Bryan Fischer
Tyrants of tolerance go after Obama, Rick Warren
FacebookTwitterGoogle+
By Bryan Fischer
December 18, 2008

Prediction: for the first time in American history, a speaker at a presidential inauguration may be booed unmercifully, and his remarks completely drowned out by angry jeers from an incensed crowd. We may even see shoes tossed at the inauguration platform by the hundreds. It could be a modern day lynching, only this time the victim of a vigilante mob will be proverbially strung up not because of skin color but creed.

Liberals in general and homosexual activists in particular claim to be all about tolerance, diversity, pluralism, multiculturalism and respect for differences.

Well, their commitment to those values has just been challenged by President-elect Barack Obama, and they have failed the test miserably.

Obama's criminal offense is that, in a move that ought be celebrated by all who claim that America's strength is found in its embrace of diversity, he picked an evangelical pastor who supports natural marriage and the sanctity of life to deliver the invocation at his inauguration.

Rick Warren of Saddleback Church has been tabbed for the task, despite the fact he openly supported Prop. 8, which elevated protection for one-man, one-woman marriage into the California constitution.

Said Warren during the campaign for Prop. 8, "For 5,000 years, every culture and every religion — not just Christianity — has defined marriage as a contract between men and women. There is no need to change the universal, historical definition of marriage to appease 2 percent of our population ... This is not a political issue — it is a moral issue that God has spoken clearly about."

Warren also said, in a recent interview with Beliefnet, that he is opposed to those who say that abortion should be "safe and rare."

"Don't tell me it should be rare. That's like saying on the Holocaust, 'Well, maybe we could save 20 percent of the Jewish people in Poland and Germany and get them out and we should be satisfied with that' — I'm not satisfied with that. I want the Holocaust ended."

A sample of what the press is calling "universally negative" outrage from the gay rights crowd:

Kathryn Kolbert of People for the American Way: Warren "doesn't ... deserve this position of honor." She adds that someone who has "consistent mainstream American values" rather than someone so "radical" should have been picked instead.

Note to Ms. Kolbert: Prop. 8 got the same percentage of votes in California that Obama got nationwide. I guess that means natural marriage is at least as "mainstream" as Obama is, Kathryn.

Sarah Posner of the "Nation" magazine: "Now it (Democratic outreach to evangelicals) has gone too far."

Joe Solomonese of the Human Rights Campaign to Obama: "[You] have tarnished the view that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans have a place at your table." The selection, he says, is a "genuine blow to LGBT Americans," and added, "We feel a deep level of disrespect when one of the architects and promoters of an anti-gay agenda is given the prominence and the pulpit of your historic nomination."

Bizarrely, Solomonese says that Warren has "repeated the Religious Right's big lie that supporters of equality for gay Americans are out to silence pastors." He appears blind to the obvious fact that that's exactly what he is trying to do here — put a muzzle on one of America's leading pastors, proving that it's hardly a lie at all.

Ominously, Solomonese told Politico, "There is a lot of energy and there's a lot of anger and I think people are wanting to direct it somewhere." If that sounds like a threat to you, I won't disagree.

Solomonese throws Warren's support for the sanctity of human life into the mix as another unforgivable sin that should disqualify him from public prayer.

Gay rights activist Rick Jacobs: "It's a huge mistake. (Warren's) really the wrong person to lead the president into office. His presence on the inauguration stand is a slap in the faces of the millions of GLBT voters who so enthusiastically supported him. This tone-deafness to our concerns must not be tolerated. We have just endured eight years of endless assaults on our dignity and equality from a president beholden to bigoted conservative Christians. The election was supposed to have ended that era. It appears otherwise."

Gawker.com: Warren is "yet one more in a long and historic line of American Huckster Ministers, but he's still a right-wing crank in mainstream clothing."

The Washington Blade, a homosexual newspaper: "Obama's first big mistake."

Obama's spokesman (generic use) gamely defended the choice, saying, "This is going to be the most inclusive, open, accessible inauguration in American history."

(But lest evangelicals take too much encouragement from Obama's decision, his spokesman was quick to say that "The president-elect certainly disagrees with (Warren) on [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender] issues.")

There are several lessons here.

One, the tolerance crowd has tolerance only for people who agree with them. They are blindly and hypocritically intolerant to the point of tyranny toward advocates of the Judeo-Christian tradition.

Two, homosexual activists really are out to silence the voice of evangelical Christians. They want Warren muzzled and driven off the platform, and my guess is that they will boo him off if Obama doesn't pull him off first. Unless cooler heads prevail, we may see the exercise of a heckler's veto like we have never seen before. Imagine the sound of 4 million people booing in unison, and you've got a picture of what may happen at the inauguration ceremony.

We have only seen the beginning of this saga. There is just no way leftwing activist groups are done putting pressure on Obama to repent in dust and ashes. They will be relentless until he recants, and make him pay if he doesn't.

Three, this shows the utter emptiness of homosexual advocacy of pluralism and multiculturalism. If they really believed that stuff, they would be celebrating the most inclusive inaugural ceremony in American history. But they won't because they don't. Their circle of inclusiveness is far too narrow, tiny and small to have a place in it for conservative Christians.

Four, it doesn't matter how gracious you are, if you take a stand for natural marriage you will be labeled a hatemonger and a bigot. Warren is about as gracious, compassionate, jovial and kind as you can get. Fat lot of good that has done for him with the tolerance crowd.

In the worldview of homosexual activists, "loving the sinner, hating the sin" is simply Sunday School bigotry.

This affair gives the lie to the accusation — even shared by many naοve Christians — that Christians are hated on this issue because we are condemning and hateful. Warren is neither, and look what they're doing to him.

We as Christians certainly should continue to be gracious, open-hearted and courteous to all, including homosexual activists. I have always treated them with kindness and friendliness, and I have a fondness and affection for many of them I've met. But it is foolish to think this will cause them to like us in return. Disagreement is not hatred — but try telling that to them.

© Bryan Fischer

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)

Click to enlarge

Bryan Fischer

Bryan Fischer is the host of the daily 'Focal Point' radio talk program on AFR Talk, a division of the American Family Association. 'Focal Point' airs live from 1-3 pm Central Time, and is also simulcast on the AFA Channel, which can be seen on the Sky Angel network.

Subscribe

Receive future articles by Bryan Fischer: Click here

More by this author