Barney Frank Rick Warren Statement: "Very Disappointed"

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), one of only three openly gay members of the House of Representatives, released a statement harshly criticizing Barack Obama's decision to have Rev. Rick Warren deliver the invocation at his inauguration:

"I am very disappointed by President-elect Barack Obama's decision to honor Reverend Rick Warren with a prominent role in his inauguration. Religious leaders obviously have every right to speak out in opposition to anti-discrimination measures, even in the degrading terms that Rev. Warren has used with regard to same-sex marriage. But that does not confer upon them the right to a place of honor in the inauguration ceremony of a president whose stated commitment to LGBT rights won him the strong support of the great majority of those who support that cause.

"It is irrelevant that Rev. Warren invited Senator Obama to address his congregation, since he extended an equal invitation to Senator McCain. Furthermore, the President-Elect has not simply invited Rev. Warren to give a speech as part of a series in which various views are presented. The selection of a member of the clergy to occupy this uniquely elevated position has always been considered a mark of respect and approval by those who are being inaugurated."

And Joe Solmonese, the president of Human Rights Watch, wrote in the Washington Post Friday about his own disappointment:

It is difficult to comprehend how our president-elect, who has been so spot on in nearly every political move and gesture, could fail to grasp the symbolism of inviting an anti-gay theologian to deliver his inaugural invocation. And the Obama campaign's response to the anger about this decision? Hey, we're also bringing a gay marching band. You know how the gays love a parade.

Yes, the Rev. Rick Warren, pastor of the humongous, evangelical Saddleback Church in Orange County, Calif., has a sound message on poverty. And certainly, in the world of politics, there is a view that Barack Obama owes Warren for bringing him before fellow evangelicals, despite fierce opposition during the heat of the presidential campaign.

But here's the other thing about Warren, the author of the bestselling book "The Purpose Driven Life": He was a general in the campaign to pass California's Proposition 8, which dissolved the legal marriage rights of loving, committed same-sex couples.

For that reason, inviting Warren to set the tone at the dawn of this new presidency sends a chilling message to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans. It makes us uncertain about this exciting, young president-elect who has said repeatedly that we are part of his America, too.

Comments

[verycold]

I listened to Rick Warren the other night doing that infamous interview about gay marriage. I am in agreement with Obama that gay unions should be supported. I disagree with Obama regarding abortions. It would seem I agree much more with Warren and therefore should be happy with this selection. However I am very disappointed and actually sadden that such a momentous occasion will be forever linked with Rick Warren. When a person feels the need to point out that some calculated decision does in fact prove lack of homophobic feelings, this smacks of insincerity. Rick Warren said that he does have gays in his house as if somehow that makes him inclusive and thus he could not possibly be homophobic. I think he has also said he has gay friends, again why do does he need to proclaim this at all? It would be like me saying that I am not a racist since I have had blacks in my house. Really, what a crock.

I think Obama is right to work with and pursue those that disagree with him. Actually that is the one quality I really liked about Bill Clinton. He scoped out those that were going to cause him trouble and went and tried to make friends. It is a smart move and long-term might pay dividends with a stronger, less angry population. We might actually see progress.

However you cannot convince me that this selection will pay that dividend we so need.

[wendy]

Obama has his reasons. Get the anti-gay guy to AFFIRM Obama, that's a plus

[harriettubman]

Barney, we're waiting to hear why you didn't stop the economic fiasco in this country. You are chair of the finance committee.

[iswideopen]

Barney Frank:
For the last time; you and the LGBT have taken the Obama bashing way too far. Please don't disrespect the African-American community any more. We keep you in office most of the time. It is so not about you, it is about AMERICA AND JOBS.

[lizziekw]

You believe Barney Frank's district in Massachusetts is black? Um... wow.

I really liked Barney's statement. Well reasoned, intelligently presented, powerfully clear on the issue. But there is more than one issue with Pastor Rick. I wish people could give their raging homophobia a rest for a minute and see this Rick Warren clown for who and what he actually is.

He actively persecutes women, gay people and scientists. For the majority of this country and certainly for the majority of the Democratic Party - his actions against millions of our people and his hatred for them are completely unacceptable.

Pro-choice. Pro-science. Pro-equal-­citizenshi­p. Anti-Rick-Warren. It's not that complicated.

[ohmetoo]

Religion the root of many evils even as it gives comfort to true believers. S Pali n's candidacy got me into working for the Obama campaign and the Warren selection took me out. I agree with Barney Frank on this one, surprised me, surely there was someone of faith who is not bigoted, that would appeal to the ultra religious.

Perhaps this pick is to show case white males who are apposed to abortion, etc, Warren is a poster performer for this agenda.

[gi]

Why GAY people have to be special anyway?

[lizziekw]

They're not special. Rick Warren actively persecutes women, scientists AND gay people. He's... um... inclusive that way.

[blueberryhill]

No matter who Obama picked for a religious leader, he will be criticized. All religious leaders say things that most people don't agree with, that is why they are religious people.

[roblabrousse]

He could have chosen a leader from a Unitarian Universalist Church or Quaker.... so there or a gay church.

[KarateKid]

How do you know that woildn't have offended some other church member or group. Everyone has a grievance these days.

[DaCoach]

Barney, let me ask you a question. Which act is more damaging to America. Obama's inclusion of Warren at the inauguration or your failure to control the expenditure of $700B by Paulson to the very companies that created the recession?

[roblabrousse]

Apples and Ornages,

[antaeus]

Nice logical fallacy. When a problem isn't number one, it's nothing? Next.

[DaCoach]

Failure to prioritize is a major problem.

[Sparkdog]

Barney Frank did all one person could possibly do. He dosen't have a police force; he is
a legislator. I think that he has done a great job. He is always interesting, hard working and
clear. Plus he's funny... what could be better?

[raysmom]

Please. Get informed about Frank. He LIES.
Mr. Frank contends that he favored "very strong reform" of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.This depends on what the meaning of "reform" is. Mr. Frank did support a bill that he and others on Capitol Hill described as reform. But on the threshold reform issue -- limiting the size of the portfolios of mortgage-backed securities that the two companies could hold -- Mr. Frank was a stalwart opponent.
Now that he's been proven wrong about a taxpayer guarantee, he opposes Treasury's reduction in the size of the portfolios in 2010. "Good luck on that," he said. Mr. Frank's spokeswoman hung up the phone when the Wall Street Journal sought confirmation.
Mr. Frank repeats his familiar claim that Fannie and Freddie are vital because they support "affordable housing." This is political smoke. The awful irony of Fan and Fred is that they have done very little to assist affordable housing. Most of the taxpayer subsidy has gone to enrich shareholders and Fannie managers, as a 2003 study by the Federal Reserve shows.
He's a crook and a shnook. And why are people surprised at Obama's pick of Rick Warren? I see the hate coming from people like lizziekw, but Obama has always opposed gay marriage- he supports civil unions, as do over 70% of the voters in this country. Obama's problem isn't that he is pandering to the right- it's that he can'r do anything to stop the whining of the left.

[popartusa]

If he had the power to do so warren would keep an athiest like me from ever getting elected to an office in the united states government....that is in direct opposistion to the US Constitution which states that there shall be no "god test" for a political job in this nation. our founding fathers clearly did not want religion medling in affairs of state. If any church wants to declared it self as a political entity let them give up their tax free status and declare themselves as "political". I doubt that "Saddleback" would give up their free ride for the opportunity to take on the responsibility of an actual political organization while they can still con both the US Government and their "flock" with "religious" gibberish.

[BlackYowe]

He has no power now.. He will, I think fade away soon. I think the social conservatives who are such blow hards are going to find themselves with no ear very very soon. These are times that will make them just a burp in time. We all had best keep our minds on the economy and saving people from poverty because it is going to get really wild very soon. Those who do not show compassion for their fellow man have no place in the coming few years. To be a leader now you had better understand the pain of others.

[Zanti]

What Constitution are you referring to? Not the U.S. Constitution, obviously, which says nothing about a "god test." Unless you have the Reader's Digest version.

The C. does, however, forbid a "religious test" for office, which means no requirement to belong to a central church. Since there is no central church, that would be a hard thing to require.

Had our founders wanted to prevent any interaction between religion and state (and in a representative democracy, no less), wouldn't they have simply said as much and left the mystery out of it? The only mega-church they cared about was the Church of the United States, and they made sure that no such body ever came to be. Mission accomplished.

In our eagerness to ban religion from our affairs, we keep reading more and more into a clause whose central meaning vanished with any chance of a central church. If our founders were here to witness all this, they might wonder why we don't have better things to do. To which I'd reply, "Amen."

[BlackYowe]

BF has been ragging on Obama since the week after the election he needs to get over himself.

[roblabrousse]

Where's your tolerance?

[Rungecliff]

What is the difference between Rick Warren's intolerance, and the gay community’s intolerance of Rick Warren? And what is the best way to defuse, possibly even change Warren's intolerance? Hate him back? That has worked well throughout human history! Let us allow Obama to try something different.

[BlackYowe]

Exactly? Why is it OK for Gay people to hate all Christians I ask?

[chaos4700]

Gay people don't "hate" Christians. They just want to be left alone to live their lives in peace without experience religious intolerance. Something Christians might appreciate if they ever knew what it was like to be a minority in this country.

[DJE12857]

GAY PEOPLE DON'T HATE ALL CHRISTIANS. THEY HATE THE FACT THAT THE MAJORITY OF CHRISTIANS WANT TO KEEP THEM FROM HAVING EQUAL RIGHTS.I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF A GROUP OF GAY PEOPLE TRYING TO KEEP ANYONE FROM GETTING MARRIED. GAY PEOPLE ARE TREATED VERY POORLY. I'VE NEVER HEARD OF A CHRISTIAN THAT HAD TO HIDE WHO THEY ARE FOR FEAR OF BEING RIDICULED AND MOCKED. I DO NOT BELIEVE IN A GOD THAT HATES HOMOSEXUALS. I'D RATHER BE AN ATHEIST THAN BELIEVE AS PAT ROBERTSON DOES THAT KATRINA WAS BROUGHT ON BECAUSE THERE WAS GOING TO BE A GAY PRIDE PARADE IN NEW ORLEANS. HOW DO YOU PRAY TO A GOD THAT WOULD DISPLACE AND KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE ?
DIDN'T JESUS SAY"JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED'.

[Stanley]

Didi Barney Frank write his scathing opinion of Rev. Warren yet forget his own gay prostitute scandal non his road to righteous indignation. Seeing others as unacceptable for what they say and do is he heart of the problem. Taking up the same mantle is weak and will only alienate many who see Rev. Warren as erudite in many areas, even if they may disagree with his views on some. This Gay marriage issue is about politics more than rights when they debate is about forcing others to change their views as a means of providing equal protection under the law. Marriage is both a property contract and a sacrament. It is registered and licensed with the state and then sanctified in the church. While property rights are clearly in need of being evenhanded, the idea of the state imposing sacred rights is the issue for most. The real issue seems to be acceptance and when that was defeated in a popular vote in California then it is now being argued as a necessity of civil rights to impose this on society. But this will not lead to acceptance because it is a political wedge issue that avoids the real problem. Redefining marriage is not the civil right of the few in guise of seeking equal protection. This will distance the gay community from the acceptance which is hoped for.

[roblabrousse]

Your posting speaks for you. You're the type of pompous fool who thinks that being able to cobble a few superficial sentences together makes you an expert. You don't know anything about this issue.
So you can comprehend. Imagine that just because you're called Stanley you were ridiculed. Nothing else just that. You found that you could lose your job because of it. You preferred other persons named Stanley and only Stanley. That you were harassed and even beaten up at times because you were Stanley. And then you found out that you had absolutely no right to get married like all the non-Stanly's did. But you were absolutely no different except for the Stanley thing. You were just as human and just as much an American citizen but the others wouldn't let you. What would you do....hmmmn no you wouldn't ask all the haters to accept you...you'd get up and go tell the authorities you wanted exactly the same treatment everybody else got.....the gov't being the only place that had no prejudice.
Your pseudo- intellectual tone is repulsive. You don't understand the issue. Your bias runs through the entire posting. It's a thinly veiled rant of bigotry .Your argument is illogical at best

.It's a waste of time to take yourself seriously.

[raysmom]

Yup- you sure showed us about tolerance, allright, roblarousse. Second time you've used the word to castigate someone. Why is it that the most personal vitriol is spewed by people who throw around "tolerance"? Zip it up- your hypocrisy is showing.

[ajax2]

Barney I liked you when I just suspected you were one penny short.

[hollyz]

Being the mother of a gay son, I have a heavy heart. You know when I became a democrat – when my son came out to me at age 15. Why? Because it is the party that espouses to fight for civil rights for all, especially for those in the minority and to foremost, adhere to the constitution. I’m so sick of the press release by Obama stating that old stupid cliché “That we can disagree without being disagreeable”. That is already null and void. The “disagreeable” factor has already been clearly established by the hate-filled filth that has continually been spewed from Warren’s mouth and nothing can ever change that.

To equate the inauguration setting with Warren’s church as a place to extend an olive branch is ludicrous. We the people never elected Warren and we did elect Obama. This celebration should be foremost for those who worked to elect him. Why is the oppressor rewarded while the oppressed are told to “live with it”? This is exactly why the 14th amendment is part of the Constitution and Obama being a constitutional lawyer makes this choice all the more perplexing. This inclusion of Warren is just so wrong on so many levels.

If I were going to the inauguration, I would stand up and boo as loudly as I could as soon as Warren opens his hate-filled mouth. If a policeman would choose to haul me away, so be it.

[Scarllatti]

It is a pity that you only "became a Democrat" when your son outed himself as being gay. I would like to know how intolerant you were (like the rest of your creed) before you "saw the light".

You feel it is your turn to criticize Obama"s "stupid cliche'" about agreeing with people you disagree with? You are falling off a cliff of insanity the way you are going.

You can stand up and boo at the inauguration for all you want. It is not going to stop anything. I don't know how many times you have hit your head on the wall in the past 8 years while GWB was s.crewing this country and trampling on your so-called "rights". You people like fishing in a shark infested waters when there is no reason to do that. Satisfy yourself. You ahead. Boo. Hit your head on the wall.

[raysmom]

Tolerance? "Like the rest of your creed"? Sheesh- I don't even know who I agree with, but it's that kind of prejudice that makes YOU the hypocrite, Scarliatti. And you can't even see it through your veil of righteous indignation.

[KarateKid]

Well, it looks like you're also spewing some also.

[lizziekw]

That's a wonderful post and you seem to be a great mom. Hang in there, gay people have a lot of friends in this fight.

[Zanti]

I wouldn't blame you a bit. I just hope to heck Obama knows what he's doing, that this pays off for him politically, though I don't see how it can.

[Wilkei]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73oZ_pe1MZ8