Rick Warren, Obama's inauguration pastor, denies homophobia

Rick Warren, the Orange County evangelical pastor who'll give the invocation at Barack Obama's historic presidential inauguration on Capitol Hill next month, says he's not at all homophobic, as some gay rights groups have charged, because he supported Prop. 8 to ban same-sex marriage.

Warren, who's at the center of a growing controversy over his inaugural invitation from the president-elect, said Prop. 8 became more about free speech than anything else. Speaking of free speech, as reported here, the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center  strongly criticized Obama on Thursday for his invitation to Warren to pray with the immense crowd at the opening of the inaugural ceremony. The group also demanded that the Democratic president-elect disinvite Warren from participating.

Obama has said he doesn't agree with some things Warren says and vice versa, but Warren invited him to speak in August at the Saddleback Forum. And, Obama adds, disagreeing with someone doesn't mean being disagreeable to each other. That's something his campaign has preached about for two years. Listen to Obama explain it himself on the video.

Warren, who heads the mega-church Saddleback in Lake Forest, says he's got no problem with gays having relationships; just don't call it marriage, he says. Marriage is between one man and one woman and has been for 5,000 years in numerous religions.

Warren also points out that his congregation has donated many millions of dollars to help gays with AIDS, which couldn't possibly be labeled homophobic.

Listen to the explanation in his own words in this news video.

-- Andrew Malcolm

Everyone agrees on registering here for cellphone alerts on each new Ticket item. RSS feeds are also available here. And we're on Amazon's Kindle too.

 

Comments

[mrclmind]

I, like so many of my gay friends, gave a lot of money to Obama's campaign. We worked tirelessly to get him elected. Now Obama decides to invite Rick Warren, who equates gays to rapists and child molesters; and who excludes gays from being members of his church to do the invocation? How many of Warren's followers do you think gave as much to the campaign as gays did? How many of Warren's followers worked as hard to get Obama elected as gays did? Warren is to gays what a Grand Wizard of the KKK is to African Americans. Obama has made it perfectly clear with this invitation how he feels about the gay community.

Do you think Obama would have had as much of a landslide if it wasn't for the gay community? I don't think so. I hope for his sake that all the evangelicals he is pandering to move over to his camp come reelection time; gays will be voting for a third party candidate from now on. It's been made perfectly clear that the Democrats don't want us. Good luck to Obama with his presidency. I don't support him any longer. I, like so many fell utterly betrayed.

[Jan]

Warren says that
'Marriage is between one man and one woman and has been for 5,000 years in numerous religions.'
And in numerous religions,marriage has not been between one man and one woman. His weasel words befit a politician rather than a minister.

Marriage is not merely a religious term. It is a state institution or construct and carries with it many legal benefits.

Marriage, as a matter of law, is not merely a "privilege" as I heard Huckabee recently claim. As a matter of constitutional law, marriage is a right. Moreover, it is a fundamental right, and any law impinging on that right is subject to strict scrutiny.

That is why prop 8 will ultimately fail. While there may be a sufficient state interest to define marriage as a union between 2 adult unrelated people, there is no (non-religious) interest that could possibly be compelling enough to deny 2 gay adults the right to marry. Conversely, there are compelling reasons to allow them to marry.

There is a reason why in this country we have the rule of law. The rule of law protects the rights of minorities from majority discrimination and worse.

As constitutional law scholar, Obama knows this.

[The Bag of Health and Politics]

Rick Warren focuses on AIDS in Africa, where the preponderance of cases are among straight people. He ignores AIDS in California and AIDS within the gay community. Jesus healed everybody, Rick.

Further, any pastor who fuses politics with religion in the way Warren does (even though he claims not to, lying is a sin, Rick) is not civil. Warren compared homosexuality to pedophilia. That's civil? He compared abortion to the holocaust? That's civil? Hypocrisy is a sin, Rick. He questioned the faith of progressive Christians and accused us of being Marxists (Godless) tools of the Democratic Party. Questioning my faith is civil? Bearing false witness against a fellow believer is a sin Rick.

What Rick Warren is really about is $elling his books and acquiring fame. And just like his minions on the far-right, he has a gigantic ego. And he knowingly and willingly fuels the flames of the culture war to get what he wants. Beneath the fuzzy beard, is Jerry Falwell in a Hawaiian shirt. It probably won't be long until Rick accuses Elmo of being gay propaganda.

[Russ]

If Rick Warren had been anti-Black, anti-Hispanic, anti-Asian, anti-Jew, anti-any other minority other than gay, then he would not have been given a place at Obama's inaugural table because it would have been wrong to give such a person a platform in which to give validity to their bigotry. But since Warren is anti-gay, Obama tries to defend his choice by saying he wants to listen to differing viewpoints. Bigotry is bigotry, no matter what rhetoric you wrap it in. If we are to use Obama's failed logic on this issue, then white supremacists should have a chair at Obama's inaugural table (but they won't because we know their positions on social issues are wrong, just as Rick Warren is wrong). Obama blew it with this one. It is painfully obvious to anyone with a brain that this is simply pandering to the radical religious whack jobs who have held this country hostage, via the Bush regime, for the last 8 years. With this most egregious of decisions, Obama has flushed his credibility down the toilet. This is not change we can believe in. This is just more of the same garbage that gay people have had to deal with the last 8 years. And it stinks. Obama benefitted greatly from gay people's, their friends', and their families' financial donations and their votes (including financial donations and vote from this gay person). And how are we repaid? We are thrown under the bus. The hearts and minds of a huge segment of the U.S. population are lost by such a purely political maneuver, and we cannot be one people/one country because of it. Here's hoping Obama wises up. If he wants to fix this country, he's going to need everyone's involvement, and right now, gays, their families, and friends are feeling like their involvement in cleaning up this country is neither wanted nor desired. Not a good message. Not a good way to begin Obama's presidency. Not good at all. And there's no excuse for it.

[Praise the Lord]

Pastor Warren sets a good example of true charity.It's
one thing to deplore aids and insist on government funding
but it is the mark of a true Christian to put up his own
money in a significant way.Equal rights does not equate
to granting homosexual mariage.Pope John Paul showed
us the light when he said to love your homosexual neighbor but condemn homosexual acts.Homosexual
exhibitionism such as so called gay pride parades serve
only to scandalize and poison the minds of vulnerable
and curious young minds.What responsable parent wants his or her teenagers to watch such turpitude?

[tomk]

"Warren, who heads the mega-church Saddleback in Lake Forest, says he's got no problem with gays having relationships; just don't call it marriage, he says. Marriage is between one man and one woman and has been for 5,000 years in numerous religions."

So what?

How many thousands of years in numerous lands did slavery exist? Seems there were quite a few slaves and concubines and multiple wives approvingly mentioned in the Bible. We'd probably still be slaves now if it were up to the Bible. Yet the Bible [or its self-appointed interpreters and enforcers] is supposed to define marriage for us, too.

Are we living in a theocracy? Who just got elected President, Barack Obama or Rick Warren? Does Rick Warren think he has the right to dictate what constitutes civil marriage?

[steve rodriguez]

I don't really care what the intolerant and irrational gay
community labels anybody!

[Carlin]

I am disgusted that Obama chose this right wing extreamist to give the invocation. It makes me sick to think that this man and not a mainstream or moderate religous leader is give this honor. I am starting to think Hillary WAS the better choice.

[Taylor]

Ok, so according to Rick Warren, Gay Marriage is the same as Incest, Polygomy and Pedophilia. I guess he would also allow rights for all of those unless it is called Marriage. Religious people should stay out of politics, makes them look stupid.

[Sally]

Rick Warren will get his in hell with the others who use God as a means for power and profit.

Obama is a fool to invite this demon in.

[Andrew]

Obama has no reason to help gays & lesbians. Democrats will always have the bulk of the gay vote, & they don't need to do anything to get it, as gays & lesbians know that Republican treatment would be worse.
So, Democrats give lip service to gays & lesbians just to make sure that they go out & vote. After that, Democrats have no incentive to help gays; it would just upset the bulk of Americans.
Obama is a typical Democrat.
Then again, Lincoln was hated in his time, & the Emancipation Proclamation was condemned by most everyone when it was introduced.
Maybe people should think on that sometime--it is a fantasy, no politician will ever help gays & lesbians--but sometimes it's something to think about.

[steve rodriguez]

He served coffee and donuts to the gay community protesting Prop. 8 outside of his church doors!
Color this pastor "love!"
What should we color Rev. Wright?

[DSciulla]

It's the height of hypocrisy on both their parts. This invitation should have been politely declined by Pastor Warren on the grounds that he and Obama have values that are diametrically opposed to one another and would cause dissent rather than goodwill on both sides of the fence. This mutual decision diminishes the credibility of both men and puts a damper on what would otherwise be a momentous occasion.

[Schmidty]

"Warren also points out that his congregation has donated many millions of dollars to help gays with AIDS, which couldn't possibly be labeled homophobic."

You have to be very, *very* out of touch to be unaware of what a sore spot that is. People in the LGBT community often hear from far-right religious conservatives that AIDS was a punishment from god for their "sinful lifestyle." I find it rather interesting that Warren keeps statistics on how many of his charity recipients are homosexual.

There is a lot of effort to downplay this issue right now, and to the LGBT community it is a deep frustration. We view Warren's position as homophobic, and homophobia itself to be another form of racism. To us, allowing Warren to give this speech would be identical to allowing a Klansman to swear in a president in the 1950s. Disagree with this position if you choose, but to suggest that there's little symbolic importance to Warren's speech is to completely fail to grasp the way that LGBT activists view the issue.

[Brian]

It seems strange that a preacher who holds to the bible would be approve of homosexuality in any form or label. I doubt that Rick Warren actually is "okay" with it. I think what he really implied is that he is okay with it being legal (just like it's legal to smoke cigarettes). Whether Obama believes that gays should have the same rights as married people, he is trying to distance himself from far left-wing preachers. This does not mean he endorses Warren's beliefs or political opinions. Also, why does who prays at the inauguration have to be a political statement? I generally dislike Obama's politics, but criticizing the man for honoring a religious leader who was respectful towards him seems ridiculous and petty. Of course, in recent years, the gay community has always been known to be loud and obnoxious about EVERY perceived slight. Free publicity, eh? I believe the constant push for attention from gays is backfiring ala prop 8. If you guys actually want to sway people, don't whine about the small stuff. It only serves to energize your opposition.

[Robert]

Don't blame me, I voted for Hillary

[Patricia Weisz]

Thank you Rick Warren for standing on the right side!
God Bless you and your ministry.

[jessicanaomi]

Obama went to a church of hate for 20 years, and claimed that he never heard Rev. Wright preach hate in Jesus' name. All those liberals out there who voted for Obama should not be surprised then that Obama asked Rick Warren, another preacher of hate in Jesus' name, to pray that Jesus damn all American gays and Jews to hell. Obama is and will always be a divisionist revisionist, just look at his cabinet choices. Get ready for a bumpy ride.

[DAS]

The last place I thought I'd be posting a comment is the LA Times. However, I'm getting tired of this...

Yes, Warren's views are contrary to certain groups of individuals - and he has certainly vocalized his strong opinions.

But strong opinions are not unique to Warren.

Those that disagree with him have very strong opinions too - and these are also well vocalized.

To me, tolerance is a two way street. Those that demand tolerance should walk the walk.

In my mind, there is going to be controversy regarding same sex marriage for many years to come.

However, to demand censorship of an individual - because of a single aspect of one's beliefs - seems to me at least - just as intolerant.

Obama has not claimed agreement with all - including his own cabinet members (a marked change from his predecessor who installed "yes man" at every corner).

To that end, this innocuous pick should be seen for what it is - a political calculation designed to dampen suspicion and even instill goodwill among his most vocal opponents: the evangelical right.

And make no mistake, the goodwill thus created could - and by all statistics WOULD - outstrip any displeasure and acrimony that the vocal minority in the LGBT community could generate.

In fact, such displeasure would - and will - only prompt a longer and more reflective pause for the right to re-examine their attitudes regarding Obama. This is part of his calculation and it WILL work - to a greater or lesser degree.

The LGBT constituency is a lock. Most of this said base exist in States that are very light blue - and are of no real threat. Their non-support in future would mean little.

The right - on the other hand - could ensure an overwhelming victory in 2012 - only if he plays his cards "right"...

Obama believes it's a gamble worth taking...(regardless of the noisy outrage that it will prompt - and which will again - promote and project an image that the far more numerous right can live with and possibly support)...

The editorials contained herein and the loud complaints aired over the networks only advance his position amongst those that he is trying to connect with at this time...

DAS

[Kimberly]

last i checked with my bible, dr. warren, gluttony was a sin, too.

you might want to get the stick out of your own eye before making ludicrous social comparisons that only underscore your simpleminded nature.

[walter]

Would it not be refreshing if we as a nation could return to the era where religion and statehood were separated? Why have any religious figure involved with the event at all?

[Pak Tam]

Dear Mr President-Elect & his Transition Team,

Considering the promises & circumstances of your campaign, this Inauguration belongs to ALL people. To have Pastor Warren to deliver the Invocation is a fundamental antithesis to what we hope your presidency will be. His advocacy to categorically strip civil rights from a group of citizens will forever mar this historical event. There will be other occasions for dialogue & reconciliation for the contending issues, but this invitation to Pastor Warren is definitely inappropriate for the symbolic re-birth of the great nation, and is clearly disrespectful to your millions of supporters who yearn for a fair & just society.

Sincerely yours,

Pak TAM

Help our voice to be heard! Please kindly circulate this!

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/107914679
http://www.new.facebook.com/profile.php?id=538567008&ref=profile&pub=2915120374#/group.php?gid=40933512660
http://www.eqca.org/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?c=kuLRJ9MRKrH&b=4025663&aid=11543
https://secure.pfaw.org/site/SPageServer?pagename=Warren_Inauguration&autologin=true&JServSessionIdr006=b3zrfzfmv2.app304b

[james]

How can Obama include this conservative evangelical preacher in his introduction to the world as a nations’ leader much less the inaugural invocation! Rick Warren publicly compares rape of a minor by an adult or sex between a brother and sister with two consenting in love adults of the same sex! He was a general in the war to push prop 8 in California which constitutionalized the exclusion of a certain right for a certain segment of the population which is afforded to the greater part of the population. This is not acceptable in a new America moving in a new direction not full of hate and disdain for anyone unlike ourselves which is what this preacher openly stands for. Obama disassociated with pastor Wright who married him and his wife, whose church he attended happily for a considerably long time - just because Wright had obvious difficulty controlling his painbody, built justifiably mostly if not entirely on being a part of a peoples who suffered through slavery Jim crow separate but almost equal etc to the point that it actually touched his lifetime. Yet Obama invites this preacher Rick Warren to give the inaugural invocation - someone who views with the worst disdain a segment of our population who at no time ever caused any harm to him or his family or friends - simply because they do not stand for the same principles as he does and he doesn’t approve of what they do in private which is no different than what he or others he DOES relate to do in their private moments. It is just not fair to allow him this celebratory platform which can not help but express his totality of beliefs including his candy-coated hate for the simple fact that he so openly expresses them elsewhere. And this is not the message the world and us need to hear. Not on such an important occasion for sure! Please reconsider letting Rick Warren speak or pray at your event. The passing of prop 8 was one of the few dark clouds that loomed and wrecked havoc on an otherwise phenomenal choosing of Obama as pres elect. Now that same threat threatens to rain on the opening ceremony of what should be one of the brightest days in American history. Rick Warren also openly admits in the past that anyone who does not believe in his god is well on the path of ultimate doom. In the words of Obama, "While we have come a long way since the Stonewall riots in 1969, we still have a lot of work to do. Too often, the issue of LGBT rights is exploited by those seeking to divide us. But at its core, this issue is about who we are as Americans. It's about whether this nation is going to live up to its founding promise of equality by treating all its citizens with dignity and respect." -- Barack Obama, June 1, 2007. How can Rick Warren be allowed this honor with such an acting divisive agenda at hand? There are so many god loving evangelical pastors and such who openly and inwardly express openness and compassion to and for all, seeing each and all of us as gods children. Obama should choose someone else other than Rick Warren. The nation is already sensitive about separation between church and state. As a non-follower of any religion myself , my heart and mind are certainly open to religious peoples who have love, kindness and blessings for all. It is not religion that is scary. What is scary is the teaching of intolerance and acting apon it, done in the name of religion or not. I would be open to meeting and acting friendly towards Warren if he were to treat me with the same respect I would expect of myself towards him, regardless of his personal views. But only to work together on building an understanding and respect for each other. Not to listen to him preach as if he were no part of limiting the rights and freedom of loving individuals who only wish to fully express their love for each other in the same way most others legally do. Rick Warren DOES deserve the dignity and respect he won’t himself afford the LGBT community – YES. That does not include just handing him a platform to show himself off for the whole world to see - along with all his past, present and future institutionalized hateful actions beside him. No matter how sugar coated his words may be for the inaugural invocation, elsewhere he is actively and successfully working against respect and dignity for all, even through changes in law and constitution (prop 8. Ca.). Rick Warren as mellow a demeanor he may have is an acting divisive evangelical who wants no part of equal respect, dignity and rights for all individuals – period. He not only gives a bad name to evangelicals - He also gives a bad name to all of us if allowed to cast his darkness of non-respect and disregard of dignity for all behind his words of inaugural invocation. There are so many god loving evangelical pastors and such who openly and inwardly express openness and compassion to and for all, seeing each and all of us as gods children. Obama should choose someone else other than Rick Warren to reflect the aspect of our society he is looking to showcase through Warren – please. It is offensive to all of us if he is allowed to give the inaugural invocation. As a straight person myself, I sense no separation between the suffering of others and myself. And I have seen many peoples’ lives affected by prop 8 first hand and find no comfort that their lack of full dignity and respect by people and now by STATE CONSTITUTION does not affect me the same. It still saddens my heart and mind and creates an oppressive environment for all of us. Even Jerry Brown AG of Ca. has now decided prop 8 is unconstitutional. Yet Rick Warren does not care about the constitution and only wishes to further his religiously oriented political agenda by maintaining his stance that any overturning of prop 8 would be a violation of the will of the voters – that is not how law and the constitution work. There are safeguards in place to protect majority rule over minority groups in areas such as assuring rights and freedoms are equal to all. Rick Warren does not reflect anything we as a nation or a world should be proud of other than his sugar-coated general appearance, tone and mannerism. When it comes to specific rights and freedom for all along with the dignity and respect they entail, Rick Warren has little to no regard for the dignity and respect of people who do not think like he does to the point of ACTIVELY limiting their freedoms and rights through INSTITUTIONALIZED HATETRED! Which not only brings great pain and sorrow to the LGBT community, but to their families and friends lives as well. Again, There are so many god loving evangelical pastors and such who openly and inwardly express openness and compassion to and for all, seeing each and all of us as gods children. Obama should choose someone else other than Rick Warren to reflect the aspect of our society you were looking to showcase through Warren – please

[hopesome]

Once again religion and politics clash like titans. When will america be like Jesus instead of thinking they are him and he is theirs. You all spend so much time trying to convince each other of how holy/or not you are that in the process people are left to die on battle fields across the universe. Jesus was LOVE, unconditional, not religion and I see more of the latter than the former. WAKE UP AMERICA and Mr Obama call on the lord if you will not man. MAN HAS A HABIT OF LETTING YOU DOWN AND NOT ALWAYS GRACEFULLY.

[Do not pass Go-Do not collect $200]

Outside the LGBT,is there anyone who ever wants to see a man become the first lady?