Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Austin Hill :: Townhall.com Columnist
Defending Rick Warren Amid The Donuts
by Austin Hill
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Breaking News: Pastor Rick Warren may be about to receive a bunch of gift cards.

The press release just arrived in my inbox this weekend. A gay marriage advocacy group, livid over Warren’s support of Proposition 8 in California, and even more livid over Warren’s selection to provide the invocation at President-elect Obama’s inauguration, has embarked on a campaign to send Dunkin Donuts gift cards to the Pastor.

Why donuts? Because in a recent interview where he was questioned about being afraid of homosexuals, Warren made it clear that he is not afraid of homosexuals, that he has always remained open to dialog with homosexuals, and that he treats them with the respect that they are due. He also stated that “when the protesters came (presumably he meant that they came to his church facility), we served them water and donuts…”

So the plan is to now “protest” Rick Warren by returning the favor of donuts. And at Dunkin Donuts one can apparently customize a gift card with personal photos, so the objective is for Warren to receive gift cards baring the images of gay and lesbian couples and families. Now, stimulating the economy via the donut sector is fine by me. However, things could get ugly if certain other activist groups try to make good on their plans to hit Warren in the face with donuts when he bows to pray at the inauguration (as has been discussed on certain blog sites).

But while Warren is being attacked by liberal America because he thinks marriage is a distinct relationship between one man and one woman, he has also been criticized by many moderate and conservative Americans because of his willingness to pray at Obama’s inauguration.

And let me be clear. I’ve never met Rick Warren, and I don’t belong to his church. Earlier this decade I interviewed him a few times about the release of his wildly popular book “The Purpose Driven Life,” and he’s a great interview guest. He’s energetic, well informed, witty, substantive. In many ways he’s a media host’s ideal guest - - and that’s a compliment.

But I was disheartened by the harsh criticism of Warren this past week, from listeners of my talk show at Washington, DC’s 630 WMAL. Even among callers to the show who identified themselves as “socially conservative,” the critique of Warren was often very negative. The rationale behind this criticism generally went like this: A) The professed social policy views of Obama and Warren are incompatible with each other; B) By agreeing to pray at Obama’s inauguration, Warren is necessarily endorsing Obama and his views.; and therefore C) Warren’s decision to participate in the inauguration is motivated by his own hypocrisy and self-interest.

Now if one-hundred percent agreement on policy issues is the requirement for a clergyman to pray at a President’s inauguration, it’s difficult to imagine how any religious leader could in good conscience participate in any inauguration. And if Warren is a self-interested hypocrite in this situation, then we’d probably have to say the same thing of Reverend Billy Graham, for having befriended, met with, and prayed with about a half-century’s worth of American Presidents.

And a Billy Graham analogy fits pretty well, here. Even if American media views Evangelical Christianity only through the lenses of political and policy activism, Warren has never allowed himself to be positioned as a political or policy activist. Like Graham, Warren has always positioned himself as a religious leader who, while remaining devout in his distinctly Evangelical theological positions, is nonetheless accessible to the broader culture, and willing to dialog with others who are not in total agreement with him.

This willingness to dialog has often resulted in Warren merely asking provocative questions, rather than lecturing. Those of us who watched got a good view of this, during last fall‘s “candidate’s forum” event that he hosted with Barack Obama and John McCain. The dialog between Warren and the two presidential contenders ended up being some of the most intelligent discussion of the entire campaign cycle - - and who else was going to have the insight to ask a would-be President “what has been your greatest moral failure?”

Six months ago, many Americans (myself included) were disgusted with what we learned of Obama’s Pastor from Chicago, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. And recently it was disclosed that, because of his failing health, Billy Graham will no longer be paying visits to the White House.

Rick Warrren may be emerging in to a role in the life of President Obama that Wright used to play, and that Graham can no longer play. In short, Warren may be America’s next “Pastor to the Presidents” - - and that’s not a bad thing.

After reading this, I’m sure there will be many who want to throw something worse than donuts at me. But now is no time to detract from a good person’s possible influence in the White House.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Austin Hill is a Talk Show Host At Boise, Idaho's 580 KIDO Radio, and a frequent Guest Host on the Fox Newstalk Radio Network. He is the Author of "White House Confidential: The Little Book Of Weird Presidential History," And Co-Author of the forthcoming title "The Virtues Of Capitalism: A Moral Case For Free Markets" (Northfield/Moody Press, 2010).
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Mac
I am rather new here and didn't know you are Catholic. That explains why we have been talking past each other. :-) I'm holding the standard view of the Protestant Reformers on the law of God.

Pope benedict's Message....
Unless we "listen to the language of creation", we end up with "destruction of the work of God." The Pope suggested that the gender ideology which seeks to redefine the sexes to allow for homosexuality, transgenderism and such things are examples of mankind separating himself "from creation and the Creator." With such attempts to decide for himself, mankind "lives against the truth and the Spirit of the Creator."

Andrea...here is my point.
Catholics believe through sacred oral tradition(passed from Christ to the apostles (prior to the bible), Scared Scripture and the teaching Magesterium, that the Old testament was a time where God's punishment was manifest in the worldy sphere more so than today. Prior to Christ's sacrifice, no one could be saved. God's vengeance, so to speak, is explicit throughout the old testament books. Christ repudiated what he saw as hypocracy in some of the ancient jewish laws and customs. He saved the prostitute from stoning, which he obviously thought was to harsh a punishmnet, consider also the hypocracy of those sinners sitting in judgement.
That is not to say that there is not punishment under God's laws, of course there is. "...judge not lest ye be judged." Christ however fulfilled the old tetament through his sacrifice, offering mercy and compassion....salvation. His admonition to the prostitute was..."go and sin no more." Obviously had the prostitute continued in her lifestyle without contrition and an effeort to change, she would face eternal punishment. I think that we are splitting hairs here. I agree that God's laws remain throughout the old and new testament. With Christ' sacrifice however emphasis is now on judgement in the next life as opposed to the current.

Mac
Thanks for your reply. This is probably not the proper venue to pursue a discussion of the continuing validity of the Old Testament moral case laws, but I'll just make one more point to clarify. I was reacting to these statements you made: "Obviously Christ disagreed with the severity of the sentence..." and "Before which God's punishmnet was more evident in the wordly sphere." These remarks seem to imply (forgive me if I am misreading you) that the God of the O.T. was harsh and now that Christ has come, we have a gentler, kinder God. But that is not true; God always has been and always will be just AND loving. (Heb. 13:8) The moral case laws and their penalties (e.g., Lev. 18) flesh out or apply the Ten Commandments. How do we know what sexual immorality is and what to do about it, for instance, unless we look at the Old Testament?

Andrea...
Perhaps you misunderstood my post. I agree that the laws remain. Ergo, I mentioned the Ten Commandments handed by God directly to Moses...
The point that I was attempting to make was for those who lack context when reading selective verses of scripture.
The old tetsment was before the Sacrife and redemption of man. Before which God's punishmnet was more evident in the wordly sphere. Many read the old testament incorrectly(especially athiests and secularists)in an attempt to make a moral equivelance to fundamentalist Islam. I was simply pointing out the difference. Christ did repudiate the hypocracy of some of the ancient jewish customs and laws(that conflicted with God's laws).
Christianity, since Christ's sacrifice, offers salvation to all wom accept it. Yes, that requires following the teachings and precepts handed to us from God.

Barney Frank

Barney Frank has come out in opposition of Rick Warren speaking at the inaugural. Barney says he finds Rick Warren condemnation of Gay marriage offensive.

Barney Frank was silent about Rev. Jerimiah Wright's words condemming America.

Clearly Barney Frank is more concerned about being Gay than being an American.

The Man Of A Thousand Careers,All Fraud.
Smokey Bear,Forest Ranger....There must be some pharmaceutical concoction that will help you with your Bush Derangement Syndrome. Maybe it will help you mind your own business and not butt in where you are not welcome.

But post away. See if you can beat the 75 you posted over the weekend when the moderators let you slide. Your fairy tales are good for our comic relief.

You 'c'hristians
Are embarrasing me with your inept lack of knowledge or understanding of Holy Scripture. Please do yourselves a favor and shut your pie holes until you can look in a mirror and that hypocritical fraud disappears. Out of your mouths you condemn yourselves (that's in Scripture by the way).

As for Warren - I've been to his church many times, was a member, got briefly involved with the Purpose Driven ATM machine on the biz side and spent time with the church insiders (not so much Rick). This brick-a-brack is nonsense - you are both worng about Rick....and both right. That's what he does and does well.

As for Rick as always I point out "Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? And what fellowship can light have with darkness?

Dollars To Donuts
Who cares who speaks at the coronation? Certainly not moi. I will not be watching it,anyway.

The Clinton / Obama Administration's coronation is just a formality anyway. The damage is already done.

Prayerfully considered!
I have no problem with Mr Warren giving the invocation. He is a sort of pop culture figure in the Church who likes camera-face time. Good for him. But I fear he's being used by the Obama-ites, a tool to portray their messiah as more centrist than he actually is. When the excitement of his 'historic' election wears down a little he will emerge as the Marxist that he is. A little appeasement for the masses goes a long way! He's sort of rubbing it in our noses til he can squeak in the real OBAMA! and if he needs to use Mr Warren so be it!

Obama is phony, Warren not much better.
Obama knows that Warren is viewed as being divisive among his(obama) supporters.
Which demonstrates Obama's arrogance and disrespect for some of those who voted for him.

As for Warren,why does he suddenly supports a person who values he does not agree with? It's all about ego and fame. They deserve each other.

One good thing about President Bush,is when it came to public prayer, he was respectful to Americans. He was inclusive of the big three; Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Leave it to the phony uniter-Obama to turn an inauguration into a divisive event.

Obama is definitely a one term president, which is good news to the Republicans.

WWJD?
Warren would be a hypocrite if he did not accept. What an opportunity to serve and share the love of Christ.

Not sure...
I've gone back & forth on this one. I initially thought that Warren should have told the big O to take a flying leap, but if he actually gets up there and drops some sort of good bombshell in his invocation it will be OK with me. However, I doubt this will happen since I'm sure whatever he plans to say will have to be sanctioned by O and his scuzzball peeps.

O is playing games (as always) by picking Warren. Just as he's playing games by calling Republicans and telling them he wants to work with them...yeah, right. He is pure evil.

Mac
Only the civil laws that were unique to the nation of Israel (e.g., borders, genealogies)and the ceremonial laws are done away with. The moral law, which is summarized in the Ten Commandments and is a reflection of God's nature and character, binds all men in all ages. The moral case laws and their penalties are applications of the Ten Commandments and therefore are still valid.

The believers in the Old Testament were saved in the same way as we are...by trusting in Christ's perfect atonement. The only difference is that they looked ahead to His coming and we look back to His completed work.

Matthew and Taft
I have had the opportunity to attend some of Rick Warren's services and he is a minister who constantly points to Christ as the way...not a politico nor a self-serving ego.

If you don't believe in Jesus then you don't understand Jesus. Start reading the Bible with a prayer and an open heart and let the transformation begin.

Rick doesn't preach hatred nor condemnation...but he does preach personal morality and judgment about our own behavior.

It's not about how we are born rather about what we DO! So what about Sodom do you not understand?

Born Gay? NOT!
There is some interesting information on the web if you look. Here is a scientific article postulating how homosexuality might develop. It also demonstrates how and why a homosexual might come to believe he was born that way.

http://www.narth.com/docs/pieces.html

Here are some other links to investigate for more information about the treatment of homosexuality.

http://www.narth.com/menus/born.html

I got tickets to the Inaugural,
but I can't go. Anybody want to buy 'em?

And the beat goes on
Some leftist types, "All these postings by you are preposterous. Only a idiot would advocate pedophilia as a consequence of accepting homosexuality between consenting adults. The two are only related in the minds of the psycho-religious fanatics that post on this forum."

Since I never "advocated" pedophilia in any fashion, especially as a "consequence of accepting homosexuality," I guess I'm not an idiot.

Now, FOR THE THIRD TIME:

I have been raising this question for years now on this board and others, and I have never had a single liberal have the guts to even post anonymously, "Doc, I don't care what the APA or the AMA or Hollywood or even Oprah says, pedophilia is ALWAYS wrong and I will fight it, even if I get labelled a hater and bigot just like I've been labeling all conservatives for not buying the "gay" agenda."

Would some leftists care to be the first?

Andrea...there is a difference.
The New testament fulfills the old. Christ's sacrifice paid the debt for original sin and offers the gift of salvation to all whom accept him as savior....and keep his laws.
Much of the old testament is a narrative through the prism of ancient jewish law and tradition. Christ repudiated what he saw as hypocracy. An example is the Prostitute where he prevented her stoning by admonishing the crowd: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone..."
Obviously Christ disagreed with the severity of the sentence, and the hypocracy of those sinners sitting in judgement. He in fact forgave the woman and admonished her to repent and go and sin no more.
Many secularists twist the meaning here procaliming that God no longer judges us for our actions. That is a mistake, as the laws remain the same. The ten commandments given directly by God to Moses, as well as the teachings in Scripture. The penalty for refusing to repent and change is the sacrifice of the gift of salvation. That message is continuous in both the old and new testament.

Ranger 29....
Unless you believe in revisionist history, you would admit that we are a nation founded on Judeo-Christian moral principals. Read the writings and quotations of the founders. "America's God and Country, a book of Quotations... by Federer.
Like it or not, the bible was a base reference for our Democratic republic and laws.
I am old enough to remember when prayer and bible study was common practice even in public schools. The so-called secular progressives have, in the last 40 odd years, with the help of the Communist founded ACLU worked overtime to subvert our founding principals.
To answer your question: yes, i look to the bible and my Church for guidance in this increasingly debased culture.

America's Pastor
I keep hearing this nonsense that Rick Warren is America's Pastor. We here all the time too where the "American People" want this, they want that, and so the nonsense goes on. Copping a phrase from Obama, and now being adopted by the pundits and other assorted Obamer admirers "Let me be clear": in the first place, politicians don't have a clue or know what I want and as an American citizen, Rick Warren sure as he!! is not my Pastor. I see him as just another Billy Graham type suck up to Presidents and other assorted politicians, and apparently is just one more self-appointed (only in his mind) spokesman for God. Better had Obama chose Rev. Wright, Jesse Jackson, Father Phleger, as these people are just as much a Christian as is Rick Warren.

Obama needs the prayers of Pastor Warren
At the moment, 84% of (conservatives) at Townhall believe that Rick Warren should give the invocation. That is a significant number. Even if such a majority are not heard anywhere near as loud as the vocal minority who feel that Rick Warren is selling out, it speaks volumes that most conservatives prefer that their values are promoted to those who are most in need of hearing them.

Compared to the Wrights and the Pfleggers that President-elect Obama has spent his adult life with, the values of Pastor Warren are both mainstream American and authentically Christian. If Obama is actually unformed as Proessor Shelby Steele believes him to be, and is pretty much the empty suit that many conservative pundits criticized him as being, then we can only hope that some of the valeus of a Rick Warrent will begin to be cultivated in the new president.

Verse 32
says: "who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things ARE WORTHY OF DEATH..."

Jesus said: "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled [in other words, until He comes back]." (Mt. 5:17-18)

Paul says: "For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; *for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil*." (Romans 13:3-4)

As you say, this is not a Christian commonwealth. If it were, *on the testimony of two or three witnesses*, not only practicing homosexuals but also adulterers, idolators, rapists, those who practice bestiality and those guilty of incest as well as all murderers would be put to death. Not my opinion, God's Word.

Re:Can't read comments
Regarding comments-can't read them. Not visible

Ranger
Romans 1:32. If you have a N.T. read from verse 24 on.

There is no discontinuity between the Old and New Testaments. God doesn't change.

Since you asked Ranger
Every sin merits eternal punishment in hell, but the seriousness of an individual sin can be ascertained by the penalty that God attached to it. Homosexual practice is a death penalty offense in the Bible. Lying is not.

As far as Warren and Obama...two peas in a pod. Both are looking out for their futures in the limelight.

I'm okay, you're okay.
Don't know so much about Pastor Warren. So, really can't say that I am disappointed in him. I thought that he did a nice job with the Saddleback interviews.

As Warren is, I am pro-life, and while I won't be watching the Inaugural, I suppose that I would rather have a Christian pastor presiding at such an event, rather than the likes of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton or Jeremiah Wright. It doesn’t seem that Pastor Warren has attempted to amend or compromise any of the views that would make him unpopular with the radical left. In fact, I think he’s taken the opportunity to correctly address and instruct on the issues

If anything, I'm amused that he is so reviled by the left, while on the matter of homosexual marriage he is in agreement with Lord Barack. Curious, that homosexual activists are so ravenously opposed to Warren, but they don't have a problem with their own guy.

Well, okay,...maybe NOT that curious.

Gestell
"I'd like to think Obama is capable of such Machiavellianism. Let's see."

You just now figuring that out? Where've you been?

Michael...context is everything.
In the old testament God destroyed Sodom and Gamorah because of the vile perversions(open homosexuality for one) that had become common place. He destroyed the world via a flood. The old testsment outlined the fate of fallen man since his rebellion in the garden of Eden, which brought with it as a penalty death and suffering...through the exercise of free will of our first parents. 15 Samuel does not condone rape, to the contrary, it speaks to the consequences and responsibilty of the perpetrator of such an act. He must marry her and care for her and the child for the rest of his life. Where in God's name do you read into that verse a condonement of Rape?
Evil was reviled by God of the old tetstament(as it is bt Christ)and was dealt with severely.
Christ's sacrifice on the cross paid for those original sins and offered salvation and mercy to those seeking forgiveness and acceptance of God's laws. The penalty for refusing that offer is far greater than the penalties of physical death...it is death of the soul.

NAMBLA would disagree with your assesment on pedophilia. A group that shared a link on the GLAAD web site. Most are homosexuals attracted to YOUNG boys...same sex. Sexual orientation can be influenced in young people via environmental factors. A prime example is the mass media glorification and "normalization" of the "gay culture" whereby encouraging impressionable young people to experiment.

Take away the scarlet letter and it becomes just an alternative choice. That is where we are today. Make drug use attractive via movies and music and more will experiment....

Rudolf
Do you confuse objection to public displays of obscenity with being anti-homosexual, (Gay)?

Things like this do not belong on public display.
http://www.urbanconservative.com/2007/02/24/what-does-the-a clu-nambla-and-child-porn-have-in-common/

Forcing a church to desecrate the sacred rites of marriage for the benefit of a few homosexual extroverts would violate separation of church & State anyway.
Government has no authority to legislate the rites of any church.

Gays already have the right to join in Civil Union.

Merry Christmas Everyone and Goodnight

O holy night, the stars are brightly shining;
It is the night of the dear Savior’s birth!
Long lay the world in sin and error pining,
Till He appeared and the soul felt its worth.
A thrill of hope, the weary soul rejoices,
For yonder breaks a new and glorious morn.

Fall on your knees, O hear the angel voices!
O night divine, O night when Christ was born!
O night, O holy night, O night divine!

Led by the light of faith serenely beaming,
With glowing hearts by His cradle we stand.
So led by light of a star sweetly gleaming,
Here came the wise men from Orient land.
The King of kings lay thus in lowly manger,
In all our trials born to be our friend!

Fall on your knees, O hear the angel voices!
O night divine, O night when Christ was born!
O night, O holy night, O night divine!

Truly He taught us to love one another;
His law is love and His Gospel is peace.
Chains shall He break for the slave is our brother
And in His Name all oppression shall cease.
Sweet hymns of joy in grateful chorus raise we,
Let all within us praise His holy Name!

The purpose driven anti-homosexuality.
This Warren fellow is just another typical example of the nutty religious right. It is too bad that he will talk abut God at the inauguration, but on the other hand, perhaps God will just not tune in.

Michael do you agree

Michael do you agree with Time magazine?

Time Magazine Declares Obama a Bigot

"...Obama has proved himself repeatedly to be a very tolerant, very rational-sounding sort of bigot.

He is far too careful and measured a man to say anything about body parts fitting together or marriage being reserved for the nonpedophilic, but all the same, he opposes equality for gay people when it comes to the basic recognition of their relationships..."

Time Magazine
By John Cloud Thursday, Dec. 18, 200

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1867664,00 .html

God, Rape, and Genocide
God condones rape in certain situations...

Deuteronomy 22:28-29

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

God advocates genocide and has told people to kill babies in the past...

1st Samuel

15:3 "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and donkey."

@ Doc Liberty.
All these postings by you are preposterous. Only a idiot would advocate pedophilia as a consequence of accepting homosexuality between consenting adults. The two are only related in the minds of the psycho-religious fanatics that post on this forum.

daft: Shoooo! You're really annoying!
.

Gestell

I read that Obama may actually just like the guy, who all tell, is a very friendly guy. He especially like the work and concern Warren has shown for the plight of Africa.

Liberal covert ops
How about a liberal covert ops scenario? Obama would like to be able to make at least some inroads among evangelicals. Indeed, some actually voted for him in November. By inviting Warren, Obama may be trying to (a) generate some increased evangelical support (among those evangelicals who are not genuinely conservative, of course) and/or (b) manuver Warren so he will become more 'establishment.' You might recall that lots of Billy Graham's really conservative evangelicalism became muted over the years of his public role as 'pastor to the Presidents.' Warren would look like a real ingrate if he did the Inauguration and then next day turned on Obama with moral denunciation of one sort or another.

I'd like to think Obama is capable of such Machiavellianism. Let's see.

daft: You're a bothersome gnat! Shooo
.

This is truly rich! :-)

The longest-serving openly gay member of Congress. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., said it was a mistake for President-elect Barack Obama to invite the Rev. Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at his inauguration.

Poor Bawney Fwanks doesn't seem to realize that HE has been offensive for as long as he's been in Congress, and being gay isn't even on the list of why he's offensive.

And ol' Bozo is really batting zero, isn't he?

:-)



Anne

Still a bit hysterical, I see. Have you tried yoga?

daft: As usual, you missed the point!

I would have thought by now, even YOU would have figured out that you're not smart enough to keep up with most Conservatives...

And yet, you continue to make the effort to log onto TH and make a complete fool of yourself.


Anne

Throw that book in the fire. Eugenics is practically nazism. This Goddard guy even wrote that

"Goddard established an intelligence testing program on Ellis Island in 1913. This program has been misreported as rejecting an estimated 80% of immigrants as "feeble-minded", including 83% of Jews, .."

Matthew/WV: You really are an angry,

foul, nasty little person, aren't you?

Hmmmm, WV? You aren't part of the Kallikak family, are you?

Henry H. Goddard, psychologist and eugenicist, did a whole study on the heredity of feeble-mindedness based on the Kallikak family.

Perhaps you're famous.


jim-CA: I was just going to IGNORE that

preposterous post, but I couldn't let something that stupid and outrageous go without being challenged.....

You posted....

"I believe God did make one mistake during Creation. After he created Adam, God looked at Adam and said, 'Blah!'"

God created Adam in His own image! Therefore, God would NOT look at that creation as a mistake, much less look at Adam and say "Blah."

Genesis 1:26-28 ESV Bible.

26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”



Typical of your misguided and ill informed posts.

thumpers at it again
I see the Bible Thumpers are out in force! Nothing new with how the social conservatives attack others by quoting scriptures. What an affective way to argue -by quoting lines from a very old book!

The bible of course is important to Christians. I study what Jesus says and uses that to guide my decisions and my morals. I use it to form my worldview.

But I would never pervert the teachings of Jesus to attack others like most of you do.

I also would not use it to justify prejudices against minority groups.

This Christmas you rabid bible thumpers could take the time for a refresher course and go back to your "word" and study what it truly means to be a "Christian".

Because you vile hateful types do not exemplify Christ in any shape or form.


And God yelled, “Perfection!”

Ranger29 Location: TX
Reply # 92
Date: Dec 21, 2008 - 3:44 PM EST
Subject: "Doc Liberty" why do you think all
well almost all of the females on Fox are "blonded" and wear short skirts,
==========

I love to see the pretty ladies, and I was married to the most beautiful for nearly 55 years.

There ain’t nothing that a man can do, that a beautiful lady can’t do better.

I believe God did make one mistake during Creation. After he created Adam, God looked at Adam and said, “Blah!”

But he corrected that mistakea little later: “And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, … “

And God looked at what he had done and yelled, “Perfection!”



Anne
I know Wobbie for what he is,that statement about not caring which way the country goes just so long as we go as a country pretty much says it all and Wobbie the beautiful thing about the truth is no matter whether man thinks other wise or says differently it will never be otherwise---am I scorching that brain cell of yours,hope so then maybe you can think for yourself.

Warren should have...
... simply said that it's no more possible to be afraid of "homosexuals" than it is to be afraid of unicorns, and for the same reason -- neither exist. As long as conservatives are willing to start their debates on "gays" by assuming that there is indeed any such discrete, distinct identity, they give away half the argument from the get go.

Anne
Each week is a repeat of the one before it. The "Man Of A Thousand Careers",all fake,goes from one thread to another,posting his little black heart out,knowing the moderators will let him slide until Monday mornibg.

Such a sad sight to see. To go where he is not wanted to try to impress folks who see him as an arrogant buffoon. He seems to think he has a calling. He is a legend in his own mind.

How many times has he repeated crowing about 'the vote in S.D.on abortion'? Every day on several columns,he must mention it. Boring,boring boring.

Ranger29
Have a good Christmas party.

We need all the factions of the GOP to come to an understanding. While we can't win without you moderates, it is certain that you can't win (as republicans anyway, perhaps as democrats) without the right wing, both the fiscal and social right wing. You raises GA as an object lesson. Indeed it is. If you lose the social conservatives, which drive the support in the South, you lose the South. And then what does the GOP have?

We surely don't need any purges, but we need to understand each other a little better. Us social and religious conservatives are better than you think at separating doctrine and politics. It gets tiresome hearing the same democrat/liberal invective, misrepresentation, and suspicion from corners of our own party. I'm sure you don't like being called a liberal or worse because you don't come to the same conclusions on the proper mix of morality and legality.

We've also got a lot of work to do on fiscal policy. We should all remind ourselves that the last 8 years, and possibly more, have not been examples of conservative fiscal governance. So while we should be discarding our recent practices, we should be pulling conservatism back out the the bottom drawer, dusting it off, and seeing what alterations to policy is necessary to make it fit before we put it in the goodwill pile.

Bye for now as well-- church Christmas program.

Jim in CA Reply # 75
YOU wrote:
Here is a recent news announcement about BamBam’s Parade.

“We are extremely pleased to announce that the Lesbian and Gay Band Association will be included as a marching contingent in the Inaugural Parade.”
************************************************
If this is true then Rick Warren has no business
being there and especially attempting to pray to our Holy Father!
He would lose what little credibility he has left with me if he does.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Now about this hate crime business. If I had a family of small children and was there and saw a bunch of these "perverts" making out rubbing on each other during a Parade I would be mad as hell! That is what I call HATE exposing themselves and their perversion to little children.
Like I wrote earlier no way can we please them.

Ranger29
I am well acquainted with margin of error. The problem is that you present no evidence (numbers) of a gradual slide, much less anything that shows this to be from Palin. If you don't like Rasmussen, you can look at the RCP Poll Average and see the exact same pattern. Significant drop for McCain and surge for Obama starting with 9/15 and thru the finalization of the bailout, at which time Palin was in hiding. Nothing going on with Palin, just bailout and McCain bumbling. If 40% is the highwater mark, then that is even more proof that it was the moderates that fled at that time because that is RCP Average shows him dropping to. So you are blaming Palin for keeping McCain from winning back the votes he himself lost?

As for supporting the bailout for fear of the right wing, that's plain crazy. It was one of the rare times you saw the far left and the far right voting together against the bailout. McCain's support of the bailout assuredly infuriated the right wing-- I know because it infuriated me.

About the only thing I can't think that squares your perception to reality is this: Once the moderates decided McCain wasn't any better than Obama, and perhaps worse, on the financial crisis and economics in general, they saw nothing in Palin that enticed them to stay.

You might note that Chambliss in GA went to a runoff--he voted for the bailout and it was a big feature of the attack ads against him (even though it was the democrats the pushed it through).

Evangelical?

How about you and all journalist pc & conservative doing a word study on Evangelical!
One can not be a Christian and not believe the word of God! Both the Old and New Testaments.
If you are then a Christian you are an Evangelist.
The Catholics, Roman, Greek, Russian and Coptic believe the word of God. The are evangelical also.
Why did they come to the New World? To convert the native Indians.
Tired of this word evangelical made to sound like they are crazy people behind it.
Talk about twisted, this effort on behalf of the American people pleasing the homosexual community is not feasible. The more they are giving the more they demand.
This perversion is a CHOICE! Their is nothing New about it. This perversion was mentioned numerous times in both the old and new Testaments.
The only thing new is we have allowed the homosexuals to take command of to too many ideas and traditions.
Glad to hear that Rick Warren has professional counselors in his organization to try to help these people. Telling them the truth would be helpful also.
Only regret that the President Elect does not take advantage of some counseling. Read of three affairs he had with men.
The question should be: 'What Man of God" wishes to be a party to the downfall of America by helping out with inauguration come January?


Homosexual Marriage
I submit reasonable scholarship must conclude Christian faith cannot advocate homosexual marriage. The entire Bible, in speaking of the character, identity, and purpose of God, continuously addresses the issue of homosexual behavior. The scriptures say that in addition to creating all things, God created a single institution, which was marriage between a man and woman as the earthy manifestation of the oneness relationship He seeks with all human beings.

Throughout the Bible He is spoken of as masculine, and all humans become feminine in relation to Him: become the Bride of Christ. To restore relationship lost in Eden, God sent Christ to die for all human sins, but people must repent of, reject all our sins. To pursue fornication, adultery, or homosexual behavior is to reject His identity and His character, and therefore repudiate His gift of salvation.

In Him absolute righteousness and absolute love achieves perfect justice. The scriptures provide no prescription for this problem, but pose a moral paradox requiring one to come before Him. His solution compromises neither His righteousness, nor His unconditional love in guiding each person who struggles through a fallen world, and lives with a fallen nature.

In advocating homosexual marriage, Christian leaders must abandon sound scholarship, and adjust and select scriptures to fabricate a god of their own design. The result is comforting, popular, and easily controlled. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob remains timeless, all knowing, all powerful; terrible, unconditionally loving, and awaits humanity’s plea to Him.


Rick Has a Chance
Will Rick Warren pray in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ or just a generic lord or god?

Will Rick Warren pray that the new administration shows mercy to the unborn children scheduled for abortion at the very moment he prays?

If not, then shame on Rick Warren.

Ranger29
Despite what you say about America not liking the right wing, the only success the GOP had on election day was with purely right wing social issues, i.e. Prop 8 in CA and a few similar initiatives in other states. Just the kind you suggest the GOP jettison. Prop 8 passed by cutting heavily into otherwise democrat voters, especially blacks and hispanics. Perhaps that is what is behind Obama's invite of Warren?

Danny: ranger-IQ29 hasn't posted a

cognitive, intelligent, responsible thought or notion in... well..... EVER!

He lives a fantasy life, and it's doubtful that he can dress and feed himself.


Danny: ranger-IQ29 hasn't posted a

cognitive, intelligent, responsible thought or notion in... well..... EVER!

He lives a fantasy life, and it's doubtful that he can dress and feed himself.


Ranger29--misdiagnosis
Looking at the timeline and Rasmussen daily tracking:
From Obama clinching the nom in early June he ran 4-7 points ahead of McCain to mid-July when McCain pulled even. From then, Obama was consistently ahead 1-3 pts until the dem convention in late Aug when he got a bounce 3-5 pts. Palin was announced at that time. After the convention in early Sept, McCain erased Obama's lead with a bounce of his own and opened up a 3pt lead by 9/15 (even after Palin's 9/11 interview w Gibson). On 9/15, the financial indices posted their largest drop since 9/11/2001 as Lehman Bros declared bankruptcy, AIG dropped 60% that day and the feds took over Freddie and Fannie. Work on a bailout began then and as it was discussed, McCain's lead dwindled and Obama went ahead by 1pt by 9/19 when the bailout was officially proposed. McCain suspends his campaign 9/24 to work on the bailout. He unsuspends and goes through with the debate after all, and Obama immediately opens a 3-5pt lead. The bailout fails 9/29 and Obama opens a 5-6pt lead. They do it again and it passes 10/3 and Obama opens 7-8pt lead.

Once Palin got back on the trail (and "goes rogue") in mid-Oct, Obama's lead is whittled back down to 3-6pts and stays there for the duration.

The diagnosis is pretty clear. As the issue became the financial crisis almost immediately after the GOP convention, McCain's bumbling and obvious weakness capped off with the bailout debacle, it was the McCain effect that set in and the election was lost at that point. The middle was gone. Palin's aggressive campaigning (as well as McCain's gift from Joe the plumber) helped make it closer, but nothing was going to help.

Ranger29, the problem was mostly McCain. he was the maverick at the top of the ticket and was supposed to bring in the independents and moderates. Palin was supposed to solidify the social conservatives. Palin delivered, McCain didn't.

Michael
Michael types, "Doc Liberty-- you are confusing sexual orientation with sexual preference."

False. I confuse nothing; the confusion is being created by the pedophiles.

"Pedophilia is a paraphilia-- basically a fetish for raping children. Pedophiles can be hetero, homo,or bi."

And there are "sexologists" (e.g. Charles Moser) arguing even today for the removal of "paraphilias" from the DSM. What will you do when he and those who think like him succeed?

"Psychologist and Psychiatrists will never advocate for pedophilia because it inherently invovles rape and victimization. They harm, rape, and sometimes kill their child victims. Even if the child lives their lives will be forever tarnished."

A generation ago no one would believe that Psychologists and Psychiatrists would ever advocate for "gayness," either.

I REPEAT:

I have been raising this question for years now on this board and others, and I have never had a single liberal have the guts to even post anonymously, "Doc, I don't care what the APA or the AMA or Hollywood or even Oprah says, pedophilia is ALWAYS wrong and I will fight it, even if I get labelled a hater and bigot just like I've been labeling all conservatives for bot buying the "gay" agenda."

Would some leftists care to be the first?


The BIg O's Choice
merely reflects a politician who is trying to win points with conservatives,only a complete fawning idiot can't see that.O stands for nothing and therefore is willing to try and kiss everyone's a** thinking by doing so it will make him look like all things to all people.For some one who says he reads Lincoln he sure ignored one of his most famous quotes...and everyone knows how they feel about a brown noser fellow employee.
And Wobbie you don't care which direction the country moves as long as we do it as a country? What a completely scary statement--can you say "useful idiot."

IS it 8AM on Monday yet?? That's when



ALL of ranger-IQ29's posts get PULLED from ALL the threads he's bogged down with his senseless, inane, incessant, interminable, blather!!!!




I'll tell you what ... IF
Rick Warren says at the invocation that Abortion is wrong ...

and homosexuality is a sin ..

then and only then will I ...

beleive that he is not just another Christain leader trying to hob-nob with politicians for his own political and professional gain ...

One difference is that Billy Graham did not have an overt political agenda like Rick Warren does ...

Graham always preached the gospel of Salvation through Jesus Christ...

He did not, as I bleleive Rick Warren is doing, look for political allies in high places to help him fulfill his politcal goals...

The question becomes then ... Who is USING who?

As a Christian, I am tired of Christian leaders and this includes the Catholic Church by the way, who play ball with Government...

I want a Christian leader who will stand up to the Government .. we need LEADERS not DEAL MAKERS in the pulpit.

Doc Liberty
Doc Liberty-- you are confusing sexual orientation with sexual preference.

Sexual Orientation is innate and has to do with the sex you are attracted to-- male, female, both, or none.

It has nothing to do with age, species, relation etc.

Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Bisexuality, and Asexuality is NOT the same thing as incest, polygamy, bestiality, or pedophilia. All people are either hetero, homo, bi, or nothing.

Pedophilia is a paraphilia-- basically a fetish for raping children. Pedophiles can be hetero, homo,or bi.

It is NOT a sexual orientation as orientation simply has to do with whether someone is attracted to male, female, both, or none.

Psychologist and Psychiatrists will never advocate for pedophilia because it inherently invovles rape and victimization. They harm, rape, and sometimes kill their child victims. Even if the child lives their lives will be forever tarnished.

doc
Doc Liberty-- you are confusing sexual orientation with sexual preference.

Sexual Orientation is innate and has to do with the sex you are attracted to-- male, female, both, or none.

It has nothing to do with age, species, relation etc.

Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Bisexuality, and Asexuality is NOT the same thing as incest, polygamy, bestiality, or pedophilia. All people are either hetero, homo, bi, or nothing.

Pedophilia is a paraphilia-- basically a fetish for raping children. Pedophiles can be hetero, homo,or bi.

It is NOT a sexual orientation as orientation simply has to do with whether someone is attracted to male, female, both, or none.

Ranger29: There is a saying that fits ..
you to a tee:

OPINIONS are LIKE A-HOLES ...

everyone's got one...

But you give A-HOLES a BAD name ...

and you don't do much for OPINIONS either..


The comparison
"They are mad at him for comparing gay relationships to pedophilia. How can anyone compare two gay adults in a committed, consensual, loving, and legal relationship to an adult raping a child?"

Simple.

First, you have to buy the "gay" comparison to civil rights:

1) One cannot choose one's skin color.
2) Therefore it is wrong to discriminate based on skin color.
3) One cannot choose one's sexual preference.
4) Therefore it is wrong to discriminate based on sexual preference.

Then, you only need answer the following question:
5) Is pedophilia a sexual preference?

Frankly, it always amuses me when this question comes up. The pedophile movement is exactly where the "gay" movement was a generation ago. There's the fringe "rights" groups that are largely reviled by even the "mainstream left" (i.e. NAMBLA -- that's MAN-BOY in the middle there, for all you "gay" activists): the mostly repudiated -- but still published -- "scientific" studies suggesting that "intergenerational" sex may not be ALLL THAT bad; and so forth.

In another generation or so, "mainstream Psychologists and Psychiatrists" will have removed pedophilia from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. It will be replaced with "pedophobia," the equivalent of homophobia.

I have been raising this question for years now on this board and others, and I have never had a single liberal have the guts to even post anonymously, "Doc, I don't care what the APA or the AMA or Hollywood or even Oprah says, pedophilia is ALWAYS wrong and I will fight it, even if I get labelled a hater and bigot just like I've been labeling all conservatives for bot buying the "gay" agenda."

Would some leftists care to be the first?

Rick Warren is just ...
another politician...

What a surprise!

Rev Warren will find out....
that his Christian compassion and good will never be enough to appease the Gay agenda.
Nothing short of abandoning his Christian beliefs as it regards the homosexual lifestyle will do, with this crowd. They care not that Christian values are at the core of this nation's founding. Or that marriage between a man and a woman has been the accepted premise of the family and civilization since the dawn of time. That homosexuality has been... and is an disordered pathology that is contra-natural law(established by the Creator). An anomaly which is by all past and present objective study, environmentally influenced. The gay lobby feels emboldened by the election of Barak Obama and is pushing full speed ahead with implementing their plan to force the gay lifestyle on the majority, as an acceptable alternatative. What they don't understand, or refuse to accept, is that we Christians live by objective moral truths contained in the teachings of Christ and the bible. Unlike their evolving moral relativism, which ultimately can justify even the most perverse behaviors as their propaganda desensitizes and indoctrinates the new generation, Chrit's teachings are immutable.

right
Like Matthew and I have said, Warren bans gays from membership at his church.

Gays can attend but they cannot be members, unless they become "ex-gay" and pretend to be straight after spending years and money being abused in their "ex-gay" programs.

From the Saddleback website....

"Because membership in a church is an outgrowth of accepting the Lordship and leadership of Jesus in one’s life, someone unwilling to repent of their homosexual lifestyle would not be accepted at a member at Saddleback Church. That does not mean they cannot attend church – we hope they do! God’s Word has the power to change our lives."


the truth
Gays and their Straight allies aren't just mad at Warren for supporting Prop 8 which took away the pre-existing marriages of 18,000 gay couples...

They are mad at him for comparing gay relationships to pedophilia. How can anyone compare two gay adults in a committed, consensual, loving, and legal relationship to an adult raping a child?

That is dangerous rhetoric that could lead to hate crimes.

They are also mad at Warren because at a conference in Uganda, a nation that has criminalized homosexuality, he said that being gay was unnatural, not a human right, and must not be tolerated at all.

That flies in the face of his statements in the US that gays should have all civil rights except marriage.

So doesn't that make Warren a liar?

I'm surprised that many more evangelicals aren't upset with Warren for saying that he has gay friends, eats dinner in gay homes, and believes that gays should have all civil rights except marriage.

Doesn't that mean Warren probably agrees with Civil Unions?

Warren also bans openly gay people from membership at his church. He also endorses "ex-gay" programs in which mainstream Psychologists and Psychiatrists say is quackery at best and abuse at worst.

Book title
It was my error, sorry. Rev. Warren's book is titled 40 Days of Purpose--not Promise. I guess I was looking up to him too much. The quote was part of a discussion about the gays wanting their way and refusing to accept that they have to control themselves in the society we live in. He made his point very well, but the statement kind of shocked me. I guess I'm old-fashioned and Rev. Warren's candor came as a surprise.

Where is the fuss?

Here is a bunch of news you just can’t wait to hear.

For the Inaugural Parades of President Reagan, ad for George W. Bush, one of the most fabulous floats in the Parade, was the Mormon Tabernacle Choir.

Here is a recent news announcement about BamBam’s Parade.

“We are extremely pleased to announce that the Lesbian and Gay Band Association will be included as a marching contingent in the Inaugural Parade.”

And why hasn’t a bigger fuss be made about this stupidity, than about Rev. Warren?

Let Your Nay Be Nay...
Dr. Chaz said it all very succinctly."

"Warren is providing tacit approval and political cover for Obama in exchange for a moment in history."
I couldn't agree more!
I did not vote for Obama. His background and his views are anathema to me--a conservative Christian.

I cannot support Obama and I cannot support Rev. Warren here. In a recent TV interview (Today Show), Rev. Warren said that he would like to have sex with every beautiful woman he sees but he knows he has to control himself. I wish he had used that same "control" and said no to Obama. He should have said no! Christian leaders have to do better than this when we are at a moral crossroads in our country. I did go through Warren's 40 Days of Promise workshop, so don't tell me don't know anything about Rev. Warren. I don't care how many books he writes, sermons he gives or African diseases he tries to help cure. He has shown himself to be an opportunist in this situation. That, to me, speaks louder than all of his "good works."

Obama, like a Shylock, has sold his soul to the devil and he will reap the whirlwind. Unfortunately for conservative Christians, we may be swept up in that ill wind, too.

When Rev. Warren agreed to give the invocation for Obama he chose to swim with the current instead of standing like a rock. What in heaven's name were you thinking Rev. Warren?

I like this quote that was posted on another TH thread. It's a quotation from Thomas Jefferson: "In matters of style, swim with the current. In matters of principle, stand like a rock!" Sorry, Rev. Warren you blew it on this one.

Obama and Pastor Rick
Obama never made any decision in his entire career that he didn't make for some political gain. He clearly thinks that currying favor with the religious right outweighs the risk of disgruntling the far left wing of his party. When he runs again in 2012, the gays will vote for him anyway. From the good Pastor's point of view, he gets some publicity and (if he is smart) a chance to move a little further into mainstream America. This is a "win" - "win" situation for both of them.

Ranger29, we do have some agreement
I find that I agree with your assessment of Obama's strategy and performance to date. I agree that Warren is a smart pick. Warren has some hard-line doctrinal stands, but is much less committed to seeing them become public policy. Warren is much more interested in facilitating even more divestiture of the Church's responsibility for social relief to the government, which Obama sees as a fertile field for growing his base. That the gay-crazies are hopping mad does nothing to alienate them come election time, but makes Obama seem more in tune with the mushy middle of religious folk.

BTW, it wasn't Palin or the social conservatives that dragged McCain down, nor are they dragging down the GOP. McCain was doing quite well against Obama, within striking distance, until the financial collapse. As the campaign shifted from focusing on foreign policy to economic policy, it was all over for him. He has never had a clue and has always been feeble in selling what clue he has. His drama with the bailout, which Bush was pushing, the democrats were desiring, the public and the GOP was balking, and which he put himself joined at the hip with Bush AND the democrats finished him. If there was any doubt that the tag "McSame" fit, it was removed in the minds of moderates and independents by his own actions.

Robert
I shall leave you to your illusions.

mj

Her is Warren telling people that Homosexuals are bad.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/18/rick-warren-i-dont -hate-g_n_152157.html

He also sounds ignorant.

Ranger,

Just saw your post and you are probably right. Thanks

Ranger29 -- the exceptions
I think you hit the nail on the head as to why the abortion lobby fights tooth and nail for having any recognition of the fetus at any stage of development acknowledged as protected life. Once you declare it so, where to draw the line, or even if to draw the line, becomes in play. To err on the side of caution in protecting life could indeed eliminate abortion as alternative altogether.

But as you also note, any compromise made by the religious right poses a consistency problem. My personal view is that abortion for any reason other than imminent danger to the mother is wrong. I do believe that there could be no question that a nearly full term baby who is intentionally partially delivered breach so as not to be defined as "born" in order to kill it before completely exiting the mother is certainly, unquestionably endowed by God with a right to life that the government should be obligated to protect. That a 3 day old fertilized egg constitutes life that must be protected is something I believe but have a harder time defending. So as a practical matter, I would accept protections on what everyone could agree should be protected life in the meantime and let those cases where there is uncertainty be left to be sorted out considered at a later time or adjudicated by God Himself in that Day. Kind of along the lines of divorce where Jesus said it was not allowed from the beginning but God made provision because of the hardness of our hearts.

Robert
The difference between you and I is that you view it with hope; I view it with foreboding.

Obama makes the Clintons look like
amatuers when it comes to manipulating public opinion.

This guy's political instincts are absolutely and stunningly amazing and are a study in the fine art of disarming his critics through prevarication, flattery, and staying one step ahead of them.

I have never seen anyone with instinctive reactions as he displays. They are almost otherworldly.

Those who can't see through Obama can't be expected to be able to see through Warren, but what excuse do the others have?

What Would Billy Do?
Rev. Billy Graham would go anywhere (and did for half a century) to preach and to pray and so should Warren. I doubt that Rick will ever show himself to be the giant that was Dr. Graham, but I will listen to what he says that day even if I don't listen to the anything else. In the end, Presidents come and go, only God's Word remains.

Merry Christmas to all.

Obama's 'Mentor' Jeremiah Wright

Obama's 'Mentor' Jeremiah Wright allowed Homosexuals to join the Barack Obama choice of churches.

Why didn't Barack Obama chose 'Mentor Wright' to 'God Damn' America at his Coronation?


Homosexuals Want Vulgarization of all

Homosexuals want respect of both themselves and their lifestyle - yet most homosexuals and certainly their leaders, show NO respect for anyone else and their lifestyle.

The goal of most Homosexuals is a complete and utter vulgarization of society.

Ever watch a Homosexual parade? The only goal is to shock and degrade any semblance of normality.

This is NOT about 'Civil Rights', but about 'Vulgar Rights'.

There are no orderly quests for Civil Unions which most Americans would agree to - rather it is a vicious attack on anything 'Sacred' - anything 'Traditional'.

Most Homosexuals hate themselves and anyone who does not agree with their vulgar lifestyle.

Regardless of what Homosexuals gain, it will never be enough to satisfy or sate their unnatural lusts.

Homosexuals want to deny others freedom of religion, freedom of speech and even freedom of thought - unless all others praise them and their deviance from normality.

The concept of live and let live is 'Anathema' to militant Homosexuals.

There are more than enough respondents
here willing to cast the first stone. I'll take Warren over Jeremiah Wright any day.

ONE of the problems is that the left,

including the gay community, is that they can't differentiate between "disagreement" and "hate."

There are people I disagree with, but don't hate them... in fact, there are people I disagree with that I don't even dislike them... I just disagree with them!

AND, I don't think I'm unlike many, many people who oppose gay marriage... We just don't agree with gay marriage, but have NO HATE what-so-ever toward gays.

But then, as I said, it's typical of the left... For example, any Conservative who thinks people should enter this country LEGALLY is automatically accused by the left of being a bigot, racist, and my own personal favorite, an exenophobe.

Nothing logical or rational about it, but that's what they do.




Obama Opposes Gay Marriage - Outrage?
Biden said during the VP debate that both he and Obama opposed gay marriage as well. So where's the outrage over them?


Matthew
Prove your source! that Saddleback Church will not allow gay people to become members. You are as off the deep end and uninformed as TAFT. That simply is not true! And, as in my earlier post regarding abortion, I think (my view) both the mother and doctor should be charged with murder! Imagine aborting a baby who could live outside the womb, and any other infant for that matter.
Warren a disgrace? You do not know him. YOU are a disgrace for spreading lies about him.

The 'People' chose Barack Obama

The MSM keeps telling us that Barack Obama was the people's choice.
True - but then again, so was Barabbas.

warren is no true christian.
The majority of the mainstream media has put a whole spin on this controversy.

The problem with Warren is not that he's against gay marriage. It is that he views same sex relationship as being morally equivalent to incest and pedophelia.

That is the issue and that is why those of us who advocate gay rights are very upset!

Warren is ignorant, a hate monger, and should not have been asked to pray.

Warren's church will not allow gay people to become members. Warren's views are extreme.

I do like that Warren is concerned with the environment, global warming, and fighting AIDS, but deep down he's another crazy social conservative that goes ape sh** over abortion and gay rights.

OR maybe Warren is just trying to get his cred back from the radical right that has issues with him by going after "teh gays".

Warren is a disgrace.

Taft
As noted in my earlier post, you obviously do not know Rick Warren. What are you talking about when you say he tells 'people who were born a certain that they are bad?' WHAT?! What are you talking about when you say he is a torture appeaser? He against the torture of murdering unborn babies! Yes!! I personally think the mother and the doctor should both be charged with murder. He does not put down 'people who were born a certain way - whatever the heck you are talking about. Where is source on that monstorous lie? Give me a break and get some education before you spout off! Boring and uninformed!

n2

If Obama were fool enough to have Warren as a regular influence, he deserves to go sown the drain.

We'll see
said the zen master. You do make a valid and valued point. If Rick Warren does indeed become the next pastor to the White House, will he have the influence on Obama that you mention? We'll see.

Doesn't really matter anyway.

Obama is just doing this for show. Hes not the least bit religious.

No real Jew, Christian, or Muslim could support Abortions, same sex marriage, forced charity etc. etc.

Warren -> First Good Choice by Obama

Warren has given millions from the sale of his book 'Purpose Driven Life' to help those suffering - Barack Obama has given Zero of his money from his books.

Maybe Warren can help Obama have a purpose in his life other than Socialism and 'paling around' with radicals and terrorists.

Wrong Subject
It's not about homosexuality - (they always think it is and want it to be) - it's about abortion. Or rather, post-birth abortion. And THIS president-elect was the ONLY man to publicly decry the Illinois legislation making it illegal to ki.ll babies AFTER they were born. His comment? "It's above my pay-grade." (That, Mr. Future President was what you said later on: you'd already made yourself judge and execu.tioner in your earlier statements.)

Perhaps we should send "Obama-Christmas cards," with a baby, alone and unwrapped in a manger, despised and left to die in the cold and filth. These days, leave the baby to d.ie in the cold washroom of a hospital named afer our Savior, who was born in similarly intolerable conditions.

Obama has not repented. So I ask: Rick who? Rick who? Rich who? I think I hear an echo. Here's a man who has begun to love the view in the mirror. Narcissism, it seems, isn't only a sin of the politicians.

Warren is nothing more than a multi-level marketing guru, who represents a product. Might as well be hand sanitizer.


mj

He isn't trying very hard to "wipe out pain and suffering" when he tells people who were born a certain way that they are bad.

RG

The poem may be, I don't know, a sad reflection on the true story of the Venus Hottentot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saartjie_Baartman


Also, most of the people associated with Obama are good.

Obama's 'Who's Who'

Barack Obama's friends, Mentors, religious advisers and alliances, look like the 'Who's Who of Radicals, Terrorists, Hate Mongers and Racists' in America.

The question is:

Are fundamentally flawed and corrupt people attracted to Barack Obama?

OR

Is Barack Obama attracted to fundamentally flawed and corrupt people?

OR

Is it just a mutual admiration society?

Rick Warren
Those you who are knocking Rick Warren obviously know little about him. Get to know him, then see if you can write your offensive tirade. You know nothing about him and your letters show your ignorance. By the way, ask about what he has done in Africa and other countries to help those with aids. And know that he gives 90% of his earnings, including book royalties, to help those less fortunate. Open your minds and get a life. What have you done to wipe out pain and suffering in the world. Probably nothing! Just sit and complain!

Obama Chooses Original Poem

Obama chose Elizabeth Alexander to read an Original Poem at his 'Coronation'.

Do the following lines represent the best that modern American literature offers?

"Her genitalia will float inside a labeled pickling jar . . . "

"Monsieur Cuvier investigates between my legs, poking, prodding . . . "

"Since my own genitals are public I have made other parts private."

They come from "The Venus Hottentot," the most celebrated poem of Elizabeth Alexander, chosen by the president-elect to compose an original work to read at his inauguration on Jan. 20.

Taft it is NOT Obama's first 'Goof'
Taft wrote: "... It's Obama's fist big goof..."

2000-2001
=========
Obama opposes a bill that defines as a “person” a fully born baby who survives an abortion.

Obama votes “present” on legislation that would require doctors to give medical attention to babies who survive abortions. Obama argues that defining “…a pre-viable fetus" that survived an abortion as a "person" or "child would essentially bar abortions, because the Equal Protection Clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an anti-abortion statute."

2002-2003
=========
In 2002, Obama, as an Illinois legislator, votes against the “Induced Infant Liability Act,” a law meant to protect the lives of babies who “inadvertently” survive attempted abortions and then need medical attention to survive; Obama’s is the sole vote against the bill, and a similar bill later passes unanimously in the United States Senate.

In 2003, the Born Alive Infant Protection Act again comes up in the Illinois Senate; as chairman of the Health and Human Services Committee, Obama shelves the bill, preventing it from even being brought to the Senate floor for a vote.



Warren

Warren is better than some but it was still a slap in the face to pick him to say a pray for a nation that encompasses many types of people. It's Obama's fist big goof and I hope he feels the heat. On another note, Warren seams pretty fake, being a torture appeaser and all.

Warren-BHO Charlatan Collusion
"Now if one-hundred percent agreement on policy issues is the requirement for a clergyman to pray at a President’s inauguration, it’s difficult to imagine how any religious leader could in good conscience participate in any inauguration."

There are certain moral issues that should be non-negotiable; murdering babies is one of them. This is a quid pro quo deal between two charlatans. Warren is providing tacit approval and political cover for Obama in exchange for a moment in history. And this is not the first time Warren has sold out. He has a history of placing his rather oversized fame needs above religious principle. Rick Warren is leading the Ego-driven Life.

protestors
America has become a land of squalling adolescents. Just because they want something, they think they should receive it. And if they don't get it, watch out! They throw a 2 year old's tantrum, complete with screeching, throwing things, flinging themselves to the floor, and bashing someone else's head (read throwing donutcards at Rick Warren). They shout they want tolerance, but are intolerant. They say they hate restrictions of government, but they try to restrict others through government restriction. The list goes on, but will America as we know it survive? Not a happy consideration.

Obama did WHAT? Warren did WHAT? I have

to admit, when I first heard that Obama had asked Rev. Warren to do the invocation at the "coronation," and Rev. Warren had accepted Obama's invitation, my first reaction was, "He did WHAT?"

But, after giving it a little thought, I realized it was actually not a bad thing, and I think Hill's assessment is spot on.

What WILL be interesting, however, is if the gays will actually disrupt the invocation, or any part of the "coronation" with throwing donuts.

Having seen a number of interviews with spokespersons from the gay community, even before Obama asked Rev. Warren to do the invocation, it was WAY TOO CLEAR that they were NOT HAPPY with Obama. Now they're FURIOUS with him.

In fact, I've yet to see or hear or read anything by any Conservative that even comes close to the anger in the gay community.

I'm beginning to wonder if some in the gay community aren't sorry they didn't vote for McCain... They may not have agreed with McCain on a lot of issues, but at least they knew where McCain stood, and that he was honest about his agenda... which obviously IS NOT the case with Obama.


Turn the tables!!!
Rick,

Give the cards to hungry and homeless. They can get hot egg and sausage sandwiches anytime and hot coffee and hot chocolate in the cold.

-Ray
NRA Life Member
Soli Deo Gloria!!

Obama's motivation for
having Rick Warren pray at his inauguration is irrelevant.

Rick Warren is a godly man who has been used mightily by God.

The word of God instructs us to prayer for our goverenment and its leaders.

Who better to pray for than Obama? We need to be on our knees before God regarding America and its future.

It is far better to have a godly Christian man like Warren praying for the nation.

Even if Obama doesn't have pure motives.

Um...
Warren's a showman who does some good and some not-so-good.

What makes us think God will listen?
I have no problem with Obama's choice of Rick Warren to pray at the inagural. I also believe it's sadly accurate to call him the "Billy Graham" of our generation.

I will point out however that Pastor Warren is nowhere near as theologically conservative as Graham. Warren can only be considered conservative relative to the looney, far left political groups rising to power in America today. He may also be slightly to the right of all the old, mainline Protestant denominations on some theological points, but his pragmatic approach to all things leads one to believe that his standards are a moving target.

But no matter. I would be very much surprised to learn that the prayer of Rick Warren (or any other well known American religious figure) had risen above the Capitol dome. It should be sadly obvious to all that God is in the process of removing His hand of blessing from our increasingly heathen, sodomitical nation.

REV. RICK: COURAGEOUS PICK OR POLITICAL
Barack Obama's "courageous" choice of Rick Warren for giving the opening prayer at the inauguration had nothing to do with "reaching across the isle" in the spirit of bipartisanship and unity. On the contrary, picking an outspoken opponent of gay marriage was a calculated ploy to divert attention from the very damaging Blagojevich affair. Outraging homosexuals and gay marriage proponents shows just how badly Obama is hurting especially from the salt that Hannity and Rush are rubbing into his wounds. If Blago doesn't resign or isn't removed from office Rick Warren probably won't be the last of Obama's ploys.

John Spencer
I was replying to Ranger29's post of 1:50AM. In another article's comment section (O'Reilly's latest) he had used that "god squad" label against Falwell and accused him of twisting scripture to fit his own political positions, which were to impose (as Ranger29 supposed) some fashion of theocracy (If I'm reading too much between your lines Ranger29, forgive me). I defended Falwell and the religious right (of which I consider myself a part) on that thread and was poking a little fun at Ranger's apparently broad use of the term using his own characterizations. They certainly are not my views. I can see how you might misunderstand. However, after reading my other posts on this thread, should it not have given you a little pause before placing me in the "ultra-liberal, atheistic" camp? In case I am not crystal clear, I am referring to the posts where I indicated I considered not voting for McCain because of his historic hostility to evangelical and that I considered his short answer at Saddleback on the abortion question unconvincing of the firmness of his belief.

My views on Warren, however, are not so charitable as those to Falwell, though not for the same reason as Ranger29 might object to him.

Poor dmac
To which "god" are you referring? If you mean that Jerry Falwell believed in the God of the Bible, and preached forcefully the message of the Gospel, then you are attacking Christianity as a belief. Are you also saying that Christains do not have a right to their belief, and to speak out if favour of it? Once again, those who scream the loudest for tolerance, are indeed the most intolerant.

Using not-so-clever little labels as "god-squad," only highlights your lack of reasoned arguments. It is those who use epithets and expletives, rather than logical reasoning (recognise yourself?) who actually help the cause of those whom they attack.

So, dmac, PLEASE continue your ranting; it only serves to demonstrate the lack of substance in the ultra-liberal, atheistic camp.

Poor dmac
To which "god" are you referring? If you mean that Jerry Falwell believed in the God of the Bible, and preached forcefully the message of the Gospel, then you are attacking Christianity as a belief. Are you also saying that Christains do not have a right to their belief, and to speak out if favour of it? Once again, those who scream the loudest for tolerance, are indeed the most intolerant.

Using not-so-clever little labels as "god-squad," only highlights your lack of reasoned arguments. It is those who use epithets and expletives, rather than logical reasoning (recognise yourself?) who actually help the cause of those whom they attack.

So, dmac, PLEASE continue your ranting; it only serves to demonstrate the lack of substance in the ultra-liberal, atheistic camp.

Sodomizing Warren (2)
We cannot tolerate that a vicious minority of sodomites are going, not only against nature, but against the will of the people and imposing their unhealthy, unnatural, and sinful life style.

These coward sodomites are ready to assault old Christian ladies and intimidate Christians; however, they are incapable to stand for America against Muslim terrorists. They are incapable because they lack moral courage; and they lack moral courage because they are selfish and narcissistic individuals whose main interest in life is the worship of the genitalia.

With no shame on themselves, the radical Nazi homosexuals advance their lethal agenda. They feel proud of their own corruption that they do not care to brainwashing American children into making them believe that sodomy is natural and force them to accept that disgusting life style. Honestly, that is comparable only to child abuse.

They hate Christians because they live in rebellion to the commandments of God. They know that their sexual perversion is incompatible with the will of God. They know that their unnatural inclination is repulsive. Men having anal intercourse with men, Is that “civil right”? How is it possible that a man desire better to have sex with another man when God created beautiful women? How is it possible that sodomites find attractive the body of another man when women are physically more attractive than men? Do not tell me that they are born that way, that is a big lie!

Homosexualism is a sin, a natural aberration, and sexual perversion of the human race. It is sin against the Creator. Even if the homosexual puppets in black robes legalize sodomite “marriage,” the truth will not change, God created man and woman and blessed them. By pushing their dark agenda, sodomites are bringing the judgment of God upon themselves. You may laugh or mock, that is irrelevant. What is relevant is that God is holy and will never let sin go unpunished.

Afraid? NOT!
Apparently most conservative traditionalists, even a sizeable number of Christians and Jews, have fallen prey to the homosexual dissemblance of "homophobia." "Anti-" is not a synnym of or for "phobia." One who knows homosexuality to be wrong, a sin, a perversion--basically, the actions or predisposition of a one who is dissatisfied with who one is, and determined to behave as if the opposite sex--is actually usually not afraid of homosexuals in general. One may be afraid of a hostiley violent homosexual, just as one might be afraid of anything or anyone who is violent and aggressive. It really depends on the one being threatened, and the one doing the threatening. If a given homosexual is strong, or has a weapon, there is good reason to be afraid, but that is not homophobia, anymore than being afraid of a rabid dog is canine-phobia.

Christians, and others who, for very good social, anthopological, and physical reasons, are against the perversion of homosexuality, should cease accepting the terminology of homosexuals. They are decidedly NOT gay, but rather bitter, morose, and neurotic people, for whom to pray, and, in a Christ-like, i.e. Christian, way to love (which does not mean what modern society means by "love," but rather having a deep compassion and caring for another or others).

Just as "gay" is a fine old word, meaning:

1 : excited and merry : manifesting or inclined to joyous exhibition of content or pleasure *gay carefree children* *a gay word of greeting*
2 a : bright and lively in appearance *gay sunny meadows* b : brilliant in color *the dress a bit too gay for her years* c chiefly Britain , of poultry : marked with white *Anconas often become gayer with age*
3 obsolete a : FIRST-CLASS, FINE, EXCELLENT b : speciously or artfully brilliant — used of things immaterial (as reasoning or rhetoric).

Sodomizing Warren (1)
Once again the BROWNSHIRTS radical sodomites are assaulting decent people. This time the target of their sodomization is Pastor Rick Warren. Let’s be clear, the main issue here is not if Warren should participate in the inauguration of Obama or not, the issue is if we are going to allow that radical sodomites intimidate Christians across the nation and take away our constitutional rights. The answer is a firm NO.

Radical sodomites are in an open war against Christians and will not rest until muzzlimg each one of us. By making use of the coward and pathetic media, radical sodomites are pushing their sinister agenda, which is the destruction of America by taking control of the public schools, government, media, and churches.

These children of Hitler are working day and night to silence Christians and to prevent us from teaching what the bible says about homosexualism. With the help of so called “theologians” they are re-interpreting biblical passages to fit their filthy and sinful life style.

With unusual hatred toward the bible, church and Christians, never seen in America before, they defend themselves by saying that their cause is a “civil rights” cause and that they are the “new” blacks. The truth is that is neither one. They have already all the protections that the Constitution grants to all American citizens. They do not need special rights. They are actually ripping off our laws by using the court to overthrow the will of the people. This is outrageous and must be stopped.

Typo...
Ratas y Ratones
Location: IN
Reply # 12
Date: Dec 21, 2008 - 5:12 EST Surveillance Video...

~~~

I cerish donuts! Throw the cinnamon glazed kind. My favorites.

Maybe I can snag a couple before they hit the floor !



~~~~~~~

OK, it is late.

cerish = cherish

As in, "I cherish cinnamon glazed donuts and rolls."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

AND, Let's give a hearty 'Thank You' to the stalwart TH Techs!

I hear they have been battling 'Hackers' for several days now, and they are still able to keep the site up and running, with minimal delays !


Ranger29-- the god squad?
who are the prominent religious leaders that you do not consider to be part of "the god squad"? Your list seems pretty broad encompassing the hard-line, morality imposing, holy warring, and theocracy building likes of Falwell on one end and the squishy Warren on the other.

Ranger29
The abortion question was entertaining in that it didn't lend itself to the usual answer formulation by the social liberals and Obama had to shrug it off. It would have been even more entertaining if Warren had pressed him as to how long AFTER birth does a baby get protection given Obama's votes and statments regarding born alive act. Obama has the most absolute defense of abortion at all stages, for all reasons, as any president in history. Quite an absolute stand for someone who is uncertain about when life begins and so is not sure if an abortion could be taking a life at some point.

If McCain's certainty bothered you, it was a double negative for him then. Because his short answer told me he knew the "right" answer for the target audience he was courting, but he did not support it with reasoning that assured me that he really meant it or that he would make it a priority if the opportunity arose.

Most people are comfortable with some restrictions on abortion, for the very reason they are uncertain that the fetus may in fact be life that should be protected. And most religious folk opposed to abortion would be glad to compromise on an exception for the life of the mother, rape, incest, or at some very early stage of pregnancy. It is the pro-abortion activists who have the most inflexible position.

Surveillance Video...




Several may have noticed wobbie's prolonged absence a few days ago.

We here at "Commie Watch Institute" received a short video from one of our 'Dark Birds' in the Scranton, PA area.

~~~

The video opens in the basement with wobbie's Mom running toward wobbie with a broom in her hand, screaming, "You filthy heathen!
I caught you Red Handed !
Mommie told you to never do THAT with your blow-up doll !"

We saw the broom swinging, and then as it connected with the 'Tin Foil Hat', the secret transmitter apparently broke, and the video portion went blank, so we were spared the sordid graphic visions.

Some of the sound was garbled, but we obtained this...

Mommie says, "Just wait until your Daddie gets home from the VFW !"

wobbie says, "But Mommie, Daddie hul showed me how to do this."

"When I get done with your Daddie, he will be spending all his time at the VFW !
Come to think of it, so will you. Criminy wobbie, you're 32 years old, with the mind of a 12 year old ! Are you EVER going to grow up ?"

Mommie adds, "And another thing. Why do you two hate all those people over at the Town House ? Are you jealous because they have lives ? And what is all this LMAO ? Both of you wear size 50 pants. LMAO isn't working !"

~~~

The video is very garbled from here on, but our technical department is hard at work, attempting to recover more of it. Preliminary results are very promising.

~~~

I cerish donuts! Throw the cinnamon glazed kind. My favorites.

Maybe I can snag a couple before they hit the floor !




Rick Warren

Rick Warren is a good choice simply because he doesn't preach hate. He doesn't demonize. He encourages an open respectful discussion.

Liberals are outraged.

Ranger29
The problem with McCain was that he had poked his own party in the eye for the last 6 to 8 years. His performance at Saddleback went a long way to make evangelicals at least comfortable voting for him (if not actually abstaining or voting against him). If he had not solidified the evangelical vote, he would have lost worse that he did. I considered not voting for him (abstaining) since I didn't see a lick of difference in the likely outcome on social issues between Obama and McCain, and he had been openly hostile to evangelicals in the recent past. Still, I figured he would hold the line on spending and that was something.

He always had the hard-core political conservatives. He never had the "independents". It was the religious conservatives, the very one-issue types, that he needed to keep support. You have a tough row to hoe in a bad political climate for your party if you are trying to maintain support from you base.

Obama covering his tracks with Warren

Obama knows that in the immediate and long-term future, when Internet users search for Obama's performance in the Rick Warren interview, they probably won't come up with Obama's response to the abortion question about when does life begin, "That's above my pay grade."

Most people will search for "Obama" and "Rick Warren" and they'll come up with the fact that Rick Warren is giving the prayer at the Obama inauguration.

Exactly how Barack Obama and his Web-savvy campaigner staff want it.

I am a gay man
and I wholeheartedly support Obama's judgement!

Barack may not support gay marriage (publicly), but he and Michelle are unequivically the BIGGEST gay-friendly president & first lady the U.S. has ever had (even bigger than Bill & Hill).

Gays will make large civil rights strides in the nest 4 to 8 years.

This is only the inaugural invocation
Relax. President elect Obama only appointed Rick Warren to deliver the inaugural invocation. Warren isn't going to make speeches about gays or same sex marriages. President elect Obama didn't attend Warren's church for twenty years. There is no way President elect Obama is going to be influenced that much by an inaugural invocation. Many have been lead to believe whoever President elect Obama meets with, he becomes that person. For those who expects President elect Obama to be the President you know he will be, then wait until after the inaugural invocation.

Dangerously naive
Warren has always been a liberal. It is only in your imagination that he is a conservative or a "good person." He is a parasite who convinces his victims to dedicate their lives to making money so that they can tithe to his church.

Don't forget that in addition to asking the candidates what their greatest moral failure was, he also asked them what our country's greatest moral failure was. You can't control your victims until you can get them to feel mindlessly guilty. Hook 'em, reel 'em, cook 'em.

By ingratiating himself to Obama, he is both returning to his true philosophical home and cynically looking after his own butt at the same time. It looks like even your see-no-evil evangelical chimp listeners are starting to figure out that he is a fraud.

on a nicer note
Warren's Saddleback Forum was of great value and was well done. His most brilliant insight was to frame the abortion question in terms of when does the fetus gain constitutional protection. But he let Obama off the hook with no followup. But all in all, I agree that it was the most substantial of the candidate "debates" and certainly the only one that framed any of the issues from a conservative side.

gag
"...Warren has never allowed himself to be positioned as a political or policy activist. Like Graham..."

Warren is now firmly positioned in the eyes of the media and the lefty activists as a political and policy activist. And indeed he has positioned himself that way on issues like poverty and relief and now for his support of prop 8. He is not like Graham in that regard at all.

And Mr Hill, Graham has indeed been criticized for some social conservatives for his softpedalling to remain ingratiated to presidents. And he has also been criticized for his increased ecumenicalism.

Warren as "Pastor to the Presidents" makes me gag. Warren has none of Graham's good qualities, but shares in his bad qualities and brings even more of those to the table.

Check out his running feud with Joseph Farrah of WND (yes, Farrah can be quite out there) over Warren's lies and dissembling over what transpired about Warren's trip to Syria. And Warren's Purpose Driven Church (or "how to take over a church and drive out dissenters")has been the ruin of a few churches I know about who had pastors who adhered to Warren's methods.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.