|
Previous Posts
Why Jews Around the World are Praying for the Victory of the Egyptian Uprising
Originally appeared on Tikkun Daily BlogEver since the victory over the dictator of Tunisia and the subsequent uprising in Egypt, my email has been flooded with messages from Jews around the world hoping and praying for the victory of the Egyptian people over their cruel Mubarak regime.&nb
posted 1:48:39pm Feb. 01, 2011 |
read full post
»
When Generosity, Love, and Kindness are Public Policy, the Violence We Saw in Arizona will Dramatically Diminish
The attempted assassination of Congresswoman Giffords and the murder of so many others in Arizona has elicited a number of policy suggestions, from gun control to private protection for elected officials, to banning incitement to violence on websites either directly or more subtly (e.g., Sarah Palin
posted 2:44:04pm Jan. 19, 2011 |
read full post
»
The Spiritual Messages of Chanukah and Christmas -- and Their Downsides
Christmas and Chanukah share a spiritual message: that it is possible to bring light and hope in a world of darkness, oppression and despair. But whereas Christmas focuses on the birth of a single individual whose life and mission was itself supposed to bring liberation, Chanukah is about a national
posted 12:59:53pm Dec. 02, 2010 |
read full post
»
Obama (and Biden) Have No Clue About What's Bothering Their Political Base
Shortly before the California Democratic primary in 2008, the San Fransisco Chronicle invited me to write a short article explaining why I, chair of the interfaithNetwork of Spiritual Progressives, was supporting Barack Obama. Like most other progressive activists, I understood that a pres
posted 1:44:11pm Sep. 30, 2010 |
read full post
»
Values or Partisanship? TV Ad calls out Graham for caving on climate
by Keely Brewster
It was disappointing that Lindsey Graham changed his mind, values, and opinions surrounding climate legislation. Lindsey Graham was right when he discussed the need to decrease our dependence on foreign oil for reasons of national security, economic security, and job loss. Lindsey
posted 2:32:58pm Jun. 16, 2010 |
read full post
»
|
posted December 18, 2008 at 12:23 am
I can’t say I’m pleased about the choice. Behind his moderate facade, Warren hates LGBT citizens just as much as Jerry Falwell or Rick Santorum – comparing homosexuality to incest – which makes him all the more dangerous, as people pretend that he’s a moderate. He’s basically Jim Dobson with a goatee. Bigots like him do not deserve a prominent place in public, and do not deserve a prominent place in Christianity.
Of course, the fact that actually giving a damn about world poverty and the environment is now considered something moderate or even liberal in Christianity, rather than a basic assumption and starting point to be considered a Christian of any kind, says a great deal about the state of contemporary American Christianity. It speaks to the extent to which the charlatans of the “Christian” Right have led American evangelicals to accept free-market consumer capitalism as a tenet of the Gospel.
That said, my problem is with Warren – not with Obama. Warren is being asked to give the opening prayer at the inauguration, not set policy positions or run a Cabinet department. Much as I may think Rick Warren is a terrible choice, and can think of ten people off the top of my head (some of whom post on this blog) who would be a better fit, I also think a lot of the outrage over this choice is overblown. Obama’s position on equal rights for all, while tepid and milquetoast, remains the same today as it was during the election.
posted December 18, 2008 at 2:56 am
I’m divided about this. Certainly I wish that someone more gay-friendly would be given the pulpit for this event, but I fear that we’re so theologically divided as a nation that choosing only pro-gay clergy for the event would effectively make evangelicals feel cut off. There may be no middle ground in our nation right now, and anyone who satisfies the progressives may well offend the conservatives and destroy the very bridges we’re all hoping we can build.
If the inauguration committee feels that Obama can gain the most traction by showing evangelicals that he respects them, someone like Warren might be the only possible compromise.
And doesn’t THAT suck?
posted December 18, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Why do we even have an inaugural invocation anyway?
posted December 18, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Obama’s choice of Reverend Warren to deliver the invocation is a painful blast for human rights! Faith and religion should necessarily include ALL PEOPLE in our human family. This concept is reflected at the core of all religious movments.
Although I do not belong to any Christian sect, I belive in the princpal–HE WHO CASTS THE FIRST STONE….
Reverend Warren certainly has cast a few stones in his career–this in direct opposition to Jesus’ teachings.
Would some one in your ranks please reconsider this choice!!!!
posted December 18, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Rick Warren is not the appropiate person to give the inaugural
invocation for President e-lect Obama. He is a right-winger
and hates black people, WHERE IS HIS PASTOR AT HIS NEW BLACK CHURCH?
I HOPE WARREN IS NOT HIS SPIRITUAL ADVISOR.
posted December 23, 2008 at 11:29 pm
The Gay and Lesbian Community Needs Some Help during the Rick Warren-Obama Inauguration Situation
The saddest part of the controversy regarding Obama’s pick of Warren as “inauguration invocator” has been the way the controversy has been framed by the mass media. The political dust-up has been portrayed as “the gay and lesbian community v. Rick Warren.” The idea that the gay and lesbian community should be the only ones outraged by Obama’s decision is ludicrous. Every American with a conscience, regardless of sexual orientation, should be outraged with Obama for this decision. Rick Warren is a fundamentalist Christian and biblical literalist. Does anyone know what that means exactly?
It means that Rick warren believes that women should be subjugated to men as is laid out in 1 Corinthians 11:3. It means that he believes public schools shouldn’t teach our children that the earth is more than “thousands of years old” as is told in the book of Genesis. It means he agrees with the statement that men are “holy to god” and not women, as Luke 2:23 tells us. It means he adheres to the belief that the “natural use” of women is for sexual objectification as is stated in Romans 1:27. It means he embraces and preaches the belief that those who do not love Jesus will be damned as is indicated in 1 Corinthians 16:22. Approximately one third of the bible is so x-rated that children can’t even read it. It’s wrought with everything from genocide to slavery.
Warren perpetuates a millennia-old dogma that should be relegated to the history books, not made part of the modern American record. There is a 30 to 50 million strong evangelical community in this country that is growing by leaps and bounds every year that adheres to this type of warped philosophy. Obama’s decision to give their leader a center stage position at the inauguration is not an act of tolerance or goodwill. Rather, it’s a decision that says: “It’s OK to believe what you believe, even if I don’t.” No, Mr. Obama, in fact, it’s not OK to believe what Warren believes!
Warren’s beliefs are immoral, divisive, and downright disgusting in many cases. And it’s a crying shame that the gay and lesbian community is alone in stating that. It’s time that all Americans, especially conservative females like Laura Ingraham, Ann Coulter, and Bay Buchanan denounce this man’s beliefs. Or perhaps they believe they should remain silent, as is taught in 1 Timothy 2:11-12.
Best Regards
Craig M. Flaherty