Rick Warren does the right thing

Rick Warren has officially come out against the proposed laws in Uganda that would make homosexuality a crime, punishable by death in some cases. In an open letter to the pastors of Uganda (with whom Warren has a great deal of influence from his missionary work) the American mega-pastor says,

As an American pastor, it is not my role to interfere with the politics of other nations, but it IS my role to speak out on moral issues ... the potential law is unjust, extreme and un-Christian toward homosexuals, requiring the death penalty in some cases. If I am reading the proposed bill correctly, this law would also imprison anyone convicted of homosexual practice ... I urge you, the pastors of Uganda, to speak out against the proposed law.

Obviously, Warren holds (and reiterates in the letter) beliefs about sex and about queer men and women with which I thoroughly disagree. But I want to thank him for doing the right thing here, for putting his influence and power to use to save the lives of innocent people. Hopefully, Warren's letter will make a difference.

Rick Warren: Letter to the Pastors of Uganda

Previously:

Maggie Koerth-Baker is the science editor at BoingBoing.net. She writes a monthly column for The New York Times Magazine and is the author of Before the Lights Go Out, a book about electricity, infrastructure, and the future of energy. You can find Maggie on Twitter and Facebook.

Maggie goes places and talks to people. Find out where she'll be speaking next.

MORE: Action

More at Boing Boing

Eurovision 2013: An American in London

The technology that links taxonomy and Star Trek

TariAkpodiete

for anyone who thinks that religious extremism isn’t a part of some Americans christianity:

Rick Warren Urges Followers To Emulate Hitler Youth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRctKSeyQ-s

i found out about that video from a post by Bruce Wilson made here:

http://www.talk2action.org/story/2009/12/11/11629/913

“It’s gratifying to know “America’s most powerful pastor” seems to have taken notice of my videos, showcasing Rick Warren’s 2005 speech at California’s Anaheim Angels Stadium, during which Warren outlined a “stealth” program to take the world and called on his listening to show the sort of devotion to Jesus as followers of Hitler, Lenin, and Mao gave to their respective leaders.”

Warren has been complaining on twitter that Wilson is unfairly portraying him, but the Warren’s own words speak for themselves
PlushieSchwartz

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Rick Warren is delusional, or a con man or little bit of both. He’s just sensing his own stink – and the possible repercussions – once again he’s chosen political expediency rather than show his true beliefs. He’s like the lizards from V patiently biding his time. Then he’ll eat us gays.
takeshi

I second the previous comment. Rick Warren FINALLY does the right thing. And frankly, what in the Hell are we talking about? It’s the “right” thing to tell Uganda NOT to murder people for their sexual orientation? Has the bar really fallen so low?

Warren is a hatemonger. If he really wanted to do the right thing, he would side with the evidence. Homosexuality isn’t a choice. It can’t be “cured.” It’s not contrary to the laws of God, and neither is homosexuality among dogs, horses, dolphins, penguins. We need to stop being apologists for those who politicize their religious views.
- Antinous / Moderator
  
  Has the bar really fallen so low?
  
  Do you know what’s happening in Oslo today?
J France

I don’t think he’s aware that my reading of the “faith tools” at his website are not exactly as he intended.

A “christian social network for tools” is a more fittting description.
Anonymous

Look – I can agree with the statements regarding Mr. Warren’s shortcomings. However, as a gay person – I am thrilled that someone with as much influence as he has is speaking out. How many countries already have death penalties in place for homosexuals, and no one outside of Amnesty International is addressing it?
He could have kept his mouth shut, despite the prompting, and I wouldn’t have been surprised.
He did the right thing here. Lives may be saved because of it. It doesn’t have anything to do with anything else. Right here, right now – he may have saved some lives. It is life and death. It is commendable. It is applauded.
takeshi

@ mati:

Warren has been extremely influential in Ugandan politics. He’s lobbied to push for abstinence-only education in Uganda, and made trips to Uganda in support of the Ugandan ministers who boycotted the Church of England for being “pro-gay,” so his statement that it’s not his intention to “comment or interfere in the political process of other nations” is flatly untrue. As Rachel Maddow points out, Warren also came out in support of Proposition 8, and later denied that he’d endorsed it. The man is a liar, and if you really believe that he’s being “helpful,” you are one seriously misguided individual. With respect to this issue specifically, he’s done far more harm than good.

Rick Warren’s belated “opposition” to the proposed law is akin to a death row inmate speaking out against homicide. It’s prevarication, it’s pandering, and unless Warren makes another trip to Uganda to voice his “concerns,” it is wildly doubtful that his opinion on the subject will do anything to derail this legislation.
Bevatron Repairman

Sometimes a moral condemnation is just a moral condemnation.

I don’t understand the need to hedge praise for a person on the other side of an issue when he does the right thing. He is in a very strong position to make a statement against this law and he has done so. That he is morally opposed to homosexuality and premarital sex is totally immaterial here. He’s done the right thing and should be thanked for it. It’s not like the protestant churches in Uganda spend a lot of time listening to MSNBC or Pacifica Radio.

The head of my Church is certainly sitting on his ass about it all. Which is probably sort of uncomfortable, with his head right in the way.
- Anonymous
  
  If he truly felt, and felt strongly, that state-sanctioned murder of gays is wrong, he would have said so from the git. As it is, his “we don’t take sides, we just offer the support” mealy-mouthedness, combined with his past public positions on gays, gives any rational human being and most of the lunatics ample reason to question his sincerity.
takeshi

OK, so let me get this straight. Rick Warren is to be commended for coming out against this proposed legislation? Please.

He’s going with the tide, and he wouldn’t unless it was in his best interests politically. Let’s not kid ourselves. I’m hetero, but that doesn’t stop me from looking at this with compassion for all those gays he’s denounced over the years. It is precisely his brand of hatred that has given rise to Uganda’s current “kill the gays” climate.

Don’t be a fool. Rick Warren would murder a billion homosexuals if he thought he could get away with it.
cloudthreads

@takeshi, What about “Let me be clear that God’s Word states that all sex outside of marriage is not what God intends. Jesus reaffirmed what Moses wrote that marriage is intended to be between one man and one woman committed to each other for life” says that he thinks same-sex attraction is purely a choice? Seems to me is that he’s saying a particular behavior is a choice, under his understanding of personal morality this behavior is wrong, but that morality shouldn’t ever be something laws are made to enforce.
Anonymous

I just stumbled upon this, but I just have to say: This extreme distrust of people you disagree with hurts the world as a whole.

That is all.
Xenu

How dense do you have to be to listen to this idiot, let alone let yourself be influenced by him?

Who cares about these sheep?
- Brainspore
  
  Those “sheep” are on the cusp of passing laws to allow the mass slaughter of gay people.
  
  If ANYONE can use their influence to help stop them then that is a good thing.
takeshi

I was speaking of the God who doesn’t murder people, or make bets with the Devil. You know, the same God that made all the homosexual animals.

Jesus and Moses were delusional. Not terrible people, I’m sure, but fucking batshit.
cloudthreads

@takeshi. It sounds like you’re extrapolating and inferring particular things about what Warren believes in order to call him a hatemonger based on what you think he believes (based on his stated belief system) rather than what he’s saying.

“ALL life, no matter how humble or broken, whether unborn or dying, is precious to God. My wife, Kay, and I have devoted our lives and our ministry to saving the lives of people, including homosexuals, who are HIV positive. It would be inconsistent to save some lives and wish death on others. Weâ€™re not just pro-life. We are whole life.” sounds like a person who doesn’t hate people, but is trying to help them.
zio_donnie

who the hell is this guy? i know i can google it and i get that he’s some kind of american style infomercial McPriest but i never heard of him before. but a McPriest that has enough influence abroad? wow the power of american TV, just wow.

anyway fk him. he did nothing more than state the bloody obvious for any decent human being and in great delay from what i read. a hero is somebody that goes out of the ordinary in order to perform a great deed not someone that does what he is supposed to do in the first place.

Also fk priests of all religions. they will do anything they can get away with to get money and influence. no exceptions whatsoever. ever.
- dsac86
  
  Come on, you have to be more intelligent than to paint every priest, pastor, or person of religion with the same brush.
  
  I’m agnostic and dislike a lot of things about pretty much every religion, but some of the nicest, most selfless people I have met have been priests, pastors, and other persons of religion. There are a lot of pastors I can’t stand who do things for all of the wrong reasons, but there are also a lot who sincerely want to make the world a better place.
  
  Also, you’re kidding yourself if you think priests do what they can for money. Yes, the Catholic religion makes way more money than it should as a whole, but 99% of that does not go to priests. They live extremely humble and modest lives. I lived in a cold, snowy town in northern British Columbia and the priest rode his bike everywhere and lived in a small house reserved for him across the street from the parish.
- Anonymous
  
  Also fk priests of all religions. they will do anything they can get away with to get money and influence. no exceptions whatsoever. ever.
  
  Speaking in my capacity as an ordained minister, who serves a church which welcomes and celebrates men and women who are in loving relationships regardless of gender or sexuality, and receives no remuneration: Huh? What?
  - zio_donnie
    
    ordained minister of what church if i may ask?
    - Anonymous
      
      Universal Life, zio_donnie. It’s a Universalist denomination that will ordain anyone, no questions asked. It’s popular with Unitarian Universalist ministers who want legal recognition from the state (to be able to perform marriages that are legally recognized) but do not wish to attend a traditional seminary.
      
      http://www.ulc.org
      - zio_donnie
        
        @ Anonymous 80
        
        mate with all due respect i have never heard of Universal Life, or the Unitarian Universalist denomination before. from what you say you are not even recognized from your own state, so i was not talking about you.
        
        if you got offended by my previous bashing of priests it was not intended for you D.I.Y priests. declare myself a priest does not a priest of me make.
        i was thinking more about the vatican, the orthodox and the anglicans and the american evangelical McPriests.
        
        i do have respect for people like you that try to reform christianity by giving example but in other times you would already be fried by the inquisition today you are simply irrelevant.
        
        not a bash here just a matter of fact.
doogiehowsah

Surprising and shameful, Boing Boing and Ms. Koerth-Baker, that you would post this story with zero background or investigation of the actual facts. You’re merely taking Warren’s press release at face value and giving him a pat on the back, and it’s revolting. As has been made clear in multiple, apparently more responsible media outlets, Warren as recently as last month publicly refused to “take sides” on the issue of whether Uganda should kill people perceived to be gay, with the mealy-mouthed excuse that he shouldn’t “interfere” in Ugandan affairs. But as the Daily Beast has reported, Warren has been interfering in Africa for a long time, and his work there has been 100% bad news, supporting the most frighteningly anti-gay leaders like Martin Ssempa, fighting the promotion of condoms, etcetera. Rather than, as you blindly claim, using “his influence and power to use to save the lives of innocent people,” his far-too-late letter to Ugandan officials is actually a cover-up of multiple bad deeds, a bit of lip service designed to combat a growing outcry. A person reading your post would have no idea what Warren is really doing, and to the uninitiated, you’ll read that story and say “hey, he’s not such a bad guy.” It’s profoundly disturbing that a site like Boing Boing, with such a proud tradition of seeing through such bullcrap, is instead, in this instance, spreading it around more.
- Brainspore
  
  @doogie: Maggie has been writing about Warren’s failures to address the problem up until now all week, as you’ll note if you read the links at the bottom of the story.
  - doogiehowsah
    
    Indeed. But that doesn’t excuse the tenor of this post. It shouldn’t say Warren “does the right thing,” it should say “finally, and only in response to a massive media outcry, issues a generic statement urging Uganda to step back only from the most shocking and heinous aspects of their anti-gay legislation, legislation that in fact is only a logical outcome of the years of anti-gay work Warren himself has engaged in.” His “beliefs,” as Koerth-Baker refers to them, aren’t the problem, it’s his actions.
    - Antinous / Moderator
      
      doogiehowsah,
      
      This post isn’t the problem. Please redirect your rage into doing something about Rick Warren.
      - doogiehowsah
        
        “This post isn’t the problem. Please redirect your rage into doing something about Rick Warren.”
        
        Yes, I do think this post is part of the problem, and dismissing my opinion by referring to it as misdirected “rage” seems a little un-moderator-like.
      - Brainspore
        
        Doogie: You used the word “revolting” to describe Maggie’s decision to write this post and went on to lambaste her for doing “zero background investigation” despite the fact that anyone paying the least amount of attention here can see that she’s been one of the people trying to bring this problem to the attention of the media all along.
        
        If that’s not “misdirected rage” then I don’t know what is.
      - Antinous / Moderator
        
        Yes, I do think this post is part of the problem
        
        I presume that you’ve contacted your elected representatives to ask for US sanctions against Uganda and written letters to the editor of your local paper denouncing Rick Warren before getting all the way down your list to attacking a pro-gay blogger on a very pro-gay blog that regularly reports on GLBT issues.
emilydickinsonridesabmx

I think it’s important to keep some perspective here. Yes, Rick Warren is a creep. However, the fact that he came out and made this statement, which may actually save the lives of our gay friends in Uganda (may not, sadly). We live in an imperfect world. Let’s take the small and Pyrrhic victories where we can get them.

After hearing the story of the anonymous gay gentleman from Uganda on the BBC this morning, I’m inclined to think any little thing that may help him, and his friends still in Uganda, is a good thing.
Pipenta

This the same fckwd (I’m disemvoweling myself to save the mods the bother) who says women should stay with their husbands even if the husband is abusive.

Oh yeah, rah for him. He’s a fckng prince.
marcusp

“..Also fk priests of all religions. they will do anything they can get away with to get money and influence. no exceptions whatsoever. ever…”

Someone remind me again which side is the “close-minded-loves-blanket-judgements” one?
- zio_donnie
  
  i imagine that you put me on the atheist side of the popular american game of religious sociopaths against atheist nutjobs. i inform you that i am not american so i do not understand nor i participate on this sterile debate that i perceive more as gang warfare.
  
  i am on my side only and in my limited experience all priests are either people that do not want to work so they just join church INC for a salary or self righteous, dangerous and greedy sociopaths. same goes for those atheists that feel the need to evangelize atheism (oh the irony…)
  
  i am equally anti christian-muslim-jew-atheist. i believe only in decent human beings.
Anonymous

I have a reading recommendation for BBers: “Things a Computer Scientist Rarely Talks About” by Donald Knuth. He’s all manner of awesome and also happens to be a Christian. He talks about his Christianity but doesn’t have anything to sell you, and there are lots of really interesting asides about translation and calligraphy and computer science. Plus I’m pretty sure anything by Knuth counts toward your geek merit badge.
Lady Katey

Yo, sorry to be off topic, but is it just me or is BoingBoing really SLOW today? It seems to keep getting hung up on the Facebook and Tweetmeme links. I hope this gets fixed!
- Antinous / Moderator
  
  Yo, sorry to be off topic, but is it just me or is BoingBoing really SLOW today? It seems to keep getting hung up on the Facebook and Tweetmeme links.
  
  Word. I thought that it was just me.
Neon Tooth

I’m glad he did it but it strikes me as an empty and calculated response based on self interest in the face of overwhelming disgust.

Local radio show “Worldview” did a very interesting segment today on how many right wing Christian groups in the U.S. have had a direct influence on the legistators involved in these proposed laws:

The Ugandan Parliament is currently considering legislation that would criminalize sexual relations between persons of the same sex, making it punishable by life in prison or death. Even a doctor who works with someone who has become HIV positive through homosexual relations could be prosecuted and face death for aiding and abetting homosexual activity. And thereâ€™s something else, the inspiration for the bill comes from Evangelical leaders here in the United States who promote Christianityâ€™s role in helping lead gays back to a straight life. They have missions and churches in Uganda.

Kisuule Magala is a Ugandan journalist and the online editor of Crested Journal. He currently lives in Chicago. He says the ties between influential leaders of the religious right here in the U.S. and Ugandan politicians, including the major backers of the legislation, goes back to the early 1980â€™s. After the Obote regime was overthrown during a coup, members of its leadership, such as David Bahati and James Buturo, the current Minister of Ethics and Integrity, came to the United States. And while living in exile in Washington they established certain connections.

Radio Show
tim

Warren is a hatemonger. If he really wanted to do the right thing, he would side with the evidence. Homosexuality isn’t a choice. It can’t be “cured.” It’s not contrary to the laws of God

It shouldn’t even matter whether it is innate or a choice. Even if it were ‘curable’ it makes no difference – if people want to choose to be gay (or goth, or chess players, or motorcycle riders, or even something really bad like Tory voters) then they have that right. And since there is no god, there can’t any ‘laws of god’.
takeshi

@ cloudthreads:

Apparently you have me confused with someone who actually believes what comes out of Rick Warren’s mouth. Incidentally, he also said that the removal of Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube was “an atrocity worthy of Nazism,” and opined without a shred of evidence that her husband only wanted her to die because, if she became responsive, she might have “something to say that he didnâ€˜t want said.” He compared same sex marriage to the marriage between an adult and a child, later backpeddling by stating that he didn’t equate homosexuality to pedophilia.

Yup. Real class act there.
vert

I’m going to chime in on the side of Warren doesn’t deserve even a small amount of praise for doing this. Yes, this was the right thing to do, but it’s hardly a change of heart for this bigot who *helped* create the problem at hand.

Alsoâ€¦ and this is just my curmudgeony atheist side coming outâ€¦ but he’s wrong that it’s an un-Christian policy. The Bible is pretty clear that homosexuals are to be put to death. Is he now saying that we should believe in the Bibleâ€¦ but only a *little* bit? Or is he saying that God isn’t Christian?
- dsac86
  
  Not being facetious or starting an argument, but what part of the Bible says homosexuals should be put to death? I haven’t read the Bible since my younger days, but I know that there’s a Commandment of “Thou Shalt Not Kill” that seemed to cover pretty much everything. Unless you’re referring to Sodom and Gomorroh, but that was Old Testament and had more to do with rape than anything else (again, from my recollection…)
  - zio_donnie
    
    Lev 20:13 If a man also lies with mankind, as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be on them.
    - Antinous / Moderator
      
      Seriously, argue with someone living, not someone who’s been dead for three and a half millennia. It’s a waste of time.
      - dsac86
        
        Just FYI – he was responding to a question I had asked, and being helpful. I didn’t consider it a waste of time.
      - zio_donnie
        
        hey actually i don’t argue with anyone that believes that a compilation of sayings, beliefs and superstitions of ancient camel breeders is the ultimate word of god. i would discuss for argument’s sake but said book says everything and the contrary of everything so it is on one hand too easy to counter argue on the other impossible to get a final victory. specially with the hotheads that actually believe that some ancient culture was somehow wiser than the current one.
        
        i was just being helpful.
    - dsac86
      
      Thanks for that. Most Christians I know argue that this verse no longer applies, given Jesus’ teachings in the New Testament (Leviticus being old testament). Also, nothing in Leviticus is really followed anymore.
randalll

In other news, after weeks of pressure, Rick Warren finally came out against stomping puppies faces.
Anonymous

Uganda has become the Christian version of the Taliban. I’d say the nation with its child soldiers, terrorist militias and now this is slightly worse. Remember, this the nation that gave us Idi Amin.
Sean Blueart

I hope and pray it has an influence.
RynTheTyn

Yeah, and now he’s implying on Twitter that his work behind the scenes is what led to the dropping of the death penalty provision. He’s hoping that his supporters, who probably didn’t even hear about the bill until he released his statement, see him as the hero who not only strongly condemned the bill but whose behind-the-scenes work saved people’s lives.

I’m glad he finally ended his silence, but I’ve grown up in the religious right and I’ve got enough distance from it now to recognize when someone is spinning, and he’s most definitely trying to spin his bad press by hinting that he was willing to put up with the bad press to do real work behind the scenes, thus trying to make himself look like a selfless martyr who didn’t care about his reputation.
baconner

Better late than never, but I would hardly classify avoiding speaking out as long as possible and then finally doing so only after massive public pressure “doing the right thing.”

Wouldn’t the right thing be speaking out without needing to be shamed into it? If Rick lived in Uganda where he wouldn’t be under public pressure to oppose it would he speak out? I won’t pretend to know for sure what Rick would do but I have a theory.
Xopher

Antinous, zio_donnie’s comment was a reply to a comment asking where the Bible says homosexuals should be put to death.
- Antinous / Moderator
  
  I just don’t understand why we’re still arguing based on 3,500 year old words. We’re letting them define the argument.
seanbedlam

Never forgive a christian, because that would be confusing.
jonathan_v

i would have titled this article “Rick Warren might actually have a soul, or Rick Warren actually does something decent”.
- dsac86
  
  Or maybe “Rick Warren celebrates opposite day”
SammHain

Rick Warren didn’t do the right thing. This is political maneuvering at it’s most disgusting and I see no real point in pretending it’s something else. It should not take an ethical human being this long to go on record saying the execution of homosexuals is the very definition of evil. But Warren can’t even do that, after hemming and hawing over the issue we get a tepid this is unchristian…but btw the bible is clear that Jesus opposes homosexuality.

That same bible is also pretty clear on what to do to homosexuals…execute them. Am I honestly expected Warren had a sudden crisis of faith and managed to see the wickedness in that scriptural command? Or is it more likely that he’s lying in order not to further risk his agenda? Any small amount of digging into fundamentalist sects turns up the belief that lying to unbelievers in order to further god’s purpose is a ok.

It’s beyond depressing that in 2009 we’re having to ask or debate with people who believe in celestial tyrants for which no evidence exists whether they think killing homosexuals for being homosexuals is ethical or not.

It’s insanity on the art of their ilk to even entertain that horror of a myth as being literally real in anyway, but it is insanity of another kind for those valuing a secular society to treat these people as some kind of heroes for begrudgingly coming out against theocratic execution.

Warren and his ilk are throwbacks to a dark and bloody part of our past, one which we should have out grown long ago..or at the very least stopped enshrining as virtuous.
davidould

Most Christians I know argue that this verse no longer applies, given Jesus’ teachings in the New Testament (Leviticus being old testament). Also, nothing in Leviticus is really followed anymore.

Well, it’s a little more complicated than that.

one of the key questions in reading the Bible is how to understand the transition from Old to New Testament in the light of the coming and work of Jesus. This topic, referred to generally within the subset of hermeneutics, is one which brings about a wide range of debate.

As one example, the Anglican Church’s Articles state:

VII. Of the Old Testament.
The Old Testament is not contrary to the New: for both in the Old and New Testament everlasting life is offered to Mankind by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and Man, being both God and Man. Wherefore they are not to be heard, which feign that the old Fathers did look only for transitory promises. Although the Law given from God by Moses, as touching Ceremonies and Rites, do not bind Christian men, nor the Civil precepts thereof ought of necessity to be received in any commonwealth; yet notwithstanding, no Christian man whatsoever is free from the obedience of the Commandments which are called Moral.

Here the Anglican Reformers elaborated a threefold division of the Law: Ceremonial, Civil and Moral.

All reasonable scholars are agreed, the coming of Jesus is the centerpiece of the Bible and brings about a massive transition in thinking because of the concept that Jesus has “fulfilled” a number of the requirements of the OT Law. Nevertheless, the NT itself shows that some requirements are held over. One example of this form of debate can be seen in Acts 15 at the “Council of Jerusalem” where the Apostles discuss the requirements to be placed (or not placed) upon Gentile converts.

All of this, however brief, should hopefully begin to persuade the more discerning reader here that the simplistic “why do you still eat shellfish?” arguments brought in response to questions of human sexuality are inadequate to deal with these slightly more complex issues.
- dsac86
  
  Thanks! I knew it was more complicated than I had worded it, yet didn’t really care to go into more depth, realizing I’d be wasting my time researching and wasting my breath since it’d just get attacked. And, not being religious, I had no stake in that particular argument.
  
  But I do find religion fascinating (albeit infuriating), so thank you for that.
- Anonymous
  
  Well now, isn’t this a convenient excuse for being able to cherry pick from Leviticus?
- zio_donnie
  
  actually it is a whole lot more complicated than that since the orthodox and the catholics have guidelines of their own. and if you want to take this further the orthodox and the catholics recognise each other as christians (albeit the schism) but pretty much consider the rest heretics that have no doctrine whatsoever and do not engage in theological debate. pastors as this Rick Warren character are as reputable as Michael Jackson in the traditional churches.
  
  i can say from experience that on everyday life and much to its credit the greek orthodox church mainly stays out of the secular debate of sexual intercourse. no crusades against gays or abortion they just preach what they believe if you ask them. until now at least.
  - davidould
    
    possibly, but that’s a different question – not one of hermeneutics but of basic understandings of what the essence of the Christian gospel is.
    
    Those questions, I would suggest, are not as directly relevant to this particular issue.
    - zio_donnie
      
      i agree that the theological debate per se has become chaotic nowadays. pretty much anyone has an opinion and expresses it, so much that even the Pope cannot keep his cardinals in line.And every american oddball pastor straps a crucifix on his chest and makes his own doctrine adding to the confusion.
      
      On the sex life issues for example the South American catholics are the most liberal while the Spanish with Opus Dei backing them are the worst reactionaries.
      
      The Orthodox have not expressed themselves in a uniform way other than the classic “god made man and woman to procreate”, local priests are allowed to follow their conscience in discretion.
      
      in general it’s not as much a doctrine issue as it is politics for the future of the traditional church. the gay haters are trying to hang on to the authority and power they had over people and that they have long lost even if they do not fully understand it yet, while the moderates or liberals are trying to gain traction in a new society before they become irreversibly irrelevant.
      
      more or less theology has taken a back seat to tactics, that’s how it goes in europe at least.
      
      american tv pastors where always a joke to me so i never considered them more than curiosities, another american pop culture phenomenon.
      - davidould
        
        the gay haters
        
        You know what – I think perhaps the biggest impediment to any sensible debate is the continued use of such inaccurate and perjorative statements. Like the “shellfish” arguments before them they simply fail to do justice to the issues involved, or confer upon those whom we disagree with the basic respect of understanding their position that we insist others show to us.
      - MrJM
        
        “laws that would make homosexuality a crime, punishable by death in some cases”
        
        Gay haters seems perfectly accurate to me.
      - davidould
        
        “laws that would make homosexuality a crime, punishable by death in some cases”
        
        Gay haters seems perfectly accurate to me.
        
        Yes, but let’s have some honesty – the label is not intended to be limited to only that category of people.
      - MrJM
        
        “laws that would make homosexuality a crime, punishable by death in some cases”
        
        Gay haters seems perfectly accurate to me.
        
        “Yes, but let’s have some honesty – the label is not intended to be limited to only that category of people.”
        
        I defer to your superior mind-reading abilities.
      - zio_donnie
        
        what’s inaccurate and dishonest about gay hating priests? i have no respect for these people and i will not discuss with them anything because they cannot discuss in an intelligent manner since they start with the flawed logic that there is something wrong with people.
        
        actually there is nothing to discuss either. all people have equal rights and they should be respected – the end. there’s nothing wrong with being gay. who cares what the church thinks about that? talking with them just legitimizes the church. they should be left out of the public discourse like they did in Spain and France. it is a secular state after all.
        
        PS: i am not even gay, but self righteous priests that interfere in peoples lives arguing that their book said so give me the creeps. if we let them limit the freedom of one group they will eventually try to limit us all in their demented view of the world.
Anonymous

I love reading BB. It is provocative and shows a wide variety of things from a unique perspective.

However, often when I read the comments section, I can see that a lot of BB readers (at least those who leave comments) are sadly narrow-minded and predictable in their knee-jerk reactions regarding politics and religion. This makes me sad because it seems like people are not thinking for themselves, but are just following a certain crowd that has self-reinforcing opinions. Of course the same thing can be said for probably the *majority* of comments sections in various blog sites…but for a site that has self-aspirations to be ‘free thinking’ this trait of the BB commentors is especially disappointing.
- Steve
  
  narrow-minded and predictable in their knee-jerk reactions regarding politics and religion…but for a site that has self-aspirations to be ‘free thinking’ this trait of the BB commentors is especially disappointing.
  
  Well put. I like coming here to see the offbeat and quirky stuff, but the religion & politics groupthink is frustrating.
  - Anonymous
    
    I’m going to have to agree with these people. I for one follow the teachings of Christ. I also read boingboing. Although I do not agree with a lot of things BB may say, I find it an important forum and an important window on worlds that I may never encounter. To me that is the very attitude of Christ. He hung out with prostitutes, tax collecters, aka people unlike the “religious right wing”. Jesus was open minded and listened to people he had no self interest in being around. But, to wholly dismiss Christianity because of your close-minded stereotyping misconceptions and the followers that are trying to live that faith out is painfully foolish. I hope this ignorance is something that changes overtime and that self-righteous atheism and agnosticism is not a trademark of a happy mutant.
  - Antinous / Moderator
    
    groupthink
    - noun
    
    1. Something I disagree with
‘berto

What a lot of people here don’t seem to realize is that Rick Warren came to his “epiphany” a full day AFTER Uganda had already decided to remove the most contentious parts of the legislation — the death penalty and life imprisonment — from the proposed bill: “Uganda Bill to Drop Death Penalty, Life Imprisonment for Gays” — http://www.towleroad.com/2009/12/uganda-to-drop-death-penalty-life-imprisonment-for-gays.html

In short, Warren’s “moral stance” is nothing more than after-the-fact window-dressing for the sake of gullible North American (straight) audiences.

Queers have never been fooled; the man is still a scumbag, and deserves no thanks or credit whatsoever.
‘berto

Also worthy of note:

Scott Lively “Commends” The Brave Ugandans Who Want To Kill Gays — http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2009/12/scott-lively-commends-brave-ugandans.html

“Lively is the author of The Pink Swastika, a book that blames the Holocaust on gay Nazis. SRSLY.”
MrJM

Cheers to Rev. Warren for doing the very minimum necessary to establish his basic human decency.

Hip! Hip! Hooreallycanimaginedoingless!
mati

@takeshi

First off, I’m not inviting him to speak at the next TED conference, I’m saying “thank you.” This might be an exasperated, hands in the air, punctuated-by-a-sigh “thank you,” but it’s a thank you nonetheless. There are far too many right-wing ideologues who would use left wing pressure as an opportunity to score points with their crazy-base. The fact that Warren is willing to engage with the reality-based community–even in a begrudging, wheedling way–is something to be encouraged, acknowledged, and exploited. Stonewalling, ignoring, and marginalizing the other side won’t make them go away. Just check out Cuba.
Scamp

Rachel Maddow is the one I thank, for her coverage of the Uganda “kill the gays bill” and its American connections.
zio_donnie

http://allafrica.com/stories/200911270311.html

Uganda: Not Every Human Right is Right

Kampala â€” One Sunday morning, I was going to church when I met a lady who was so skimply dressed, one would think she was a sex worker. I initiated a conversation with her, only to find out, she was going to church.

I sarcastically told her she was smart and God would hear her prayers, but not those of the people who were going to sit near her. To my surprise, the lady responded with a verbal tirade: “It is my right to dress the way I want. Who made you judge over those whose prayers God answers?” she shouted.

This whole concept of human rights grates my nerves. It has made people un-african, mean and self-centered.

One can now shamelessly stand up and tell you: “I do as I please. You have no business in my affairs.” A sodomist can now swear to you that what they do in the privacy of their bedroom does not concern the public.

No wonder when a brilliant MP comes up with a Bill against homosexuality, the human rights activists baptise him an enemy of the people.

It is high time politicians, religious leaders, cultural leaders and all concerned Africans woke up and defended the African heritage against the moral confusion of Western civilisation. This civilisation is eroding African moral pride.

The so-called human rights activists have hijacked the driver’s seat and are sending nations into the sea of permissiveness in which the Western world has already drowned.

Every evil that has penetrated our society comes disguised as a human right and is watered by a group of elites who have attained education in the West. These elites have come back to impose on us practices that our forefathers deemed abominable.

You find them holding conferences in five-star hotels and lecture rooms delivering speeches aimed at breaking marriages in the name of human rights activism.

These activists force their unsuspecting disciples into believing that everything the West does is right. That is why they always refer to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

When the world gets compressed into a small global village in the name of globalisation, it does not mean that the African should throw away what belongs to him.

Not every human right is a right, and not every right is a human right. As Africans, we should defend our heritage even when human rights activists are misleading our society.

The writer is a Pan Africanist
- Xopher
  
  The writer is a Pan Africanist
  
  Wow. If that’s typical of Pan Africanists, then death to Pan Africanism! May his human rights get same respect he wishes for others.
  - zio_donnie
    
    this article is pure evil because this guy just writes what this Warren character has not the balls to say in the US or the Pope in Europe.
    
    it creeps me out. and it saddens me too, because our bombs delegitimized everything that is good and true. people are suspicious of the West and vermin like this one gain authority for their own greedy and\or crazy agendas.
mati

Gah. I feel like a lot of commenters are under some sort of misapprehension about what “thanking” Rick Warren means. It doesn’t come with a cash prize. It doesn’t come with BB Comment Moderator privileges. It’s one simple word to acknowledge that, for whatever his motivations, what he just did was helpful. I would hope that, if Richard Dawkins were appointed Supreme Chancellor of the United States and made a move to guarantee religious groups’ freedom to assemble, they would take the five seconds to thank him as well. It has nothing to do with compromising your rhetorical purity; it’s just being civil.
Ian70

It’s good to know that even someone with their head that far up their ass can still listen to criticism and respond to it.
takeshi

@ mati:

Oh, I never said that *you* couldn’t thank Rick Warren; only that doing so is every bit as ineffectual as his sudden change of heart. Since you completely glossed over my points, I will reiterate: Warren’s stance on this issue makes no difference. Not when one considers (a) his innate duplicity, and (b) his prior, dubious meddling in Ugandan (and American) affairs.
TariAkpodiete

i think ‘thanking’ Rick Warren goes a little far. ok, a lot far. so he did the ‘right thing’. AFTER doing the wrong thing for quite some time. so what? honestly, i feel it’s like thanking a killer for turning themselves in. they’re still a murdering scumbag. and let’s not forget what he continues to do (besides condemning gay people generally) – for example: his continuing so-called help program in Africa which stress abstinence to avoid HIV infection.
- Maggie Koerth-Baker
  
  I agree that it’s pretty damn shameful that it took a huge amount of public pressure to get him to do this. But I’m a big fan of positive reinforcement. Maybe the next time something like this comes up, he’ll do the right thing without prompting.
  - IamInnocent
    
    Dear Maggie,
    
    I don’t know if positive reinforcement can work with him. I believe that he was born this way.
- smammers
  
  Yeah, he’s still a scumbag, but not advocating gays is still better than advocating it. It’s a step in the right direction. Granted, he’ll probably never stop preaching abstinence (among other things), but that doesn’t negate him speaking out against this bill.
  - smammers
    
    Oops, my comment should read: “but not advocating killing gays is still better than advocating it.”
Anonymous

Took him long enough. Maybe if he remembered his moral duty a bit sooner, he could have avoided some of the poop-flinging.