Melissa Etheridge to gays: Turns out Rick Warren’s a great guy, so let’s let it go
posted at 9:03 pm on December 22, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
I told my manager to reach out to Pastor Warren and say “In the spirit of unity I would like to talk to him.” They gave him my phone number. On the day of the conference I received a call from Pastor Rick, and before I could say anything, he told me what a fan he was. He had most of my albums from the very first one. What? This didn’t sound like a gay hater, much less a preacher. He explained in very thoughtful words that as a Christian he believed in equal rights for everyone. He believed every loving relationship should have equal protection. He struggled with proposition 8 because he didn’t want to see marriage redefined as anything other than between a man and a woman. He said he regretted his choice of words in his video message to his congregation about proposition 8 when he mentioned pedophiles and those who commit incest. He said that in no way, is that how he thought about gays. He invited me to his church, I invited him to my home to meet my wife and kids. He told me of his wife’s struggle with breast cancer just a year before mine…
Brothers and sisters the choice is ours now. We have the world’s attention. We have the capability to create change, awesome change in this world, but before we change minds we must change hearts. Sure, there are plenty of hateful people who will always hold on to their bigotry like a child to a blanket. But there are also good people out there, Christian and otherwise that are beginning to listen. They don’t hate us, they fear change. Maybe in our anger, as we consider marches and boycotts, perhaps we can consider stretching out our hands. Maybe instead of marching on his church, we can show up en mass and volunteer for one of the many organizations affiliated with his church that work for HIV/AIDS causes all around the world.
Maybe if they get to know us, they wont fear us.
I know, call me a dreamer, but I feel a new era is upon us.
“A new era is upon us”? Man, that must have been some phone call. In fact, Warren’s position on Prop 8 was always more lukewarm than was advertised and he’s taken steps in the last few days to downplay Saddleback’s views on gays. It can’t hurt either that he’s gotten a vote of confidence from The One, whose Absolute Moral Authority is more absolute than most progressives’. Whatever the reasoning, it’s a shrewd move by Etheridge: There isn’t much politically that gay leaders can do for Warren, but as a hugely influential evangelical there’s a lot he can do for them by helping to mainstream gays and gay rights with values voters. The media will lionize him for it, too, which adds to the incentive. The question is, is this brand of identity politics capable of laying aside grievance and victimization and building a bridge if it’ll benefit in practical terms from doing so? What’s more important, in other words, the identity or the politics?
Here’s Warren addressing MPAC recently, affirming that he loves everyone (atheists too?) and emphasizing Etheridge’s point about restoring civility to disagreement. A common theme today.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
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: 1 2 3 Next »
Until Republicans are in office again.
mylegsareswollen on December 22, 2008 at 9:07 PM
“Never trust a preahcer who owns more than one suit.” -Lenny Bruce.
profitsbeard on December 22, 2008 at 9:09 PM
I hope she stays away from my window!
canopfor on December 22, 2008 at 9:10 PM
It would surprise me if he doesn’t love atheists.
mikeyboss on December 22, 2008 at 9:11 PM
OK, I’ll bite …………… why don’t we start by calling the individuals in question and their movement “homosexuals” and not gay?
……………… let’s see how much they are willing to compromise on a basic issue.
Seven Percent Solution on December 22, 2008 at 9:11 PM
If only the Liberals would drop the Labels!
Civility only works,when Liberals ‘SILENCE’
Republicans!
To Liberals,that is’CIVILITY’!
canopfor on December 22, 2008 at 9:15 PM
Smooth. Very smooth. (Whether it’s true or not.)
Realist on December 22, 2008 at 9:16 PM
a hard left fatwa against melissa in 9, 8 …
:-)
Buckaroo on December 22, 2008 at 9:18 PM
Is that supposed to be funny or pithy?
I know lots of preachers, some who own several suits, & some who I’ve never seen in one. I trust them all. They’re excellent, loving, generous people.
I’ll bet there are people you look up to who have lots of suits.
jgapinoy on December 22, 2008 at 9:19 PM
Hey, Gang. You’re exactly right. Their idea of compromise is for Conservatives, Christian or otherwise, to adjust their moral compass to align with theirs. I’m afraid Rick Warren wants to take Billy Graham’s place as “America’s Pastor”. I hope he remembers that you don’t gain respect by being wishy-washy.
kingsjester on December 22, 2008 at 9:20 PM
Well, the left will begin to love us when we begin to accept their ideas, ideals and values. If they are sniffing out Warren then they are sensing either vulnerability or a relativist.
There’s no other explaination for the hard left warming up.
Warren is a fraud!
katy on December 22, 2008 at 9:20 PM
“jgapinoy on December 22, 2008 at 9:19 PM”
dude, no one forced you to take that bait …
Buckaroo on December 22, 2008 at 9:21 PM
You can stick your “civility” where the sun don’t shine, after 8 years of hate you want to make nice under a cloud of ownership?
Bite me!
christene on December 22, 2008 at 9:21 PM
Note to Melissa – Very few people in the christian community hate gay people. Those that do either A) don’t understand their faith or B) are people that tend to get lumped in with us that don’t really belong such as Fred Phelps and his cult.
Most of us just don’t agree that marriage should be redefined to accommodate you. That’s not hate. That’s a difference of opinion.
I will grant you that most christians don’t follow some of the Bible’s rules on marriage such as on divorce and remarriage. I wish they did but there’s nothing I can do about that. If someone proposed a federal law that made it more difficult to divorce and impossible to remarry unless your spouse had died, I’d be all for that too.
PS – I’m a fan of your music too
Benaiah on December 22, 2008 at 9:22 PM
The whole Christians hate gays is a bogus call to victimhood. It creates an instant underdog status therefore an easier route to push their radical agenda down the throats of America.
The Majority of Christians do not hate gays or lesbians. Period. It’s the throat craming they hate.
katy on December 22, 2008 at 9:26 PM
He’s a Christian, he’s supposed to love everyone. Hate the sin, love the sinner and all that.
meltenn on December 22, 2008 at 9:27 PM
Why wouldn’t he? Loving your neighbor is one of JC’s commandments. That said, some of our neighbors seem to think that love equals agreement or equals letting the neighbor have his way all the time.
baldilocks on December 22, 2008 at 9:27 PM
barf
Maybe we just dont want the federal government dictating the values of the people?
DwnSouthJukin on December 22, 2008 at 9:28 PM
Warren is a class act who is firm in his Biblical evangelical worldview. He is also a very loving, graceful person. Contrary to popular opinion, the two are hardly separate things.
What Melissa may not realize or be able to accept is that just because you love someone doesn’t mean you will agree with their choices or their worldview. Warren, and other Christians like him, don’t “fear change.” They simply disagree with the idea that the homosexual lifestyle is not sin.
Most of my friends truly love gay people, and we are also firm believers in Jesus Christ. We understand that all of us are sinners – gay and straight. We all have our struggles and our faults and our sinful habits and desires. Because Jesus loves us doesn’t excuse that sin, and because we love each other doesn’t mean we condone the sin in each other’s lives. Sin is sin, and whether it’s the sin of heterosexual promiscuity, gluttony, greed, homosexual promiscuity, or anything else, it all must be recognized as the sin that it is. Because sin keeps us separated from God, and all of us, straight or gay, have to put our sinful tendencies aside to draw closer to Him if we say that we believe in Him.
MikeknaJ on December 22, 2008 at 9:29 PM
When those people are bankers, lawyers or performers–sure. Religious leaders who amass wealth are difficult to reconcile with this Gospel verse:
dedalus on December 22, 2008 at 9:31 PM
I downloaded one of Melissa’s free Itunes called Christmas in America. I liked it the first couple of times until I listened closer to the song and realized it is pretty much an anti-war/Bush song.
While I understand the sentiment of wanting everyone home for Christmas I understand why it is not a reality. I resent her using Christmas as a ploy to make a statement against the war and the administration even though I understand her desire for utopia.
Lyrics to Christmas in America
Mr_Magoo on December 22, 2008 at 9:32 PM
It is funny that the Libs want to bring “civility” back now that Barry’s President. Where was all this “civility” the last 8 years?
Pres. Booosh wanted “civility”, so did McCain. How was their “civility” repaid?
kingsjester on December 22, 2008 at 9:39 PM
Concerning Rick Warren. He does not speak for everyone in the Christian community and his Purpose Driven ideas are suspect in a lot of Christian’s views. Read Bob Dewaay’s Redefining Christianity: Understanding the Purpose Driven Life Movement
Mr_Magoo on December 22, 2008 at 9:39 PM
Hey, I don’t fault Warren for getting all the publicity he can. He’s sort of a heavy set Joel Osteen to me. Hey, the guys are entertaining and do have some good things to say now and then. But can we stop pretending they’re ALL THAT?
Sugar Land on December 22, 2008 at 9:44 PM
Yes but don’t you understand? Now it is within reach!
Notice she doesn’t say “we must change our hearts” because their hearts were always right to begin with. It’s everyone else’s hearts that need changing.
And I so wanted to believe her.
Mr_Magoo on December 22, 2008 at 9:47 PM
As much as I don’t care for Warren, Obama is the prez-elect, and can pick whomever he wants for this. It’s for a prayer, not a government job.
JetBoy on December 22, 2008 at 9:48 PM
As a homo myself, I must say I am very pleased with Melissa’s response to Rick Warren. Good for her for reaching out and wanting to speak with him… and how wonderful that she is now challenging other homosexuals to essentially start behaving responsibly if they’re going to engage in a dialogue about these issues. It’s a tall order because so many gays are so myopic — it’s gay, gay, gay and nothing but for many of them. For those of us for whom being homosexual is simply a part of who we are (as opposed to the defining element of our being), this is a welcome statement from a prominent gay celebrity. Good for her, and good for Rick Warren…
D2Boston on December 22, 2008 at 9:49 PM
I’m in total agreement. I am a Catholic and I admire Billy Graham’s fortuitousness and strict adherence to the teachings of his faith. Sometimes I would wish that priests were like him. Warren, in my opinion, is very much like Obama in using people for personal gain (money and power). I never heard of Warren until Saddleback.
What I also don’t like about Warren is that he tries to appease everyone rather than saying ‘no’ and being strong about it, or as you said kingsjester, ‘wishy-washy.’ Obama does the same. He thinks that keeping Gates is somehow going to win over conservatives. Yes, Obama suckered in some, but not me. Gates, to me, is not the guy I give credit to for the changes in strategy in Iraq. He was critical of Petraeus.
Etheridge is trying her hand at suckering in people to go against Prop 8 but it won’t work!
jencab on December 22, 2008 at 9:50 PM
In New Jersey, gays got civil unions. I was in favor of that since it gives them legal protection and it didn’t use the word marriage, and we know that language is powerful. If you allow GAY MARRIAGE then what will stop them from suing churches who do not want to play that game? What about the church tax exempt status?? Well, no sooner the NJ gays got the civil unions, they claimed that wasn’t enough and are going for full gay marriage, with the support of legislative lackeys and the liberal Governor Corzine.
They can’t be satisfied with unions that aren’t called marriage. I thought this was about having legal rights and survivorship? Well, it’s less about that and more about making those who don’t want marriage redefined accept gay marriage. The churches will be next, I guarantee it.
The radicals won’t play nice, so neither should the MAJORITY of people.
So, now I am totally against civil unions for gays thanks to the radicals who won’t play fair.
So yeah, they ought to listen to Ethridge on that. Radicalism will only be met with resistance and stubbornness on my end, and probably for many more who start to wake up and see the REAL agenda of the radicals in that movement.
worlok on December 22, 2008 at 9:50 PM
I was told to read “the purpose driven life” and while it is not as tedious or detrimental to the faith as “the secret” it is still an unhealthy melding of humanist thought with the clerical….
“self-help” is fine as long as it does not deify desire.
sven10077 on December 22, 2008 at 9:51 PM
The Free Exercise clause in the First Amendment would stop them as it has stopped others–including the federal government–from interfering with the way people in a church worship.
dedalus on December 22, 2008 at 9:58 PM
Indeed, I fought conservative friends on the civil unions issue, but when the ACT Up brigades started trying to overturn even that I quit.
sven10077 on December 22, 2008 at 9:58 PM
Warren is listening to the siren song of name and fame.
I mentioned in one of the Headlines last week that at the MPAC (Muslim Public Affairs Council) Convention, Warren was the top speaker with a group that included, among others, Juan Cole, Agha Saeed, Reza Aslan and Suhail Khan. If you don’t know who some of those people are, do a search combining the name with Jihad Watch. When Warren tells the MPAC ‘You don’t have to see eye to eye to walk hand in hand.’, at best, he is headed for Dhimmitude and at worst, he comprises the gospel of Jesus Christ.
INC on December 22, 2008 at 9:59 PM
Yup just like political speech being sacrosanct and campaign funding being speech by precedent kept uan Queeg’s CFR from being held as anything other than a non-Constitutional breech of free speech….
erm wait a sec.
sven10077 on December 22, 2008 at 9:59 PM
Well, “I am the way and the truth and the life” doesn’t get you quite the same attention as Rick Warren’s statement did, I would suppose.
Snowed In on December 22, 2008 at 10:04 PM
Exactly. Dr. Al Mohler has a post up titled, The High Cost of Being (and Staying) Cool — Rick Warren in a Whirlwind.
It appears Warren is going to opt for staying cool.
INC on December 22, 2008 at 10:08 PM
I am a Melissa Etheridge fan – I don’t like all of her music but I love her talent. I also like Boy George’s talent – even if he is a putz. I have liked Elton John’s talent for a long time as well.
Waiting for the Boy George post by Allahpundit……..
Sweetness0726 on December 22, 2008 at 10:12 PM
Well, “I am the way and the truth and the life” doesn’t get you quite the same attention as Rick Warren’s statement did, I would suppose.
Snowed In on December 22, 2008 at 10:04 PM
No. It definitely would have gotten a different reaction.
Is he reaching out in love and proclaiming the Gospel as Billy Graham did or is he reaching for publicity and “deifying desire”?
kingsjester on December 22, 2008 at 10:13 PM
I think Melissa and others have realized that power politics doesn’t always work–even if you win, there’s a ballot proposition or law suit chasing your victory.
All the activism in the world ends up at that old fashioned place: convince your fellow citizens of your point and you will win. That’s America. Deal with it.
PattyJ on December 22, 2008 at 10:20 PM
Very few Americans, by percentage, actually hated Blacks. Lack of hatred does not preclude a broad swath of discrimination.
I don’t think gays experience the same type of marginalization as those who are visually distinguishable as minorities have at different points in America’s short history. However, to act as if they have not endured a steady stream of cultural bigotry is quite insulting.
Many in here seem to want to whitewash the schoolyard rhymes, pop music, movies, television shows, church sermons and political posturing that made being gay worthy of absolute disdain, disgust and maltreatment.
The same short shrift is given to the experience of Blacks.
That is not to say that things are unequal or unchanged. Rather they are great for many Americans. The so-called playing field is green for all who want to work hard.
There is, however, a strong tide of revisionist theory that is en vogue in Republican circles, chats, blogs, etc. The whole “it’s actually harder to be a white guy” meme is laughable.
That being said, I think Christians, followed by obese and/or ugly women are still castigated openly without fear of negative repercussions.
***
Niggard is the new black.™
The Race Card on December 22, 2008 at 10:29 PM
You might want to read this article, Banned in Boston The coming conflict between same-sex marriage and religious liberty. , by Maggie Gallagher, especially page two in which she discusses that in December of 2005, “the Becket Fund brought together ten religious liberty scholars of right and left to look at the question of the impact of gay marriage on the freedom of religion.”
In the article Gallagher wrote:
From one of the scholars from the left Gallagher wrote this:
INC on December 22, 2008 at 10:29 PM
I was looking in my usual gay Jewish way to be oppositional on this thread, but what INC says changes all that. What he has to say is really more than our petty debates. We face an Islam that threatens our very existence. Rick Warren’s “love” is no more meaningful than the “peace” that Neville Chamberlain brought in 1938.
thuja on December 22, 2008 at 10:30 PM
For which I tip my hat to him, provided the FAQ stays offline.
RightOFLeft on December 22, 2008 at 10:34 PM
Good article. Thanks for the link.
Mr_Magoo on December 22, 2008 at 10:35 PM
Mr. Magoo, you’re welcome.
INC on December 22, 2008 at 10:37 PM
SCOTUS voided part of CFR with “FEC v Wisconsin Right to Life”. Numerous times courts have slapped legislative bodies down for interfering with Free Exercise.
Anti-discrimination laws haven’t enabled women to successfully sue the Catholic Church after being turned down for the priesthood.
dedalus on December 22, 2008 at 10:42 PM
What’s so hard to understand about a Christian loving gays and atheists? I don’t get it. Does a parent love their child if the child does wrong? Of course. We need to love the sinner while we hate the sin. That’s what it means when you hear a Christian say they love gay people or atheists (at least, I hope it is).
apacalyps on December 22, 2008 at 10:42 PM
I’ve been a Christian for almost four decades. I’ve never heard a sermon that did that. It’s a big country and obviously, there may be some sermons like that, but then the minister would need to remember that he, as well, is a sinner in need of forgiveness.
(Phelps’ is a hate-filled and strange cultic kind of group).
INC on December 22, 2008 at 10:48 PM
I like eggnog at Christmas time.
apacalyps on December 22, 2008 at 10:49 PM
“Here’s Warren addressing MPAC recently, affirming that he loves everyone (atheists too?) ”
Why would an atheist care whether a Christian whom he doesn’t know loves him? Love is to be earned, not doled out indiscriminately. If you feel it for every louse in the street, it is not love.
ashleymatt on December 22, 2008 at 10:50 PM
Another pastor who gets in the limelight and starts to comprosmise. Now being liked by everyone is more important than loving everyone enough to tell them that their behavior, as stated in the Bible, will lead to their condemnation? Is Warren going to be one of those lukewarm people Jesus said he would vomit out? I live in CA I know many gay people, I like most of them but I think I have the more loving attitude. I don’t want them to engage in behavior I think will send them to Hell. So because I’m a Bible follower and actually care about these people, I’m vilified and called a bigot and treated as if I’m a monster when I’m the one who really cares…
CCRWM on December 22, 2008 at 10:54 PM
thuja & RightOFLeft,
Warren’s a squish, and it appears he’ll compromise as seems best for his own advantage. You may not like a stand someone may take because of their beliefs, but at least you know who they are and what they think. Warren is shifting sand.
INC on December 22, 2008 at 10:55 PM
ding ding ding!
No kidding. Even a broke clock is correct once a day, twice if you dont care for am, pm precision.
aikidoka on December 22, 2008 at 10:57 PM
I have never like Melissa Etheridge’s music but I love Alison Moyet, K.D.Lang, the Pet Shop Boys, Elton John’s Captain Fantastic is a fovorite. Moby…
CCRWM on December 22, 2008 at 11:03 PM
I don’t think Joel Osteen is “all that” either…I like Hank Hangraff who exposes Olsteens naivete….
CCRWM on December 22, 2008 at 11:05 PM
But it is the federal government that has defined what marriage is, and there are something like 1700 laws on the books, both federal and state, that define rights that are reserved for marriage. So if the government is supposed to get out of “dictating the values of the people”, then it has to go both ways.
nukemhill on December 22, 2008 at 11:05 PM
To have a true relationship with God, we must have a new relationship with sin. God can forgive all sin except the sin of not loving Him and the angels rejoice when we repent with heartfelt humility.
Rick Warren knows what the Bible teaches about homosexuality and the consequences of his own lukewarm, diluted theology. If you want a dose of the real thing, check out Pastor John MacArthur, one of the most authoritative Bible scholars and intellects of our time.
Terrie on December 22, 2008 at 11:09 PM
No… Jesus defined marriage as between a man and a woman in the New Testament/ He reiterated what God stated in the Old Testament.
CCRWM on December 22, 2008 at 11:09 PM
Thanks. Good article. The Catholic Church might have persued the matter in court, but didn’t. Evidently, the votes weren’t there in the legislature to craft an exception to agency regulations for religious institutions. The RCC might have prevailed in a court fight as the Lutheran Church did in Kansas where they were found to be exempt from the supervision of the civil rights agency.
The RCC and other religious organizations would logically face more regulations the further removed they are from religous worship. Could the state cause the RCC to redefine a sacrament? I’m certain SCOTUS would stop the state. Should something like a religous-affiliated day care center be subject to some state regulation? Probably makes sense in some instances.
dedalus on December 22, 2008 at 11:10 PM
Be encouraged by John 15:18-21.
INC on December 22, 2008 at 11:12 PM
I did hear one time that Rick Warren gave 90% of his income back to the church in tithes and various other charitable organizations.
In context, however, the story of the Rich Young Ruler that you quoted is one about a person who loved his possessions more than he loved God. It is not a call for all believers to live impoverished lives.
Fundamental Fred on December 22, 2008 at 11:13 PM
Honestly, I’ve felt more hate from fellow gays than from Christians. All the Christians I know are laid-back, mind-their-own-business types.
SouthernGent on December 22, 2008 at 11:14 PM
dedalus,
I saw that article soon after it was written and I thought it was excellent. As far as something like day care, for instance, there may be safety laws which could even include the ratio of caregivers to children, but as far as character, belief and teaching of the caregivers that would be up to the church, IMO.
INC on December 22, 2008 at 11:18 PM
I love both of my little boys even though they do things that are wrong.
Believing that a behavior is wrong and hating those who commit the act are two very different things.
Why is that concept so complicated to some folks?
pugwriter on December 22, 2008 at 11:19 PM
INC on December 22, 2008 at 11:12 PM
CCRWM on December 22, 2008 at 11:23 PM
Sorry, Jesus didn’t write our bill of rights, and last I heard, he’s not a member of Congress. Our marriage rights are defined by laws passed by state and government officials. Period. You can go on all you want about biblical mandates, but we follow the rule of law in this country. And if you want the government out of the business of defining marriage, then it has to be all the way. You don’t get special privileges just because you think you’re “saved”.
nukemhill on December 22, 2008 at 11:23 PM
I resent the willful condescension in her letter. Is it so hard to accept that some folks think certain behaviors are wrong? There’s no fear or hatred involved.
AbaddonsReign on December 22, 2008 at 11:26 PM
I can’t tell you how tired i am of hearing that. People don’t “fear” you or other gays Melissa, they just realize that there’s no reason to change the definition of marriage. Gays can get the rights they want without changing marriage, but they’re pushing to re-define it because of their hatred of Christians. To be fair, Christians have brought some of that animosity on themselves from years of trying to “convert” gays, but it’s long overdue that we put a stop to the lie that marriage has to be re-defined in order for gays to get the rights they want.
clearbluesky on December 22, 2008 at 11:29 PM
I love reading DU on nights like this. The response to Melissa Ethridge is predictable, and then there’s this:
“Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.” – Senator Stuart Smalley, D-Minn
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132×8025687
capitalist piglet on December 22, 2008 at 11:31 PM
Thank you, in turn, because to see another believer hold fast in adversity is always encouraging.
INC on December 22, 2008 at 11:32 PM
The pro-gay marriage crowds are the one’s who are looking to have government to modify and redefine the institution of marriage. Those of us against Gay Marriage only want to maintain the traditional definition of marriage as held by this country from its inception. Everytime one of these measures to change the definition of marriage comes up for a popular vote- it loses!! The will of the majority of people is to maintain marriage as between one man-one woman.
Fundamental Fred on December 22, 2008 at 11:33 PM
O’s topless photos from Hawaii should appease the
folksgay community. Silly Savages!sonnyspats1 on December 22, 2008 at 11:34 PM
The Pilgrims and the Puritans who founded our country left Europe because of the deviation from the Bible and the Word of God. This country was founded on Christian principles and has been blessed because of this. All the Founding Fathers believed and said so. For 7000 years marriage has been between a man and a woman. It’s just been the last 35 years that marriage has been tried to be redefined by gay people and their sympathizers… Anyway our Bill of Rights and Constitution are Christian…you don’t have to take my word for it though…look it up…
I understand your anger and frustration but getting mad at me isn’t going to change the truth…
CCRWM on December 22, 2008 at 11:35 PM
The ‘culture war’ which is used by many people to divide Americans isn’t really being fought person to person. It becomes harder when you are addressing the ‘enemy’ directly and you realize that they are decent people and not the caricature that zealots on either side want us all to see.
Pity the Pope made the kind of speech he made today.
lexhamfox on December 22, 2008 at 11:39 PM
What state are you in?
CCRWM on December 22, 2008 at 11:40 PM
Only if 1700 state and federal laws are changed. They refer specifically to the Federal definition of marriage, and it ends up being easier to change the definition of marriage rather than change all those laws. Remember, because of the Federal definition of marriage, states are not required to recognize any variations on it by other states. So one state may grant “common-law” or “civil union” rights, and no other state has to recognize them.
That’s the battle that gay-rights advocates are fighting. I completely understand the desire to preserve the traditional definition of marriage. I don’t agree, but I understand. But I think a lot of people really misunderstand the battle that gay rights advocates are fighting. It’s not about “hating Christians” or “hating traditional values”. That’s an unfair label and really does a disservice to those who are authentically fighting for what they think is right.
I think you need to check your presumptions at the door and actually listen to the arguments being made on the other side. That doesn’t, by any stretch of the imagination, invalidate the upset many of us have felt over many of the smears the Left has thrown at the Right over these years. But it also doesn’t mean you get to dismiss anything you disagree with as “hating Christianity” or “hating Conservatives”, or cast your own broad aspersions back at them. That’s a simplistic argument and gets you off the hook.
nukemhill on December 22, 2008 at 11:41 PM
The Sunshine State of Florida.
INC on December 22, 2008 at 11:42 PM
Seems pretty reasonable to me. I suppose to a lot of gays, this sounds like hate to them.
wise_man on December 22, 2008 at 11:43 PM
“Because it’s easier” is hardly a reason to change a tradition that’s thousands of years old. As for gays hatred of Christians, i’m going by what i see and hear, not presumptions.
clearbluesky on December 22, 2008 at 11:50 PM
That’s crap. They want to get married for the same reason that many heterosexuals want to be married. There are plenty of gay Christians out there. It’s not about messing with Christianity or straight people… it’s their private business. Why others want to prohibit their wanting to cement their relationship or seeing their lifestyle as a threat is the weird thing going on. Stay out of their personal life and they will leave you alone too… isn’t that a big part of civility?
lexhamfox on December 22, 2008 at 11:59 PM
I don’t like or love anybody…. I just lust.
Kini on December 23, 2008 at 12:00 AM
I generally agree.
dedalus on December 23, 2008 at 12:00 AM
I’m no fan of Warren’s anyway, but has anyone noticed how quickly liberals are dismissing this as “not that big of a deal”, simply because it was Obama who made the choice. Imagine if we were talking about McCain. You think we’d have the same reaction? No, we’d have riots over McCain “endorsing hate”, etc. etc. The moron Tanya Acker was on the O’Reilly Factor tonight, and guest host John Kasich had to keep reminding her that Obama is against gay marriage too… she’d then stumble through some thing like “but… uh… but, he wasn’t fighting against Prop 8!”
Anyway, I just dropped by to point out (as always) how shameless liberals are. These people are letting this slide, because the man who made the call is their messiah.
RightWinged on December 23, 2008 at 12:00 AM
I suppose you were against interracial marriage too since that was part of the legacy you are strive to protect. That wasn’t overturned until the 60’s and some of those laws remained on some state books until 2000. Let them have it.. I don’t see how it affects you or your marriage.
lexhamfox on December 23, 2008 at 12:03 AM
They manage to avoid mentioning the Bible or Jesus Christ. I agree that Christianity had a tremendous influence on Democracy and Western thought, but the U.S. Constitution included non-church influences.
dedalus on December 23, 2008 at 12:04 AM
Hey look Christianity is important to Western values but if you can find any of the Bill of Rights in scripture then quote it. Otherwise, I would suggest that our Bill of Rights and those freedoms are in spite of Biblical law rather than because of it. Think the Enlightenment rather than Gospel and you might get a little closer to the truth.
lexhamfox on December 23, 2008 at 12:11 AM
I read it as Jesus calling the man to the ministry. The man has kept the Commandments but is aking what more he can do. Christ’s request is that he do what the Apostles have done, which is to leave their families, jobs and possessions. Being a believer doesn’t require one to give up possessions, but that verse conveys a higher calling that some religious orders follow with vows of poverty.
Warren seems OK to me. I’m guessing that he sees media exposure as a way to get his message out to as many followers as possible.
dedalus on December 23, 2008 at 12:12 AM
Yeah, you’re right. The hostility that i hear directed at Christians from the gays that i know is just a figment of my imagination. And marriage doesn’t need to be changed in order for gays to “cement” their relationship. There are plenty of straight couples that somehow manage to have a strong relationship without being married, my parents are one of those couples.
clearbluesky on December 23, 2008 at 12:20 AM
Hmm, where have I heard something similar sounding to this before, except the exact opposite? Oh yeah, I remember.
Amos 3:3
Can two walk together, except they be agreed?
NeverLiberal on December 23, 2008 at 12:20 AM
If you look back, the man approached Christ asking what he must do to inherit eternal life.
There are differences between disciples and apostles, at some level. The number of apostles was set at 12. The number 12 is significant because there were 12 tribes of Israel. I believe Christ did extend an offer to him to be a follower. In the context of the man loving his possessions more than loving God, it is a problem that still exists in the form of materialism. Christ used the instance of the Rich Young Ruler to demonstrate that there are some who put there trust and confidence and passion into the things that they have moreso than putting their trust confidence and passion into the things of God.
BTW, I am much more fundamental than Warren and have some issues with his agenda, as I perceive it… But I did have to give him appropriate cred for his charity.
Fundamental Fred on December 23, 2008 at 12:22 AM
Isn’t it funny how all of a sudden, now that democrats control the government, why, wouldn’t you know, we must all be about restoring civility to disagreement? Well, I have just 1 question, why? What difference does it make? Have the voters punished democrats for their lack of civility? Clearly not, in fact, there is an argument to be made that their lack of civility was rewarded. Democrats have given us a bird’s eye view in treating the opposition with everything but civility for the last eight years and do you know what? Not once did I hear anyone talking about civility. In fact, we were encouraged to understand their rage at conservatives, republicans, and Bush. So I must ask this Obama suck-up why he feels civility is all of a sudden the order of the day?
Dollayo on December 23, 2008 at 12:25 AM
Those who championed the cause of inter-racial marriage did not attempt to redefine the institution of marriage… They addressed the specific laws that forbade the practice. I do not recall marriage ever being defined as “one white man and one white woman” or “one black man and one black woman…”
While it may or may not affect my marriage, it does affect me in other ways… Consider the cases of the legislation that is being considered for emergency contraception and FOCA. These laws deny doctors and pharmacists the ability to decide not to perform abortions or dispense the morning after pill, respectively. As a church leader myself, gay marriage proponents would deny people like me and my pastor the ability to object and to refuse to perform gay weddings in our church. That is a severe infraction of our rights and puts the government squarely in dictating the parameters for the practice of religion.
Fundamental Fred on December 23, 2008 at 12:30 AM
Thanks for the insightful read on the verse from Luke. Warren seems like a nice man. Good in front of the camera. I don’t know much else about him. With regard to tithing, I’m not too impressed by it without understanding the ownership make-up of his church and what types of expenses he runs through the business. If he takes $1 as salary but has his house paid for and flies private jets then the 90% tithe isn’t all that meaningful.
dedalus on December 23, 2008 at 12:31 AM
I am not to fond of Melissa. There is one song of hers I like. She has a attitude. She sure spouted her mouth off at Bush. I have been getting into Iced Earth. They are great! They do their music on the Civil War, and some the Bible. They are like hard rock. They are incredible! They have a my space page. You could check them out.
sheebe on December 23, 2008 at 12:31 AM
Congress with legislation like the Religious Freedom Restoration Act as well as the Supreme Court would continue to protect the 1st Amendment right to religious expression.
dedalus on December 23, 2008 at 12:35 AM
If you don’t get it now, you likely never will.
Who’s right?
Who’s wrong?
ABSOLUTELY FOR A FACT FOR SURE DEFINITELY I DON’T KNOW.
If you disagree, please kiss my ass.
hillbillyjim on December 23, 2008 at 12:38 AM
Many fundamental preachers are seeing the “hate crimes” legislation that will make it illegal to preach against homosexuality as a real threat to their 1st Amendment Rights.
Furthermore, you know that the goal of the liberal/gay agenda is to force their lifestyle on everyone and to make everyone to accept it. Any refusal to fall in line on the part of clergy will be punished as an act of discrimination or a hate crime.
Fundamental Fred on December 23, 2008 at 12:51 AM
He could have had the house, the jet, and the big fat check.
I don’t like the fact that I am defending him– like I said, I am much more fundamental and HELL-FIRE than he is.
Fundamental Fred on December 23, 2008 at 12:54 AM
oh, look, a “lets hug gays” commentfest? cmon, get real. wheres all the REAL haters like right4life? yooohooo, right4life??? ding ding ding!! its another gay post for you. time to get on your “gay sharia” pedestal and tell me how I want to exterminate Christians.
do I even dare link to the last 5 or so “gay” posts where 400 plus comments were FULL of foul references to gays? This is a nice change, but im sorry, its NOT the taus quo on THIS site.
your_worst_enemy on December 23, 2008 at 1:00 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »