Michael Crawford

Rick Warren: gays are immature and slutty

Filed By Michael Crawford | December 20, 2008 9:30 AM | comments

Filed in: Fundie Watch, Media
Tags: religious homophobia, Rick Warren, Rick Warren and Barack Obama, Rick Warren hates gays

Despite his Mr. Rogers-like public persona, it is increasingly clear that Rick Warren is nothing less than professional anti-gay James Dobson in a cardigan sweater.

Check out this clip of Warren being interviewed by Ann Curry on the Today Show about his views on gay people:


iPhone users: Click to watch

So, it doesn't matter to Warren if homosexuality is found to be a biological trait. He will still consider being gay something undesirable and a threat to the social order that needs to be rained in or overcome.

That would explain why Rick Warren explicitly bans "unrepentant" gays from membership in his church.

And, this is the guy chosen to deliver the invocation at what will likely be the most watched inauguration in history?

I tend to lean towards Bil Browning's view on the Rick Warren controversy, but I am sure as hell glad that members of the LGBT community and our allies are speaking out against the supposedly "inclusive" act of inviting Warren, who sees LGBT people as a cancer that needs to be eradicated, to deliver a blessing for the nation.


Recent Entries Filed under Fundie Watch:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


Please!
I've straight male friends who are going on about numbers of girlfriends, though that is close to the biblical model of polygamy.


What a slick, underhanded indictment of us....

Reverend Warren, just because I've straight friends who devote themselves continuously to their efforts to get women that they find attractive into bed does not mean that I condemn the entire straight lifestyle...

Same sex marriage encourages love and monogamy with your spouse. It has in my life. We are fighting this arrogant person and others like him on May 5th before a judge at the U.S. Tax Court in San Diego. The facts we legally married couples in California will rely on are constitutional "Separation of Church and State".

Oh, really, Michael? You agree with Bil that maybe this is overblown and we should all calm down?

Really?

I would never have guessed that would take this position. Why wouldn't you?

Really?

You really are a courageous leader...just like our savior Saint Obama...change YOU can believe in...no matter how great the paucity of evidence of that change might be...you will trudge forward to defend your candidate and place him ahead of your own self interest.

You would have made an excellent Bush supporter in middle America.

Michael Crawford Michael Crawford | December 20, 2008 12:32 PM

Oh, really Patrick? You putting words in my mouth again?

As I say above, I am glad that people are speaking out strongly against Warren's appointment, but I do think we need to do more than get pissed off about things after the fact.

We would have had a better chance of defeating Prop 8 if all of the people who are expressing such outrage now had been involved in trying to defeat the amendment before November 4.

Enough with constantly being on the defensive! Let's go on the offensive to win equal rights.

For the record, while I am a passionate supporter of President-Elect Obama, it was you, not me that called him Saint Obama.

"We would have had a better chance of defeating Prop 8 if all of the people who are expressing such outrage now had been involved in trying to defeat the amendment before November 4."

I agree.

What were YOU doing before November 4 - helping elect Obama?

Michael Crawford Michael Crawford | December 20, 2008 4:34 PM

Yeah, I spent a lot of time and energy helping to elect Obama president. And, I don't regret one minute of that time.

As if Bil and Crawford had any power to do anything. lol. Neither have balls to stand up maybe afraid to insult Obama. I think Pamshouseblend, Signorile, JoeMyGod, and other blogs do have balls and will make changes, not milquetoast Bilerico. This blog is too divisive running off white gay men and lesbians through intimidation of "priviledged white leaders are bad". I was so proud of Joe Solmonese at HRC and Melissa Etheridge's tax protest. Did they get mentioned on this blog ? Nope. Although Joe is listed as a contributor, he never writes anymore. A closeted Mormon lesbian'ss topic was more important i.e. (changing to low voltage lightbulbs). Joe Solmonese is a leader to admire and he is going to cause trouble by sheer numbers of LGBT's. Good for him and all the TV pundits like Hilary Rosen, Rachel Maddow, Keith O, ect.
Why do I come here ? It's fun to tease those who take themselves very seriously. Sometimes I don't get posted.

Michael Crawford Michael Crawford | December 20, 2008 1:44 PM

Charles,

Unless you know something about my anatomy that I don't, you are in no position to comment on whether or not I have balls.

I wonder if your criticisms have more to do with your being a white male who feels out of sorts because you are no longer the only game in town.

It is pretty fun to tease people who take themselves too seriously! Let me know what your next artistesque project is in advance, Charles!

Also too thanks for erasing the 20 contributors who've said that this is a big deal. the queers aren't going to march lock-step on anything, and, unlike other groups of people, we appreciate our own diversity.

Just because it was bothering me, I had to check it out. Melissa Etheridge's column on taxation was actually posted about twice here:

http://www.bilerico.com/2008/11/melissa_etheridge_threatens_to_withold_s.php

http://www.bilerico.com/2008/11/prop_8_updates_lawsuits_protests_and_civ.php

Me and Bil got to it, I don't know what else you could be asking for.

Joe S. has been discussed ad nauseum here, so I don't know what you mean about no one talking about him.

Maybe you'll at least search before you complain about something not getting covered?

Thanks Alex,
I will let you know as all proceeds from sales have gone and will go to UCLA's Williams Institute, a think tank for legal LGBT issues. I have a page from Romans torn out of Thomas Kincade's Family Bible that condemns women with women and men with men writting by Paul. A black marker through those passages but (signed and numbered by me) Framed and ready to hang over your sofa in conservative Indiana. Good luck.

Charles;
We the Lesbians can hold our own...

I agree Maura. You, Melissa and Rachel Maddow are my favorites. I was a guest on the Rachel Maddow radio show with Melissa. Love them.
About these guys from Indiana. They don't have a clue as to what is happening in California. They can't feel the passion sitting on a sofa petting a little dog.

So, it doesn't matter to Warren if homosexuality is found to be a biological trait.

That's the first thing, and likely will remain the only thing, I've heard that I can agree with him on. The granting and denying of rights should not be based on proving or disproving an immutable biological trait.

It really annoys me when people in the media, like in this clip, assume that the belief that sexual orientation is biologically determined is synonymous with supporting queer folks (and disagreeing is synonymous with opposing queer people).

If rights ever were extended on this basis, then everyone who isn't a kinsey 6 would be out in the cold -- because if you have some attraction to the opposite sex, like Warren argues, you would be expected to suppress all same sex attraction. That's what rights based on immutability leads to.

Part of going on the offensive is to protest the hell out of the Warren invitation.

Robert Ganshorn Robert Ganshorn | December 21, 2008 1:11 AM

Michael, smile when you call me slutty!

The news cycle on this is already over. I do not care if "homosexuality" is a biological condition, a learned behavior or an adaption of superior people to the chains of conformity.

(I rather like that last one though :)

Warren is completely invested in his message which will not change until his followers change. Obama has again expressed support for our community. Lets hold him to that, and work with congress, rather than engage in pointless posturing.

You are giving Warren publicity he does not deserve.

Warren has no business participating in any official governmental function, certainly not the first official act of the Obama Administration.

He has publically called for violations of Hague IV in assasinating the Iraniam PM.

He has supported the actions of Peter Akinola in Nigeria, that were condemned by the Parliament of the European Union.

I don't support international criminals, I prosecute them currently. I do not support people who attempt to legitimise or increase the power of people committing international crimes, I prepare Conspiracy indictments against them.

Warren is eligable for such an indictment. If the incoming Government of the United States of America presents Warren with a platform that will increase his legitamacy and perforce his influence, then it's first official act becomes an act in furtherance of the cospiracy under a broad read of Hague IV, various UN Charters, Compacts and Treaties, Kellogg-Briand, all of which which the US is signatory to, as well as support of Warren's endorsement of various Commonwealth Treaties and a repudiation of a Condemnation by the European Parliament of actions endorsed by or lobbied for and carried out by Akinola of Nigeria that Warren has, through actions, staments and writing, lent support to.

should read "Warren's endorsement of violations of various Commonwealth treaties"

Marla R. Stevens Marla R. Stevens | December 23, 2008 3:37 AM

Actually, we're just starting to give Warren precisely the publicity he deserves -- that of the depth of his bigotry and wingnuttery he simultaneously promotes to his flock while trying to hide from the saner world. People who matter politically are just beginning to figure out just how bad a choice Warren really is for invocator.

The silver lining is that Warren has been exposed as virulently anti-gay. A positive point to consider.

Not much silver in that lining Bil.

This is a man who I could make a convincing case for indicting for conspiracy, for accessory after the fact in crimes against humanity (Nigeria, based upon EU Parliamentary Condemnation of Akinola's actions) and for advocacy of and a conspiracy to efffect a violation of Hague IV.

And out "Constitutional Scholar" makes him the official opening of the Obaba Administration.

What the world will read in this is that Obama is ok with what Akinola did in Nigeria including the murder fo 700 muslims and OK with violating Hague IV by assasinating the PM of Iran.

Strangely enough, the world was hoping for a return to respect for international law by the United States.


I actually do think that this is a silver lining. Usually he's talked about in the media as a friendly moderate, but this has given him more attention than he's had before and the message is going, generally, in the right direction.

It’s entertaining watching Obamadolators like Crawford try to squirm and wriggle their way out of this one. It's not easy to come up with a Party Line to explain this latest bit of pandering by The Obama.

The real experts at that were the Stalinists of the CPUSA, and in the book When the Old Left Was Young author Robert Cohen describes how the Communists scrambled to explain the gyrations of Soviet foreign policy from the military opposition to fascism in Spain to the Stalin-Hitler pact, from opposing Roosevelt as a clueless fatcat with no chance of ending the Depression to a policy of deep entry into the Democrat party.

Crawford and GLBT Democrats aren’t as good as the Stalinists, not by a long shot. Ignoring the reality of Obama’s deep seated religious bigotry they promoted him as the best thing since peanut butter and jelly.

They’re wrong because they’re always ready to sacrifice the needs of the movement to partisan politics. They deny the role that The Obama’s bigotry played in our recent defeats at the polls. The candidate they foisted on us isn’t a ‘fierce’ defender of anything but giving $8-9 trillion to the Wall Street dunces who wrecked the economy, continuing and expanding the war to please the merchants of death, and his attitude towards us is the political equivalent of love the sinner but the hate the sin.

The truth is as clear as day. Obama panders to bigots like Warren and McKlurkin while trawling for bigot votes. He does it nonstop, 24/7/365. Now The Obama himself is pushing us under the bus, sitting down in the driver’s seat, putting the key in the ignition …

So do we say “Ouch! Not Again” or do we begin to take action defend ourselves from The Obama and his bigot pals? The time for childish reliance on vacuous political hustlers like Clinton and Obama is over. The time for reliance on sellouts artists like HRC is over. It’s time to leave the last closet, the political closet.

I would support raising hell before the inagural and at least demonstrating to our imprisoned brothers and sisters in Nigeria that we care enough to reject the ally of their jailer.

It would also send a message to the world that not everyone endorses violating international law whenever we feel like doing so.

If you're in the neighborhood and have time to contact some friends and paint a big banner go for it. Best of luck.

further proof that obama can never defend this choice!

thanks

shame!
alicia banks
OUTLOOK
http://aliciabanks.blogspot.com/

Ok, when Warren made that comment about sluttiness, how many people were just hoping Mike Rogers had the goods on him?

I was hoping for better..I was hoping that Ted Haggard would come foreward with a tell all about the two of them...