Rick Warren & Barack Obama -- Bold Leaders

May God bless Leith, Colson and Warren with gay grandchildren to open up thier cold closed hearts and narrow little minds.

I think Barack Obama made the right choice.

What balderdash.

I propose that, to understand the implications of Obama's invitation to Warren, imagine if Lyndon Johnson had given a prominent role in his 1964 inauguration to the Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan. I raise this theoretical idea specifically in response to the plethora of commentators who justify Warren's role under the "big tent" rubric: it's always a good thing, they argue, to reach out to people with differing viewpoints, even to those who might oppose your position. Let everybody have a voice. Unity is better than divisiveness. Unity, in fact, trumps everything.

I hope the idea of LBJ's inviting the KKK Grand Dragon to his inauguration shows the phoniness behind the "big tent" rationalization. It would have been seen as palpable nonsense for the KKK to be given a role in an inauguration in the midst of the Civil Rights battle, all in the name of unity. In fact, it still would. No American would be taken seriously if he argued that giving the KKK, or any extremist voice, a seat at the table in the name of unity trumped all other considerations. On the contrary. The right and moral thing to do would be to explicitly deny such voices a role in an inauguration.

But in addition to this general argument, I also have specific words of Warren in mind. Those are the ones in which Warren offered a list of partnerships that he believed would be wrong: "a brother and sister being together, an older guy marrying a child and a guy having multiple wives."

Comparing gay relationships to incest, child sexual exploitation, and bigamy, in my opinion, is the equivalent of referring to blacks with the "N" word. It bespeaks a bigoted mind and a bigoted outlook. It's bigotry, no less than the bigotry exhibited by those who openly call for discrimination against blacks. Neither viewpoint should be given legitimacy in America.

To those who argue that Warren is part of mainstream America, let me remind you of something I have a feeling that you and many other Americans have forgotten, or never knew: The KKK was once considered a respectable organization, and not just by flaming racist fanatics. The KKK had widespread support among "respectable" Americans. The KKK regularly marched in civic parades, and not just in the South.

And let me make my central point again: We decent Americans relegated the once respectable, mainstream KKK to the margins of this society, not by inviting them into the tent in the name of unity, but by kicking them out of the tent and telling them never to return. Rick Warren, with his hateful characterization of gays, has shown himself as just one more bigot. I could not care less that many "respectable" Americans worship at his feet, any more than I care that many Americans still consider the KKK respectable. It's time to put the Rick Warrens of the world on the dust bin of history, just like we did the other bigots, the KKK.

Obama can try all he wants to reach out, he will still be vilified and attacked by the bigots and racists that make up the religious right in this country. The Republicans will continue to encourage this as they know it solidifies their base.

"No, I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God." - George H.W. Bush, Presidential Nominee for the Republican party; 1987-AUG-27

McCain wasn't even at Warren's debate when Obama was talking less alone sitting in the soundproof booth Warren lied about McCain being in. These are the kind of RNC Fox News "Christians" Warren and McCain are.

Of course you would have picked Warren, Leith. So would you buddy Colson. You both like jolly rotund intolerant white homophobic evangelicals.

If you belong to Leith's NEA, be careful what you say. Ask Pastor Ciznik if you don't know what I'm talking about. Let's give these zealots two or three states to go live in (like the Mormons have Utah) to leave the rest of us alone. Maybe Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi. They're already infested with racist neochristians - a few more won't matter.

So a "bold" leader is one who can stand with a pastor who doesn't agree with all of his politics?

Earlier this month, Richard Cizik, your Vice President for Governmental Affairs, resigned under pressure because he dared to say that while he did not support redefining marriage, he DID support civil unions between people of the same sex.

Instead of standing with Cizik, you happily accepted his resignation and told your board members: "Although he has subsequently expressed regret, apologized, and affirmed our values, there is a loss of trust in his credibility as a spokesperson among leaders and constituencies."

What does that say about YOUR leadership, Mr. Anderson?

So, no, Rick Warren is not 'Bold.'

Not the right kind of 'Bold' anyway.

Some will say it's 'bold' to start queerbashing before anyone has an idea what to do with their plumbing, but that's not bold.

I know for a fact that's just chickensh** with more bodies.

Bold would be Mr. Warren rising to the occasion.

Expecting his flock to evaluate what he said,
And his flock taking the moment.

Otherwise, I'll tell you about 'bold,' Reverend.

Cause I mean, Christians, it must be the *nice* thing about claiming 'Oh, queer folks, you can change, even if there's no good reason to *want* you to change and we kicked the crap out of all of you trying to make you change in Christian school anyway....

Cause as long as you can irrationally blame us for everything that is so *obviously* maladjusted between you and your sex and your God and your rulers....

Well...

You don't have to look at what you've done, do you?

Someone will make it *easy* for you.

To hurt me.

And say that's all you have to do.

I mean, that's why this cheeses queer people *off.*

The sheer arrogance of Evangelicals *whining* about their notion that their *opinion* outweighs other Americans' *lives.*

(Yes, I know you claim it's your God and not you that is bigoted, ...but as thin a claim as that is, I'm not about to kneel to that God as a friend of humanity and America, never mind vote for completely self-destructive and irresponsible policies just to try and coerce myself out of building a life with someone I love under the sweet light of Liberty's torch *even if I would.*

Your 'comfort in definitions.'

My *life.*

This is one of the big *problems* as regards your religious politics in America.

You whine it's 'religious oppression' if you aren't allowed to use the *government* to *enforce* your *opinions* about *your* establishments of religion.

If you don't think your God of forgiveness would forgive you for giving a couple queer gals a fair shake for once, that's really between you and him.

Frankly, *My* Lady taught me better than that.

I dunno what's going on in *your* house, but I don't think it'll be fixed by hurting me. Gods know if it would, it would have worked a long time ago.

So.

Maybe Rev Warren there has some things to say you like to hear.

I hear a lot of Christians whining about the 'censorship' that didn't happen, as regards their 'right' to impose on my life while voting for people with bad economic policies.

If you're less willing to make *me* and my dear one *suffer* for your trivial 'opinion' than Warren is to try to manipulate national politics and tell people it's about who I snuggle with,

Well.

Ain't me you need to be talking at.

It's yer man Warren there.

" themoderate
"Dear Rev. Anderson:

"Good points. If we can move to a place where we can disagree on some things but work together for the common good, we may recover some hope of a civil and functional polity."

I mean, pardon if the 'disagreeing on some things' just so happens to be an *opinion* to you and Rev Warren, and *my rights and those of the dearest one in the world to me as American citizens* to me.

Evangelicals want to be the 'big man' here, well.

'Humor me.'

Till you get your 'opinions' all comfy.

"Warren extended a bold invitation to Barack Obama for a debate/interview during the general election on the platform of Saddleback Church. Obama has extended a bold invitation to Rick Warren for an invocation/prayer on the steps of the Capitol."

It was hardly 'bold' of Warren to host a forum where McCain could read off bumperstickers, probably with questions given in advance, and Obama was somewhat grilled on hot-button issues.

*Bold,* to include Warren anyway, I'm sure.

My hope is that Warren won't be so *bold* as to claim it's an endorsement of his teachings that I'm not an American or a good person, just cause he was invited in spite of what he did.

*tossing some rope.*

Yaknow, I hear a lot how some come away from megachurches thinking they know what to do with this, but, sorry, couldn't make it to DC. :)

Dear Rev. Anderson:

Good points. If we can move to a place where we can disagree on some things but work together for the common good, we may recover some hope of a civil and functional polity.

Merry Christmas

Dear Rev Anderson

A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2009!

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

Great commentary... differences of opinion, yet a respectful relationship between the two. We can use more of this type of dialog. When one decision upsets the politcal left and right, it's probably a good one! Rather than looking left or right, as a nation, we need to look up.

"Who would I pick if I could have made the choice for who should give the invocation at the coming Inauguration? I would have picked Rick Warren."

I have no doubt. He's the most popular christian bigot around these days. Keep snuggling up, Leith. Maybe he'll cut you in on more of the action.