Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
Rick Warren is once again in PR-speak mode when faced with his ties to the most barbaric elements in regressive Christianity. As I've written before, Warren has long had close ties to Martin Ssempa, an absolutely crazed anti-gay paster from Uganda who is one of the primary forces behind the push to make homosexuality even more illegal in that country than it already is (along with punishing anyone who advocates for gay rights as well).
Now that new proposed law has come to the attention of the American media and they are asking Warren about it. And despite the fact that he has long been involved in taking bold stands on political issues, he's suddenly decided that it's not his job to take a stance on the rightness or wrongness of the bill:
But Warren won't go so far as to condemn the legislation itself. A request for a broader reaction to the proposed Ugandan antihomosexual laws generated this response: "The fundamental dignity of every person, our right to be free, and the freedom to make moral choices are gifts endowed by God, our creator. However, it is not my personal calling as a pastor in America to comment or interfere in the political process of other nations." On Meet the Press this morning, he reiterated this neutral stance in a different context: "As a pastor, my job is to encourage, to support. I never take sides." Warren did say he believed that abortion was "a holocaust." He knows as well as anyone that in a case of great wrong, taking sides is an important thing to do.
As a pastor he never takes sides? He certainly had no problem declaring that gay marriage is just like beastiality and incest (and then lying and claiming he didn't despite the fact that it was on video). He had no problem explicitly telling his followers to support the ban on gay marriage in California (and then lying and claiming he didn't despite the fact that it was on video).
But when it comes to legislation that puts gay people to death, legislation being advocated by someone he has embraced at his church, he suddenly gets coy. How convenient for you, Rick.
Politics
Comments
Lying for the sockpuppet, as usual.
They should try to lie for a dildo: happiness would be much closer for many of them...
Posted by: diegopig | December 2, 2009 9:39 AM
Ed,
He supports the man, the legislation and the concept. I'd sure like a look in his closet.You've answered your own post with:
Posted by: MikeMa | December 2, 2009 9:54 AM
He also posted to his Twitter (maybe it was hacked, who ever knows) something along the lines of "166,000 Christians were killed last year and no one else said anything about it." Quite possibly the most asinine statement he's made yet. There are at least three major responses I have to that.
1. Since people were unkind to Christians, does that justify being unkind to another social group?
2. I'm pretty certain there are other people upset about the persecution of Christians who are not Christian themselves.
3. He's not being asked to comment on the Uganda laws as an observer, he's being asked why he supports the movement's leader financially and spiritually unless he agrees with the laws proposed. If I were supporting groups / governments who I found out were killing thousands of Christians because of their faith, you best believe I'd stop it and condemn them as publically as possible. That would entail a loss of political power for Warren, so he will fight against admitting he's wrong to support them as long as he can.
Posted by: Odie | December 2, 2009 9:55 AM
These types of religious people always confuse me. He seems to know that his blatant homophobia and campaign against gay rights is wrong, which is why he tries to deny it. But at the same time he seems to actually believe that gay rights are something to fight, which is why he continues to support those who do it.
Most religious people have no problem voicing whatever batshit ideas they have and hating gay rights is still kind of popular in some circles. Does Rick just think hes better off if people believe hes a religious moderate? This whole act of skipping from one stance to another just doesn't seem to work. Moderates don't like the anti-gay stuff, and believers don't like the lack of conviction. I mean he could have a career either way, but not both ways.
Posted by: random guy | December 2, 2009 9:58 AM
If he did, he couldn't return to Uganda without facing charges under the law.
I must say, I admire the way that Uganda lines up legislative support. Make opposition to a bill illegal, and the party of "NO!" would sprout epiphanies all over the place.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | December 2, 2009 10:05 AM
But Warren won't go so far as to condemn the legislation itself.
If he did, he couldn't return to Uganda without facing charges under the law.
How the law could pass under these conditions is beyond me. It's not just oppressive bigotry against gays, it's an open invitation to reprise the Salem witch trials. Not only is not reporting an act of homosexuality illegal, but I'm pretty sure being the defendant's lawyer is illegal as well.
Rick Warren should not WANT to set foot in the country with a law like that in effect.
Posted by: Odie | December 2, 2009 10:17 AM
Bullshit! His job as a pastor is to absolutely take sides on issues where there is a clear moral imperative. It's his job to stand up for justice.
This isn't some worship committee conflict about which hymn they start the service with. That's where his job to encourage people to work it out and not take sides.
Posted by: katydid13 | December 2, 2009 10:18 AM
I've got to completely disagree with you on the first part, random guy. He believes the campaign against gay rights is right, but only because God said so. He can't think of any reason or logic why God would say so, which is why he denies it, because it's an unsupportable article of faith directly contrary to Enlightenment principles of reason and equality, and he would sound like an idiot if he tried to justify it.
That's what's dangerous here - the internal battle between reason and equality versus blind faith, which all too often faith wins.
The disgusting thing here is that people will cling to blind faith to guide their actions even as the harm those actions inflict upon others is clear and evident.
Posted by: SteveWW | December 2, 2009 10:41 AM
random guy states:
It appears to me that Mr. Warren believes he's an open-minded guy on an intellectually honest journey to the truth which ended with his literalist understanding of the Bible. He defends himself as honest by posing to consider contrary arguments. He believes his Christian faith is based on well-executed human reason rather than other factors.
I would argue what's actually going on is a classic case of cognitive dissonance. On the one hand the Bible and American ideals, in Rick's mind, support treating others like we'd like to be treated and that we are each endowed rights and free will. On the other hand, his interpretation of the Bible is to condemn homosexuality. We know the 'love the sinner, hate the sin' argument is absurd when it comes to gays, and I think even Mr. Warren has come to recognize the absurdity of that position as well. Gays coming out of the closet clearly prove that sexual identification and the fierce desire by many to be leaders of a family is by no stretch of the imagination 'sin', now supported both by example and empirical evidence.
The failure here are journalists like David Gregory who don't follow up with obvious questions, "Mr. Warren, why are your religious beliefs, even if held by the majority of Americans, justification to deny gays and their families the same liberty, property, religious freedom to marry, and equal protections right you enjoy in our self-proclaimed country of free people? Mr. Warren, no one is prohibiting your right to not marry if you were gay or forcing your church to accept gay members and marry them, so what justification do you have to deny gays these same rights?"
But those obvious questions never get asked.
Posted by: Michael Heath | December 2, 2009 10:54 AM
IIRC, he did the same shit with Prop 8 in California, telling people from the pulpit to vote for it, then denying he ever took a stance on it.
The first Google result for 'rick warren prop 8' is
Rick Warren disavows support for Prop. 8, with a transcript of him stating his support for it.
Posted by: Equisetum | December 2, 2009 11:04 AM
Okay, so it's a "holocaust" if you end a pregnancy, but morally neutral if you end a homosexual.
I don't expect religious people to be particularly logical, but this is from the leading light of what passes for intelligentsia among Baptists.
Posted by: Molly, NYC | December 2, 2009 11:16 AM
"The fundamental dignity of every person, our right to be free, and the freedom to make moral choices are gifts endowed by God, our creator. However, it is not my personal calling as a pastor in America to comment or interfere in the political process of other nations."
There is so much dog whistling here, it's nuts.
The first part basically says to fellow Christ-bots, "Look, I told those gays to stop all the gay stuff, but God lets them decide for themselves if they want to sin, so I guess I can't MAKE them stop." And the second part says, "I'm not going to reject or oppose the Ugandans treating gays in this Old Testiment-inspired manner; Afterall, all the gays have to do is not sin against God. They had fair warning to stop all the gay stuff. If they get hurt after that, it's all their fault."
What an evil bastard.
Posted by: Woody Tanaka | December 2, 2009 11:27 AM
Even taking a "neutral" stance on a bill that puts innocent people to death is flat-out evil.
Posted by: Sadie Morrison | December 2, 2009 11:39 AM
I attended Saddleback Church back when the so-called "P.E.A.C.E. Program" was still a twinkle in Rick Warren's eye. His wife, Kay, had just traveled to Africa, where she "discovered" people suffering from AIDS. God had used Kay to admonish Rick and open his eyes to the fact that Saddleback Church had not been honoring God's Great Commission. So, during services one weekend, in the "heartfelt" style of Jimmy Swaggart, Rick confessed his sin to the membership and declared that Saddleback members would start ministering "unto the end of the world."
I also remember that Rick, in describing his plan, told members that, while helping people with AIDS, they would NOT be compromising their beliefs at the same time. I don't remember his exact wording, just the uncomfortable feeling I got from the way he said it. He didn't elaborate - and I stopped attending right around this time (and became an atheist, btw), so I never heard more. Now the statement seems rather prophetic, obviously.
"The future of Christianity is not Europe or North America, but Africa, Asia, and Latin America." ~Rick Warren
Posted by: Lynn | December 2, 2009 12:10 PM
Posted by: Taz | December 2, 2009 12:16 PM
The scariest part of this whole business is light it sheds on "The Family" , "The Fellowship" or C-Street, whatever you want to call them. They support "Christian"extremists in foreign countries using American money and policies. The members and supporters are a who's who of Republican Senators and Congressman. Can the "Right-wing conspiracy" hid behind religious freedom? If homosexuals are killed in Uganda, aren't they supporting state-sponsored terrorism?
I want a spotlight focused on these religious extremists.
Posted by: thebob.bob | December 2, 2009 12:44 PM
Oh, fun. Shall I point out his hypocrisy?
HANNITY: Can you talk to rogue dictators? Ahmadinejad denies the Holocaust, wants to wipe Israel off the map, is seeking nuclear weapons.
WARREN: Yes.
HANNITY: I think we need to take him out.
WARREN: Yes.
HANNITY: Am I advocating something dark, evil or something righteous?
WARREN: Well, actually, the Bible says that evil cannot be negotiated with. It has to just be stopped. And I believe…
HANNITY: By force?
WARREN: Well, if necessary. In fact, that is the legitimate role of government. The Bible says that God puts government on earth to punish evildoers. Not good-doers. Evildoers.
- Hannity and Colmes, December 3, 2008.
Posted by: ckitching | December 2, 2009 1:01 PM
The amazing -- and sickening -- thing about Warren's backing away from condemning this is that even some of America's leading homophobes -- including Scott Lively -- have condemned the legislation as being far too strong. I couldn't find the reference to the others, but Exodus Ministries is at least another group that has condemned it.
Aren't those Saddleback crickets deafening?
Posted by: Prup (aka Jim Benton) | December 2, 2009 1:04 PM
Soon after Rickypoo said that, he sent the following tweet:
"Globally last yr 146000 Christians were put to death because of their faith. No one, except Christians, said anything."
First off, bullshit. I'm just as outraged at Christians dying for being Christians as I am at gays dying for being gay.
More importantly, though, that's just hypocrisy. You can condemn overseas killing of Christians, but not overseas killing of gays? Come on. I tweeted the following in reply: "The world according to @RickWarren: Killing Christians? Bad. Killing gays? Meh, can't intervene."
Posted by: Jeff | December 2, 2009 1:39 PM
diegopig said:
Are you another reader of Sinfest? One of my recent favorites:
http://www.sinfest.net/archive_page.php?comicID=3359
Posted by: Umlud | December 2, 2009 2:35 PM
Posted by: llewelly | December 2, 2009 3:07 PM
The Bible clearly says that homosexuality is the bottom rung on the depravity scale. It's down there with incest, beastiality, and pedophilia. I detest a preacher that backs down on matters of morality. There is no place in God's army for gutless cowards.
Posted by: Mary | December 2, 2009 3:21 PM
The Bible clearly says that homosexuality is the bottom rung on the depravity scale...
More depraved than murder? Mary's statement is so batshit stupid I can't tell whether it's even serious. If it's serious, it's a disgrace to the Virgin Mary, whether or not she ever really existed.
Posted by: Raging Bee | December 2, 2009 3:49 PM
Mary @22:
Which is too bad, really, as "God's Army" is made up entirely of gutless cowards, who are too weak and feeble to withstand people who are different from themselves, too scared to venture outside their own petty bigotries, and too frightened of the real world to consider anything but their (cherry-picked and filtered by confirmation bias) Bible.
If this "army" is the best god's got, then he's fucked, big time.
Posted by: Kyorosuke | December 2, 2009 3:49 PM
"He seems to know that his blatant homophobia and campaign against gay rights is wrong, which is why he tries to deny it. But at the same time he seems to actually believe that gay rights are something to fight, which is why he continues to support those who do it."
This is nothing but a rhetoric. Warren knows he can't say this shit outright. Its all wink-wink nudge-nudge in the US because these assholes know they are the minority. In Uganda, not so much need to hide behind that rhetoric. This isn't hypocrisy, just a strategy.
And Mary, perhaps you quit your whinging and go find some gay couple and stone them if you love your god so much.
Posted by: We Are The 801 | December 2, 2009 3:56 PM
Mary, howsabout you do something more productive with your time and lick your labia?
kthxbai.
Posted by: Shawn Smith | December 2, 2009 3:56 PM
"These types of religious people always confuse me. He seems to know that his blatant homophobia and campaign against gay rights is wrong, which is why he tries to deny it. But at the same time he seems to actually believe that gay rights are something to fight, which is why he continues to support those who do it."
I would attribute that to politics.
He believes that his homophobia and campaign against gay rights is not just right, but divinely ordained and thus of the highest order of morality. He also knows, though, that were this view to become widely known in the US it would be the end of his political career - the people are, after all, fallen and living in sin. They are no judge of what is right - that's for Warran to do, because he has the guidance of God. Thus, he lies, to protect his career - he couldn't do God's work in politics if he were voted out in disgust.
Posted by: Suricou Raven | December 2, 2009 3:59 PM
Rick said he believes in: "freedom to make moral choices..."
That's all you need to know. He believes being gay (behavior)is not moral; he supports this genocide.
Instead of saying that "you without sin may cast the first stone," he stands there with a rock in his hand; or worse, just passes to the other side of the road to avoid the bleeding Victim.
Posted by: SharonB | December 2, 2009 4:11 PM
Mary,
Who gives a shit what that worthless piece of garbage, the bible, has to say about anything. Fuck off.
Posted by: Woody Tanaka | December 2, 2009 5:04 PM
I thought a government that institutes a progrom of death against a group identified by an accident of birth was already dealt with as a crime against humanity in Nuremburg?
@Mary: uh, no, it doesn't, it merely says don't lay with another man when preparing for religious ceremonies.
Posted by: Gray Gaffer | December 2, 2009 5:27 PM
random guy #4 wrote:
I don't know much about Warren's church, but my understanding is that it's one of these "megachurches" -- and that means lots of people, lots of activities, lots of wide appeal ... and that usually entails a certain amount of diversity. Thus, Saddleback may have both moderates and believers, and they're all so busy or distracted they haven't quite figured out there's a split.
So my guess is that Warren is trying to keep his own congregation happy by being 'all things to all people.' You can mask a lot of ambiguity with spiritual happy-talk; the anti-gay people are therefore convinced that pastor agrees with them, and the pro-gay folk are comfortable that the pastor is on their side. Warren is on God's side. So they know.
Believers are already used to picking and choosing from the Bible, and then insisting there is only an amazing harmony. They won't see Warren as waffling, but just use one of his stances to "clarify" the other one.
As I said, just a guess. Usually, the first people you're concerned with, are the people immediately around you.
Posted by: Sastra | December 2, 2009 5:31 PM
OT but I need some help. in discussion about GCC and lying english scientists.. someone says that there has been peer reviewed publications debunking GCC and the link with CO2.
anyone know this ? http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/press/proved_no_climate_crisis.html
"WASHINGTON (7-15-08) - Mathematical proof that there is no “climate crisis” appears today in a major, peer-reviewed paper in Physics and Society, a learned journal of the 4,600-strong American Physical Society, SPPI reports. "
was that real?
Posted by: Kevin (NYC) | December 2, 2009 8:15 PM
I'm not sure that I'd call this "hypocrisy". Rick Warren, it may be argued, is a passive-aggressive douche who is almost pathologically self-deluded about his own motives, this doesn't necessarily warrant the label "hypocrite". On the contrary, this non-move is entirely in keeping with the inconsistent public profile for which he is well known.
Posted by: Pseudonym | December 2, 2009 8:26 PM
The Bible clearly says that homosexuality is the bottom rung on the depravity scale. It's down there with incest, beastiality, and pedophilia.
Citation?
Posted by: Shay | December 2, 2009 8:40 PM
Ed, Speaking of hypocrits, you really MUST see the rest of this post on our buddy Pat's site. And, notice the post under that. It is titled: Um, is it a full moon? Thanks, James P.S. sound familiar?
Some idiotic bitch named Colleen Mckinnley, who lives out in California, did not like what I wrote about Alan Grayson and the Liberals on my Blog here. Here are the comments that she left on my Blog and the email exchanges. Check this chick out:
The insulting comments first:
Posted by: James M. Phillips | December 2, 2009 11:22 PM
Kevin (NYC): The article is real; that it was peer-reviewed is not.
From the journal:
Posted by: lharris | December 2, 2009 11:23 PM
Rick Warren twitters: People become atheists because of hurt, then seek intellectual arguments to validate their desire to live without God.
So therefore throw the victims of "hurt" into hell for eternity. What a disgusting theology.
Posted by: 386sx | December 3, 2009 12:01 AM
386sx: You just say that because you hate God. And you don't want to be held accountable for your actions. And also you had a bad relationship with your father. And...
Posted by: Modusoperandi | December 3, 2009 12:53 AM
Actually, it's his job to make the privileged in America feel better about their privilege and the under privileged feel better about serving the privileged.
Posted by: Owen | December 3, 2009 1:27 PM
It gets even better when you find out God selects his chosen people before they were even in the womb. It was decided you'd go to hell long before you did anything to deserve it.
Posted by: Owen | December 3, 2009 1:33 PM
Or, conversely, people become atheists because they've never experienced hurt, which would make them turn to God for support. I've heard that one almost as often.
In other words, people disbelieve in rational atheists because their entire worldview collapses without constant social reinforcement, then seek intellectual arguments to validate their desire to ignore atheists' actual reasons for disbelief. So far without success.
Posted by: DaveL | December 3, 2009 1:38 PM
I have no respect for religious tyrants: people are too sexy for their hate, too sexy for their lies, and too sexy for their self-righteous genocide. We must expose the religious tyrants for the evil control freaks that they are.
Posted by: Jim | December 7, 2009 10:38 PM