Rick Warren Accuses Gays Of "Christophobia," Hate Speech

The Jed Report:

Via John Aravosis at AMERICAblog, Rick Warren is doubling down and accusing his critics of "hate-speech" and "Christophobia."

Rachel Maddow has the video, and takes Warren to task for the hypocrisy of saying that it's unfair to call his views hateful while simultaneously accusing his critics of hate speech. Moreover, as Rachel notes, Warren flat-out lies about his comments comparing gay marriage to pedophilia and incest.

Read the whole story: The Jed Report

Comments

[swo68]

There certainly is Christ-ophobia, but after this guy's idiotic comparison, he's probably not the right person to be talking about it.

[Manx]

Christophobia? Sounds as if Rick Warren sees himself as Christ. Talk about a bad case of megalomania!

[SirReal1]

Meanwhile, The Pope, in his address to the world, from the Basilica (which is decorated by more gold than there is backing most nations currencies), informed the "faithful" that "the world was headed toward ruin if selfishness prevails over solidarity during tough economic times for both rich and poor nations."

I can't imagine why anyone would find this "hypocritical"!

While he spoke, thousands of impoverished people in "poor nations" quietly expired from starvation.

[RODERICK098]

The evangelical movement is a perversion of the teachings of Jesus. They claim that Jesus is a capitlaist loving God who expects great wealth for his ministers and he expects those ministers to spread hate. Jesus was actually a socialist who called on his followers to help the poor and 'love everyone as thy self.' No hatred asked for by him. In fact the only anger I remember he had was when he came in contact with someone of his day such as Jerry Falwell or the new Jerry Falwell -Rick Warren. The Rethug money helped build these monsters and these monsters have helped destroy the US. They are not religious and need to be exposed for the charlatans they are. If they were to lose their tax exemption for being political or for spreading hate they would stop right away. They are all about money and that is it.

[JohnFromCensornati]

e⋅van⋅ge⋅lize – verb (used with object)
1. to preach the gospel to.
2. to convert to Christianity.

There might be a few people in the remotest part of Laos that have never heard of JC, but I doubt it. They could do us all a favor and confine it to the people that walk through their church doors.

[helenwheels]

I noticed that today this article is hard to find on HuffPo. All the articles about Warren now easiest to find are the ones making nice, glossing over everything... in fact, I had to go to my comments list to find the link to this story.

Quite telling.

[JohnFromCensornati]

The RW stories & blogs are all on the "Obama's Inauguration" BigNews page.

[helenwheels]

I kinda wonder why they didn't create a RW bignews page....? No biggie I guess.

Thanks!

[JimR]

Oh baloney. The vast majority of posts on Huffpo about Warren are highly critical of him.

Some people see consipiracies everywhere...

[pjburke]

Of course. We should hate gays because this book says so. And this book is inerrant because god wrote this book. And god wrote this book because I said so. Are we all clear now?

[keepemhonest]

pjburke - Yes, you are perfectly clear ... this book that God wrote ... even though, it is a leap of "faith" that anyone even believes in one God ...

Funny, the God who wrote the book I read said: "Love thy neighbor as thy self" and MY God did NOT differentiate to only love my 'straight' neighbor ... THUS, MY GOD wrote I should LOVE ALL MY NEIGHBORS AS I LOVE MY SELF -- That would include Mr. Warren AND gays, blacks, whites, asians, transvestites, lesbians ...

I suppose, then, the difference between Warren's God & MY God is that MY God loves US ALL.

[pjburke]

I was in 'snark mode.'

The entire torrent of verbiage from religionists boils down to some assertion made by a human... a claim which all other humans are just supposed to accept on the basis of "because I said so." Even though the evidence is insufficient and the claim utterly outrageous. It is textbook authoritarianism.

Rick Warren and his ilk -- rank authoritarians, every last one -- all make such preposterous claims, based upon "because I said so." Their claim that "god said so" is really just them _claiming_ that god said so, without sufficient evidence... so once again, its an empty "because I said so."

[JohnFromCensornati]

If God doesn’t ultimately separate the righteous from the wicked, He is not just and therefore not loving. There must be a He// to punish the wicked. God is love.

[JackLivigni]

It is not that complicated for those who actually are honest about it. Christianity considers homosexuality a sin, and homosexuals don't like that. READ CONFLICT. To say that many in the gay community are not anti-religious (or at least selectively so) is tantamount to denial. Religion is just as much under attack as are gay rights. As I write this, on the bottom of the screen is a publicity for a book "Did Jesus Christ Exist: the God who wasn't there." LOL... Who's rights are more important?

My suggestion is that both sides need to step back and stop fighting. The kind of relentless bashing of Warren is the type of politics that will polarize and delay the promotion of rights.

[helenwheels]

"religion" is NOT under attack. Please stop your persecution complex. The religious (f)right has way more power than it should.

[Smith808]

The issue isn't with religion and it's views on homosexuality. You're implying that this "consideration" is only a static notion and that it's, in fact, "the gays" who are vindictively attacking religion for this belief (another falsehood).

The issue is with religion imposing it's discretionary morality upon our lives through laws that shackle our liberty, our bodies, our love, and our choice.

[SirReal1]

Perfectly stated!

It is worth noting that this is exactly, and specifically, precluded from happening in this country, by the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

Why is this so hard for the religious to understand? They are ultimately threatening the very words that have allowed them to flourish and prosper.

[keepemhonest]

JackLivingni: "Christianity" does NOT consider homosexuality a sin ... Leaders of religious organizations who are themselves anti-christian (or at least not good christians) consider anyone who thinks different from them sinners.

Catholics consider divorse a sin .. but they relocate ped*o*phile priests to parishes with kids ... neat how they pretend to be christian but are really sinners huh?

[SirReal1]

Jack,

I think you are WAY off base here.

You are making some fairly "sweeping" generalities that I think might not be as much of a "given" as you believe.

Christianity encompasses a plethora of religions. SOME of them have taken the stand that homosexuality is a sin, some have not. Within many of those religions who have aligned themselves with the belief that it is a sin, are MANY parishioners who DO NOT believe that on a personal level. SOME in the gay community are undoubtedly "anti-religious", but many more would likely say they are pro-religion, but anti-funda­mentalist.

Your statement that "Religion is just as much under attack as are gay rights" is, I believe, fundamentally flawed!

Religion IS NOT under attack, RELIGIOUS ZEALOTS ARE!

I don't really expect you to "buy" my argument. Anyone who thinks that an advertisement for a book that offers an intellectual perspective that differs from their own, amounts to an "attack" is not likely to engage in a "reasoned discussion" of the issue.

I do think you have the issue correct though. It comes down to "rights", of which our Founding Fathers were fairly clear, these rights are "inalienable" and are the property of ALL OF US.

[JackLivigni]

Are we going to argue which religion is more correct now? The point I am making is that religious have rights too. Simply saying "keep their religion in their church" like some posted is a plain copout. The failure to recognize that this discussion is far more complicated is a big problem. Obama and many others have a solid constitutional framework behind their rejection of Gay Marriage, and denying that by invoking the term "bigotry" is sticking one's head in the sand. Many in the homosexual community prefer to try to shape public opinion through various forms of demonization. That is a fact. My argument is that this avenue will delay progress toward 14th amendment rights, because it ignores real problems linked to religious rights, and not to bigotry.

[JohnFromCensornati]

Religion is NOT under attack. If they keep their religion in their churches and out of public policy, there is NO CONFLICT.

[aliceinthewater]

Why am I told that I have to be tolerant of intolerance? We are either equal or we aren't.

It's that simple.

[helenwheels]

Yup. Tolerance of intolerance isn't tolerance, it's enabling.

[Agentprovokatur]

Or an oxymoron. A word three letters longer than those who advocate it.

[helonias]

Who would Jesus hate

[keepemhonest]

Helonias: No one, Jesus would hate no one and Jesus hated no one ... Jesus didn't even hate Pontius Pilate or Judas ...

[JohnFromCensornati]

If a fictitious character hates, does it really count anyway?

[helenwheels]

LOL.... good point.

[Ceartas]

I have not yet begun to hate.

[Agentprovokatur]

Proposition for Consideration in California - "Government Anti-Establishment Protection"

In order to comply with Amendment 1 of the U.S. Constitution which reads in part " . . . Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, . . ." and Section 4 of Article 1 "Declaration of Rights" of the California State Constitution which reads in part ". . . The Legislature shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." it shall be the law in California that no governmental entity shall be prohibited from the provision of goods or services to any religious institution or organization unless such provision is at a value less than "fair market value."

For purposes of this law "fair market value" shall be defined as the greater of
1) The actual out of pocket cash spent on the provision of such services and/or the cost paid for the goods so provided; and
2) The fair value of such goods or services as determined by reference to recent transactions in such goods and services in markets local to their actual provision.

We may not be able to tax them but we sure don't have to subsidize them.

[tbone99]

I'm dense - what are the goods and services?

[Agentprovokatur]

Access to public lands and facilities, police overtime and other crowd control coverage for any of their events. If you don't think it's happening suggest it in your home state and watch the howls from the churches. No need to howl about something that wouldn't affect them.

[clearthinker2008]

Rick has a point from what I've been reading here.

[dolphy]

He has a point? Talking about the kettle and the pot.........WTF?

[JohnFromCensornati]

Of course, that's what you would have said anyway. Like you have multiple times.

[helenwheels]

You also have a point, luckily for your your hair covers it.

[Drdemocrat]

This whole thing is getting BORING.

[Agentprovokatur]

Yawn . . . .

Your attention span for Civil Rights issues of importance to others and calling our attention to it is REALLY boring.

[FlamingLibrul]

No kidding. I think some people get NO attention at home.

[Giada]

Oh Rick, be a good little Christian and turn the other (butt) cheek.

I'd like to know .... just how much money your church took in with the debate between Obama and McCain. It's my understanding parishoners were charged up to 2,000 ... per seat and the total intake was between 3-10M.

[helenwheels]

I'm still livid that relig!on was allowed in this past campaign. WTF were they doing debating at a fvcking C.H.U.R.C.H?

I don't remember that ever done before. I'm w0rried that Obama is going to give the religious (f)right even more legit!macy and power. Ugh.

[Drdemocrat]

Your headline is wrong. Warren didn't say the word "gay" when discussing Christophia. He was talking about his critics in general whether they be straight or gay. Misleading headline drummed up to further chastise.

[QuietNetworker]

Now that's a parse that gives pause.

Who cares if he wasn't saying it about all gays?

Who cares if he was also saying it about pro-gay
straights?

You've found a distinction that doesn't make
a difference.

Cheers,

Paulie Sabol

[helenwheels]

Who cares who he was talking about? The man obviously equates himself with christ, as he has recently equated gays with people who commit incest and pedophilia.

Oh and then there's that pesky suggestion of his that the U.S. k!ll Pres. Ahmadinejad.

Another batsh!t insane, violence-hungry, bible-hump!ng fundie and our newly elected POTUS is giving him an honor and legitimacy.

You should be very afraid.

http://www.alternet.org/story/114798

[Smith808]

Please...not only was the timing intentional, but he injected "gay" between every other word in his 20 minute "woe is me" videocast.