Controversy, Controversy
By the time of the Presidential inauguration, we should have had enough controversy about Barack Obama and Rick Warren. I don't mean to belittle the criticism as much as to suggest that the grumbling about Obama's invitation even before he has assumed the presidency seemed rather excessive. If it was not about Warren, then it has been about Caroline Kennedy or Obama's choice of cabinet members or his other appointees to the White House staff. You'd think the critics would not be happy unless or until Noam Chomsky was named press secretary.
Like so many Evangelical preachers, Warren's rhetoric in the past has been over the top. Sometimes, his carelessness made him sound like a windbag and a jerk to boot. The statements attributed to him about Jews, gays and lesbians were repulsive and unacceptable to me and any rational people of whom I know, especially coming from a man who will bless the podium where Barack Obama will be sworn in as the nation's 44th president. But we also know that the election of our next president has re-gained respect around the world for the United States that had been lost for a long time, thanks to George Bush..
Obama is a compromiser, a political figure committed to building bridges, even to those who will give him heartburn as well as their support. So his well-intended critics need to give him some space. He'll catch enough hell from the Republicans and other malcontents once the presidential honeymoon is over. The social conservatives who believe it's their God-given right to tell their fellow Americans what to think and how to live won't let a Sunday go by without unleashing some of their sanctimonious bombast.
In a nation that cherishes freedom of speech, we cannot change that.
But I've been around pollsters long enough to know that many of those same pastors would be shocked to hear that an overwhelming number of Americans would probably tell them to mind their own business and keep their noses out of our bedrooms and classrooms.
Rick Warren was unknown to most people until Obama's invitation became public. Only the chattering class thought it was worth significant commentary once the story broke. But remember folks, it's only an invocation that Warren will be delivering on January 20th; perhaps two or three minutes long; It's not the Gettysburg Address. But suddenly, the Orange County pastor was sought after by the nationwide media. Some Warren's lookalikes in the commercial prayer business were flustered by his acceptance of the Obama invitation. Holy God, they thought he had joined the enemy camp. Hard as it is to believe, even a ghost from the past, Phyllis Schlafly, came out of the woodwork to denounce Warren when he invited her to speak to his congregation two years ago. Yet, by comparison, Warren is considered more moderate than a majority of the nation's evangelical pastors.
But as it turns out, the image of Warren standing within inches of the incoming president also alarmed and angered advocates of gay and lesbian rights, supporters of abortion rights, human rights and spokesmen for Jewish communities across the country. Perhaps they forgot that Obama visited Warren's church during the election campaign and they managed to have a civil conversation in front of a lot of his Orange County parishoners, many of whom couldn't stand Obama's guts.
In response to the criticism of having Warren participate in the Inaugural ceremony, the President-elect issued this statement on Christmas Day which in part said:
"A couple of years ago I was invited to Rick Warren's church to speak despite his awareness that I held views that were entirely contrary to his when it came to gay and lesbian rights, when it came to issues like abortion. Nevertheless I had an opportunity to speak, and that dialogue I think is part of what my campaign's been all about, that we're not going to agree on every single issue, but what we have to do is to be able to create an atmosphere where we can disagree without being disagreeable, and then focus on those things that we hold in common as Americans."
Warren's recent conversation with singer and songwriter Melissa Etheridge also resulted in a touching and sensitive encounter. Check out her blog on the Huffington Post.
Granted, we are still waiting for him to reconsider some of his comparisons that insulted many Jews by linking candidates who support abortion with those who operated the gas chambers during the Holocaust. It was not only an outrageous and insensitive comparison. It smacked of blatant anti-Semitism.
But gradually, Warren has begun to temper his rhetoric by urging worshippers to help alleviate hunger, to control the spread of AIDS and assist in the campaign to cope with illiteracy in Rwanda. He has even apologized to thousands of delegates to an international Baptist convention to concern themselves more with "deeds not creeds." Moreover, he delivered a conciliatory message to a gathering of Muslim community leaders a few weeks ago and he engaged in friendly conversations with liberal clergymen in the Los Angeles area. The fact that his wife subsequently was diagnosed with breast cancer, he says, may have contributed to his growing moderation.
For eight years of enduring George Bush as president, Americans have tolerated the erosion of their democratic rights. But with a trained lawyer about to occupy the White House, we may finally have someone who intimately understands the nature of our Constitution. Hopefully, he will have the opportunity to select a number of like-minded candidates to the U.S. Supreme Court during his presidency who will recognize the difference between church and state.. At least, we can rest assured that there will be a safer guardian of the freedoms that guarantee our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Those Evangelical pastors who want to control our personal conduct were notably silent when it came to criticizing the lies President Bush told us in order to justify the war in Iraq. They were mute when the shocking revelations at Guantanamo began to surface. Across the country, these preachers have spent more hours butting into our private lives than offering comfort to tens of thousands of people whose hopes of fulfilling the American dream of home ownership and a steady job have been shattered by our mushrooming recession. We can only hope that a moderate number of these apostles of outrage finally will come to the realization that this nation needs a more sensible agenda of faith. That would underscore the motive behind Barack Obama's invitation to Rick Warren.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The issue is about whether gays and lesbians can marry is a legal, civil rights issue, not a moral or religious issue. Marriage has been labeled a civil right by the US Supreme Court in Loving v. State of Virginia: "The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men."
That same decision found that laws cannot use race to bar marriage, because of equal protection,
which is guaranteed in the 14th amendment.
The California Supreme Court earlier this year reaffirmed that marriage is a civil right that is subject to equal protection. And, the California court stated that gays and lesbians cannot be denied the same right to marry as everybody else because of equal protection.
Some say that civil unions for gays and lesbians are the way to go. But that does nothing to resolve the civil rights and equal protection issues. Instituting marriage for straights and civil unions for gays and lesbians will very likely be found as unconstitutional as "separate but equal". We can't have two-tiered marriage for straights and gays. This will not end until all have equal protection under laws allowing the civil right of marriage for everybody.
Read more at http://blo
rick warren was probably a mistake. how much of a mistake? only time will tell.
I agree. As a gay man, and especially as a recovering evangelical, I realize that Warren is actually kind of moderate as evangelical preachers go. I'm not worried about him giving the invocation, and I think that perhaps the outrage over Warren has incited a dialogue. Maybe the dialogue needs to mature a bit, and I think that Warren will eventually change his views or at least soften his position quite a bit. In a dialogue the goal is to understand another person's perspective. If there's any mainstream evangelical pastor that may be able to engage in such a dialogue, it is Rick Warren, if only because he speaks for so many mainline evangelical conservatives who listen to him.
Good comment!
As a feminist, and someone between an agnostic and atheist, I'm sick and tired of the Warrens of the world wielding power in politics. I don't understand why they aren't content to keep religious matters inside their churches where they're apt. IMHO, Warren (and his ilk) pushing to legislate which consenting adults can marry, or on private health issues, is the same thing as forced conversion to his particular faith. The same freedom Warren has always had to choose his own path, is the same freedom he is trying to deny others.
That said, until Obama does something more than invite Warren to say a prayer, I'll remain optimistic about this incoming admin. It seems to me that Obama has been very clear where he stands on the issues above, so for now, I'm taking him at his word.
Thanks for the article.
It was at the same time that 70% of gays voted for Obama that their civil rights were taken away in California due in part by the work of Warren. Geez he could have picked someone else. It was only last month. Gay people still support Obama's work on the economy and foreign affairs, etc. But they were insulted to make a political point. Not that he ever supported equal rights for gays. He doesn't. Maybe gays would be less hurt if they remembered that.
Well Obama does support nondiscrimination protection for gays and lesbians in employment, in military service and the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act. He supports federal civil union recognition, which would be good, but not nearly as good as same sex marriage rights. So his positions on gay rights support a large part of what we should have. If he follows through on his promises, I could care less about the callous choice of Warren for an invocation I would not watch, no matter who made it.
I am like Obama for civil unions, I am a black male with a granddaughter who may be gay. I love her but I do not think that she should be able to marry another woman, I have started to talk to her about my political position. I do not equate gay civil rights with the black cilvil rights movement, in fact I don't rmember any gay white people breaking down the walls of segregation. I am indebted to a lot of jewish people some of whom may have been gay. And at some point they even abandoned the civil rights movement when they became more amalgamted in the white community or seemed to benefit from "white skin privalage". My positon may change. I keep wrestling with what the history of marriage is and whether its a state sanctioned or if its something biblical, My position may change, but it is what it is currently. It seems to me that its about civil rights regarding medical and social issues rather then wanting to get married in a church or have state sanction when its not part of the fabric of the state or the church to do so...marry
The Democrats, including Obama, have been in the habit of capitulating, not compromise. They tend to roll over without a fight on every issue of import. This is spinelessness, not masterful diplomacy.
Thank you for sharing your POV, Baffler. I agree.
So, because Rick Warren asked our future president to be one of many speakers at a church conference, it's only fair that he be given a place of honor at the inauguration? And because he had a nice chat with a lesbian pop star we gay folk should overlook the fact that he successfully spearheaded a campaign to remove the judical rights of LGBT Californians? That he pats our backs with one hand and stabs us in the gut with the other? All this we silly gay grumblers should overlook because our future president shows PROMISE?
The sound you hear, Mr. Fromson, is millions of hearts breaking as LGBT America realizes it has been betrayed again. This is the straw that broke the camel's back. We are DONE with promise, Mr. Fromson. Done.
If you know any gay people, go talk to them. Maybe they can help you recognize the difference between what you think of as grumbling and the rage and resolve that grows out of yet another deep and bitter disappointment.
I know plenty of gay people who do not care about Warren, they care about policy, not symbols. It sounds like you don't have the stomach for politics, seabelly. The Democratic Party is a big tent and we find consensus with people on some issues but not others. I am a strong feminist and I do not think that Warren's comments on choice and women's roles is in anyway a threat to me nor do I think it means Obama is endorsing Warren's ideas on women or the LGBT community by the invitation.
Maybe there's the difference. You know Obama is pro-choice. Gay people know Obama does NOT support equal rights for gays. He wants separate but equal. You know, sit at the back of the bus and don't raise a fuss because the bus gets you there at the same time. Sorry, no. Won't do.
I agree, loper.
"that he successfully spearheaded a campaign to remove the judical rights of LGBT Californians?"
Sorry, that is a LIE. He didn't spearhead it. He barely took part in it, as a matter of fact.
http://www
Mr. Obama had no idea what he was doing to us. How this was a sword through the heart. He, in the hope of bringing folks together, lost a strong segment he already had. It has taken what he hoped for and put it back seriously.
I want him to be successful, but right now, my heart is frozen and he'll need to earn back my trust and support. I expect and hope for great things from him. But I DO intend to an equal citizen for those great things - or they mean nothing to me.
I've waited long enough for my civil rights, while having worked for years for other's civil rights.
I've had enough. Period.
"Mr. Obama had no idea what he was doing to us."
seems to me that you're doing it to yourselves. i haven't seen him do a single thing past the invitation and a single statement about the issue. he isn't twisting the knife, you are.
Great point!
Yep!
Maybe Obama had no idea what he was doing to us because he either overlooked or does not understand that religious leader's activities are responsible for denying our civil rights. True, there is prejudice and ignorance, maybe, in a majority of the population, but that is passive. The challenge is, can we, will we neutralize religious activities.
My question is Why Not Rev. Joel Osteen? Talk about someone who keeps his nose out of other people's business, preaches that it's ok to be successful and properous! Doesn't give an opinion either way on homosexuality, gay marriage, just loves God and what he does.
That to me would have been a much better choice especially at a time when there is already so much conflict in this World. So much conflict on his selection. Did he not think it would alienate a portion of the people that worked so hard to help get him elected?
Why not Rev. Joel Osteen???
When you are elected president, you can have the Rev. Joel Osteen deliver the invocation at your inauguration.
LOL, yep!
It is so easy for Mr. Fromson (who I assume is straight) to be so cavalier about Obama and his utter disregard for the LGBT community. Let President-elect Obama invite someone who hates whites to do the invocation and see how Mr. Fromson reacts. Let's see how quickly he is to give Obama a pass. I thought so.......
Thank you for a voice of reason. I can't say I am not still upset, but I also have faith in the process and understand that sometimes, what appear as setbacks on the surface, are actually huge oppurtunities. I think this is proving to be one of those oppurtunities mainly because of the discussions (even the non-civil ones) that are occuring. Thanks for your post!
Civil rights in the US are not meant to be "compromised". BO screwed up and can't walk away from it. Doesn't mean I don't still support him and want the best for his presidency.
Let it play out as it should with protesters and maybe the end result will be that BO listened to his critics and does something or that the continued speaking out on this issue will help a case get to the SC.
I fully expected to be seething with rage before ever reading your post; and had planned on a good, long rant that would probably never see the light of day on the HuffPo. However, I must admit, that by the end of your article, you had convinced EVEN me, that perhaps I should give Obama the benefit of the doubt. So, for the moment, Barack Obama is back in the "Circle of Trust." And, hopefully, he won't blow it.
You don't get it. For many of us in the LGBT community Obama is just like Bush. Can't say he's sorry or admit to making a mistake. Sounds like Bush to me!!!
Yeah OK.
Speak for yourself, Cindy--to me (a gay guy), Obama is NO Bush and doesn't need to apologize to me for anything!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
