Rick Warren: Good idea or not?

[Rachmaninoff]

I'm sure you've all read about this guy since he's been invited to speak at the inauguration. If you haven't heard about it yet, articles about it can be found here:

[URL="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28349798/"][U]Frank: Warren's views ?deeply offensive?[/U][/URL]

and here:

[URL="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28354114/"][U]Rick Warren's critics include other evangelicals[/U][/URL]

Now I'm not religious so no matter what their views are, I already know they're going to say things I don't agree with, or have views I don't agree with. So I don't see a problem since I already know that having similar beliefs as whoever is chosen, isn't going to happen. Well on the more controversial stuff which is part of why there are people objecting to the choice.

Anyway, I'm not really too familiar with this guy so I don't have much else to say on it. How about the rest of you?

[Mr. Blonde]

Bad decision.

Not because he's a pastor, but because of his outspoken opposition to homosexuals. He compared being gay to "incest and bigamy". Unfortunately it's still okay socially to denounce homosexuals. If he had said such slanderous remarks about jewish folks or people of a certain race or creed, this man would be poison.

I've said before... don't expect a flood of gay rights during the Obama administration.

Bad choice, Barry.

[Esther]

[FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"][SIZE="1"]I really don't see why everyone is so shocked that Obama chose Warren to deliver the prayer and speak at the inauguration, Mr. O has a record of associating himself with inflammatory characters; I'm not going to name names, but I'm pretty sure everone can think of two examples to back this up..

The Obamamaniacs are trying to cover this gaffe up by saying this is an example of how Obama is going to bring the nation together. Yeah, okay.

The LGBT community should not be upset by this choice because Obama was never on their side. He only appealed to them to seal their vote. Obama did not appoint one LGBT person to his cabinet nor did he (to my knowledge) have any LGBT people in his senior staff for his campaign, [B][I]but Sen. McCain did.[/I][/B]

Do I believe this was a good choice? No. If he really wanted to bring the nation together, he would have chosen a religious person that appeals to EVERYONE and not one demographic, not a man who has abused his power of voice to [B]compare homosexuality to polygamy, BESTIALITY, AND PEDOPHILIA.[/B]

Good job Barack, he's sure to hit the ground running.[/SIZE][/FONT]

[Doublehex]

Wait, so people are going crazy that Obama invited Warren, who opposes homosexuality?

Despite the fact that the opposition of homosexuality is a standard in Christianity (God, specifically, was against it! I'll look up the verse later).

lawl

[James]

[quote name='Matt']Wait, so people are going crazy that Obama invited Warren, who opposes homosexuality?

Despite the fact that the opposition of homosexuality is a standard in Christianity (God, specifically, was against it! I'll look up the verse later).

lawl[/QUOTE]

[font=franklin gothic medium]No, I think people are annoyed because of his apparent inflammatory comparisons.

It's one thing to think homosexuality is a sin (and even that idea is becoming very outmoded among mainstream religion globally, as it should) but even if you hold that view, it's another thing to start digging in and attacking an entire group of people.

I haven't read his comments so I'm only going on what's been said here, but I doubt there would be much controversy if he just followed the most basic line of the Catholic church.

As much as people want to love Obama, I think everyone will soon realize that he simply can't satisfy everybody. Nor should he - however, a [i]lot[/i] of people voted on the idea the Obamessiah can do no wrong.

People will discover that, invariably, he'll make mistakes and he'll have flaws - just like everyone else.

As long as those decisions can be debated properly, I don't have a problem.

[b]Edit:[/b] Okay, just read some of his quotes. He did indeed equate gay marriage to incest and even child abuse. So I can understand why people would take issue with that.

On the other hand, I also think Obama may be doing a good thing by trying to be inclusive of people with many different points of view. It certainly does follow through with what he said in his campaign.

While I don't agree or disagree with the choice, I can see why people would legitimately disagree.[/font]

[Aaryanna_Mom]

His views and beliefs aren't an issue, but the inflammatory remarks are uncalled for and decidedly unchristian in my opinion. If not for that, I would have no issue with the choice. However it's been made so unless they try to sneak some of that into the inauguration I'm not going to worry over it.

[TimeChaser]

I can understand Obama's desire for inclusion, but I really think he should have picked someone else, especially after the recent defeat of rights in several states during the election. He could have picked someone less controversial.

[Raiha]

[quote name='TimeChaser']I can understand Obama's desire for inclusion, but I really think he should have picked someone else, especially after the recent defeat of rights in several states during the election. He could have picked someone less controversial.[/QUOTE]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]Actually this may come as a shock to you and indeed everyone else who doesn't religiously follow Lexis Nexis [not that I blame you, it's usually dull as dishwater]...

Rick Warren is disliked by many 'evangelicals' and otherwise decent, boring, conservative, and otherwise non offensive Christians. It all started [not really] when he made a trip to Syria and complimented the government's thoroughly corrupt and generally twistedly evil family on their "moderate" and "peaceful" ways. And then there's his long tradition of not condemning terrorism, and indeed reaching out to radical Muslims [watch how I said radical and not 'everyday' or 'peaceful']. Most Christians approve of peaceful relations with Muslims, just as many Muslims do in return, but Rick Warren has made a mistake [or perhaps deliberately decided to] for refusing to condemn radical Islamic terrorism and decided to hop into bed with it instead. It'd be another thing if he'd praised say...Egypt for their moderate ways. Because indeed, that would be a far more fitting term. Instead he saved it for good ole Syria. Human rights violators extraordinaire.

If you want to see more on the nice steaming hot Rick Warren/Syria connection, google will serve you if you type in just "Rick Warren Syria." Whether or not you agree with the slant of the articles you find, his quotes are pretty hard to spin.

I never thought I'd be saying this, but Rick Warren does no credit to Obama, and is too radical to be allowed to circle around him. It pains me to see that Obama's staff, or perhaps he himself, has decided to pick such a morally ignorant monkey right out of the starting gate. He could have picked any number of the less controversial and slightly less insane clerics in the country, but his picking of Rick Warren was a [b]Very Bad Thing[/b].[/FONT][/COLOR]

[TimeChaser]

I wasn't aware of any of that. :animestun

Makes you wonder if Obama was even aware of all those things. You'd think he would be. He really should have picked someone else. :animesigh

[Aaryanna]

[COLOR="Sienna"][FONT="Tahoma"]Other than to think the guy is an idiot, I don't have much to say. It's not like this Warren guy is becoming president or anything. =P And regardless of his inflammatory and idiotic statements, I think it changes nothing that he'll be there.

Plus Obama can't please everyone, no matter who he picks.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='Aaryanna][COLOR="Sienna"][FONT="Tahoma"]Plus Obama can't please everyone, no matter who he picks.[/FONT'][/COLOR][/quote]That's part of why I honestly just don't care. I know that no matter who he picks, someone will be mad or upset. He could have chosen better (in my opinion), but at the same time, I'm sure he could have chosen someone even worse.

[Mr. Blonde]

[quote name='Rachmaninoff'] He could have chosen better (in my opinion), but at the same time, I'm sure he could have chosen someone even worse.[/QUOTE]

Jeremiah Wright.

Though I personally don't find Rick Warren any less offensive.

[Nathan]

[FONT="Arial"][quote name='Rachmaninoff']That's part of why I honestly just don't care. I know that no matter who he picks, someone will be mad or upset. He could have chosen better (in my opinion), but at the same time, I'm sure he could have chosen someone even worse.[/quote]That sums up my feeling on the matter as well since no matter what Obama does, someone will be upset. I don't like the choice, but I don't see it as the end of the world either.
[/FONT]

[James]

[font=franklin gothic medium]I don't think it's the end of the world, but I do think people are right to criticize it. People must be responsible for what they say and Rick Warren is no different.

Having said that, I suspect that the reaction would be a lot harsher if this guy had been chosen by president Bush. At least right now - and throughout 2009 - Obama will benefit from a strong honeymoon period. So that will help. And therefore, he may have more leeway to try to incorporate many different views early on.

Nevertheless, there's no question that it's an unwise choice. If Obama had wanted to represent evangelicals or the religious right in some form, he could probably have gone with a more middle-of-the-road representative.

Still, I guess that if I had to look for something positive here I'd say that at least Obama is attempting to bridge the gap between himself and others. It may be a somewhat awkward bridging, but the strength of his Cabinet choices helps to temper that quite a lot.[/font]