The Rev. Michael Piazza sent out one of his regular missives from his Hope for Peace & Justice group, and I have to say, he not only misses the point, he becomes a very sad, wrong-headed apologist for Barack Obama.
In the statement, Piazza says — several times — that he “disagree[s] vociferously” with Warren’s views, and that Warren “doesn’t deserve our [the gay community’s] support.” But he then defends Obama’s choice nonetheless:
“The President-elect made a point of the fact that he, too, disagrees with much of what Warren believe and does. That is the genius of Barack Obama: He invites people with whom he disagrees into his life and administration.”
Wrong-o, Mike.
The problem with Warren is not that he doesn’t support same-sex marriage or much of gay rights. It’s not even that Obama may disagree with him at some level but still want his counsel. No, the problem is, Obama has already insulted the gay community (as have, sadly, virtually all major political candidates) by steadfastly refusing to support same-sex marriage (and, in fact, vocally saying he opposed it — the same position, I might add, that George W. Bush and John McCain have espoused). But we have supported him still. He promises he’ll be a better president for gay rights than anyone before him. “Trust me,” he has been saying.
But trust must be earned. And yet, he chose for the invocation — a position of honor which should be rewarded to someone deserving — not someone who may have, incidentally, taken a position not fully supported by Obama (who fully supports the positions of ANY one person), but a lying separatist who, if he said about blacks what he has said about gays and was selected by a Republican to give the invocation, would have probably resulted in Obama being shocked and vocal about the stupidity of the selection.
And Warren basically has said it. Here’s how Warren has lied: He has maintained — you can see the video on Instant Tea — that marriage has remained the same for “5,000 years” in EVERY culture, and has ALWAYS been one man-one woman, and that what gays want is to “change” it. Well, that’s a lie. Ask a Mormon. Ask a concubine in a harem. Ask a slave from the American South. Ask the late Mildred Loving, who barely 40 years ago was considered a felon because she was black and had a white husband. THAT is the marriage Rick Warren wants to maintain. Indeed, if Warren had been when Barack’s parents had met, we can only assume he would have objected to their union as violating 5,000 years of what marriage means.
Warren is wrong. Obama is wrong — dead wrong — in selecting him. He owes the gay community an apology.
But he will never feel the need to apologize himself when he has Mike Piazza doing it for him. There is a difference, Mike, between diverse opinion and insulting your supporters. Diversity of opinion is not a absolute. Would you defend the choice if Obama selected a Neo-Nazi preacher who had once invited Obama to speak at his Klan meeting?
I plan to boycott the inauguration. I plan to hold Obama’s feet to the fire on every issue that concerns me. If we give him a pass right now, just because he’s “better than Bush,” we are not making progress. I voted for Obama, but he has to earn my support. And if he can point to leaders of the gay community who, two days before Christmas, justify his selection of Warren, he’ll never feel he has to earn it.
I agree with Rev. Mike Piazza.
The LGBT “community” has lost touch with the rest of mainstream America. We are fighting for “marriage equality” when we haven’t even achieved the right to hold a job or have access to housing.
Yet, even though we want “marriage equality” we reject the possibility of those rights unless they bear the name “marriage” instead of “union”
Bob Osterag hits the nail right on the head in his piece for HuffPost. Today’s gays just don’t get it. We have spent so much time talking amongst ourselves and yelling at our enemies that we have not been listening to the people in the middle.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-ostertag/why-gay-marriage-is-the-w_b_152717.html
“I plan to boycott the inauguration. I plan to hold Obama’s feet to the fire on every issue that concerns me. If we give him a pass right now, just because he’s “better than Bush,†we are not making progress. I voted for Obama, but he has to earn my support. And if he can point to leaders of the gay community who, two days before Christmas, justify his selection of Warren, he’ll never feel he has to earn it.”
And this is why the gay community is failing. This does not help your cause. If you haven’t noticed, Obama is trying to bring the country together by bringing in people of all sides of the fence. Why do you (or any other organization/race/religion/sexual orientation) feel that your needs must be met above all others? Why can’t people look past the whole idea of “us vs them” and try to come together? If you bring people together, then those people will be more open to new ideas. Keep them separated, and everyone will remain in the “us vs them” mode and nothing will ever get accomplished.
So far I’ve heard the Gay community, Women’s communities, and Black communities complaining about this that and the other lately. It’s getting to the point where I don’t have much sympathy left for your causes when all you do is complain when something doesn’t go “according to plan”.
It is an idiotic allegation to say that Warren would have objected to an interracial marriage. The difference in the matter is that the Bible casts homosexuality as a moral issue, while interracial marriage is not.
It strikes me that there are several issues here that are related yet distinct, and we’re not doing ourselves any favors by giving them all equal weight.
The first issue is same-sex marriage, and whether working for civil unions with all the rights and privileges of marriage would be settling for second-class status.
The second issue is President-elect Obama’s choice of Prop 8 supporter Rick Warren to give an invocation at his inauguration, and whether we should be so insulted by his choice that we’re willing to boycott the inauguration and declare Obama our foe du jour.
The third issue is the gay community’s lack of national leadership and our complete inability to develop a strategy for securing equal rights.
Regarding the first issue, religious institutions don’t own marriage. Marriage is as much a civil contract as a religious covenant. It always has been and always will be. Therefore, the state shouldn’t simply cede it to the church because it’s an easy way out.
Regarding the second issue, comparing Rick Warren to the Nazis or the KKK seems a bit extreme. He may be many things to many people, but likening him to the architects of genocide and racial purity may be out of line.
Regarding the third issue, even the leaders of the Civil Rights movement disagreed among themselves. When the MLK’s nonviolence didn’t achieve the desired results, Malcom X and others stepped forward to propose more militant solutions. We will always have disagreements over leadership and strategy, but the very least we can agree upon is what we want.
So, what do we want?
Firstly, the Interracial example does *not* apply. It still involves one man and one woman. Even Mildred Loving was a woman married to a man.
Secondly, Mormons did (and some do) practice polygamy. However, that is not legal in the US, and was generally condemned by the cultures Mormonism existed in.
And, finally, concubines are not married. They would be called “wives” in that case.
So these are not legitimate comparisons.
-Pie
The main thing I wish to see is tolerance of other people’s views and it’s not happening here.
Unfortunately, certain parts of the left and certain gay groups are the most intolerant people in our culture. It’s very sad that we don’t respect each other enough to allow each other to think different thoughts without having to “crucify” the different one.
Remember the old saying, “You can catch a lot more flies with honey than you can with vinegar.”
If the left and certain gay groups would use honey in their tones instead of hate they’d get more of what they want.
The only difference between Piazza and Warren/Falwell/Osteen/Tilton, is that he is OPENLY gay.
I stopped going to COH the day I found out he was building a green room off his study at the Chruch.
Arnold – you got it wrong this time.
As the others have commented – – this “us vs. then” will get us nowhere. And yes, when did Gay Marriage be the litmus test for anyone deserving to lead the country in 2 mins of prayer? Also, need I remind you that the closing prayer is delivered by a pro-gay marriage minister, and for the first time, a gay and lesbian marching band will be participating?
When did OUR issue become the ONLY issue.
Obama inviting Warren is not a collapse on the issues he believes – Warren invited Obama to speak at his church. Do you think their disagreement on a much larger and more contentious issue – abortion – keep him from doing so?
Move the middle – fight for small wins, and eventually those will build into a larger consensus. In case you didn’t read the numbers, most of the people in this country are not supporters of full gay marriage. Are they wrong? Yes, probably. Are we going to prove they are wrong by yelling at them, turning our back on them, boycotting the inauguration of what could be one of the most pro-gay Presidents in history? Acting like babies? Nope.
Will we change their minds by sitting down at the table with them (and I’m not talking about Warren – I’m talking about half the country) and finding something we can agree on, then move on from there? Civil Unions? Sure. Same benefits? Sure.
We gays just don’t get it at all. Nobody will take us seriously until we actually have something serious to say.
The Rick Warren thing is way out of control. Yea he is a dick to LGBT people, but he is not the Obama Administration and has no power, except metaphysical. All this ranting does absolutely nothing to advance our cause.
Now that we have a Democratic Congress and a Democrat in the White House, it’s time to press our case, not yell about the guy who says a prayer. We have receptive ears in Washington and we could much better use our indignation and energy doing something visible and productive rather than this carping about Warren.
How about spending a little energy and organizing a full court press on Washington for Gay Rights? A nice million LGBT march and a couple of days of intense lobbying would have much more effect. Lawmakers understand when vast numbers of people show up in their office to talk to them and they know those are voters. Face time will do much more than blog-rants.
Yea, I don’t like Warren any more than anyone else, but I do like Lowery who is giving the Benediction and Obama who is the President and Biden who is the VP. It’s not like Warren is going to open the Inauguration with a missive against LGBT people. Get over it and get on with it!
Arnold Wayne Jones. Well said. And, thank you for saying it.
Well, thank you Rachel Maddow for staying on top of this – Day 4 – over 30 minutes of coverage on this issue with Rick Warren… they are must sees!
Dec 23rd not posted yet… another must see.
Dec 22th https://www. msnbc. msn. com/id/26315908/#28358353
Dec 19th https://www. msnbc. msn. com/id/26315908/#28320114
Dec 18th https://www. msnbc. msn. com/id/26315908/#28304233
Dec 17th https://www. msnbc. msn. com/id/26315908/#28287154
Tonight’s tidbit– Dec 21st Rick Warren has taped a 22 minute unscripted conversation on his Saddleback Church site. (was that after his meeting Melissa Etheridge??) https://www. saddlebackfamily. com/blogs/newsandviews/index. html
Main site is: https://www. saddleback. com Spend some time there. And forward this to everyone.
……………… I am at minute 20. I HAVE BEEN CURED OF THE GAY and HEALED. OMG IT IS AMAZING! I have been ……………….you….must………watch it. You TOO can be cured of ‘the gay’ and your “Christo-phobia”. I love you too Rick Warren!
In the interest of a fair and balanced debate, I invite people to read Rev. Piazza’s piece “Defending Rick Warren” at https://www.h4pj.org/enote/archives/index.php.
I keep going back and forth on this issue. As a Baptist preachers kid, I left the church years ago after years of absolute hell dealing with my sexuality. I can easily side with the “pro” civil union advocates and “dish” those that demand marriage as a fundamental right. I can easily agree with those “non-religious” bloggers that suggest we are on the wrong path.
Then I think about gays that may be religious and want a marriage sanctified by the church. Who are we to argue with those with these beliefs? If they share beliefs in a supreme being and want to get married no different than Christian “straights”, then more power to them and we should respect their opinion and demand for equal rights.
Who says we can only battle one topic at a time? Yes we need to continue to fight for our fundamental right to employment, housing etc. Suggesting that only until those rights are secured before moving on to another right….is bullshit. Absolute bullshit.
So pressing for marriage equality passed by two states and about to be resecured through the courts in California is a positive thing and certainly gets media attention across our country. We need this passionate and very controversial topic continued to be debated across America. Media attention keeps the discussion on the front burner. More discussion….more persuading “middle America” about our rights. Take it out of the media….no more discussion, nor persuasion.
Gays that want to take a conservative approach and just settle for civil unions have it all wrong. Civil unions seem to be already to be gaining acceptance one we can easily get without too much controversy…..nor media attention. Gay marriage is still controversial and the more controversial…the better.
Wake up Gay America…..sticking to a “mainstream” “don’t ask don’t tell” type civil unions approach is not going to accomplish our ultimate goals for our community. That’s basically the approach you are advocating. Didn’t work for Clinton and will not work for us today.
I’m with most of these people, this is making a mountain out of a molehill…and in fact giving Warren a bigger platform to get his agenda out there by creating controversy over it.
In my opinion we’re taking attention away from the bride on her wedding. Americans are about to have our first BLACK president! It took 300 years for slaves to be freed in our country…& the African American community still has major systemic problems because of discrimination. Things are changing for the better! We just aren’t there yet.
Have some hope!
I agree with you, Arnold. Obama has waffled and tried to play to both sides of the fence
the entire election. It’s no surprise that he did this, it’s true to form.
I don’t understand why this media is already portraying this as The Great Betrayal. Save it for history to decide. I equate the inauguration to a wedding day. I’ll pick my own minister, thanks.
This is Obama’s moment. Not ours. And this choice indicates a well rounded character, even if you don’t like it. Let him throw a bone to everyone he can.
I agree we earn trust. He’s had a year to earn voter’s trust, he’s had a month to make the smallest of decisions (which seem thus far trustworthy), and he’s got 4 years to prove to us he’s worth 4 more. Lay off a little. It’s not all about us. Like you would have even liked the McCain Palin inaugural choice?
Ok, I tried, but I can’t let this pass. To say that the inauguration of The President of the United States equates to someone’s private wedding day is beyond ridiculous.
Robert Moore
Publisher
Jennifer stated, “Obama has waffled and tried to play to both sides of the fence.”
Last time I checked, Obama must represent and address ALL Americans, not just ourselves, and the ones that happen to agree with our point of view.
And, not just the ones who voted for him.
He has not “waffled” – his stance on Marriage has been very clear from Day One. He has also made it clear he will invite all those with a view to join in the debate – not just his views. This is why I voted for him – bring all the voices in, and let the rationale ones win.
Robert Moore,
Don’t you have enough opportunities in your paper to express your opinions without having to post comments on your own blog to bully and embarress your readers?
I do indeed have ample opportunities, but it is extremely rare that I add my opinion either in print or online. When I do, it is never done with the intent to bully or embarrass. Not my style.
Robert Moore
Publisher
I would argue that your entire publication is a mouthpiece to advance your opinions. One need only look at the Voice’s coverage of the Democratic primaries to see an obvious bias towards Hillary Clinton in the paper’s coverage.
And the very act of a publisher posting a negative reply to a specific reader’s comment, is in and of itself an act of bullying, especially when the comment is to say that the reader’s opinion is “beyond ridiculous.”
The quality of a publication suffers when it is staffed by people who do not possess the gravitas to speak their mind to the publisher.
And the steady decline in the quality of the Voice is clear to anyone who has continually read the paper since the mid 1990’s.