Warren, Wallis on a Mission to Save Politics

At the end of the day, what will, in fact, be their "fruits?" The lines between church and state are blurred, and I'm not much comforted that Warren says that the church-state separation is being honored, but that there cannot be separation of politics and faith. To me, it's all fuzzy and confusing. Warren played his hand last week and showed himself to be Conservative; Wallis shows himself continually to be liberal. Neither is willing to be quiet, nor should they be, but their active involvement in the political process to me muddies the intent of the separation of church and state. When it's all said and done, civil or not, people are divided into two political camps, opposed to each other, in the name of the same God. So, what has been achieved? What has always been achieved: "divine endorsement" for a particular point of view.

Its articles like this:

Joel Hunter: Democrats Could "Steal the Title of the Pro Life Party"

http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/2008/08/joel-hunter-democrats-could-st.html

that make the "new evangelicals" look like sold out shills for the DNC hoping to influence a few votes in their sizable congregations.

from the article:

"Obama is just as pro-choice as any other Democratic nominee; critics say he's the most pro-choice candidate ever. Hunter makes a practical argument: providing women with economic help in carrying babies to term can actually reduce the number of abortions more, and more quickly, than focusing on overturning Roe v. Wade. "With eight years of Bush the abortion rates have not declined. Every indication is that with financial support and different forms of supporting pregnant mother and then some post birth help also we could come close to 50% reduction in abortions. That's huge. That's huge."

Continuing with the same culture war paradigm is therefore morally dubious. "If we insist on keeping this an ideological war we're literally not saving the babies we could save. The Democrats have a huge opportunity here to really steal the thunder from those who are seen as traditionally pro life."

To compromise on abortion (which believers see as a moral equivalent of murder) hoping enough pro-life votes will swing to Obama is making a pact with the devil that may burn men like Joel Hunter in the end. I too am watching and praying.

Let's hope these pharisees fall like Jim Bakker and all the other Elmer Gantrys.

Yes, Warren has shown himself to be, not only a conservative, but also a liar just like EVERY other conservative.
When a conservative is caught lying they STILL refuse to admit they lied!
We saw this when Warren had to admit that McCain was NOT in a "Cone of Silence" like he stated at the beginning of the forum.
These people do not see outright lies as "lies" but rather misstatements or gaffes.

They need to stay out of politics just like Jesus did. Jesus was not part of the world because his father kingdom was no part of the political system of that time.

Rebecca, if you truly believe that abortion is the moral equivalent of murder, and that life begins at conception, then you should support the imprisonment (and possibly the death penalty) of every woman who has had an abortion, including those who have taken the morning after pill. It continues to baffle me that pro-life people are willing to call it murder, but unwilling to accept the consequences of their belief.

No, they will not be changed. They're hypocrites already. They will remain hypocrites. Anybody in the "business" of God cannot be transformed by politics. It's like asking if turning on your lawn sprinkler will transform the rain.

"You shall know them by their fruits." This might be more appropriately referring to these self-righteous, intolerant, evangelical zealots and the delusional megalomaniacs that lead the flocks.

The last eight years have been led by one of these fruits and all we have to show for it are record deficits, an unecessary war costing hundreds of thousands American and Iraqi lives, a blind eye turned toward the poor and disenfranchised, and an economy in shambles.

Indeed, let's save politics and our country by doing what Thomas Jefferson said, in creating the "wall of separation", keeping religion a personal exercise and governmental policy an exercise in the common good for all Americans, no matter what their religious persuasion might be.

As a Christian I have never had my faith so insulted by Rush Limbaugh. Rush Limbaugh continually referrers to Obama as the Messiah. He has even referred to Obama as my Messiah because I support Obama. This is blasphemy. My Messiah lived 2000 years ago and is Jesus Christ To say Obama is my Messiah is so disrespectful of my and millions of American’s faith. A real Christian would never say a person who has professed his life to Christ (as Obama has) is the Messiah. I can tell you that I will never buy a product from a sponsor of Rush Limbaugh because has insulted my faith. This is pretty bad for a guy who says his gift is on loan from God.

Lord save us from the Evangelical Fanatics.

As a born-again Christian, I find it very difficult to vote Democrat. But I find it much more difficult to vote Republican. Here's why:

1. Republicans seem to favor the rich. That is not at all a Christian value. The Lord specifically highlights that a rich man is living the wrong life. Of course, rich might be a matter of perspective in this world, so maybe I'm rich too.

2. Republicans are extremely pro-war. This is 100% out of allignment with Christian thought.

3. Most of the spokespeople for the Republicans, particularly on radio and TV, preach hate and use the word hate when describing liberals. This is unChristianlike.

4. Republicans claim to be pro-life, however I don't believe them. They proposed a constitutional amendment against gay marriage, but not against abortion. I don't believe they truly want to win (and thus lose) that issue.

Democrats seem to me to be the party that shows a greater representation for humanity.

But even they fall far. Many voted for this illegal and immoral war. They have helped to kill.

"YOU SHALL KNOW THEM BY THEIR FRUITS"

Biblical reference to Pastor Ted Haggard

Religious figures from Henry Ward Beecher (abolitionist leader) to the Fathers Berrigan (anti-war left) to Warren and others have always staked out political positions and crossed into the secular to support or oppose variuos causes or canndidates or parties. When the leader is a leftist, he or she is invited by the left with oopen arms . . . when right, denounced and threatend with IRS probes. Fact is, the First Amendment applies to all, regardless of occupation. Get over it.

Religion is for the truly retarded. Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Hindus are war mongers that murder millions for profit or just because that's what retards do.
Anyone mentally crippled enough to join an organized religion should be culled for the good of the sane people on earth.
Religion should be outlawed in the USA.

The best thing these fanatics could do for politics is to leave politics alone. If these evangelicals hadn’t marched like sheep to the polls in order to “protect” marriage, to discriminate against gay people, and to combat environmental awareness, we wouldn’t have gotten our worst president ever, GWB. Thanks a bunch you religious sheep.

Warren is frustrated because he want's to be the next Billy Grahm, kind of "America's Pope". Like many wealthy "religious leaders" Warren is only interested in his own accumulation of power and wealth. Sadly this "Christian" sees Jesus as merely a method of getting ahead in life.

The point that great reforms in America can be led by spiritual folks is certainly true, but Conservative Christians have led any kind of movement for anything. Organized Conservative Christians only work to restrict the rights of others and impose their ways on the rest of us. Hence in the 1980s and 90s we heard a lot about forcing school kids to pray to their god.

Of course nobody should take Warren seriously as a "spiritual person". He is rather dishonest.

Why are there so many "Christians" on here telling what they think everyone should be doing without a single Bible reference. Real Christians are to be fighting a war againsg the world, not joining with the powers that be (Titus 2:12). Paul said, "Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ." 1 Corinthians 11:1 Show me where he tried to influence the government or set up any form of civil government? When he spoke to kings did he talk about abortion, or judges, or taxes. No! He preached the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Be subject to the higher powers and serve the Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 13:1-6). "Peace is 100% Christian thought[!!!]. Show me the scripture where the Christian is to even pray for peace... Oh, you think, you feel, you want. Who cares. WHAT DID GOD SAY?

They're both morons and the only reason they get any publicity is because the press is made up of morons too. C'mon, they majored in the easiest subject possible in college, mass communications.

You are the ones that are nuts. We have God's word in the bible. He created us and gave us what was on His mind. It's not all for us today but it does show us the mind and actions of His chosen people Israel. We are no better than they are today. We are still putting our opinion and feelings over what the creator of the universe says. No one is perfect and you cannot hold up evangelical and say they are the pattern. God is the pattern and our doctrine for today is in Paul's epistles which are Romans thru Philemon. In these books are all you will ever need to lead a life of Christ. It is not about republican or democrat but I don't see how anyone can vote for a party that would condone killing an innocent baby while fighting for the rights of a murder on death row. And republicans do not favor the rich, they just want to earn their own money and have no one tell them how they can spend it. Democrats want us to give what we have to people that don't want to work. The Apostle Pauls writes that if you don't work, you don't eat.

David Waters, editor of the “On Faith” blog, which appears on The Washington Post and Newsweek Web sites, urged reporters “not to go” to established leaders like Robertson and Dobson, contrasting them to “real people”:

I think, as journalists, our No. 1 obligation is obviously to the truth, and if we’re going to be about the truth then we have to fight and we have to fight for space and for time to tell the right story and to tell the real story, and I think the best way to go about that, at least I’ve found in my experience with my own reporting and with other reporters, is to take time and not go to the Pat Robertsons and the James Dobsons of the world but to find the real people who are really struggling with this issue.

Sounds like you pretty much judged them. Why can't Rick Warren be afforded that same right. They don't speak for me as an evangelical christian but they are closer my values than Wallis and you ever will.

Jesus was a liberal Democrat.

What is faith without compassion?

Exceeding to the demands of Right Wing Christians our presidential contenders have to pander over the issue of “Faith.”

Imagine if at the time of the Constitutional convention this well meaning but misdirected group of “Christians,” held sway. Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin would have been excluded. They would have told their flocks not to read the words of Thomas Paine. We need to come to the realization that they are limiting America’s possibilities. Hard as it is to believe, some of the most caring and compassionate people just happen to not believe in a redemptive God.

The Right Wing Christians are carting truckloads of false pride. They should be concerned that those Red Bible belt states in our Nation that strongly support McCain, have more poverty, lower incomes, teen pregnancy, people in prison, people without healthcare just to mention a few. I can only conclude that their “Faith” has very little to do with compassion.

It brings me back to my old Sunday school days where we heard the words of Jesus, “Do not point out the speck in someone else’s eye while ignoring the log in your own.”

My yellow dog died of cancer. A few months back I took a magazine with a John Edwards cover, tossed it into the doghouse and put it out for the trash. Now who is in the doghouse? You never know except when you do know. I got him from the rescue people in early 2001. That dog helped us through 911 and now he's on duty someplace else. He's in a better place than John Edwards.

Activist clergy have a long and honorable history of political advocacy in America. Henry Ward Beecher (father of Harriet) is just one example from the past. Political and policy choices are always choices about values and as long as we have an open system of honoring ideas, we should welcome those who enter the arena and use their persuasiveness to challenge or inspire us to do better, whatever their belief system.

I have been listening to these Pastors talking about the separation of church and state but not faith and politics. I wonder if they have asked the people in their church if they can separate church and faith. My experience has been that most people do not separate faith from church. So my question to them would be if a person does not separate faith and church, and can not separate politics and state, where does that leave us?

Rick Warren lied when he said McCain was in a Cone of Silence. He knew McCain was not in the Cone the last time he checked. So why did he lie to the viewing audience? Sure I think we should learn to have civil discussions, but if they aren't based on truth and facts - why bother. How come the media didn't question his credibility. If the first thing you say to me is a lie, I don't want to hear anything else. Forget learning how to debate - learn how to tell the truth regardless of your religion or political views.

From many of the posts, I doubt the posters have actually read anything by Wallace or Warren. To call Jim Wallace narrow minded is so far from reality to be funny. Same for Warren who has a different slant on things. Jim Wallace has an online journal "Sojourners" which is easy to find and read. Don't judge a book til you've even seen the cover, let alone read it.

I don't know if you can ready anything of Rick Warren online, but he is the author of "Purpose Driven Life", which is worth the read.

It seems to me that the fundamental question is what makes any religious leader assume that he or she has the right to enter into the political arena as a religious leader rather than as a private citizen expressing purely personal views, especially if he assumes that he knows how the political system should function? Both Warren and Wallis are manifesting hubris in two fundamental ways. One, they are acting as self appointed religious leaders who can speak with authority about the standards by which religion can evaluate the political system and offer cures for its presumed shortcomings. Two, they are assuming that as a religious leader who can speak authoritatively to such standards, they are by virtue of that in possession of the wisdom that will enable them to speak with intelligence to those in the political system who can speak authoritatively from within the logic and language of that system. In a religious world characterized by great diversity and profound disagreements this first assumption is clearly unfounded. This renders the second assumption invalid from the start. Even if the first assumption in correct, the simple fact of political diversity would render any attempt to offer religious perspectives as a trump card that controls the play of the system invalid. In short these leaders fail on both of the major grounds and it behooves all of us who care about the integrity of the political system to pay them litte if any heed, until such time as they can make compelling arguments based on a different set of assumptions.

I remember seeing an interview of Rick Warren on this site where he dismissed the atheism of Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, and so forth by means of some argument like "they're not really atheists, they just don't like the idea of having a boss."

The optimist side dismissed him as stupid.

The cynic in me, which usually ends up being right, thought, "Wow...this guy is a big liar. He is so terrified that his flock might realize that 'hey! there are people that ACTUALLY DO dismiss God as Santa Claus for grown-ups, like I do' that he's willing to make up any lie he can muster to persuade his flock that there's no such thing as atheists."

If these goons want to save politics, they should stay out of it. Religion is, as it is in most things, the problem, not the solution.

Susan says "When it's all said and done, civil or not, people are divided into two political camps, opposed to each other, in the name of the same God"

Wrong Susan. There are many people that don't believe in any of your superstitions and oppose both camps.

As TJ said, religion IS the problem.

Neither party is perfect, but it's deciding which one best suits your preference. Just as each of us is different we'll of course see differently. For me, as a Christian, it's hard to vote Republican because of the war and violence. I also don't agree with the Democrats' pro-choice views however with all the issues on the table I'm leaning towards voting Obama.

A beauty of being Christian is you realize you're not perfect and others shouldn't be judged on that level either. It is disheartening to see your Christian leaders made mistakes, but it's a daily effort to be as "good" as possible - even with the smallest of decisions. If someone hopes to present a Christian view to politics I'm open for it, cause I'd like to judge each candidate from as many angles as possible.

Who cares what any of these preachers, who are nothing more than leeches, think about anything?

Wallis, Warren, and their counterparts in any/any religious denomination should be contacted by the IRS through their pocketbooks; they open their mouths in public regarding political issues of any kind, they lose their tax-exempt status.

These people simply shouldn't be allowed to have it both ways. They're either religious leaders or political figures but we can't have these guys (again, of any denomination) shaking their flocks down for church collections and then telling them, directly or not, how to vote. The practice is hypocritical and it's clearly done damage already to the American polity and its system of government; we should stop it.

It saddens me to see, and read, all of the hate people have for one another - just because they share a different opinion. We are all shaped by where we grew up, who our parents are, who our friends are, where we went to college (if we went to college), etc. People need to recognize they would probably be very different (and have different opinions and beliefs) if they grew up in a different part of the country with completely different parents, friends, and teachers. Everyone lies. We are all imperfect. We are all biased and judge people, think poorly of others, disparage people in our minds. But to demonize people takes it a bit too far; just because they have a different opinion. I don't get it.

I don't see how we can separate faith from politics. For most, whether they realize it or not, their spirituality, or lack of one, forms the foundation for many of their core beliefs. These beliefs should then drive whether they are Democrat, Republican, or fit the belief system of any other party. Let Warren and Wallis speak. If the news wants to put them on, then go for it. If the news wants to put anyone else on - great. But we should all take it with a grain of salt. Try to read between all of the b/s both candidates are putting out there and vote your conscious. I have traditionally been a Republican, but I am unsure who I will vote for this election. I don't think McCain is another Bush - he has shown it in the past by being somewhat of a renegade in the Republican party.

The separation between church and state does not exist. It never has. It's based on the philosophical notion of a split between the sacred and the profane - secularism is nothing more than a modern myth. A myth like unbiased journalists and reporters.

Those who think that religious people should stay out of politics, are political people who have chosen to stay out of religion. For something that apparently has no validity or truth, it sure does pose a menacing threat to their way of life.

So what if Warren is a conservative and Wallis a liberal? To the extent of being mutually exclusive, maybe there is room in Christianity for both. It's a discussion worth having.

Jesus did not stay out the political system. He expertly worked from within it, as did Paul. A truly radical idea.

Lord save us from our ignorance, and our pride - especially my own.

Tambopaxi, Wow, if people had to choose between being a religious leader or a political leader, then I guess we would never have a Martin Luther King, or a Jessie Jackson.

Brian: The phrase and principle of 'separation between church and state' is enshrined in the constitution - the Russian Soviet constitution that is.

Salute The NEW Commander(s) in Chief, 2009+

.
.
http:////////////2///0///0///8/////////////O
V?:♦)

Warren was a lame moderator at Saddleback.
A moderator's job is to moderate, he didn't.

Warren is the leader of a rogue church, non denominational means not responsible or accountable to anyone.

Warren is so obviously just a self serving money grubbing powergrabber. Hey Warren, one of the seven deadly sins is gluttony, practice what you preach.

No religion in politics!

I spent 12 years in the Catholic school system and know how manipulative "men of religion" can be.

Brain, I do not know what Bible you are reading, but the one that I read does not have Jesus in politics. His message is one of love, forgiveness and inclusiveness.

To say that “The separation between church and state does not exist. It never has. It's based on the philosophical notion of a split between the sacred and the profane - secularism is nothing more than a modern myth. A myth like unbiased journalists and reporters.” is incorrect.

The founding fathers were, like us, the children of their time – the Age of the Enlightenment. Even though they may had faith in God, they were suspicious of the “religious” establishment:

"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."

"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not."

James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments (1785)

"Men of religion" need to stay out of politics.

Rick Warren is the antithesis of the Jesus he worships as a god. As a matter of American principle, he does not belong in the political arena. As a religious leader, he has no place at that table. Rick Warren has enough pastoral work on his hands just making his pathetic Christian flock into a Christ-like group. Including Warren, they are all self-serving ideologues who've failed miserably, living hypocritical existences based on hate and exclusion. Warren and his ilk are nothing more than extensions to the Republican party cloaked in a religious farce. It's time they were formally rejected and decent Americans freed of their lies.

Cant we just agree that no matter who we vote for, we're going to get screwed. At this point American politics is a bigger joke than it ever has been at any point in history. Its been turned into a game of us vs. them, do whatever it takes for the *party to win, not the american public. The Democrats want to waste your money on programs that the government has never been efficient at running, and the republicans have been hijacked by the bush administration and the religious right (no offense.) The republicans have managed to take a party that was centralized around "small government" and have turned it into the most powerful and imposing government in american history (say bye to all of your liberties.)If you want my advice, stop being a pawn and change your registration to indipendent. Liberatarian for the win...less government - everyone wins

Both Major Parties are MAJORLY CROOKED and collaborate much to our demise. Most are already aware of this, yet they keep playing the RepubliCrat game of FEAR, choosing the "lesser of two evils"! STOP IT! Quit voting for these corrupt parties...PLEASE!

Vote LIBERTARIAN PARTY and make a difference, a REAL difference! This will be the only way we can get our country back! Restore Rule of Law by voting Libertarian Party and watch the Majorly Crooked two do an about face!

Bob Barr 2008! And don't forget the Libertarians running for Congress in just about every state!

unfortunatly at this time the liberatarian party is a bit of a joke, so voting for them would kind of be throwing away your vote, which i guess isnt much different than voting for a democrat or a republican. The only problem i see is that a majority of the people who would vote for a third party canidate would probably be democrats, thus taking votes away from obama (whom i consider the lesser of two evils right now.) I just dont want to see another 4-8 years of republican control, and increased government power yet again. I dont want to give up my freedoms and liberties again to "protect us from terrorists".

I feel that alot of the miscommuniation occurs when people assume that 'others' have different values.
Is a lie any less of a lie because it is told by a christian?
Is an honest man's veracity diminsihed because he is an atheist?
A Hindu woman can love her child with the same fierceness and devotion as

No group has a monopoly on goodness- and no person has a monopoly on evil.

Man is a social and political being. And als a spiritual being- even if he doesn't call it godor religion.

It is not realistic to expect people to leave their religions out of their judgement and decision making- as for msot religious- that is their template for guidance.
If one has a different template for their own reasoning, they are welcome to it.

I think religious folks come under a more intense scrutiny because the rules of their behavior and misbehavior are genenrally known.

Strangely, atheists look to those very rules to gauge the behavior of faithful, and see if they are living up to or betraying their own belief.

Which is kind of a form of hypocrisy.

And faithful look to the atheists, and assume they have no moral compass because they simply don't understand that, for some, their compasses are entirely inside.

Another form of hardheartedness and hypocrisy.
I guess both are trying to prove to the other their own superiority-
It is not really necessary- good manners and respect for each other will be noted if it is present, by those who also possess those values.

I am troubled by Pastor Warren's comments that he is skeptical of Barak Obama's desire to find ways to reduce the need for abortions. Why would any evangelical voice skepticism over any effort to reduce abortions? Only ideologues (of all fundamentalist stripes; whether Christian, Islamic, or whatever) are unwilling to discuss outcomes which don't conform to their rigid constructs. Hasn't Rick Warren stated that his mission was to encourage a civil dialogue over just these issues? It's no surprise that the Democratic party is using Karl Rove's playbook against John McCain by turning their supposed weakness ("family values") into their strength (yes values, but values that reflect the contradictions of real human experience). Ignoring those contradictions does not engender credibility in a world of rational thought. Strike down abortion rights, but not the death penalty? Preach salvation of the soul, but stay silent on torture? Love thy neighbor, but tolerate with closed lips the deaths of countless innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan? Cast out the moneychangers in the temple, but turn a blind eye to the private corporate plunder of our public coffers? Where's the "value" in that? To my mind, Rick Warren's stated desire to encourage civil discussion will generate credibility only in the same proportion as his willingness to dialogue in good faith (no pun intended) and invite his fellow evangelicals to follow suit.

Has Warren said anything at all about the fact that the Republican party and George Bush support the use of torture? Have any of the important religious figures, any of the Conservatives, come out against the use of torture? Is torture an acceptable family value to Warren, to the other evangelicals? Innocent men were tortured by this president, the government, sometimes to death, and I have yet to hear a policy statement against it ffrom any major Conservative religious group. This is the most important issue of this time, Torture. Can't we have a column or two on it? Can;t someone question these guys about it?

I guess I'm missing the point of the election for president of the United States. I thought we were trying to come to some agreement, as a nation, about which person (and party) could best lead the nation. I thought we were trying to elect someone to help the nation address the issues that truly threaten the security and prosperity of us all. Things like oil dependency, international relations, providing healthcare for our citizens, good schools, safe roads, secure borders, pragmatic monetary policy, etc. None of these problems will be remedied with an abortion ban. No Social Security fix will be resolved by teaching intelligent design and no war will be won by banning same sex marriage.

We as a nation are being diverted from the work of preserving the union by the effort to "christianize" politics. I don't think either Pastor should spend much time meddling in national politics. But then I come from a tradition where church and congregation were neighborhood institutions (not national media conglomerations), we didn't broadcast on tv, sell DVD's and promote ourselves while being wrapped in the trappings of religiosity. We picked up the trash in on our block, made sure no one went hungry on our street, looked after the kids in the neighborhood and just thanked God for the opportunity see a new day.

One thing I find refreshing about the stated position of Warren and Wallis - the one thing on which both believers and atheists can agree - is the need for civil discourse in public life. If America needs anything from the coming political campaign, it is to focus on the issues facing our country, and leave aside the corrosive attacks on the personalities of the Democratic and Republican nominees.

Now, what would be even more refreshing is if these religious leaders were to tell their congregations: "Study the candidates, think about it, pray about it, and decide with the minds that God gave you," and then, endorse no one. In my view, that is part of what "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's" means.

This is very helpful. The widely heralded "moderation" of Christian evangelicals is a media myth.

At least Warren is being honest in his WSJ comments -- the anti-abortion, anti-birth-control, anti-woman, anti-homosexual, anti-government and anti-tax agenda is still the core belief of the Christian Right. There was never even a question of being open to voting for Democrats -- the only question was whether Republicans might be too "liberal" for these people.

Warren, acknowledging his beliefs align with Dr. Dobson, is an extremist in a sheep suit. All he has done is heed his marketing data (nobody does marketing better than megachurches), which tell him he'll fill his pews if he sounds more kind and gentle.

Really, is Rick Warren any different from Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition in their heydey -- acknowledging here fairly frankly that his church is basically a subsidiary of the Republican National Committee. He plays the same old Southern Baptist winking game with the IRS over his tax exemption, which should mean he's not telling his flock how to vote.

I just heard a self described evangelical christian, while speaking on NPR today, say that he is not a single issue christian and that opposition to abortion (his position) is not worth a hill of beans if it does not go along with other christian ideals such as feeding the hungry, etc., etc. He said that he was for Huckabee but is now supporting the Democratic candidate because his platform is more in keeping with his proclaimed faith. He just contributed another reason for me to ease up off one of my generalizations which is based on the utterings of what I refer to the big mouths who seem to be unable to talk sense with microphones in their faces. That generalization is that Evangelical Christians are predominantly opposed to the idea that all people are really created equal. They are therefore predominantly racist and xenophobic. Pastor Warren and some colleagues seem to be creeping away from this characterization. I am not sure that their organizations see themselves as being able to make that transition without being made to pay. History shows otherwise but some habits do die with great difficulty.

Sorry, I have problems with "attempt to solve" from these or any consertative minister.

If the managing of Pastor Rick's questioning of the two candidates is to be an example of his fairness, it is a misleading example. This forum was most certainly slanted toward McCain and the response of Warren to McCain's abortion answer gave certain gives credence to the thought that the only interest in consertative christian politics is the abortion issue. If you don't agree with them, it makes no difference how strong your leadership abilities are in other areas. Warrens forum wasn't about partinship, its was about showcasing McCain and his abortion stance.

There is not now nor will there ever be any compassion or support for any politican that has disagreement with or at least a different take on the abortition issue. This group can look past a bush and unecessary war and the death and injury of thousands without censor or outrage and they have not been a voice in the condemnation of the bush torture policys. In short, you will have to convince me that the only issue of importance to them in the judging of a candidate is his support of their abortion stance. Nothing else matters.

King:
Rebecca, if you truly believe that abortion is the moral equivalent of murder, and that life begins at conception, then you should support the imprisonment (and possibly the death penalty) of every woman who has had an abortion, including those who have taken the morning after pill. It continues to baffle me that pro-life people are willing to call it murder, but unwilling to accept the consequences of their belief.
August 27, 2008 2:47 PM
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
I think the only person who should be prosecuted in the case of an abortion is the father of the child. Nip it in the bud. For most of the 50 million abortions, there have been 50 million irresponsible, cruel, deviant, spineless animals lurking in the shadows under the protection of their parents or their threats, leaving a woman with a lifetime of pain in exchange for his 3 minutes of fun.

I am hardly impressed by Rick Warren credentials. The way I look at it, he is a profiteer just interested in making millions selling spiritually shallow books with "The purpose driven ..." (fill in the blanks) mantra as their title. His goal is none other than to run the church as if it were a well-oiled corporation (say, Exxon and IBM). His strict focus on the mechanics of building a bigger church (the so-called mega-church) is misplaced, as it relegates spirituality to second stage. None of apostle Paul's epistles concentrates on the mechanics of running a mega-church, for they are all about doctrine and spirituality. I remember when Newsweek, I believe last year, printed a debate between Rick Warren and Christopher Hitchens. Warren's shallow counter-arguments were, simply put, pitiful and uninformed. This revealed to me that spiritually is a novice and not at the level of past great Evangelists, such as, for example, the late William Hendriksen, who wrote the definitive study of the Book of Revelation in "More Than Conquerors" (first publsihed in 1939). Rick Warren is a celebrity, no different from Paris Hilton and the Hollywood actors. He uses the same trade tools as other celebities to push his spritually-shallow books.

please, please, please go away. Religion, god, "faith" have no place in politics. You cannot govern a people guided by superstition. And the people should not choose its leaders based on such. Keep your supernatural beliefs out of politics. Can you not look around the world and see the danger of injecting religion (or god or "faith") into government?

It is always dangerous when pastors and other religious leaders start actively dabbling in politics. It is an indication that they have strayed from their original calling. And once they do, the rules of the game change and their future actions and motives will always be called into question. They should re-read the gospels and follow Jesus'lead. There was a good reason Jesus avoided direct involvement in the politics during His earthly ministry - it wasn't part of His mission and He didn't allow Himself to be pulled into it. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's.

Warren and Wallis would be better advised to try to save themselves.

If Rick Warren seeks a real distinction between himself and people like James Dobson, he can start by rejecting the supposed will of deities as a factor in making public policy. I don't know what his actual stance is on the matter. I do know that it's dangerous to use religious beliefs as a justification or rationale for policy. Not only does it go against the spirit of the church-state separation, it enables the actual basing of policy on belief, which is what Mike Huckabee advocated.

Warren might win more allies if he defended his policy ideas on a secular level, or more correctly, on a level commensurate with neutrality among competing faiths.

Rick Warren, by brazenly stating that he could never vote for an atheist, has exposed himself as a bigot. He's the last person who should be criticizing anyone else for their political positions. It's shameful that the candidates, in their desperation to woo evangelical voters, lowered themselves to pandering to such a divisive figure in such a divisive venue. It has the effect of establishing a religious test for office, in direct violation of both the Constitution and the intent of our founding fathers, and in violation of the tenets of the religion they profess to follow - render unto Caesar what is Caesar's.

Rick Warren and the rest of the evangelical preachers are nothing more than parasites, non-productive members of our society that suck the life blood of working people. They are snakes in the grass, ever ready to thrive on the conflict and misery that religion creates in society. They make me sick. Every person who makes his or her living from religion should be banned from uttering one public word about politics.

To Ipanema:

You say Mr. Warren "is a profiteer just interested in making millions selling spiritually shallow books". I have heard Mr. Warren say that he has paid back all of his salary over the past 25 years to the church, no longer takes a salary and only keeps 10% of his income from book sales etc while tithing 90% back into the Kingdom. I would say that is quite honorable. Wouldn't you?

You also address the shallowness of PDL (and PDC, which I have not read). While I feel the PDL did not speak to me as some other books do, I know that it has certainly touched millions and led countless people to a closer relationship with Jesus Christ. The book is supposed to be practical/devotional, not theological/doctrinal. As C.S. Lewis once said, "the laymen or amateur needs to be instructed as well as to be exhorted". I would argue that PDL does well to exhort and instruct (at least on a basic level).

As David Waters noted, the Good Book tells us we will know them by their fruits. Rick Warren's fruits are impressive; fulfilling the Great Commission in more ways than book sales alone.

We're all part of the body of Christ; let us show some civility to a man who is part of that same body and doing his part in fulfilling the Great Commission. Dare I ask what any of us have done recently to do the same?

The thing about the reverend clergy is that anyone believing the nonsense they preach is worthy only of contempt.

Let us pray.

Dear jeezuhova, in all your divine love and retribution, could you and mary and those other gods you have up there take an interest in our political season and smite the [insert hated enemy here]. Thanks, and ... uh ... I'll get back to you on that money I borrowed to bet on the big game.

Oh, and thanks for that sweet young thing you threw at me last weekend. It seemed like adultery to me at the time .. but I never really understand your mysterious ways anyhow, you certainly wouldn't have sent her to me if you didn't want me to do it.

Oh, oh, one last thing: could you break my mother-in-law's leg sometime this week? My wife and I are going to disney world and for some stupid reason the old lady invited her mother along.

Chagasman (12:54 pm)
please don't give snakes a bad name by comparing them to the preachers. Snakes eat only when necessary; if not provoked, they are peaceful.
While obese preachers are the norm, not so for the snakes.

1) Religion has NO ROOM in American politics - period. The sooner you sci-fi fools are gone the better.

2)Is Rick Warren asking for donations from the top of Oral Roberts Tower in Tulsa yet? One of your top 5 losers.

The current flap over the influence of religion in politics and the current Republican ridicule of Democrats who dare to address the issues of faith as well as to accuse them of being insincere is like something that I experienced years ago.

I was taught how to play chess by a very good friend. It turned out that I learned too quickly. When I beat him of at the game he loved, that was the end of chess playing.

I am beginning to hear the same noise with the Republicans. The Democrats have shown that indeed they know Jesus, too. In fact, Barack knows Jesus' name. McCain did not seem to remember Jesus' name at Saddleback. Not many are making an issue about this, but I know that it is a big deal. To acknowledge my Lord and Savior before others means that my Lord and Savior will know me before the Father. It is a big deal!

But like my friend when I beat him at his game, his game did not mean much anymore. He tried something else to beat me at.

It seems that Christian ideals do not mean much to the Republicans or the religious right anymore. Just look at their rhetoric and listen to their lies. Christians do not lie about other people.