You’ve no doubt heard that Rev. Rick Warren – the author of the book The Purpose Driven Life – has been invited by The Nazarine (a.k.a. Barack Hussein Obama) to speak at his inauguration. This single act has people on the Right and the Left up in arms.
The Right I can deal with. The Left, however, is going to get the brunt of my scorn…which they richly deserve.
From Fox News:
Rep. Frank Opposes Warren Invocation at Inauguration
Frank, who is openly gay, says it was a mistake to give such a high honor to a pastor who compared homosexuality to incest.
WASHINGTON — The first openly gay member of Congress said Sunday it was a mistake for President-elect Barack Obama to invite the Rev. Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at his inauguration.
“Mr. Warren compared same-sex couples to incest. I found that deeply offensive and unfair,” Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., said in a broadcast interview.
“If he was inviting the Rev. Warren to participate in a forum and to make a speech, that would be a good thing,” Frank said. “But being singled out to give the prayer at the inauguration is a high honor. It has traditionally given as a mark of great respect. And, yes, I think it was wrong to single him out for this mark of respect.”
Warren, a best-selling author and leader of a Southern California megachurch, is a popular evangelical who stresses the need for action on social issues such as reducing poverty and protecting the environment, alongside traditional theological themes.
But gay rights advocates, who strongly supported Obama during the election, are angry over Warren’s backing of a California ballot initiative banning gay marriage. That measure was approved by voters last month.
Although Warren has said that he has nothing personally against gays, he has condemned same-sex marriage.
“I have many gay friends. I’ve eaten dinner in gay homes. No church has probably done more for people with AIDS than Saddleback Church,” he said in a recent interview with BeliefNet. But later in the interview, he compared the “redefinition of marriage” to include gay marriage to legitimizing incest, child abuse and polygamy.
Warren, in a speech on Saturday, said he took “enormous heat” three years ago for inviting Obama to speak at his church, even though the two men disagree on some issues. “Now he’s invited me,” Warren said.
Obama defended the selection of Warren last week, telling reporters that America needs to “come together,” even when there’s disagreement on social issues. “That dialogue is part of what my campaign is all about,” he said.
Frank appeared on “Late Edition” on CNN.
Does this maneuver look familiar? Can anyone say: “New Tone?”
I want to preface my comments by saying that I know virtually nothing about Pastor Rick Warren. I know there’s a lot of buzz about this guy because he wrote some inspirational book. That’s all nice and fine – I don’t follow those trends. So, I’ll take him at face value.
The people on the Right side of the equation are concerned about someone like Rick Warren giving some sort of credence to Obama’s pro-abortion (pro-murder) views. This is easily dismissed when you look at Rick Warren’s stance on abortion. Plus, it gives him a platform, albeit a limited one, to highlight the virtues of those who are pro-life…or, people who are on the right side of the equation when it comes this this subject.
Sinners came to Christ, just as Christ went to the sinners. By being a reverend, this is Warren’s implicit mission. No fault can be found in his accepting such an honor. Just so long as he says what it is that he believes, or claims to believe.
Guys like Barney Frank, however, find themselves in a bit of a dilemma. Here they are, playing themselves up like they’re the people who are all for inclusion and acceptance of people with “differences”. That is until the “differences” aren’t something they agree with.
Judaism and Christianity have been around a long time, as is the case with the Bible. They are pretty clear what God thinks about homosexuality. So, Rick Warren’s views are neither new, nor unheard. The best most liberals can do is redefine with is accepted and what is not, all the while claiming they are willing to accept just about anything. And that’s when their hypocrisy rears its ugly head.
What may be especially galling is that human debris like Larry Flint – whose claim to constitutional fame was a “spoof” on Jerry Falwell’s life by claiming his mother got knocked-up in an outhouse – is embraced by people like Barney Frank and Bill Clinton when it best suits their purposes. Along comes someone like Rick Warren, and all of a sudden the whole notion of “tolerance” needs to be thrown out the window for political expediency.
I personally find homosexuality repugnant. In light of modern, brain-dead thinking this revelation makes me “homophobic”. Absolutely absurd. I don ‘t “fear” homosexuals at all – I have acquaintances who are homosexuals. We get along just fine. I don’t preach to them about the errors of their ways, and they don’t bring up the subject of their lifestyle to me (mainly because they have a really good idea about what I’ll say to them).
That’s called “tolerance”. What slime-bags like Barney Frank practice is purely agenda-driven.
I make no bones about my beliefs that homosexuality is a perversion of nature. Period. It’s a sin. Yon cannot consider yourself a good Christian and live homosexual lifestyle no more than an adulterer can use the Bible to justify their carnal impulses. It’s wrong. End of discussion. Don’t go there with me, because you won’t win.
However, their business is none of my business, unless it starts overlapping onto my life, or the life of my family. And that’s where the boundary is drawn. So, I practice “live and let live.” None of us are perfect. Just don’t try and bend the long-tested concepts of Right and Wrong with me – you’ll not get very far in that task.
But let’s put the whole homosexual thing aside. Why in God’s name does anyone really care what Barney Frank has to say about anything? Why in the hell is this guy still on office after the events of the last couple of years? This was the guy who had a whorehouse run out of his apartment (if that’s the right gender-specific term). He’s also the same guy who blocked reforms at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and was later discovered to have been carrying on a relationship with a high-ranking person in one of these institutions. The man is on the Banking and Finance Committee – can anyone say, “conflict of interest?” He was also the MAIN cheerleader for multi-billion dollar bailout of the financial sector. You know, the bailout that’s got everything in all a huff because the money has literally disappeared off the face of the earth?
To be blunt: Barney Frank could be the congressional equivalent of a financial STD (Sexually Transmitted Disease). Should any thinking American should actually give a crap what he thinks about Rev. Warren speaking at Obama’s inauguration?
(The answer to the last question, by the way, should be a resounding “no”.)
Maybe the few token people in the Democrat party who have been allowed to keep their consciences should duct-tape Rep. Frank to a chair, and place him in the front row when Warren takes to podium?
It’s just a thought.