Skip to comments.Defending Rick Warren
Posted on 12/26/2008 9:18:49 AM PST by dbz77
Barack Obama's decision to have Pastor Rick Warren deliver the invocation at his inauguration next month has provoked anguish among some of his formerly ardent supporters. Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, upbraided the president-elect according to The Politico. "Your invitation to Reverend Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at your inauguration is a genuine blow to LGBT Americans. (W)e feel a deep level of disrespect when one of architects and promoters of an anti-gay agenda is given the prominence and the pulpit of your historic nomination." Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen accused Obama of condoning a man who "dehumanizes" homosexuals. NPR talk show host Diane Rehm called some of Warren's comments on gays "ugly."
What had Warren done to provoke such feelings? He supported California's Proposition 8, which overturned a state Supreme Court ruling in favor of gay marriage. But wait, Barack Obama opposed gay marriage, didn't he? He stated explicitly during the campaign that he believed marriage to be the union "between one man and one woman." His supporters clearly assumed he was being disingenuous. Based on Obama's other beliefs, the atmospherics of the campaign, and their own hopes, they dismissed his opposition to gay marriage.
Other supporters of traditional marriage don't get such gentle treatment from proponents of gay marriage. Instead, as the above quotes on Warren demonstrate, there is a pretty systematic effort to portray opponents of gay marriage as simple bigots, no more deserving of respect than racists or anti-Semites. What particularly outraged gay rights activists was a comment Warren made in a TV interview when he compared two homosexuals getting married to a brother marrying a sister or an adult marrying a child. Those were not the most felicitous comparisons and probably unnecessarily hurt the feelings of gays and lesbians.
And yet, the point Warren was making was a valid one. Once you abandon the traditional definition of marriage to suit the feelings on an interest group, by what principle do you stop redefining marriage? Gays and lesbians argue that their same sex unions are loving, committed relationships. Fine. But there are, or could be, other loving, committed relationships involving more than two people. Supporters of gay marriage say this is a ridiculous slippery slope argument.
But consider the name that many gay activists have adopted. You no longer see gay and lesbian alone. Instead, the new terminology is LGBT -- lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender. Lesbians and gays say that without gay marriage, they cannot fully express themselves as they really are. But what about bisexuals? I ask this not to poke fun or to hurt anyone's feelings, but in all seriousness. How does gay marriage help a bisexual? I assume that if you are bisexual, you believe that you need to have sexual relationships with both men and women. If you are a bisexual man married to a woman, don't you need to break the marriage bond to express your bisexuality? If you choose to express just the homosexual side of your bisexuality, then aren't you gay? Likewise, if you choose to express only the heterosexual side, how are you a bisexual? Why is bisexuality not a recipe for infidelity? As for transgender people who believe that they are "assigned" to the wrong sex, their sexuality seems a deeply complicated matter. According to Wikipedia, the term "transgender," which is always evolving, today encompasses "many overlapping categories -- these include cross-dresser (CD); transvestite (TV); androgynes; genderqueer; people who live cross-gender; drag kings; and drag queens; and, frequently, transsexual (TS)." We are now in the realm of a multitude of sexual deviances.
Where do you draw a line? Once traditional marriage -- supported by centuries of civilization and the major Western religions -- is undermined in the name of love, there is no logical or principled reason to forbid polygamy, polyandry, or even incest. Gay activists recoil from incest. But on what grounds exactly? Suppose, after we formalize gay marriage, two 25-year-old sterile (to remove the health of offspring argument) twins wish to marry? Let's suppose they are loving and committed. What is the objection? That it offends custom and tradition? That it offends God? Isn't that just bigotry?
When asked which was a greater threat to marriage, divorce or gay marriage, Rick Warren laughed and replied that it was a no-brainer -- divorce. He was right. But there are very solid reasons to oppose any redefinition of marriage -- and it isn't bigoted to say so.
This is mutually beneficial for both Warren and Obama. Helps portray Obama as a centrist and helps Warren sell more books and make more $$$$.
Anyone who saw Rick Warren at Saddleback knows the guy is a solid conservative. I’d like to see him admonish Obama and all those tuned in on the issues of abortion, perversion, and the sin of envy.
He is on the global warming bandwagon. Can a conservative succeed in much of anything in CA?
Rick Warren will, I predict, become the new Billy Graham. He will be at every state function and have the ear of many more presidents. As was Graham, he will be seen as the safe and non-threatening choice for such duties. Sadly, he will also be no more effective in shaping the world of politics than was Billy.
I saw this guy on TV the other night. After all the hullabaloo I expected something truly outrageous, but he didn’t say anything unreasonable. Course who knows what he says when he isn’t being televised.
Just the fact that this is an issue is a victory for gay rights advocates. The fact that someone like Warren, a fairly moderate and apolitical figure is forced to defend himself, shows who has the upper hand in the culture wars. I don’t think that his selection would have been an issue even ten years ago.
I agree - the only thing about Rick Warren that sends them into a frenzy is that perverted sex issue. Men marrying men? Women marrying women? Who would have dreamed such a thing would ever be considered acceptable? The power of the drum beat of the anti-Christian forces, with the media trumpeting their cause.
The only reason it succeeds is that, as a population, we have allowed our foundation to be chipped away at - to the point that it no longer holds us up.
They ought to be used to bending over.
Dig deeper.... you will find that Warren voters are in large numbers Bama voters. There is nothing solid conservative about the Warren doctrine. The majority believe they are out of here before the 'trouble' begins.
Compared to Pope Benedict, Rick Warren is a light weight
Go back to Democrats Undergound where your ilk belongs. You are not welcome here unless you can behave yourself. This is not a good example of what is expected. But check, we may have a gay forum.
“Dig deeper.... you will find that Warren voters are in large numbers Bama voters. There is nothing solid conservative about the Warren doctrine. The majority believe they are out of here before the ‘trouble’ begins. “
Totally agree. Neighbors & some that are not religious agree & we all live approx 5 mi from his church. IMO he is Barry's useful idiot.
I wonder if Platte River Rick knows he is a tool of the left?
Rick Warren is a sellout to the church of Jesus Christ, and maybe this will wake him up to realize he hasn’t made ANY friends by pandering to both sides.
If I wasn't laughing so hard, I would say a lot more about that. Anyone who accepts homosexual marriage or civil unions, global warming, one world garbage, is no conservative. He is a fraud and more people discover that every day.
I see warren as just another is a looooooooooooong line of feel good chinese menu televangilists.
nothing more nothing less.
you could get the same amount of life affirmation by reading the “everthing I needed to know about life I learned on star trek” poster (original series not any of the PC new ones)
Bingo. Rick Warren has become a fake and a fraud in my view, the same as Benny Hinn and the rest of the "televangelists" who say to send them money, then place your hands on the TV so they can heal you.
Billy Graham wasn't worried about politics or being politically correct. He was (and is) focused on the Lord's work and saving souls. You can't help but see that when you see him speak to a crowd. He's an amazing warrior, and I suspect there's a very special place in heaven for him.
I agree! Billy’s reward is not of this world. I was merely pointing out that many politicians use him (and now Warren) as religious bunting on their political grandstands.
He doesn’t support Homosexual marriage saying that he does is a lie. Too many conservatives seem to take glee in discerning the minds of those who are not as fiery as they would like. I don’t care much for his brand of religion but then again there are a lot about organized religion I don’t like in general. There are far too many sanctimonious prophets who if you judged them from their dress alone one might think they are a little on the limp wristed side. I don’t know where he stands on global warming and really don’t care. It is a farce but of course such falsehoods tend to make themselves evident of their own accord.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.