are willing be able to perform services in a legally binding manner.
P.S. of all the dog and pony shows, you Catholics and your stand-up-sit-down-kneel-hokey-pokey dances provide me amusement to no end. I mean, jesus, how long ago was it that you finally decided to speak English in your services so that the congregation could understand what the priest is saying? 20 years? 30 years? Did you think god would need a few hundred years to pick up a new language?
lastly, where the hell is my other comment and why do I keep getting waitlisted? I play nice (for the most part).
Ah, the sputtering, apoplectic Spitfire. Ho ho. Where to begin?
"Gays have no families so they have a lot of money and time on their hands." Like the gay girl or guy working at Walmart or your local fast-food restaurant are swimming in free cash. Do you seriously thing the only people who "choose" to be gay are trust-fund babies? try 5% of the population of the country.
"A lot of people are getting disgusted by all that and are turning against them..." Well actually, more and more people are becoming familiar with the gay person next door and are becoming more accepting of gay rights. Maybe it's a generational thing.
"...and social over-representation." You must mean the what, three or four openly gay representatives in an overwhelmingly white, old, male, hetero Congress and Senate, right? And how many gay governors of the 50 states? Oh, maybe you mean on television, that bastion of free thinking. Let's remember that most of what's represented on television is FICTION. Otherwise we'd have been living under the liberal staff of "West Wing" the last eight years.
"Rome will never allow such ignominious travesty of matrimony to despoil its rites." I think the same was said in the '50s about interracial marriages, and for that matter, the idea of a Black President. Things change. I can't wait.
Warren has made a fortune with his marketing. The showmanship at his mega church is very well done (if you like loud music). The parking has three separate multi-lane highways to get the traffic in and out including their own bridge. I can't agree with him and IMO he is a poor choice. He is very MEGA.
It's nice to see so many people who aren't totally blind or just stupid. If Obama continues with this jelly fish policy, we need a march on Washington 10 million strong, a mass demonstration to let him know wants and end to the wars, an end to placating bigotry and a return to constitutional law. Having Rick Warren give the invocation for the inauguration is really asking us to swallow live eel. Actions speak louder than words.
Obama is really letting us down. I voted for Hillary and then for Obama in the GA. I am gay and Warren is a poor choice and shows a lack of sensitivity on Obama's part. I was planning on attending the inauguration to show support for the change Obama promised. I will stay home now as this historic moment has been tainted by a far right hate monger choise. I hope Obama will remember that all Americans should be respected and included. When a man such as Warren is given such a place of honor at this event there is no room for me and those like me.
It is myth that the gays and lesbians were the force to get Barack Obama into office. I am an evangelical Christian that you so blythly characterize as homophobic and bigoted, yet you accuse us of hatred and bigotry. There is a word for your attitude: hypocricy.
I believe that we evangelicals had a lot to do with his election, too, with the promised expectation that there would be room to discuss why a person like myself should be subjected to a litmus test of homosexuality and abortion. I heard Obama say that such quick rejection of all things religious would not be the way of his administration, and I was persuaded that he was sincere in his remarks.
Politically, you heterophobes should probably cool your heels a bit, as the potential for garnering the support of even evangelical pastors like me, given even a narrow corridor of entrance without being asked to leave because of our faith and practice would vastly outnumber the gay and lesbian voters in a New York minute.
When can we have a civil and intelligent discussion of homosexuality and why we believe it to be an abomination towards God, and a cousin, if not brother, to incest and pedophilia? I doubt that you could participate in such a discussion, as you are so vehemently opposed to Christianity that you would persecute all Christians if you had the opportunity.
But the Christian worldview has very valid and reasonable reasons for its opposition to the sins of homosexuality. The problem here is that you can't even hold that discussion, since you by your autonomous reason reject the very basis of rationality.
That's right: the Christian faith, and only the Christian faith provides the foundation for rational thought. In a proper forum, we could debate this, but I doubt that you will participate, as it would be for the Christian apologist like battling with a foe with his hands tied behind his back, like the Black Knight in the Monty Python classic.
Obama is taking the right and reasonable path, and trying to counter your radical wing of hatred that wants to claim that homosexuality is normal, when nature and the world population loudly claims that it is not.
My own view of homosexuality is based on the firm foundation of God's written revelation, particularly Romans chapter one. It is the consequence of God's judicial abandonment of the willful rebellious sinners, in which God "gave them over," and "gave them up to vile passions, for even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due."
The homosexual mind is perverse, despite your loud protestations to the contrary. But more than perverse, it is entirely irrational, and against all nature, so that I call it a form of insanity.
The solution? Easy, really. Repent of that, turn from your wicked ways, and you shall be saved from your iniquity.
Funny. I am an evangelical Christian and I have doubled my contributions. Go ahead and take your football home; we'll buy another.
Mr. Obama directs our attention often to the "beating heart" of America.
And then he directs our attention to a pastor who believes that a beating heart in my belly is worth more than the beating heart in my chest.
For those of you who are familiar with the Scriptures, the Old Testament, incest did not appear to be abominable. Sara and Abraham were siblings. Jesus the Christ of the New Testament, never touched on the subject of homosexuals. They have been around since Genesis, so He must have known about them. His message was one of love and inclusion, in that He died for everyone. Preachers (and others) who disparage anyone for any reason are not acting in a Christlike manner. This includes racists, some who are Klansmen who say they are christians. Hatred of any kind, although too numerous to mention, is not a trait of a true Christian. Unfortunately many of the churches and their leaders are misinformed. They should seek to know the Master.
Rick Warren is anti-gay, and anti-reproductive rights. Why is Obama allowing him to speak at his presidential inauguration?
"Seems like Obama could have invited a group of clergy to say a short prayer. Why aren't Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, mainline protestants, or catholics represented?"
Well, I know this is going to go down hard with some people, but, maybe it's because Obama *is* an evangelical.
No?
12/19/08
Obama v. Warren
For one who supported President Elect Obama, it is an outrage to have a Far Right Cult Religious Rick Warren to give a prayer at President Elect Obamas Inauguration. There is no place for prayer at any U.S. Government function. There is what is called, 'Separation of Church and State' in America and it is about time it is practiced 24/7.
No 'President', if they be a Christian, Jewish, Muslim or a practicing member of any other 'Cult Religion' can be a practicing member of their 'Cult Religion', if they are President or in any division of the U.S. Government.
Being President Elect Obama is a practicing Christian, he can not practice his 'Cult Religion' and be President at the same time. If President Elect Obama is going to follow the 10 Commandments to the letter of what they state, he can not serve as President of the United States of America. Since no former President has never followed the 10 Commandments to the letter of what they state, proves my point. You can not state you are an Acting Christian as President Elect Obama states and when he takes the oath of office as President of the United States of America and order the Killings of citizens in other countries or in America as just one example. Neither can you practice 'Discrimination' against the American Citizens President Elect Obama. We have had this happen for the past 8 years by Emperor Bush and his Dick as in shoot your best friend in the face Cheney, since they have been in public office and are always talking about they are Christians. Being a Christian myself, is a private matter of Faith, as I do not support 'Religious Cults', not one I support to have in our U.S. Government ever. The same goes for having, 'In God We Trust' on our 'United States Currency' or on United States Government Buildings is wrong and should be removed.
Far Right Cult Religious Rick Warren is a Bigot, Racist and Discriminates and supports Hatred 100%. He enjoys the comforts of his 'Mega Cult Religious Church' that has nothing to do with the United States Government. Unless you are talking about his 501(c) Tax Status.
I can no longer support President Elect Obama as he has broken his pledge of 'Change' by allowing Far Right Cult Religions into the U.S. Government. It is a proven fact that no former President including the present one we have living in 'Our White House' that have professed to be a, 'Practicing Christian and sign orders that go against their practicing 'Cult Religions' can call themselves a 'Practicing Christian'. This is just a fact. To be any other way is a 100% Oxymoron.
Good Bye President Elect Obama, just when we thought you were going to be the 'Change' we supported. You have failed even before you have taken the 'Oath of Office'. President Elect Obama, you can not talk out of both ends and think we are going to buy it as you have committed your first lie to the American Citizens by stating you are going to have 'Discrimination, Hatred, Racism & Bigotry' at the Oath of Office taken on January 20th, 2009 with Cult Religions Leader Rick Warren. We have had to live the past 8 years of lies by President Bush and Vice President Cheney and their Far Right Fascist Republican Party of the 1% Rich, and we surely do not need to have the practice continued. The 'Buck Stops Here' with the American Citizens. There is no place for 'Cult Religions' practiced in the United States Government, period.
Godless Heathen, I must tell you I just love your comments. I am soooooo sick of the constant religious BS and the monumental amount of time that is being wasted on this non-sense. It is indeed a sorry nation who measures its worth on just how superstitious its leaders are. And this in the 21st Century. We are no better than the Taliban when it comes to weird believe systems even though we really should know better. So sad that we just refuse to evolve.
I think the gay community should step back and take a positive look at this situation. It appears to me that we will soon be getting seperate drinking foutains, reserved seats in the back of the bus, seperate bathrooms, and lets not forget better seating in resturants...
Maybe just one more comment. After browsing through the comments, I come up with a list of the slanders that are hurled at Christians and those who opposed homosexuality and gay marriage. Sadly, it is only a partial list.
Christians and Christianity are:
* repulsive
* sub-human freaks
* far right [I am a left Dem]
* idiots
* bulls--t
* bigots/bigotry [but see below]
* stupid
* racist
* god-damned fundamentalists
* hypocritical nut cases
* half-baked
* assholes
* pious jerks
* stand-up, sit-down, kneel, hokey-pokey dancers [Catholics]
You guys are SO nice!
Now, since the term bigot is perhaps the must ubiquitous term tossed around, let's consider the meaning:
"One who is strongly partial to his own group and intolerant to those who differ."
Sorry, all you gay folks here, but you have just proven yourselves bigots.
And, while I am here, let me clear up one overused and silly mockery. It is the Xiantity thing. What the ignornant writer seems not to understand that the Greek name for Christ begins with the letter "Khi," which in the Greek is X. So around our church, we don't mind the reference at all, indeed, we use it to represent Christ.
Doh.
It seems like all of the progressives who 'worked long and hard' for Obama weren't really paying attention to the issues.
Chris Hedges says it better than I can:
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20081103_only_nader_is_right_on_the_...
Look at Obama's choice for Secretary of Agriculutre, his apparent choice of Rep. Congressman Ramstad as drug czar
http://www.drugpolicy.org/news/112408dczar.cfm
This isn't 'change' by any stretch of the word.
Does anyone hear The Who playing?
To Victor,
who claims "all homosexuality is against nature". I suggest you go back to biology class, buddy. The natural world abounds with homosexuality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behav...
From a straight ally.
Perhaps the most revealing thing about Warren is his observation that gays are proof there is no evolution. Actually, since he also believes that our species walked with dinosaurs, it's obvious he hasn't evolved himself.
Someone here wrote :"There is what is called, 'Separation of Church and State' in America and it is about time it is practiced 24/7."
I stand by my ideas. My next door neighbor is gay, and I like him a lot because he's a nice person, and a good neighbor. One of my best lady friends is bisexual. She does NOT try to involve me in her politics.
But my girlfriend is heterosexual and that's all that matters to me. To each his own.
The rest of you "militants" can just go sit on it and spin...
Oh!
I'm an atheist, by the way.
No capital!
Religious expressions were declared illegal at our local public high school commencements after a student and family protested that the separation of church and state required that no such religiosity be sanctioned.
What's the law on the inagural ceremony? Has it been sued?
Here is the thing to remember about this, in all blogs, posts and whatnot. Here is the Golden Rule:
"Actually, as freethinkers, we were represented early..by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison and others. If our early American history was taught more and the principles of our founding documents more explained and referred to accurately in the media, we would recognize the greatness and relevance of its principles and turn back the tide of ignorant religious bigotry."
Posted by: W.S. on 12/19/08 at 1:24 PM
C'est ça, exactement! W.S. has captured the soul, and the need for, America The Beautiful.
Let's make it beautiful again...
Spitfire
I can see no valid reason for this choice of pastor at the inauguration. It is not inclusivity to include someone at this landmark event whose philosophy promotes exclusivity . The choice of Warren offends my liberal beliefs and my faith as a Christian. I am so very tired of bible-thumping evangelicals getting to represent 'Christianity'. Note that it is usually the old testament that they use to justify their moral outrage. I agree with Misty that Jesus's message was love. Love your neighbor as yourself. Not if s/he looks and thinks like you. Love your neighbor whatever their race, culture, religion, sexual orientation, etc. Also-many Americans are not Christians. Should our Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist,Muslim, Shinto, Sikh or Pagan fellow citizens feel excluded? Warren was a bad choice, a VERY bad choice. What can Obama have been thinking????
"..keep your enemies closer...". By that logic, why not just keep Cheney, et al, on?
Obama does NOT need more "conservative appeal". Just listen to FOX or Neo-con Radio--he's GOT IT!
Now, how about a progressive or two?
BTW--The LGBT community is taking this VERY personaly--and I do not blame them! What Warren say is despiscable! Obama has some nerve!
Of course, most "liberals" had to know he was a very conservative christsian, right?
Please check out analysis from black gay and lesbian people starting here:
Embracing Uncle Good-But-Homophobic: Why "Reaching Across the Aisle" to Rick Warren Does Not Feel Safe to Everyone
The issue is being forced to remain silent while someone who would do away with your rights gets to speak to you on a day of celebration. "Reaching across the aisle" will cause fear rather than "warm and fuzzy" feelings depending upon one's social vulnerability. As a heterosexual, Obama refuses to see it. I have always seen him as wearing heterosexual privilege even more so than Clinton wore white privilege. This is just another moment of it.