okay but then the terrorists win, and Satan too.
I think it would be great to have Steve Carrell offer the invocation and raising his hands skyward howl, “OH MIGHTY ZEUS”
That’s obviously an impossible demand. I know of no one who does surveys of that type so there can’t be a cite. In the absence of such a survey, I use common sense and I read the opinions that I happen to hear or read. If Warren were a politician, he’d be a centrist, leaning somewhat right on social issues and somewhat left on economic and foreign policy issues.
Out of curiosity, would anyone who’s upset about the choice of Warren be willing to name a religious figure who they think would make a better choice, and explain why?
That may be true in California, but consider this. Obama also won in states like Virginia where 80% of the population voted in opposition to gay marriage. So in those places, at least three out of every ten voters from the total are Obama voters who oppose gay marriage.
Nope. That’s something you made up on your own.
You’re question is how long have I been following Warren? I’ve seen his name pop up from time to time for the past couple of years regarding various issues, such as abortion. I really started to hear about him after CA legalized gay marriage, and then of course, he hosted the forum for Obama and McCain, so a lot of information was printed about him then.
I can start citing all the objectionable things which Warren has said and done over the past few years, but I’ll just list a few here, since I’m in a hurry. I find his rhetoric to be ungenerous and divisive. He routinely compares abortion to the Holocaust (as if pro-choice people like to be compared to Nazis). And when it turned out that McCain hadn’t been in a “cone of silence” at the Saddleback forum, rather than just saying he made a mistake or something, he accused his critics of having “sour grapes.”
And as I pointed out before, he has resorted to unethical tactics to achieve his goals. It’s all well and good to be forgiving of people who have harmed you. But until he changes his behavior, I’m not going to view him as a decent person.
Liberal, gay people have been denied their civil rights in part because of the actions of people like Warren. If I have to reach out to Warren and the religious right, how about you try reaching out to people who are understandably upset about people trying to take away their rights? Telling someone who is upset over the loss of their civil rights that he is holding his breath and stomping his feet is divisive and mean, isn’t it?
I get that and I agree that ongoing bad behavior should not be glossed over. Especially when someone actively seeks the public ear and affects the rights of others who have done him no harm. My point is that even good people can have a blind spot that sometimes lasts for years. A generous person can be prejudice in an area. That doesn’t negate the good they do in other areas. I always despised Jerry Falwell but after he died I saw a couple of shows about him that outlined a lot of good work he did. I realized I was focusing only on what I disagreed with and judging the whole person on that. The reality was that wasn’t the whole person. That’s the point I wanted to make. YMMV.
Per the OP I don’t think it’s trivializing the things I disagree with Warren on, or ignoring his bad behavior to support including him in the ceremony.
Well, I don’t think his inclusion is the thing that’s trivializing his behavior. But when you include someone like Warren, you have to expect that a number of people will be upset by this, and it’s completely valid for people to be upset with the decision. All I’m asking is that people extend the same level of understanding to the people who are upset that they are extending to Warren.
I understand people being upset. Advocating keeping certain groups from having rights or taking their rights away is no small thing. I hope they can see that giving him a spot is not really supporting all his views but a recognition that even when we disagree we must strive to keep the communication going and operate as one country.
I hear those who are upset saying it’s a personal insult to gays and its giving him an undeserved place of honor or somehow tacitly supporting his views. I understand the feelings behind it but I don’t think those things are true.
Prop 8 wasn’t in Virginia, though. I remember when Michigan had some token law to stop gay marriage. A friend of mine was talking to a coworker and the coworker mentioned that he voted yes on it. My friend asked if he even knew what he voted “yes” on. The coworker thought the rule meant that gay people couldn’t marry in his church, not that they couldn’t get married or have a civil union at all.
Ignorance is out there, for sure.
The Prop 8 people in California (supposedly) did very little campaigning, told their volunteers to not bother coming in on Election Day. The ones that did come in anyways were told to grab a sign and wave it on a street corner.
What communication? That’s the problem; you’re talking as though Rick Warren’s deeply held religious beliefs are something he’s open to changing. Why should those who’ve been personally targeted by his belief system conclude that?
I am heartened to see Obama doing what he said he would, and reaching out to and working with all sides. Bush promised the same thing, but did the opposite. We don’t need more of that approach.
I don’t agree with Warren on everything (not even a Christian myself) but I do respect him and he has a right to his beliefs on abortion and homosexuality. Tolerance goes both ways, as difficult as that may be to accept when we strongly disagree with someone. (why should he have to CHANGE his beliefs to be worthy of inclusion? That is not tolerance or inclusion.)
I’m very liberal, and I’m not bothered at all by any of Obama’s choices to date. (yes, I voted for him). I said during the election that Obama was, imo, the more moderate of the 2 candidates, and that people who thought he was some radical, extreme left-winger were nuts. A lot of my left-leaning friends said the same, but now that it turns out to be true, some of them are pissed, lol.
Except for gays. He’s too busy smacking them in the face to work with them.
Neither is putting the Presidential stamp of approval on a bigot like Warren. Tolerance does NOT go both ways when the other side is bigoted. This is about Obama catering to bigotry, not him being “tolerant”.
They were fools to trust Obama to be anything else than another slimeball, as he is in the process of proving he is.
ou might want to look at this article about this very issue. I haven’t verified but this writer claims that scumbag Warren does reverse tithing
in any case it’s an interesting read about the issue and relates to the point I was making.
Well, at least you’re not jumping the gun or anything. I mean, he’s been president for, what now, negative 29 days already!
I think we’ve sort of pounded this discussion into the ground. But I will take a look at the article.
That depends on what he’s smacking them in the face with.
For you
Well we knew that when he talked about his faith right?
Appreciated. Not claiming I agree with everything in it but it presents an interesting pov.
now that’s funny right there. I don’t care who ya r. 
I would just like to point out that I do not believe that Rick Warren believes that homosexuals are inferior, or any worse than any other human being. Like most evangelical pastors he believes that it is a Sin to act on homosexual desires and for some reason feels the need to mix that up in politics. If you sat down and talked with him he would admit that the sin of homosexual acts is no worse than the sin of lieing or any other sin, and that all of these sins are punished the same in the eyes of God. I am not one hundred percent sure on this but knowing many evangelical pastors and being trained as one now ( at Liberty Seminary, aka Jerry Falwell school) I can honestly say that I do not know a single pastor or seminary student who believes they are inferior, though I* know many who for some reason want to get involved in the political side of it. I do not believe that the laws have a point, but I do bleieve that a homosexual is no different than any other person, we are all sinners. Thank you for your time.
I never trusted him. Why would I ? He’s been doing exactly what I expected of him.
For everyone; that’s the point. He makes it clear to the gays that they’ve been used, and to shut up for another four years; while making it clear to the bigoted majority that bigotry is still the law of the land.
That was a pretty good sign that he was a bigot.
Yeah, right. That’s why he compares allowing same sex marriage to child molestation.
Should we conclude they can’t change and not even try? The question often is , what’s the alternative to an effort at communication? The goal doesn’t have to be changing Rick Warren’s mind to make the effort worthwhile. We reach out in a reasonable and rational, inclusive manner rather than a constantly combative one to show that our goal is a better society for everyone in it, not just winning the argument for personnel victory.