Rick Warren Praises Obama's "Courage" For Taking "Enormous Heat From His Base"

Here is Rick Warren's statement praising Obama for his "courage" in picking the pastor to deliver the invocation at the inauguration despite criticism of the president-elect due to Warren's opposition to gay marriage:

I commend President-elect Obama for his courage to willingly take enormous heat from his base by inviting someone like me, with whom he doesn't agree on every issue, to offer the Invocation at his historic Inaugural ceremony.

Hopefully individuals passionately expressing opinions from the left and the right will recognize that both of us have shown a commitment to model civility in America.

The Bible admonishes us to pray for our leaders. I am honored by this opportunity to pray God's blessing on the office of the President and its current and future inhabitant, asking the Lord to provide wisdom to America's leaders during this critical time in our nation's history.

Comments

[scottMontgomery]

05:46 PM on 01/01/2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VClnqdRtiJM&feature=channel_page

[PoliticalAmazon]

04:25 PM on 12/22/2008

1) If honoring a b.igot and segregationist at the inauguration is "getting everybody on the same page," then I expect him to have David Duke and the K.lan honored, as well.

2) Honoring a b.igot and segregationist isn't "getting eveybody on the same page" because it legally discriminates against two minorities: GLBTs and women.

3) If you think having your equal rights taken away from you should be tolerated and is "getting everybody on the same page," then get YOUR minorty to volunteer to be the scapegoat and volunteer YOUR rights be taken away. Then GLBTs and women won't have to be the scapegoat.

4) Your logic is faulty If Obama honored David Duke by having him give the invocation, and had the K.lan sing the National Anthem, would his appointment of ONE African-American to his administration mean that he isn't honoring a b.igot? No.

Obama is viewing GLBTs and women as disposible minorities and voters, who he will willingly scapegoat if it means he will get a few religious-righters' votes. However, he's delusional if he thinks that the RR will ever vote for him in large numbers. Obviously, if they think it's God's will to dscriminate and segregate GLBTs and women, it can be God's will to discriminate and segregate other minotiries.

The GLTBs just saw their constitutional rights taken from them by Warren and his fellow b.igots, and African-Americans shouldn't assyne that their rights are sacred with this bunch.

[VagabondSaint]

03:23 AM on 12/22/2008

I've said this before, and I'll say it again:

Rick Warren's invocation looks, to me, like a symbol of where America has come from: conservative, anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, evangelical rule.

Joseph Lowery's benediction looks, to me, like a symbol of progress, of where America is going. (Why does no one ever mention Joseph Lowery? He's a Methodist minister, a civil rights leader who marched with MLK, and a staunch supporter of gay marriage! Why isn't anyone talking about him being included in the inauguration ceremonies? You don't see conservatives pitching a fit about him being included, nor do you see progressives and LGBT leaders praising that selection!)

That, to me, is the symbolism of this inauguration: beginning with a farewell to where we have been and ending with a man who symbolizes where we need to go. Don't just focus on Warren; look at the larger picture, will you?

http://vagabondsaint.wordpress.com

[PoliticalAmazon]

03:51 PM on 12/22/2008

Perhaps your larger picture isn't what the majorty of people around the world will see as the bigger picture, and what they will assume about Obama because Rick Warren is giving the invocation.

An incoming president's inauturgation is ALL about him and his vision for America. It's not about Bush Jr's vision, or David Duke's vision. The inauguration is carefully choreographed so that each person who appears is one who will reflect favorably on the president.

To believe that Obama is going to have Warren as a "this is the past" message is so far from the reality of inaugurations, I can't imagine where you came up with it.

Indeed, Obama is showing us and the world what we can look forward to in his administration: nutballs like Rick Warren having access to Obama and pushing his b.igotted agenda.

We are seeing that Obama is set to make the same mistake Ronald Reagan did when he bent knee to the religious right because he needed their votes: he created a monster of leviathian proportions that has consumed the GOP.

Think I'm kidding? This is the kind of control the religious right has on the GOP: McCain's first 3 picks for VP was Lieberman, Ridge and Romney. The GOPs religious right handlers told McCain that if he chose any of those, they would start a huge fight on the convention floor, dividing the party, and ensuring its demise.

[Beninn]

02:32 AM on 12/22/2008

To those of you who support Obama for inviting Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at the inauguration, what do you think it will cause Warren and evangelicals to do in kind?

Do you think it will cause them to smack their heads, have a "I should've had a V8!" moment, drop all their opposition to women's reproductive rights, stem cell development and gays marrying?

[PoliticalAmazon]

03:52 PM on 12/22/2008

Mea culpa, but I don't get your point. Can you rephrase it for clarification? Thanks.

[Beninn]

02:28 AM on 12/22/2008

Americans of good conscience are outraged by Obama's invitation to Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at the inauguration.

Think how grand it would have been had Obama invited clerics from all denominations of religious practice to join him on stage and speak prayers together. As an atheist, I could have gotten behind that and respected that inclusion of a religious practice into a state ceremony of my secular government.

I am profoundly disappointed in Obama, have been for some time now, but am not surprised. The closer he was getting to the nomination, the less he was sounding like his own man. By election day, the Barack Obama who took a chance in the early months of his campaign by promising populist governance had all but disappeared.

[Beninn]

02:28 AM on 12/22/2008

Obama ran on platitudes. Pretty talk. Actions speak louder than words. Throughout Obama's career, that's all he has delivered on leftist issues -- Words. Not actions.

His every step since November 4th has been farther and farther to the right. Having an evangelical Christian who is politically active in preventing gays from gaining equal rights, preventing stem cell research and condemning non-believers to hell deliver the prayer for his inauguration is so stunningly disrespectful to thinking, intelligent Americans that I have to look at Obama's history and say, "Not a surprise."

To turn this around, to make this right, Rick Warren needs to bow out of the inauguration.

That would be the nod from evangelicals that they realize their part in the awful devastation that their politics have brought on the country. That would be a position gesture towards telegraphing that they are willing to work together in a bipartisan fashion and recognize that their ways have been hateful, divisive, extreme, damaging and extremely hurtful.

Evangelicals gave us the Bush administration, which has destroyed the USA. Evangelicals need to make this right, own it and then stop insisting on their way.

[parisblues]

11:48 PM on 12/21/2008

Happy Holidays, Pastor Warren. Oops... I'm sorry....was that remark somehow offensive to you? Well then, Merry Christmas! And may you have a totally sucky New Year.

[dominiqua]

10:28 PM on 12/21/2008

Those of you who want to make fun of those who are upset, remember that when you find yourself deeply hurt and upset about something. Expect people to laugh at you and tell you to "get over it" eh?

[PoliticalAmazon]

03:55 PM on 12/22/2008

"Those of you who want to make fun of those who are upset, remember that when you find yourself deeply hurt and upset about something. Expect people to laugh at you and tell you to "get over it" eh?"

----------

Those urging others to "get over it" should realize how similar they sound to Bush Jr after he stole the 2000 election. He immediately said "Get over it, move on."

Sorry, there are some things you don't "get over" and "move on" from. Stealing an election qualifies, as does an incoming Democratic president honoring a b.igot and segregationist by having him give the invocaiton at his inauguration.

[LarBear]

08:56 PM on 12/21/2008

P E OBAMA,
You have asked for feedback from WE the People...

The essential disagreement I have with Pastor Warren is the same one I have with President G W Bush, Sarah Palin, Neo Cons, and "Evangelical" Right Wing Christian's... ALL put their BELIEF ABOUT GOD, and their Religion, ahead of their Nation... The place their Religious Beliefs above and ahead of their Constitutional Beliefs...

I don't view Pres. Bush as an Evil man... Clearly, G W Bush believes in GOD (His version) and doing what is "RIGHT" (again his version) for the USA... Just as clearly Bush's "RIGHT FOR" the USA, outweighs his Belief in Constitution and Constitutional Law... Gitmo, Abu Ghrab, Torture, Enemy Combatants, Illegal Eavesdropping, etc., ALL say so...

When Religion becomes the Prime Belief, and doing what's "Right For" the USA, then Patriotism and Citizenship becomes Secondary and sublimated... As though they are a Christian (First), Citizen of the USA (Second) and Human Being third...

Perhaps in placing Religion ahead of their own Hummanity and Citizenship, they also make reducing others stature, much easier... Other's becoming Christian, becomes more important, than others Humamanity... Hetrosexual Male Christian's are Prime Creations...

I believe WE the People made a mistake when WE added the words "Under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance... NOTE: I learned the Original pledge and disliked the change then, also...

You have a Constitutional Right to YOUR beliefs, Pastor Warren, but not the "Right" to inflict them onto others....

[PoliticalAmazon]

03:59 PM on 12/22/2008

"You have asked for feedback from WE the People..."

----

He may say he wants feedback, but in reality, based on his actions, its only the "Gee you're WONDERFUL!" type of feedback.

His reaction to the outrage from Americans who don't want the Constitution overtured to suit closet-case whackjobs like Warren was one of arrogance--on the level of Bush Jr at his most strutting arrogance. Obama indicated it is his administration and he would do what he wanted. He termed those protesing Obama having a b.igot and segregationist give the invocation at his inauguration as "special interests" trying to control the Democratic Party.

I don't know what he thinks he gains by insultng GLBTs and women, who make up a large majority of Democratc Party voters, but if believes GLBTs and women are "special interests" then civil rights for African-Americans are "special interests," too, and I expect him to embrace b.igotry and segregation for African-Americans, too. Otherwise, his hypocrisy and his selfish "I got mine, who cares about you!?" attitude is shown loud and clear.

[Okieborn]

10:26 AM on 12/21/2008

This Okie Baby Boomer Loves President Elect Obama "BUT" Billy Graham would have been a much better choice than Rick Warren and Valerie Plame Should Have Been Picked For The Head Of The CIA And in my estimation Hillary Clinton was a Bad Bad Pick !!!!

[Dragonfly0867]

05:58 AM on 12/21/2008

Look, I've worked in social services for over 20 years and in that time, found myself shoulder to shoulder with some of the most anti gay, anti choice, anti everything individuals you can imagine. But, as we stood shoulder to shoulder stocking food pantry shelves or ladling out soup to the hungry, our differences were overshadowed by our common purpose. Many of those individuals later became folks I worked with on policy issues making major changes in the state we worked. Our dialogue also evolved so that although we would have to agree to disagree on several key issues, we all acknowledged that our values came from a place of deep conviction and should be respected no matter what.

President Obama understands that getting everyone on the same page begins with identifying our commonalities and focusing on them. BTW, nominating an openly gay man as Secretary of the Navy kind of dampens the argument that Obama is supporting an anti gay (or ignoring gay) agenda. We are all in this together people, so pick up a paddle and start rowing. Either that, or step off and let the rest of us get us to the promised land. :-)

[oldugly]

10:33 AM on 12/21/2008

well said

[yesman]

10:55 AM on 12/21/2008

No, we will not 'step off " because you command it. Gays have every right to be outraged. Warren compares us to pedophiles. I'm rather surprised and frankly disappointed at how tame the reaction has been.

[Sargoth]

07:32 PM on 12/20/2008

I voted for Nader. Now you know why. =P

[turnaround08]

03:31 PM on 12/20/2008

If you attend the inauguration and you are
bothered by this, simply turn around and
face the audience while RW is on the stage.

Please pass this around far and wide and
to every political newsgroup you belong to.

[PoliticalAmazon]

04:36 PM on 12/22/2008

I suggest that those attending the inauguration who disagree with a b.igot and segregationist being honored, that they wear white robes and white pointy hats to the inauguration.

Le's see how OBama likes to be confronted with tose who want to take away his rights and segregate him. I'm sure Obama would think it was worth te humiliation and slap in the face because just think of all the southern r.acists he can "include" by embracing the ideals of the r.acists and segregationists.

[tigerlille]

02:36 PM on 12/20/2008

It is not courage. It is pandering. Basic human rights are non-negotiable. I guess Obama isn't as smart as I thought he was...or perhaps he is just too shrewd.

[PoliticalAmazon]

04:37 PM on 12/22/2008

I wonder how the Obamas and their children would feel if a b.igot and segregationist had just successfully worked to make their marriage illegal, making their children ba$tard$?

Would he be so eager to honor them by allowing the to give the invocation?

[WaynedKing]

11:18 AM on 12/20/2008

I feel the depth of disappointment from the gay community on this. However, it comes from a place that - understandably - the community has to leave behind, victimhood. The gay community is so use to being the victim that it is hard even for them to see themselves in a different way.

At Barack Obama's new American table, the gay community is already seated. With the Warren invitation, Obama has invited the Evangelicals to dine at that great American table of diversity as well. This will be a test of their ability to move toward a more tolerant world view. Rick Warren can start by toning down his own rhetoric.

Those of us who support equal rights for all Americans need to set an example that is better than they have offered and invite them to ask of themselves . . . what would Jesus do?

[akkadian]

03:06 PM on 12/20/2008

this is absolutely the case, as he has said before, he believes in one america, not a gay america and an evangelical america, a blue america and a red america but one america....so it is courage...catch up people!

[PoliticalAmazon]

04:41 PM on 12/22/2008

You are quite offensive and insulting.

Would you call African-Americans who fought for their civil rights coming from a place of "victimhood"? How about all of the A-A's who risked their lives to eat a public diner and attend a public school? When they were risking their lives, were thy coming from a place of "victimhood"?

If within the last 6 weeks b.igots and segregationists had taken away the rights A-A's worked so hard for, making their marriages void, and all of their children b.a$tards, and they were furious at those who had done it, would that be "victimhood"?

GLBTs and women do not have a seat at the table if the do not have equal rights under the law.