I posted about the Rick Warren controversy yesterday, accidentally deleted it, pondered it some more and got even angrier.
Frankly, I’m embarrassed by the self-appointed gay leadership, which has shown its usual lack of context — and then some.
We’re talking about an inaugural invocation, a ceremonial post that signifies nothing, save that the president-elect is at least cognizant of constituencies beyond his own. And demonizing Warren as a Robertson or Falwell type ignores the yeoman’s work he’s done in Africa to combat AIDS. Most pastors won’t even say the word.
(And would the PQE be speaking out against Warren if he was an imam? I doubt it, based on their silence about the persecuton of gays in the Middle East.)
The political tone-deafness is even more stupefying. You don’t make churlish demands of an ally over something like this.
If only we got this excited over an issue of consequence. What’s more important, going after Warren or mobilizing Congressional support to overturn “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”? The answer is obvious, yet we’d rather focus on backstage melodramas.
“We must demand exclusion in the name of “unity”! writes Chris Crain, “as defined by those who somehow think of themselves as ‘progressive’ despite their own naked intolerance.”
It’s time the serious people push back against the PQE. They’ve embarrassed us enough.
I * think* we’re on the same side here.
I always thought “being more inclusive” meant actually, ya know, being more inclusive. If Obama wants to have a respected anti-gay conservative preacher to give the invocation, then I think all of us liberals could shut up and listen to the man speak for a moment or two. It’s not gonna kill us, and after all, we have the guy in office we wanted.
I think the real scandal here–which no one seems to be talking about–is that the president-elect has invited Rick Warren to come to his inauguration and publicly speak with an imaginary old man who lives in the clouds and grants wishes. This is an insult to every rational person in the country.
Ronnie seems unaware that Obama is a politician and that 92% of Americans (ie voters) identify themselves as believing in God or a higher spirit.
Obama isn’t stupid.
Ronnie thinks that 92% of Americans are not rational enough to know that we shuold be insulted.
Add “elitist” to “atheist” in your profile, Ronnie.
I like the acronym PQE – seems appropriate in this example. I also couldn’t believe the outpouring of outrage over Warren. PQE pushes inclusiveness — unless you disagree with their view. And you are again right. On other blogs, they seem surprised Obama would invite a pastor who’s against gay marriage … did they forget Obama also is against gay marriage (though also against changing constitutions to ban it, he says)? Good post — and gave me a chance to vent!
[...] Posted by Gray under Uncategorized | Tags: Barack Obama, lgbt, Rick Warren | ATL Malcontent posts thoughts regarding the Rick Warren controversy: Rick Warren won’t be introducing any [...]
I think it is a great idea of Obama. Putting Warren on the inauguration list is surely a symbolic act that he really wants to unify the country. The funny thing is that so called liberals are suddenly pretty pissed because there is somebody at their party which does not have their opinion. I thought discussion different opinions is the best way to get closer – not denying different opinions.
And Ronnie – god is in your opinion an imaginary old man? How retarded is that? I mean, come on. Even atheists should have a fancier description of the god.
Then color me petty.
Obama may not be the enemy, but Rick Warren sure enough is.
From Pam’s House Blend:
With all the hub-bub about Rick Warren being a kinder, gentler, evangelical, I thought I check to see what his HIV/AIDS programs have to say about gay folks.
Not surprisingly, it’s not good.
For example, his HIV/AIDS Caring Community site lists this resource under “Recommended Reading”:
“Walking people out of homosexuality
‘More Than Words’ is a compelling one-day conference geared to help you better understand homosexuality so you can minister to a friend or family member. You will learn how to respond to “gay theology,” what the research really shows, and what your church can do.”
Yeah, there’s a bunch of other stuff on the site about loving the sinner but hating the sin, but the bottom line message from Warren’s program is that gay = sin which leads to HIV/AIDS.
Do you have any idea about how much this kind of spiritual abuse — even in allegedly sane, hip or “respectful” or even “loving” clothing has done to LGBT people?
When Obama deserves criticism during this administration, he will, just like Clinton got, get the justified criticism when it comes to LGBT issues. I’m not going to be told to sit down and shut up. This is not a circular firing squad; this is about standing up for what you believe in.
Fair enough, but I’d argue your contention that the LGBT community was ever tough on Clinton. They weren’t tough enough. Don’t forget Bill signed DOMA into law, then approved ads, targeting evangelical voters, in which he touted he touted his “defense of marriage.”
That’s not even comparable to the token gesture of inviting a conservative to deliver an invocation.
I also missed any criticism of Hillary for trumpeting the endorsement of an anti-gay pastor in New York. Meanwhile, Obama was savaged because an anti-gay pastor appeared on stage at one of his rallies that Obama didn’t even attend.
Warren’s take on gay issues is disappointing, though not surprising. He’s an evangelical. Many of them believe the Bible literally. That doesn’t make them all bad. Some are sincere, if not misguided.
And there’s still many Americans who don’t even know an openly gay person. To expect tolerance from a high school dropout in Alabama is expecting too much. Changing minds will require engaging those who think differently, not condemning them all as bigots.
As to your final point, I bet I know better than you what it’s like to face that “spiritual abuse.” I was raised in a conservative Southern Baptist church, and my parents remain deeply religious. Consequently I tried in vain to deny the obvious, fearing God’s wrath for my “abominable” sin. I was in my early 20s before I recognized the folly of pretending.
Going after Warren’s role in the inaugural accomplishes nothing, save for turning off more open-minded believers who struggle with their own moral doubts.
Fighting absolutists with absolutism gets us nowhere. Might make you feel good, but that satisfaction is fleeting.
ATLMalcontent, I am sorry that you went through spiritual abuse. And frankly, everyone’s experience is different from others, so please don’t insult me by saying “I bet I know better than you what it’s like to face that ’spiritual abuse.’” Yes I do.
I don’t think most Christians or evangelicals are bigots; Warren is. He needs to repudiate calling same-sex marriage incest. Until then, there is no “dialogue.”
Well, this is where we separate the men from the boys. Simply put, the Rick Warren invitation puts religion in its proper place — a window dressing.
That was the whole point of this election cycle, and now that it’s time to actually govern, certain people will have to come to grips with the fact that their narrow issues and “causes” are deprecated, as are the fealty and corruption inherent with their politics.