DiscussMormonism.com

"[I]f someone publicly charges that "Mormonism is a cult," it is impossible to say that the claim by itself is mistaken or untrue. However, if the speaker says that heaven is a real place but that you will not get there if you are Jewish, or that Mormonism is a cult and a false religion but that other churches and faiths are the genuine article, then you know that the bigot has spoken."

(Christopher Hitchens on Rick Warren)

I never could understand how people can sit there with a straight face and pretend like their version of Christianity is any less asinine and fictitious than a Mormon's.

The article might be of particular interest to some here, considering Warren's feelings on Mormonism. I happen to agree with Hitchens, "If we must have an officiating priest, surely we can do better than this vulgar huckster."



.

I don't agree with Rick Warren's faith in God, but from what I've read about him, he's a pretty good guy. Probably a majority of the human population on Earth has some religious beliefs, and we can't go around being opposed to everyone who believes in some sort of supernatural deity.

I tell you what, if I had to choose an Evangelical Christian leader to play some sort of role in public life, I'd prefer it to be Rick Warren than someone like Pat Robertson, or Jerry Falwell.

Read this article for examples of what I mean. He donates 90% of the profits from his book to his church, and hasn't taken a salary from them in six years. He came out for Prop 8 in such a tepid way that some accused him of undermining the evangelical position on it. He supports AIDS victims, opposes global warming, and other "left of center" things, to the point where other Evangelicals don't trust him. That's gotta be a good sign.

Sethbag wrote:I don't agree with Rick Warren's faith in God, but from what I've read about him, he's a pretty good guy. Probably a majority of the human population on Earth has some religious beliefs, and we can't go around being opposed to everyone who believes in some sort of supernatural deity.

I tell you what, if I had to choose an Evangelical Christian leader to play some sort of role in public life, I'd prefer it to be Rick Warren than someone like Pat Robertson, or Jerry Falwell.

What have you heard? I've heard Rick Warren as "Jerry Falwell in a Hawaiian shirt".

I guess if I had to wear a button-up shirt I would rather have an open collar with a tropical print than something starched white with a sacrament tie. But usually I prefer T-shirts.

The article I linked to happens to be something that was on the front page of msnbc.com today, but I've heard other similar things about him before. I could be wrong, who knows. But I don't automatically despise the guy as a human being just because he believes in an invisible sky daddy. I'd have to hate almost everyone I know if I did that.

Sethbag wrote:I don't agree with Rick Warren's faith in God, but from what I've read about him, he's a pretty good guy. Probably a majority of the human population on Earth has some religious beliefs, and we can't go around being opposed to everyone who believes in some sort of supernatural deity.

Can we be opposed to rewarding bigots with soap boxes at our Nation's most important Inauguration?

I'm also particularly opposed to his public opposition and coercion of others to oppose - on his authority - abortion, gay marriage, stem-cell research, human cloning, and euthanasia -- calling them "not even debatable." And his racket's tax-exempt status.

He donates 90% of the profits from his book to his church, and hasn't taken a salary from them in six years.

I don't know what this is supposed to say for him. Are you suggesting he isn't filthy rich? Or his church's massive budget doesn't contribute to his wealth? His crappy little book is one of the best selling of the decade, and whatever percent he purports to keep after giving the rest back (to himself?) is significant.

He's a charlatan getting fat off of the idea, among other things, that Jews, Mormons, gays, and other members of the outgroup are of less worth. His charity work: I like what one blogger calls it -- disaster Christianity.

Sethbag wrote:The article I linked to happens to be something that was on the front page of msnbc.com today, but I've heard other similar things about him before. I could be wrong, who knows. But I don't automatically despise the guy as a human being just because he believes in an invisible sky daddy. I'd have to hate almost everyone I know if I did that.

I despise his bigotry, not his mere belief in the celestial Santa. He could be worse, but he's not good enough. The article you linked only tells the good stuff and in a very funny way. He gives back 90% of his book earnings to his own church -- that's still pretty damn self serving, don't you think? Why is that even mentionable as a good point? Oh, because he didn't keep it for himself (which would have made him pay more taxes, of course.) Imagine Paul Newman recycling 90% of his earnings right back into his salad dressing empire instead of donating all 250 million of it to education and charity. Why couldn't Obama get a humanitarian icon like Paul Newman to speak at the inauguration instead of a hypocritical bigot like pastor Warren? Don't fall for it, Seth.

I'm not really in favor of having a prayer at the start of the inauguration at all. But, like Christopher Hitchens' article starts, "if we must have an officiating priest..." I think we could do worse than Rick Warren. We could do better, too, but it's not like Rick Warren is the Great Satan or anything.

I can't go around hating everyone who doesn't believe in abortion rights, or human cloning.

And for Warren plowing 90% of his book profits into his church, well, he could have kept it all. How many capitalists do you know giving up 90% of their profits (while they're still alive that is)? Precious few.

Look, every single Christian worthy of the name has to believe that if you don't believe in Christ, you're not going to heaven. Christians (at least nominally) make up a vast majority of the American people. That means that a vast majority of Americans either actively believe, or identify themselves with religions that believe, that Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc. aren't going to Heaven*. Are we really saying that none of these people should be involved in the Inauguration at all?

So, to avoid constituting some travesty, the Inauguration has to consist of an Invocation by Christopher Hitchens, an introductory speech by Sam Harris, and then Richard Dawkins holds a copy of the Origin of Species for Obama to place his hand on while swearing the oath of office?

*and with Mormons it's really a trick question, because after they bow their knee before Jesus, accept their baptism for the dead, and give Joseph Smith the secret handshake, they won't really be Jews, Muslims, and Hindus anymore, will they?

Why couldn't Obama get a humanitarian icon like Paul Newman to speak at the inauguration instead of a hypocritical bigot like pastor Warren?

Now that would be impressive since Paul Newman is deceased.

Sethbag wrote:
And for Warren plowing 90% of his book profits into his church, well, he could have kept it all.

I don't see a difference.

GoodK wrote:

Sethbag wrote:
And for Warren plowing 90% of his book profits into his church, well, he could have kept it all.

I don't see a difference.

Neither do I. He basically invested it in his own tax-free "business".

That MSNBC article was a ridiculous piece of puffery for framing Rick Warren's self-investment as an act of generosity. Furthermore, it points out that Rick Warren has never had a scandal. Isn't it wonderful that this man has not yet proved to be a bald-faced crook?

Okay, I agree with you Seth. Rick Warren is the best hypocritical bigot we could get - the best of the worst.