Rick Warren to give invocation at Obama’s inauguration; Update: Gay groups go ballistic
posted at 5:30 pm on December 17, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
I was hoping for someone a little more, shall we say, audacious, but audacity’s always been unwelcome at The One’s biggest events. Enter Warren, one of the most politic choices available, who’s been courting Obama for more than two years notwithstanding his highly nuanced voting record on life-saving treatment for babies delivered after botched abortions. For his trouble he’s got a spot on the dais on Inauguration Day, just after Dianne Feinstein and before Aretha Franklin. Jackpot.
It makes a whole lot of sense. Even though Warren and Obama disagree on the life issue, they do see eye to eye on many social justice issues. This move is also classic Obama because it is a signal to religious conservatives that he’s willing to bring in both sides to the faith discussion in this country. Obama has never shied away from that.
I’m far from well informed about this, but isn’t Warren’s reputation among religious conservatives that of a bit of a squish? Bryan used to inveigh against him here from time to time; just yesterday, he reminded Beliefnet that he’s okay with domestic partnerships for gays, albeit not marriage. Predictably, the perpetually aggrieved are agitating for Obama to boot him. Exit question: Isn’t the only difference between Warren and Obama on gay marriage that one supported Prop 8 while the other tepidly opposed it?
Update: Lefty outfit People for the American Way lowers the boom:
It is a grave disappointment to learn that pastor Rick Warren will give the invocation at the inauguration of Barack Obama.
Pastor Warren, while enjoying a reputation as a moderate based on his affable personality and his church’s engagement on issues like AIDS in Africa, has said that the real difference between James Dobson and himself is one of tone rather than substance. He has recently compared marriage by loving and committed same-sex couples to incest and pedophilia. He has repeated the Religious Right’s big lie that supporters of equality for gay Americans are out to silence pastors. He has called Christians who advance a social gospel Marxists. He is adamantly opposed to women having a legal right to choose an abortion.
Update: Cometh the outrage. Obama’s got no choice but to sit there and take it; he’s not going to alienate Christians or jeopardize his new centrist rep by uninviting Warren.
“Your invitation to Reverend Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at your inauguration is a genuine blow to LGBT Americans,” the president of Human Rights Campaign, Joe Solomonese, wrote Obama Wednesday. “[W]e feel a deep level of disrespect when one of architects and promoters of an anti-gay agenda is given the prominence and the pulpit of your historic nomination.”…
“It’s a huge mistake,” said California gay rights activist Rick Jacobs, who chairs the state’s Courage Campaign. “He’s really the wrong person to lead the president into office.
“Can you imagine if he had a man of God doing the invocation who had deliberately said that Jews are not going to be saved and therefore should be excluded from what’s going on in America? People would be up in arms,” he said.
The editor of the Washington Blade, Kevin Naff, called the choice “Obama’s first big mistake.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Wright! Why didn’t I think of that? What a perfectly wonderful idea. I like your comment even better than you know who’s.
JiangxiDad on December 17, 2008 at 9:05 PM
Mercy me, how could we have forgotten another famous Chicago preacher: Revrund Jesse Jackson, Sr.!
I mean, being Christian and all, Obama has forgotten the “cut his nuts off” comment.
Wethal on December 17, 2008 at 9:08 PM
In fairness to John McCain, he kicked Obama’s rear at Rick Warren’s Sadleback Forum. Obama’s statements were empty suit stuff — e. g., abortion above his pay grade. This was in stark contrast to McCain, who showed his real life experience and values. If I were Rick Warren, I would not give the invocation at Obama’s inauguration. I would be compelled to ask the Lord’s forgiveness of the American people for electing Obama.
Phil Byler on December 17, 2008 at 9:09 PM
Aretha Franklin is fat.
Michelle’s butt is fat.
You a racist?
JiangxiDad on December 17, 2008 at 9:11 PM
Boy, I was looking forward for mohammed himself to appear on stage, or the 12th imam from that dusty well. Oh well, hope there’s football game on or something.
texaninfidel on December 17, 2008 at 9:22 PM
Heh, what did gays expect? Obama’s most consisten-only exhibited trait is his political ambition. Gays are just a stepping stone, like every other identity within the Democrat party. Heck if the polls are bad enough he’ll ditch the UAW in a heartbeat and watch the media do a 180 on why we never needed a bailout.
Don’t worry gays Hispanics will be joining you under the bus real soon. Plenty a’ room!
Theworldisnotenough on December 17, 2008 at 9:24 PM
I agree with some above – I won’t be watching anyway, I think I have some cleaning or washing, or something important to do. However, it will be interesting to see the gays go after someone else for a change.
Bambi on December 17, 2008 at 9:27 PM
Apparently Human Rights Campaign doesn’t read Jim Geraghty at the Corner: “All of Obama’s statements come with expiration dates. All of them.“
Wethal on December 17, 2008 at 9:31 PM
I don’t know enough about Warren to make a theological judgment although I think he’s correct on the life issue and the gay marriage issue… I’m just delighted that the faggots are so pissed!
D2Boston on December 17, 2008 at 9:43 PM
I wonder if Warren will get any flak from pro-life groups for accepting this.
Wethal on December 17, 2008 at 9:44 PM
No, just sick of rich, fat, gluttonous snake oil sellers like warren, robertson, hagee, etc. passing judgment and spreading hatred on anyone who doesn’t buy the bull they are selling from their disgustingly obscene megachurches/monstrosities.
Noneya on December 17, 2008 at 9:46 PM
Warren is turning more left each day.He just wants to get more face time with the(ONE).How can a man who says he is strong pro-life give a invocation for a man who want no restrictions on a womens right to kill her unborn baby?I have lost all respect for Rick Warren and others like him.This is what happens to people when they think they are more important than they are.
thmcbb on December 17, 2008 at 9:55 PM
Obama’s first big mistake? Huh? First one today maybe…..
Dr Evil on December 17, 2008 at 10:00 PM
I absolutely agree. I also think Warren is going to take some flak from this.
INC on December 17, 2008 at 10:04 PM
PFAW says
Is this expression of grave disappointment supposed to be taken as evidence that supporters of equality for gay Amerians aren’t out to silence pastors who disapprove of homosexual conduct? Because it looks to me more like one more piece of evidence that this so-called “big lie” is the truth.
Confutus on December 17, 2008 at 10:07 PM
Barack Obusha? Quite possibly, now with footsie with the Religious Right and keeping on a great SecDef and not cuttin’ n runnin’ from Iraq.
Prez-elect: You son of a… I just might have voted for you for tilting right. Except you went up against that pair of Mavericks!!
HotAirJosef on December 17, 2008 at 10:12 PM
“I hate all those g*ddamn Christians ‘cuz they’re so full of hate!”
No sense of irony there.
ramrocks on December 17, 2008 at 11:19 PM
Isn’t Obama against gay marriage? Why the sudden hate by gays?
Mr_Magoo on December 17, 2008 at 11:27 PM
There is no such thing as a ’social gospel’. The Gospel is the story of Jesus Christ. . . there is no other Gospel (’Good News’).
‘anti-gay agenda’ means not letting them do EVERYTHING that they want to do wherever, whenever, however. . . lest ye be a bigot.
ThackerAgency on December 17, 2008 at 11:42 PM
Because Obama has been all over the map with gay marriage. See this and try to count the number of differing and contradictory statements.
INC on December 17, 2008 at 11:46 PM
Rick Warren help start a group called “Celebrate Recovery”-a Christian 12-step program-that’s helped many, me included.
I’m grateful for that.
What I’m not grateful for is Rev. Warren’s love-in with Assad a few years back.
There’s nothing Christian about making nice with terrorists.
annoyinglittletwerp on December 17, 2008 at 11:50 PM
I just saw this news regarding the inauguration:
Obama can’t have it both ways. He hemmed, hawed and embroidered his answers on gay marriage. Now, there is his quasi endorsement of a lifestyle which my faith informs me is immoral.
I have to wonder how widely this will be reported and what reactions will be to it.
INC on December 17, 2008 at 11:59 PM
Gay groups go ballistic?
More like gay groups remain ballistic.
They haven’t vandalized enough churches yet to quench their thirst for destruction in the name of perversion, so they must now attack The Messiah for not bringing in some kind of transsexual priest mockery for his inauguration.
DO NOT QUESTION OUR *$#LESS CHAPS, HOMOPHOBES! /gay activists.
BKennedy on December 18, 2008 at 12:08 AM
In a semi-related story — in terms of someone taking a position that’s you didn’t expect which is going to piss off the left — NRO noted tonight that Al Sharpton has come out against the union card check plan.
The standard line for years has been that the average African-American voter is far more conservative on social issues than the average white liberal Democrat, however, that split has never shown up at the ballot box. But Obama and his staff know the Clinton administration’s history, that going left in 1993-94 almost killed his administration and killed Democratic control of Congress. And they also know that while this may outrage all the special interest groups on the left, it’s not going to outrage African-American voters. And the coalition on the left can whine and stomp their feet all they want, but they can’t win national elections without the African-American voting block.
The left thought for the past year that they and their social agenda were riding the coattails of Barack Obama back into power. It would be funny if — at least on a few social issues — instead of them using Obama and telling him starting in January how to run things, it turned out that Barack was using them, and if he successfully pulls off the Clinton/Morris triangulation playbook by working with the Blue Dog Democrats in Congress, there’s nothing in the world the far left in the party can do about it (other to develop a case of Obama Derangement Syndrome, and given the invectives they hurled at Bush, some of the things they might say about Obama could be pretty … er … revealing to African-American voters).
jon1979 on December 18, 2008 at 12:11 AM
Of course he can. He’s The One. He can have anything he wants.
Gina on December 18, 2008 at 12:20 AM
I think it’s time for Christians to understand that gay rights groups want one thing only: to eliminate Christianity and Christians from public life. We have become their “pestilence”, and want nothing but total eradication.
I read only four chapters of “The Purpose-Driven Life”, closed it, and never touched it again. I just prefer the Bible a lot more. But his book has been the cornerstone for many forty-day revival studies at many churches. The fruit of that book has not been as good as many lead you to believe. Many people who challenge others in the congregation to follow what the Bible says, instead of what Warren says, have been summarily expelled from quite a few congregations. Many other churches have been split after “Purpose-Driven” studies and the pastors co-opting them as Gospel.
Warren may be a NYT best-selling author, but he’s seeking more and more the approval of man. That’s not the kind of figure I like to follow. In fact, I don’t follow the teachings of any pastor.
newton on December 18, 2008 at 12:38 AM
I am really tired of groups “going ballistic” about every freaking decision every freaking president makes.
This could be good–ODS coming from the left! They will be revealed as the psychos that they are.
PattyJ on December 18, 2008 at 12:46 AM
The “big lie” is what religious closet cases like Ted Haggard must live because they are shamed by the church from leading normal, healthy lives as gay americans with all the rights of heterosexuals.
Noneya on December 18, 2008 at 1:16 AM
There is nothing normal or healthy about most gay relationships. Given that when asked, homosexuals report a significantly larger number of sexual partners than heterosexuals, it is safe to assume they are at greater risk for STD’s and other ailments, in addition to an inability to understand fidelity.
It’s a sexual deviancy, plain and simple. Trying to pretend that different behavior leads to the same results is just as insane as believing that the same behavior employed multiple times leads to different individual results.
BKennedy on December 18, 2008 at 1:35 AM
Inability to understand fidelity? wtf? is that why we want MARRIAGE EQUALITY? or are you too stupid and bigoted to understand that?
Noneya on December 18, 2008 at 2:20 AM
When Rick Warren, or any other Christian leader, starts sending fake anthrax to gay groups, THEN we can talk about hatred.
I know. I’m an evil bigoted Christian fascist who hates gay people.
The people assaulting old ladies, blacklisting and ruining careers, sending fake anthrax, and, as happened in San Diego, telling an immigrant who supports Prop 8 to go back to where he came from, that’s FREEDOM FIGHTING BABY!!!!!
How’s this for hate?
You make me sick.
Hawkins1701 on December 18, 2008 at 3:35 AM
If your marriage was dissolved by religious bigots, wouldn’t you be angry too?
Noneya on December 18, 2008 at 3:53 AM
What if you were called bigots and nazis because of your beliefs? Oh yea, there is only one way to believe with no room for dis-believe in your world! Sorry, but I live in a free country where I shall live and believe as I wish and no amount of silly nonsense by people living a life style that wants to eliminate my faith will prevail. Count on that! Oh…and we also have the guns!
sabbott on December 18, 2008 at 5:48 AM
I’m going to weigh in and then read the comments, so, forgive me if this is already mentioned.
As an orthodox believer, (not capital O orthodox, just traditional) Rick Warren is not on my short list for favorite theologians. I read/listen to RC Sproul, Francis Schaeffer, Alvin Plantinga (philosophy), Al Mohler, John Piper, John Macarthur, Chuck Colson (worldview), Nancy Pearcey (worldview)etc.
I think he is a bit of a light weight…but I do not discredit him wholesale as some might. I believe he is a true believer who does some things we might not agree with but he is most times within the margin of Christian liberty. HOWEVER, there are some things he has said which could be misunderstood by younger believers and some things which are outright slaps in the face by those who really struggle for doctrinal/societal purity within his own ranks.
This is one of them.
His forum was really great, I thought. Then again, I am not one who thinks the most active religious groups in American from its inception should be silent in the public square. I think he is auditioning for Billy Graham’s spot. This is pretty sad…Billy Graham was unapologetic about the word of God and although he ministered to all presidents, he remained a bulwark of American Christian history. I *hope* Warren does/is the same.
Obama represents something quite different than, say, Bill Clinton. His atrocious anti life stance is hardly deniable and I am having difficulty understanding how that little issue of life is easily washed under the bridge by this man who seems so eager for adulation at the expense of the hard fought battles of Christians for the cause of the unborn. It is just more of the same from Warren in this regard. But, he would say that his achievements are all of God and any criticism is merely persecution over God’s blessing. Pshaw..
Mommypundit on December 18, 2008 at 6:03 AM
Absolutely right, Thacker.
Mommypundit on December 18, 2008 at 6:20 AM
so let’s see, Obama is currying favor with 10’s of millions at the expense of angering gay activists. He is a politician and the left won’t raise any stink over it. Bush on the hand, well clearly it would have been a sign on his anti-science beliefs and homo-phobia.
rob verdi on December 18, 2008 at 6:35 AM
The argument must never, ever, ever leave the objective. That is, Bkennedy, as soon as we exit the realm of objective acts, we lose ground in the subjective realm of emotion, “civil rights” etc.
Rightfully, societies have always regulated some behavior. Not all actions are equal in the sight of the law or society. There is also such a thing as “good shame.” We are a poor society when we remove all traces of moral shame for our wrong actions toward others and even self, in some respects. I think it is easy to see how we are attempting to remove all traces of guilt and shame for our behavior through our more therapeutic, self-help mentality.
As far as keeping the argument on the grounds of objective behavior: it is clear by our NATURAL BIOLOGY that our bodies were made different, with distinct functions unique to our sex for enjoyment and natural procreation. This excludes our ability to artificially inseminate, use birth control, abortion or switch gender through medical or cosmetic treatments, of course.
When two people of the same sex engage in some sexual activity, it, by virtue of their biology, violates the proper functions of their bodies, and, in many cases, causes unhealthy conditions to arise, not the least of it, HIV/AIDS. I do not think I need to give everyone a primer on how our body parts work in perfect union with the opposite sex to do these remarkable things…uh…you get my drift.
There is a moral/spiritual component to this, certainly, and I do not think that should be discounted. However, apologists for traditional man/womanhood, marriage, family and biology can handily win the argument by appealing to natural “law” which CLEARLY and VISIBLY trumps “love” and “lust” and even personal autonomy to choose a particular behavior. NOT ALL ACTIONS ARE CREATED EQUAL.
Mommypundit on December 18, 2008 at 6:56 AM
You HAVE marriage equality. Heterosexuals are only allowed to marry people of the opposite sex. Homosexuals are only allowed to marry people of the opposite sex. Of course, consider that marriage (in ALL cultures), for as long as written history shows, is the union between a man and a woman it’s kind of a given.
Oh, and don’t give me that “well why would a hetero man want to marry another hetero man” crap. Even uber-liberal Hollywood showed why ie. “I Prounce You Chuck and Larry” (or whatever it’s called).
DethMetalCookieMonst on December 18, 2008 at 7:18 AM
Good for Obama to stare down the radical LBGT crowd. I just hope that he doesn’t throw them a bone on something actually substantive to assuage their hurt feelings.
I love it when naive people work to elect a secular saint and then are disappointed when he actually acts like a politician.
I know this is off point, but I just read the WSJ story about the behavior of the Gitmo prisoners who throw pee and poo at their American captors among other horribles. If the military were to get a clue and release a video of this behavior, then Gitmo would be open for another 100 years. Imagine — we get (falsely) accused of mishandling a Koran (oh the horror!) and there are riots. In contrast, these scumbags act like scumbags, our guards have to take it and there are……crickets.
Sorry, I feel better.
johnboy on December 18, 2008 at 8:11 AM
Man, there are forces within the Christian community who are actively promoting the establishment of a centralized government. Warren seems to have embraced the liberal Christian orthodoxy in this regard.
True_King on December 18, 2008 at 8:19 AM
Who is Rick Warren, other than a debate moderator?
NoDonkey on December 18, 2008 at 8:24 AM
Oh, I understand. It’s becoming increasingly hard to miss.
Inability to understand fidelity? wtf? is that why we want MARRIAGE EQUALITY? or are you too stupid and bigoted to understand that?
I’ll answer that if you answer this: Why are certain gay leaders stating that marriage between gays will in many cases be less monogamous than our typical understanding of marriage?
Gina on December 18, 2008 at 8:33 AM
Pssst. Ixnay on the unsgay.
(Libs aren’t really opposed to owning guns. They just reflexively say that because conservatives believe in gun ownership. Once they realize they can use the guns to round up their opponents, they won’t be against them for long.)
JiangxiDad on December 18, 2008 at 8:42 AM
I guess it depends what Rick Warren says. If the BO team has to “approve” it then it will be metaphysical mush.
It’s the
economyabortion stupid.Mojave Mark on December 18, 2008 at 8:42 AM
I haven’t heard him say it, but I guaranty you that Warren believes this. I have never heard of him being accused of universalism (which Hussein embraces).
Allah, you should have a contest over how long it will take for Warren to be asked by some newsie if Jews go to heaven.
Akzed on December 18, 2008 at 8:54 AM
At least they can still feel shame.
Normal, healthy lives? Among sex perverts one finds higher rates of STDs, suicide, murder, drunk driving and other traffic offenses, domestic violence, child molestation and so on than the rest of the population. Is this particular form of narsicism evidence of a system-wide malfunction, of are all the negatives the result of people not being as “gay friendly” as you might prefer?
Akzed on December 18, 2008 at 9:07 AM
Whoever said they remain ballistic is right on target. Could they just shut up already, for the love of God, and quit whining?
Ryan Gandy on December 18, 2008 at 9:19 AM
Same can be said about the DNC and the leftists!
grapeknutz on December 18, 2008 at 9:35 AM
You should try a little morphine, take the edge off…
Akzed on December 18, 2008 at 9:59 AM
I’m glad you’re not into “passing judgement” on others.
labrat on December 18, 2008 at 10:05 AM
Speak for yourself. Have you looked in the mirror lately?
You know, I want to be afraid of you, but I’m not. We’re commanded not to be afraid of those who kill the body, but of He who can really take your soul and condemn it to eternal damnation.
Yeah, I do think that the hate you harbor in you heart is not only toxic, but it can really lead you to do some horrible things. I have no doubt that you will cheer if some “gay-rights” group takes a church hostage at gunpoint, terrorize the congregation a la Mumbai, and even take one child or two out with them to terrorize into believing them.
It hasn’t happened yet, but I have no doubt that things will escalate to that point. Because such a small percentage of the population wants to hold about 50 or 60 percent of the population hostage to their demands, in the name of that Goddess called “Tolerance.” That’s what it is. You see that we refuse to comply to your demands and bow down to you… or bend over. So, we have to be excluded and humiliated… And the time will come that Christians will be killed for it.
Here.
newton on December 18, 2008 at 10:05 AM
Sorry Mom ;).
In any event, I mispoke. Homosexuals can indeed “understand” fidelity. It is the practice of it they find difficult. I based my assertion on the common knowledge and study-backed data that homosexuals tend to have more partners, change partners more frequently, and have a smaller number of mean months per serious relationship.
Drawing reasonable conclusions from valid data is about as objective as one can get. If someone, after seeing ten years of blue skies, tells me I am a bigot for believing the sky is blue I can’t very well take them seriously.
In order for marriage to work it requires fidelity. You must value fidelity before you can even talk about marriage. Given the number of activists who like to quote the divorce rate, clearly they too believe that marriage and fidelity are potentially mutually exclusive features of a relationship.
Next:
CAPS-LOCKING marriage equality is not an argument.
Can a gay marriage ever of its own strength produce life? No. It is a biological impossibility from the beginning. To suggest, then, that gay marriage as an institution is equal to traditional marriage is ridiculous. That isn’t equal protection under the law, it is affirmative action. If society is so frivolous that the new grand step in societal progress is sanctifying “Men seeking Men,” I’d rather not take that step.
BKennedy on December 18, 2008 at 10:32 AM
This decision does not surprise me. Obama gave up on the Left within minutes of being elected. He will stay middle-left until after he is reelected.
When I have paid attention to this Warren he comes off as not having many convictions. An empty suit who will dance through issues trying not to offend too many people. He’s found a soulmate in Obama.
grdred944 on December 18, 2008 at 11:30 AM
Rick hit the jackpot.
He helped deliver the cafeteria envangelical vote by lending his new age ‘I’m OK you’re OK’ aura to Obama and Obama delivered something a lot more viable than a late term baby with spina bifida
entagor on December 18, 2008 at 11:40 AM
Actually, he should try a little hetero type activity. THAT really does take the edge off. :)
platypus on December 18, 2008 at 11:51 AM
I wasn’t planning on watching the CORONATION anyway so it won’t affect my viewing, but I agree that it is nice to have some of the followers up in arms about it.
BHO has already stated that he doesn’t believe in gay marriage but doesn’t object to civil unions.
SgtRed on December 18, 2008 at 12:12 PM
Well, in the first place that thing about the Jews is a lie. Not all Jews are going to Hell anymore than all people that call themselves Christians are going to Heaven. Now, people who practice homosexuality (aka sinners) on the other hand, that’s a whole ‘nother thing. No sinner, dying in his sin, regardless of what that sin is, and rejecting Jesus is going to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Oh, btw – I’m a sinner saved by grace, ok?
The truth: God will redeem and restore Israel. He said so, He made a covenant with them.
And when is any homosexual excluded from what’s going on in America? They’re a pretty vocal minority.
abcurtis on December 18, 2008 at 1:04 PM
Yeah, good point. I’m wondering myself why Rev JJSr isnt doing all this. I would love to see Wright there though :).
abcurtis on December 18, 2008 at 1:07 PM
In a word, yes. He’s theology lite.
He’s a beach bum with a pulpit. Dont even get me started on his New Age methodology.
abcurtis on December 18, 2008 at 1:14 PM
And I would ask God in the invocation to please hold back His judgment against this country a little while longer while we get this abortion mess fixed. But I’ll bet you a dollar to a donut Warren wont.
abcurtis on December 18, 2008 at 1:16 PM
…bit of an understatement, depending on how close to traditional (read: orthodox, with a lower-case “o”) Christianity one is.
…for some, he’s sort of a “homogenized” Christian, mixing “Christianity-lite” with some of the more happy-clappy aspects of the “feel-good” generation…theologically a train wreck, he’s a nice, well-spoken, well-intentioned train wreck….
…and, yet, if there’s anything in the world or beyond it that would make this pseudo-preacher look more sympathetic to religious and non-religious folks alike, it’s the reaction we’re seeing to his being asked to utter a simple prayer (which I’ll lay money doesn’t close with “In Jesus name….”) at The Messiah’s coronation.
…these childish, peevish morons are doing all they can, under the flag of demanding their “due” from the guy they overwhelmingly supported (think “Don Vito Corleone” here), and in doing so are setting themselves at odds with all of the other folks who supported this guy…and all over a single choice of a single guy to say a simple prayer….
…inflexible, self-fascinated, hyper-sensistive, unerringly outraged-on-command, the homosexual community, speaking the language of civil rights, once again proves that they don’t know what rights are, as they seem all to willing to deny them to anyone who doesn’t immediately and consistenly kowtow to them…and certainly don’t know how to be civil….
…they’re once again proving that they’re as distasteful vertically as they are horizontally….
…homosexuals are really their own worst enemy….
Puritan1648 on December 18, 2008 at 1:20 PM
Well, noneya, I guess that’s something Rick W and I have in common at last. I’m fat and I’ll tell you right up front homosexuality is wrong. So feel free to call me anything you like, if it will make you feel better and boost your self esteem. I’ve been called lots worse by a lot better people than you :).
Oh, btw, noneya – I guess Rev Wright is NOT a disgrace in your worldview, right?
abcurtis on December 18, 2008 at 1:20 PM
Oooooo, noneya, you cut me to the quick. Haw, haw, haw!
Since when did truth become snake oil? Hmmmmm?
Since I’m not a Pastor Rick fan, could you enlighten me on the “bull” he’s preaching from his disgustingly obscene megachurch? What, in your view, is the proper size for a church? Just wonderin.
abcurtis on December 18, 2008 at 1:24 PM
Newton – Good move on your part. My former church did the forty day thing and it totally separated the older traditional from the young contemporaries. The pastor was so “et up” with Rick Warren he totally cut himself off from the congregation (we were only about 125 people) and left the dirty work up to his associate pastor. He bought into Rick Warren’s lie that the “pillars” of the church are not needed because pillars hold things up. There is no accountability in a Purpose Driven Church. The pastor did what Warren said NOT to do in Purpose driven Church – dont try to take a traditional church and turn it into a seeker church. My pastor did. This is why he’s my former pastor. I will never be part of another “40 Days Of Purpose” and I strongly advise others not to do so either. Your church will change, and you wont like it.
abcurtis on December 18, 2008 at 1:34 PM
BTW, in case some people incorrectly think it’s only the left that calls people “bigots” or “nazis” or the like:
Here’s what BKennedy wrote to me yesterday. Always great to be called a Muslim terrorist.
“And one wonders why “more of you” will be going down to Texas? Is it like the Mujahideen, where you rape one village of all its resources, and then when nothing is left for you, you move on to destroy the next lot you run into?”
jim m on December 18, 2008 at 1:34 PM
Liberals do not have a sense of irony, nor do they have a sense of humor either. Gloomy and hate filled – that’s liberals.
abcurtis on December 18, 2008 at 1:35 PM
Ted can live his life any way he wants, no skin of my nose. And what right or rights do I have that Ted doesnt? Ted can marry a lesbian if he wants. There’s gay marriage for ya :).
And one other thing – the gay lifestyle is neither normal or healthy. Just check the AIDS stats.
abcurtis on December 18, 2008 at 1:39 PM
I think it’s funny how everyone speaks about both the gays and christians as monolithic blocks. Neither side is, and another surprising similarity is that both groups have some “leaders” that claim that they do speak for everyone.
In this article Warren is trying to claim the title of spokesman for evangelical christians and will use his position to sell more books, and increase his church earnings, How many of you would say he speaks for all christians?. On the other side John Solomonese, tries drag attention back to the HRC pretending that he cares about gay marriage (the HRC doesn’t care at all and only belatedly mentioned it on their website AFTER the protests that they opposed), and that the HRC stands for gays.
Most gays have better things to do than care which preacher or priest gives the invocation since the separation of church and state insures that it means nothing.
As a moderate atheist, I find it telling that so many christians have bought into the argument that this is about redefining marriage, from the ‘biblical’ view. After all it was solely about property and heirs in the bible. There was nothing wrong with Sara giving her handmaiden to Abram, it was just the way things were done. Lot’s daughters slept with their father, David murdered Bethsheba’s husband and begat Solomon who was the lawful heir. Jacob had two wives. the list goes on. History clearly shows that the modern marriage for romance is a recent social affectation has has led to staggering divorce rates. But none of you are protesting marriage because of that, and divorce is clearly forbidden under the scriptures.
No the only reason you take this on as an issue is because it’s easy. Your not gay, you have no gay urges and therefore it’s easy to condemn your fellow men and women when they have to struggle with these issues and decide that physically and psychologically it’s impossible to be with a member of the opposite sex. If you tell a child that he is sinning every time a pretty woman gives him a hard-on, that makes you an idiot, how much more an idiot does that make you when the same child gets a hard-on for a member of the same sex? Pedophilia is wrong because it is an abuse of power by an adult on a child. However if two adults who have tried others things decide that they want to form a union in an effort to make a stable family who are you to stand in their way. Don’t call it marriage if you don’t want to, but don’t stand in their way.
It’s easy to hate gays, but remember the same revulsion you feel for gay sex is mirrored in the revulsion that gays have when trying to engage in straight sex. These aren’t aliens, or demons they are your brothers and sisters, your fellow countrymen and women, and you denigrate them solely because you find a bible verse to quote and others to holler with. The same bible you conveniently ignore when it goes against common sense and legalizes slavery, child murder, and dietary restrictions*. Will all the english go to hell for eating blood sausage? you tell me.
Zekecorlain on December 18, 2008 at 1:40 PM
There’s no hatred or denigration of gays when a Christian says the lifestyle is immoral. As Christians we believe that we all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. We all need forgiveness.
Some of us know more about the gay life than you realize. My brother was gay and died of AIDS years ago. I deeply loved him and he knew it. In fact, throughout his life I was the first one in the family he would usually come to for support. Did that mean I squished over talking to him about turning, repenting and acknowledging his need for forgiveness through the death of Christ for his sin? No. I did so with tears for him: for his sin and his inner pain which I knew so well.
Many of your other assumptions about the Bible are not correct, but I thought that was the most important point for me to address.
Our hope is that 1 Corinthians 6:9-10:
is followed immediately by 1 Corinthians 6:11:
INC on December 18, 2008 at 1:56 PM
Isn’t it funny how the uber left is perpetually pissed off about something.
:rolleyes:
44Magnum on December 18, 2008 at 2:27 PM
@INC “There’s no hatred or denigration of gays when a Christian says the lifestyle is immoral”
I’m sure that the many of your fellow christians actions are from good intentions, but that doesn’t stop them from being hateful, and derogatory. The same christians that lump all gays together want others to judge them solely our their own personal actions, yet take the same name of “christian”. I think that the actions of gays that led to the rampant spread of AIDS and other illness is wrong. I think society should accept that there have always been gays, from the very earliest days of humanity. Don’t cast them out, accept that the every generation of humanity produces gays and expect them to be good contributing members of society. That means let them in the military openly, expect them to have stable home lives and encourage monogamy.
All my assumptions about the bible are simply from reading it. Name one thing in this list that didn’t happen
I find it telling that so many christians have bought into the argument that this is about redefining marriage, from the ‘biblical’ view. After all it was solely about property and heirs in the bible. There was nothing wrong with Sara giving her handmaiden to Abram, it was just the way things were done. Lot’s daughters slept with their father, David murdered Bethsheba’s husband and begat Solomon who was the lawful heir. Jacob had two wives. the list goes on. History clearly shows that the modern marriage for romance is a recent social affectation has has led to staggering divorce rates. But none of you are protesting marriage because of that, and divorce is clearly forbidden under the scriptures.”
Zekecorlain on December 18, 2008 at 2:37 PM
@INS, ps I’m glad you were there for your brother.
Zekecorlain on December 18, 2008 at 2:44 PM
Zekecorlain,
Thank you. I’ll try to come back and answer your 2:37 comment another day if you would like. It’s been a long day and I’m tired right now.
INC on December 18, 2008 at 6:19 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2