Another Perspective on the Rick Warren Controversy

I've been pretty ambivalent over the whole Rick Warren debacle down south. While I understand the objections being raised, I can't help but wonder - outside of the Unitarians, the Quakers, the left wing of the Methodist Church and Bishop John Spong, are there actually any mainstream Christian ministers in the United States of America who DON'T think that homosexuality is an abomination before the Lord?

Still, I haven't been real keen to wade in on the whole controversy because a) I'm not gay, b) I know almost nothing about Rick Warren, and c) frankly, I think placing that much importance on a prayer during a political event is stupid.

Happily, someone from the gay community in England has articulated a well thought-out response to all of this that saves me the trouble. He makes several excellent points:

...Warren is no James Dobson or Jerry Falwell.

He does not preach hate, even if some of his statements about gay marriage may be offensive, false, and frankly absurd.

He may not support same-sex marriage, but his position on equality for gay and lesbian people does not differ hugely from that of Obama - or indeed his opponents for the Democratic nomination, Senators Hillary Clinton and John Edwards.

He believes in providing equal protections for the LGBT community. He is also in favour of same-sex unions, just as we have in the United Kingdom.

...Let’s also remember that it was Billy Graham, who once said that all homosexuals should be castrated, who gave the invocation at President Clinton’s inauguration in 1993.

...It should also be noted that at the inauguration Rev Joseph Lowery will join Pastor Warren in offering prayers.

He is the 'dean of the Civil Rights movement', the man who founded the Southern Christian Leadership Conference with Martin Luther King Jr and a Christian who supports same-sex marriage.

Ah! So there IS one!

I'm not saying the American gay community shouldn't continue to hold Obama's feet to the fire on this. But I do agree with the author of this essay that perhaps they should focus less on a single prayer on a single day, and more on the benefits the Obama presidency is likely to have for GLBT rights and other progressive goals if they decide to work with him instead of attacking him for every slight.

(gawd, I really do sound like a Liberal, don't I?)

My New Favourite GLBT Blog

I'm not sure why I had never paid much attention to Montreal Simon before, but between Prop 8 and this story, I've been reading his blog so often lately that I thought I'd give him a bit of a shout out.

Kudos!

Olbermann on Prop 8

Twice now I've seen this guy get choked up, both in the past week. Once last Tuesday when he called the election for Obama, and again today talking about Prop 8.

You are a fine, decent man Mr. Olbermann.

The Tragic Irony of Prop 8

Many people in the U.S. and Canada had their hopes dashed and their elation deflated yesterday with the news that, in all likelihood, California's Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriage had passed.

The blow was made worse not only by the closeness of the vote (a smaller margin than Obama won by), but by the tragic irony that it happened on the same night that America elected a man whose parents would have found their own marriage deemed illegal in many states before 1967.

Worse - it was apparently the black community who voted in favour of Prop 8 in the greatest numbers and are credited with pushing it over the top.

(UPDATE: I would like to amend that last statement in light of the arguments and numbers presented in this excellent DailyKos diary. Yes, African-Americans voted in favour of Prop 8 by a high percentage, but given the relatively low number of black voters in California, that was not nearly enough to account for the final result even with the higher turnout. I apologize for perpetuating this unsubstantiated conclusion.)

This business of state-by-state rulings must stop. The U.S. needs a federal Supreme Court ruling to decide this once and for all, and with a few more progressive appointments to the bench it could happen during this new administration. My hope is that, even though Barack Obama stopped short of publicly supporting same-sex marriage during the election, he will do what Paul Martin did - put aside his personal religious misgivings and support what is right and fair for all.

I cannot think of a more fitting legacy.

"No brutality, no infamy, no degradation in all the years of southern slavery, possessed such villainious character and such atrocious qualities as the provision of the laws of Illinois, Massachusetts, and other states which allow the marriage of the negro, Jack Johnson, to a woman of Caucasian strain. [applause]. Gentleman, I offer this resolution ... that the States of the Union may have an opportunity to ratifty it. ... Intermarriage between whites and blacks is repulsive and averse to every sentiment of pure American spirit. It is abhorrent and repugnant to the very principles of Saxon government. It is subversive of social peace. It is destructive of moral supremacy, and ultimately this slavery of white women to black beasts will bring this nation a conflict as fatal as ever reddened the soil of Virginia or crimsoned the mountain paths of Pennsylvania. ... Let us uproot and exterminate now this debasing, ultra-demoralizing, un-American and inhuman leprosy"

- Rep. Seaborn Roddenbery (D), 1912

"Even political rights, like the right to vote, and nearly all other rights enumerated in the Constitution, are secondary to the inalienable human rights to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence; and to this category the right to home and marriage unquestionably belongs."

- Hannah Arendt, 1958

"Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don't think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the "wrong kind of person" for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people's religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people's civil rights.

"I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard's and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That's what Loving, and loving, are all about."

- Mildred Loving, 2007

UPDATE: And one more...

"Slavery could not be compromised in the 19th century because slavery was finally understood as a moral issue. Homosexuality cannot be compromised in the 21st century because it too is a moral issue. To the threats of parts of the Christian Church to leave if homosexual people are welcomed fully without any distinction, the body of Christ must be prepared to say, "That is your choice but we do not compromise truth to comfort you in your prejudice. The Church's doors will be open when your consciousness is finally formed and you decide to return, but we will not reject homosexuals now to avoid offending you. If the essence of our Christ is summed up in words that John's Gospel attributes to him, "I have come that they may have life and have it abundantly," then the choice is clear. Homophobia diminishes life; it does not make it more abundant. It must be ended; it cannot be tolerated even by making it kinder and gentler."

- Bishop John Spong

(H/T to Montreal Simon for the photo and the outrage)