Obama, McCain, and Rick Warren
If anyone had any doubt about the influence of Rick Warren, last night provided a remarkable demonstration of his pull -- Barack Obama and John McCain both agreed to submit, one after the other, to televised questions from the evangelical pastor at his church in Orange County, California.
Warren, of course, is the author of "The Purpose Driven Life," which, after selling 25 million copies, is now reportedly the best-selling hardback book ever. Saddleback Church, which Warren founded in 1980 with one family, now has 22,000 people at worship each week. Warren has become ubiquitous -- even in Boston, he has spoken at Harvard and was this year's commencement speaker at Gordon College -- and his words have been printed on Starbucks cups. And he has become the best-known advocate of a new set of public policy priorities for evangelicals in the public square -- yes, he opposes same-sex marriage and abortion, but his public focus has been on AIDS in Africa, and he has devoted considerable energy to training pastors in the developing world.
The Saddleback Civil Forum, as Warren dubbed last night's event, featured Warren interviewing Obama, and then McCain, for an hour each, before an audience of 2,200. The candidates, in their first joint appearance since becoming the likely nominees of the two major political parties, appeared on the stage together for a few seconds, and shook hands.
Warren asked the candidates about marriage, abortion, stem-cell research, and what Christianity means to them. Obama's answer, according to a partial transcript from Warren:
"It means I believe that Jesus Christ died for my sins and that I am redeemed through Him. That is a source of strength and sustenance on a daily basis. I know that I don't walk alone. But what it also means, I think, is a sense of obligation to embrace not just words, but also through deeds and expectations that God has for us. And that means thinking about the least of these - acting justly, loving mercy and walking humbly with our God."
And McCain's response:
"It means I am saved and forgiven."
(I just realized this morning that Rick Warren is now apparently running his own news service, so for all the Rick Warren news you need, provided by Rick Warren, about Rick Warren, check out this site. I was trying to think about whether there are any other religious leaders who communicate about their own activities in this way; the only parallels that come to mind are denominational heads, like Pope Benedict XVI or Episcopal Church Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, who have news departments that chronicle their appearances and utterances.)
There's lots of coverage of the Saddleback event in today's papers; the Globe's story, by Sasha Issenberg, is here.
But there is also some critical comment now emerging about Warren's role in the campaign.
The Rev. Thomas J. Reese, who is now a senior fellow at Georgetown's Woodstock Theological Center, sent out an e-mail yesterday wondering what would happen if a Catholic figure attempted such a feat.
"Before the forum takes place, let me say how weird the whole event appears to me as a Catholic priest. First, my understanding is that the forum will take place in the sanctuary of the Saddleback Church. I think that is inappropriate. A church hall would be OK but not the sanctuary which should be reserved for worship service. This is not a question of separation of church and state--I leave that to the constitutional lawyers. This is a question of what is religiously appropriate and inappropriate to do in churches. Catholics appear to have a very different standard than Evangelicals (both white and black). The Vatican is even opposed to holding concerts in churches. Second, imagine for a second that the forum was being sponsored by Cardinal Francis George of Chicago and was held in the sanctuary of his cathedral. The outcry would be defining. The public and the media appear more easily to accept political activity by Evangelical clergy than by Catholic clergy. Catholic clergy are held to a higher standard. For example, Pat Robertson and Jesse Jackson can run for president, but imagine what would happen if Cardinal George or Cardinal Egan ran for president. Don't get me wrong. I do not want Catholic cardinals or clergy publicly getting involved in partisan politics. I am happy that canon law and tradition restrict political activity by Catholic clergy. I just wonder if there is a double standard here."
And, the Rev. C. Welton Gaddy, president of Interfaith Alliance and a frequent critic of the role of faith in politics today, praised Warren, but said:
"Some of the questions Pastor Warren posed crossed the line and promoted the fiction that the American people are electing a pastor-in-chief, rather than a commander-in-chief. Questions like 'What does it mean to trust in Christ?' create a religious test for public office and should have no place in the political discourse for a secular office. America is the most religiously diverse country in the world, and Christianity is only one of those faith traditions. Millions of voters who tuned in tonight will feel disenfranchised by some of the questions posed in this forum. And both the candidates deserve criticism for engaging in a competition to be 'holier than thou.' The American people want real solutions for real issues. Discussing the personal theology of the candidates does little to elucidate those solutions."
(Photo by Getty.)
Comment
Permalink
E-mail
So the Priest has problems with architecture and the Liberal Protestant is less comfortable than Barack Obama when it comes to talking about his faith publicly.
What's your point? (I noticed both pundits made their remarks before watching it)
Last night was a coup for those who prefer substantive, civil discourse. I much preferred it to the "debates" we saw during the primaries.
Why not have a candidates' forum hosted by a Catholic priest?
I had gotten an email this morning from some conservatives that still are not ready to embrace McCain, they are circulating a petition to try and get Huckabee to leave the GOP and start a new party. Sounds Crazy Doesnt It. Could you imagine how bad the GOP would be hurt if the base left the party>?
http://www.mccanes.com/newparty.html
Rick Warren can have whoever he wants in his church. They choose to worship that way, so yes, they should be fine with having the presidential nominees present themselves at a forum in their sanctuary. This isn't the 1700's, so I think there's room for mainstream, non-traditional evangelical churches both black and white. Lastly, although we are hiring a commander-in-chief and not a pastor-in-chief, both candidates running for office are proud Christians. No one forced them to present at that forum. I thought it was a success, and if there were more forums like that and not the nasty back-and-forth, tit-for-tat politics controlling the media today, Americans would be much more informed.
We need more question and answer sessions like this one. I believe this forum showed more about the stark differences between these two candidates than all the other debates combined.
Although well-meaning, who does this Pastor Warren think he is anyway. I read that Obama has been friends with the good Pastor for a long time. Hmm. Seems this is just turning into another 'forum' for Obama. PLUS Obama handing out 1200 booklets telling about his own 'faith?' What IS that! If Obama was planning to do this how come McCain wasn't given the same opportunity? From his runup promotion of this get together Pastor Warren claimed to be trying to be even handed by inviting both contenders for the event. Seems it may have done more for both Obama and McCain to have had the one-on-one Pastor Warren said he didn't want.
Senator Obama gave thoughtful answers to complicated questions, in part because this was pitched as a "civil" discussion.
Senator McCain threw red meat sound bites to a conservtive crowd in conservative Lake Forrest, CA.
The crowd went for the easy answers as they have for the last 8 years. The Evangelicals have not changed at all. It was a sad night for critical thinking.
And then the media gets testy because they were shown how to do their jobs by a pastor. No slant...no spin...just direct questions, let the answerer answer, let he folks listen and then move on. Wow...I learned more from this exchange than from any political coverage of any sort from MSM in the last 30 years. So it must be inappropriate then.
The worst part about this spectacle: We all know those kinds of poser McCain type "Christians," who tell everyone else they're "saved" (by an heiress?) and "forgiven" (lucky you!) and go to church to punch their tickets; but who don't live a reflective and meaningful Christian life, who don't let the Christianity of the bible bear the least on their actions and choices. McCain's unreflective canned answers show him to be, at the very best, a ticket-punching bumper sticker "Christian" ! Let's not forget, he wants to "inspire" the poor (gee helpful!), and wants everyone to be rich (marry big $$, like you, John!), etc. etc.) And Drill now! War now! POW last century! Nothing since! etc. etc.. McCain's Jesus is an oil tycoon in full body armor ready to drill into and bomb any . . . reflective thought . . . that gets in the way. (Certainly, nothing to do with what Christianity is supposed to be. . . )
This could be especially problematic if Rick Warren attempts to create a tradition out of these types of forums. I like the idea on the surface; however, this is not a part of the political process and if tradition- over time- allows it too become institutionalized, Rick Warren's church will hold too much political power in this country.
I applaud the first event, in theory.
I will probably frown on the next.
I am a bit disappointed in this forum, but it's the way things go today. As a Buddhist and a scientist, I probably will never see a forum in which they discuss issues important to Buddhists or scientists. As soon as you start engaging in 'courtships' as the media calls them, then you must then seek to target all Americans equally. Unfortunately this will never happen due to the fundamentals of it all.
Here, here to Rev. Gaddy! This kind of shameless pandering to an evangelical christian demi-god is a disgrace to both candidates. This is truly un-American at a fundamental level and has absolutely no place in the political process. Most of the questions could have been most honorably answered "None of your damn business!"
The worst part about this spectacle: We all know those kinds of poser McCain type "Christians," who tell everyone else they're "saved" (by an heiress?) and "forgiven" (lucky you!) and go to church to punch their tickets; but who don't live a reflective and meaningful Christian life, who don't let the Christianity of the bible bear the least on their actions and choices. McCain's unreflective canned answers show him to be, at the very best, a ticket-punching bumper sticker "Christian" ! Let's not forget, he wants to "inspire" the poor (gee helpful!), and wants everyone to be rich (marry big $$, like you, John!), etc. etc.) And Drill now! War now! POW last century! Nothing since! etc. etc.. McCain's Jesus is an oil tycoon in full body armor ready to drill into and bomb any . . . reflective thought . . . that gets in the way. (Certainly, nothing to do with what Christianity is supposed to be. . . )
All this was for was to enrich another phony TV preacher!
I liked the format of Saddleback's Civil Forum. It showed Obama's leadership and McCain's pandering! In reality I think the American people want real solutions to our problems and our theology should not be the litmus test to being a president. Our president should represent ALL Americans regardless of religous preference.
In my view of the human individual, the Nation, and the World, the first allegiance of every one should be to God. For this reason It will not infringe on the Nation's well being to have a knowledge of a perspective political leaders religious understanding and beliefs. As for having such a questioning in a sanctuary, I am opposed for this, although enlightening concerning the faith of men seeking civil
office it is a civil matter and not a matter for the church or for their political gain..
On Rev. Reese's commentary: I would presume that YES, there is a double standard; imposed by the Catholic Church. Church buildings are used as "tools" to promote church activity as opposed to "monuments of religion". I agree that it would seem inappropriate to hold such a gathering in a cathedral but that perception is fostered by the "image" that Catholicism projects. As for a priest running for public office: I see nothing wrong with that occurrence. I think he would loose because the public sees a priest as being under the control of the Vatican. An evangelical, on the other hand, is inherently "independent" (excluding the activities of his own congregation).
McCain has brought in Ralph Reed the corrupt bigot and founder of the extreme right wing Christian Coalition. What is in this game for Obama? Does he believe he can outflank McCain on the religious right? That is a complete waste of time and money and an insult to his more progressive supporters. Religion has no place in politics in a country founded upon separation of church and state. Beliefs should remain personal and private they are not a badge of morality. We live in a world where continuous death and destruction is reigned down on the innocent by religious fanatics who believe they have God on their side. Enough already.
i am a muslim and i am proud of it and an american and also very PROUD of it, at work i have jewish americans , atheist americans ,buddist americans , i have a friend who is a bahai and he is also an american. the list goes on and on. one of the major advantages of being an american is you are free to worship what you like and without anyone critisizing you, and above all the religions there is a constitiution and law that regulates everything. i can not understand whats the importance of knowing the candidates believies , what is important in my opinion is 1-knowing whether the candidates abide to law. 2-knowing whether they are good honest people 3-knowing their plans for change but frankly it is not important to me and to MILLIONS of other non-christian americans to know what does it mean for the candidate to be a christian with my full deep respect to christianity
John McCain said what he thought the religious right wanted to hear, while Obama tried to give reasoned answers....This is the usual position of the two candidates, but the press never emphasize this distinction, to the favor of McCain....McCain voted for Ginsburg, Braeyer, and Souter when they were up for nomination, yet he said last night that he would not vote for such people....Again, the press never emphasize the many inconsistances of McCain....Rather, it talks about "nuance" when it comes to Obama and talk about "direct" when it comes to McCain, when the proper description of the difference between to two should be the one is reasoned and t he other is general and vague..
I hate to say this, however it seems to me this sure did not hurt Mr.Warren.
The candidates need those evangelical votes so they had little choice, but it is not appropriate. It should have been a wide open debate with faith questions coming from representatives of Catholic, Prostestand, Jewish, etc.
Don Jones
PoeSpirits.com
I think the most important outcome here will be to give "values voters" permission to crawl out from under the wreckage of the Bush administration. Many people I know personally are today ashamed of having been intimidated into reelecting Bush in 2004 by politically connected pastors, who sullied their brand-name by associating it with war, torture, indifference, corruption and hypocracy. Internet comments from actual religious voters seem genuinely relieved that their own conscience is in play again. Rev. Reese's coment that he doesn't want Catholic clergy "publicly" involved in politics is disingenuous: Catholics also should confront their church's use of religious identity for corrupt political goals.
Seeing Obama in this light will also help less-than-attentive Christians stand up to people who spread deliberate lies about him. Obama was bearing witness to the message of salvation. That is a core requirement of the actual faith supposedly espoused by the conservative "religious" political machine. A more fundamental and non-negotiable requirement is commandment number eight: "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor."
McCain,s comment about pursueing bin Laden - 'to the gates of hell' - illustrates McCain's knee-jerk response to what he images to be his audience.
Perhaps his 'handlers' suggested this unsolicited suggestion: if this was the case; thesse same 'handlers' would also limit McCain's promotion of bin Laden's pursuit.
Bringing the presidential candidates in religious discussions, before the election, is tantamount to black mailing. In order to get the votes, either they will lie, or will be obliged to do favours to churches they otherwise may not.
A catholic worship service more closely resembles a historic jewish temple worship service with intermediatory priests, and a sacrificial altar than an evangelical service would. This historal/contemporary difference in theology is what allows evangelicals to host worship services in a gym (or political meetings in a 'sanctuary') but prevents catholics from doing the same. No small wonder a catholic priest speaking from his theological position would find this inappropriate.
Carlin said it before: " If the chrurches want to get involved in political life, TAX them"
Agreed. I am not Christian and find forums such as the one held last night offensive. During the Democratic primary, there was a forum in which the question of how faith impacted policy which did not allow the candidates to campaign as they did on the air last night. McCain by the way voted for each of the Justices whom he now finds unacceptable. All of that to be acceptable to the evangilical audience to whom he was speaking. Someone on the NYT website suggested a science and technology forum. A better idea I think.
I'm glad that Rev Gaddy said, "Discussing the personal theology of the candidates does little to elucidate those solutions." He is right, as far as that statement goes. Discussing the personal religion of each candidate, in fact, does elucidate their seeming commitment to some form of religion; which should be of interest to people of all religions. A couple of Rev. Warren's questions, however, did seem a bit self serving. Overall: I would give the event an A minus.
There is nothing to prevent other groups from sponsoring their own FORUM. At least such an occurrence would "stir the pot" and create discourse. Heaven knows, we could use some open discussion, with such civility.
As a Presbyterian minister who is also an openly gay man, I believe the forum does more to disenfranchise Americans who are other than Christian than unify us, while diminshing the separation of Church and State to a blurry condition. The made-for-television spectacle demonstrates all that is wrong when politics and religion emerge together, hand-in-hand on stage. There is more here of the empty noise of a tin can rolling at the heels of sought after votes than the substance of a deep and abiding faith that would never submit to a parry or debate. In the end, a meeting like this for candidates elevates the importance of one group of voters over the other, as always, at the expense of those left behind. Not a quality I seek in a president or spiritual leader, for that matter. A mistake, I think, for both Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama to have participated.
mr warren reminded me of the middle ages where the pope had "discussions" of faith before supporting the intended king. Until Henry VIII came along, the pretenders to the throne knew they didn't have a chance without the pope backing them up. Looks like the middle ages are back. I got so sick of seeing two men groveling in front of warren. I suspect what we have here is an overweigh Elmer Gantry selling more snake oil faith. Phoney or not warren knows how to snow the public.
mary macVicar columbus ohio
Dear American Citizens and the media
Challenge to Media.
As a disabled American Veteran and concerned American citizen.
"We the citizens of the United States of America have the ultimate responsibility to elect the " Right Candidate with the right temperament" to lead our nation'
Our nation is and will be facing many present and future critical internal and external challenges as well as opportunities to address those challenges.
In order to prevent any probable prolong recession and diminished world standing as the sole superpower in the world' Whether it is the moral, democratic, economic, military, and other issues.
I impress upon voters to vote after considering following " qualities and characteristics" of our presumptive presidential nominees.
In my firm professional opinion that the media should help the common voter to explore and discuss following attributes of Hon. Senator McCain and Obama:
1. Calm, cool, and collected " temper " [ Presidential Temperament ].
2. Sound and sustained "Judgment and Caliber".
3. "Thought-fullness and togetherness" of purpose and positions.
4. Minimum "ex-poser and exploitation" around "Washington and Washington insiders".
5. Renewed " Vigor and Vision " for our Great-grand Nation.
6. Foreign policy based on " American Values, Virtuous, Vastness".
7. The campaign based of facts and free of fiction, deception, seduction, and attacks.
I plead to common voter to stay informed, stay involved, and stay engaged.
Do not allow some partisan media, pundits, pollsters, and perpetual political opinion makers effect your vote in the wrong direction.
Please do not be deceived and duped by "Psychological Terrorism" that is being directed at you without your consent and awareness.
Long live U.S.A and its diverse but democratic people.
Col. A.M. Khajawall [Ret] MD., Colonel, USAR / MC Combat Stress Control[Ret], Disabled American Veteran and Iraq Freedom team.
I agree with Michael Paulson ! Very well said. I wish I could post this article on Poltico.com
“If Christ were here now there is one thing he would not be - a Christian”
mark twain
fantastic venue , attendance was not mandatory . Liked both McCain and Obama . Please lets see more of them
Rick Warren conducted an objective and fair forum for the candidates to express their opinions on vital issues which concern each of us. He took a giant step for civil discourse.
Both are god men and each would make a qualified president.
Americans are the beneficiaries.
I watched the forum between Mccain and Obama and was very disappointed. I thought this was going to be strictly bi-partisan. I noticed that there were no blacks in the audience. I guess they could not afford the 2000 dollars for admission. I know this church and members are one of the most conservative in the country,but I thought they would be less partisan. It looked like McCain was listening to Obama's session or had and advance copy. McCain committed adultery. Obama did not. Mccain is a war monger,even worse than Bush. You did not pursue any of the topics that the american citizens would like an answer to,especially Mccain's relation and participation with the republic of Georgia. His negative ads. All of his actions so far is not the act of a true Christian. One last thing: He made so much about Obama's patriotism,and not wearing a flag pin. Why did you not ask McCain why he was not wearing one and never wears one?
I think the most important outcome here will be to give "values voters" permission to crawl out from under the wreckage of the Bush administration. Many people I know personally are today ashamed of having been intimidated into reelecting Bush in 2004 by politically connected pastors, who sullied their brand-name by associating it with war, torture, indifference, corruption and hypocracy. Internet comments from actual religious voters seem genuinely relieved that their own conscience is in play again. Rev. Reese's coment that he doesn't want Catholic clergy "publicly" involved in politics is disingenuous: Catholics also should confront their church's use of religious identity for corrupt political goals.
Seeing Obama in this light will also help less-than-attentive Christians stand up to people who spread deliberate lies about him. Obama was bearing witness to the message of salvation. That is a core requirement of the actual faith supposedly espoused by the conservative "religious" political machine. A more fundamental and non-negotiable requirement is commandment number eight: "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor."
I wish McCain had given answers to the questions that were asked instead of telling stories. I was disappointed in his responses. McCain came across as an old style politician.
Wow! Getting a fairly even-handed view, other than a liberal view, of anything from the Socialist Boston Globe, is difficult to comprehend.
This was a forum by a Christian for Christians, To see who fits the belief system that they hold so deer. If you want to know how they feel about the Olympics watch CNN
If a Roman Catholic cardinal wanted to run for President in this country, there is on secular obstacle for him. The Church might oppose it, but not the nation. As an evangelical, I would have no objection to the Roman Catholic church holding a news conference and asking questions of the candidates that are relevant to their parishioners. All Rick Warren was doing was helping to discover where these two men stand on issues that are important to evangelical Christians. In doing so, I think he was also trying to dispell the untruths circulating on the Internet claiming that Obama is a Muslim. At the very least, Rick Warren conducted a very civil period of questioning that seems not to occur in a secular setting. I wish we could have more of these very civil exhanges.
I share the same opinion as Rev. Gaddy and came away from watching this program feeling very uncomfortable about what this means for the future of politics in the Unitied States.
It is an outrage that people have not been better educated than to think or feel that a majority religion has the right to do this questioning of candidates.
It makes no difference that they accepted the 'invitation". They had to or be marginalized.
What is different from the Taliban defining someone else's reality using brute force and using subtle social pressures and political pressures? The end game's the same. MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY. Its neither politically appropriate nor even in a spiritual sense. Millions of people, having read The Lost Gospel, the book of Q, are now convinced by modern scholarship, that the Christ-who-saves-us was a later addition to Jesus's real teaching of loving and intense requirements of spiritual practice, and no get-out-of -hell-free card. Millions of others, having read about Alexander the Great and Appolonius, know that the Christ-who-saves-us, was an idea used in other earlier cultures and was borrowed by General Constantine's associates.
I saw a man thumping his new standard edition protestant bible and demanding that the Republicans at a debate swear that they believed in every literal word, talking snake and all. We are having the SNOPES trial, all over the USA now, and it is abhorrent. The 300,000 Amish farmers elected Bush in 2004. Think about that.
It was obvious from the opening moment that Warren approved of McCain when he hugged him and didn't even shake hands with Obama. Although I think Obama was more eloquent in his words I do think he risked alienating those Americans who do not believe in Christ. It shouldn't be a litmus test for being President. The question it still leaves me with is who came out ahead of the game after this moral test.
Read either book The Obama Nation or The Case Against Barack Obama to find out who the real Obama is.
Faith needs to influence goverment not the other way around.
I liked the absence of gotcha situations. I liked the same question approach.
I think there will always be elements of any important event, such as this, that have critics. Like with our best friends we have differences.
I hope this format is repeated in many settings. Buildings are buildings. Finding neutral bias in questions is in the eye of the beholder. Many of us have an opinion of what are extreme beliefs. I think, if we are lucky, most interview questions will be centrist.
Thanks for the first look at the candidates in like setting.
Jim
Rev. C. Welton Gaddy are you not aware that this country was founded on the same Christian moral principals described in the Bible? The President of the United States should represent those same values. Your argument is an example of "political correctness" which is totally absurd.
This is a mockery of the secular state, which the U.S. pretends to be: separation of church and state.
I'm ashamed that Barack Obama and John McCain subimmted themselves to this form of inquisition.
I prefer a good man - a good politician- rather than a good "christian".
Rev. Reese appears to take the position that it would be all right if the Warren forum took place in a church hall but not in a church sanctuary. From my perspective, however, If one takes the positiion that the "church" is not merely a brick-and-mortar structure, but is a body of believers, it really shouldn't matter where the forum took place.
I would argue that Catholic clergy are held to a DIFFERENT standard, not a 'higher' one, which comes across as pretty high and mighty, don't you think?
also - if a quarter of American voters come under the Christian/Evangelical umbrella (as many news agencies are mentioning in regards to the Saddleback event), and if these politicians agree to meeting with a widely recognized figure in this arena while knowing what questions are coming down the pike - who cares? Let them. Personal theology may not be a direct answer to a specific problem, but if the people can ask them what's on their iPod, why not ask what's up with their theology?
It's just more exposure for the politicians, that by participating, show they don't mind the context.
MSNBC was in FULL fever pitch to sell America the STUPID candidate....AGAIN.
Who would have guessed KKK linked Tony Perkins and aging Culture Warrior Pat Buchanan would favor McCain? MSNBC was Fred Phelps too busy to join the panel?
I hope these Evangelicals recall vividly Cheney and Rove chortling as they patted you on the head ,and sent you packing without ANYTHING, year after year after year.
It's really your own fault ,you buy the SAME BAIT and they just reel ya in.
Now quit flopping in the bottom of the boat or Dick will shoot you in the face.
I had hoped THIS election would be different, and America would see the horrific mess left by Cheney/Bush, and value the thoughtful nuanced candidate...not so much.
Words like "redeem", "forgiven" and "saved" scare the meatballs out of me. Since when did this become my business. Here are questions that he should ask then by all means, Will you you rely upon God as your foremost advisor, indeed wait for him to speak to you? Has God ever adressed you directly? If so what did he say? Has the devil? Do you believe hell is full of fire and brimstone? An eye for eye? Revelations? The apocolypse? Are you an agent of the Apocolypse? Do you eat animals with cloven hooves? Jonah, truth of fiction? Lot's wife and the pillar of salt?
I didn't find the event very helpful in finding more out about the candidates. Maybe because I am not an evangelical Christian. Warren allowed some pretty shallow and dodgey answers from both of them. If simplistic talk is what was wanted or needed, then it turned out fine, just fine. Perhaps Warren got his cues from the mainstream media.
A universal truth is this: The defacement of spirituality, by rounding up followers of religious doctrine for their vote--by a man with sheltered net worth of over USD$160 million ( much off-shored ), who desires to be more powerful--is a sham, and a disgrace to the pursuit of spiritual truth. I am sick of this kind of pandering by politicians. Churches that discuss political elections should be TAXED! John.
I think the Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves. I also think that the wingnuts who think Obama's a secret Muslim are having a confusing day today.
I think McCain gave real answers. I thought Obamas answers while eloquent were of little substance. This forum style I thought was very good/ We should have more of them.
Personally I was disappointed by the style of this back to back form with Obama fist and then McCain. I rather would have liked that each candidate answers one question at the time. What disturbs me even more are the current blogs and comments and reactions of republican Christians conservatives that see any democrat as the representative of evil. often The act in bitterness and with unfounded accusations on the democratic candidate. The negative campaigns are further examples of this bitter and low class tactics. No matter what Obama seems to say he is painted as a Muslim as a Marxist, socialist ... the same people that pledge to be true Christians but cannot live up to Jesus Christ.
I thought McCain was answering questions with what he expected the audience wanted to hear, rather than from personal conviction or belief. And the question of what have you changed your position on... I thought it was sad how quickly he came to the answer of DRILL DRILL DRILL. It reminds me of the interview question "what is your biggest weakness" and the standard response is to phrase a strength as a weakness - or in his case a perceived strength.
If drilling was the answer why did McCain not sponsor legislation back when oil was a mere 3.50/gal and republicans had complete control in washington?
and the issue gets pushed off to the very end of a Bush's term as a final handout to the Oil industry. Smells like extortion to me.
I had respect for McCain 8 years ago, but his complete pandering just makes the Maverick look beaten. He gave up on Ideals for the want of power.
I think church and state should remain separate but I do feel that by the questions asked of the two last night it gives you an idea of their thought process in regards to many issues as well as their moral values. Regardless of the faith, christian, muslim, etc. it is important to know their moral v alues as to how they would treat others.
How can the evangelical christians follow Mc Cain and crusify Edwards,
What form of hypocrissy is this.
Did you forget he had an adultris affair, or is it all ok now that he is the candidate you have chosen to follow?
It's incredibe to me how little many Catholics of some education understand about Baptist theology and practice. For four hundred years, Baptist have held that the people of God are the church. There is nothing sacred about the bricks and mortar and nothing profane about political discourse. Most town hall meeting in the early decades of our republic were held in church buildings.
As for the rest, Faith is worldview and we have a right to understand the worldview of our leaders. Believing that every person who serves in office should or even can divorce himself/herself from his/her metaphysic is naive.
After last night Pastor Rick Warren two hour of asking Obama and McCain questions, and the answers he received there is no doubt who should lead this country. McCain with his experience in the House and Senate for 26 years and the Military for 22 years Should be elected the next president of the United States
He is a true Patriot and an American Hero
I am glad to have watched the interviews last night. Any discourse between candidates that gives voters better insight into the lives and thought processes of the candidates is helpful. Elections in recent memory for all levels of government seem to be clouded. I appreciate the initiative Rick Warren shows by inviting both Obama and McCain to his church for the forum.
Regarding Rev. Thomas Reese's assertion that there is a double standard between evangelicals and catholics -- I would submit to you that the roadblocks described by Reese as to his own ability to participate in the political process are all self imposed. It is Canon Law and tradition that prohibit him from getting involved. Public policy does not prevent it. The Bible doesn't prevent it. Constitutional law doesn't prevent it. I would challenge anyone who feels led to join in the political process to do just that. Anyone who stands on the sidelines has no opportunity to complain or criticize. There is no double standard -- only self imposed limitations.
Each of the Presidential candidates chose willingly to participate in Warren's public forum. I only wish that it had not been broadcast against the Olympic games. Yes, it was prime time television but it didn't get near the coverage or attention that it deserved.
Thank you, Rick Warren, for initiating the forum. It was very enlightening.
The Rev. Reese is evaluating the activities of others through the myopic glass of his faith. Many of his concerns about the standard that Catholics are held to can be explained if the Catholics took a good look into the nearest mirror.
Those tenets of "canon law and tradition", NOT the Bible, established Catholic churches as such 'sacred' places that, before Martin Luther, the altar was hidden from view and worship was conducted in a language largely foreign to the congregation.
To this day, it prevents Catholic clergy from responsibly exercising their God-given gifts of sexuality and procreation. As a result, many clergy have taken matters into their own hands and exercised these gifts irresponsibly.
To be fair, the Catholics hardly have a monopoly on sexual misconduct by those who profess to be religious leaders. Jesse Jackson is a good example of our frailty as human beings, without the meaningless trappings of tradition and ritual that muddy the message of Catholicism.
If it seems that Catholics being held to a higher standard than other Evangelical or religious figures, it is because they profess to be elevated as such in the eyes of God. And that's hogwash.
Obama's remark: "...And that means thinking about the least of these - acting justly, loving mercy and walking humbly with our God."
A direct quote from the book of Micah (Chapter 6, verse 7 or so). As in so many of Obama's remarks, these are not his own words, which is fine, but I think he should attribute them to their source.
Rick Warren no different than many of his predecessors,Pat Robertson & Falwell bigots of the first order.And why Obama decided to do this schtick is disgraceful.Anyone catch the hand clapping & hooting when McCain vowed to defeat Islamic extremism ?All this in a church sanctuary.What abunch of sickos.
Who ever becomes president as with their stock. should also put their belief al so in trust.Let the Church do their good deeds as long as they are in the law. One President do for all.that we remain a free people. In God we trust. All people need what they feel is right. If their is anyone you can't be the President for. We don't need you. Bob
To /rev. Gaddy's comment:
Rick Warren asked these two men about their Christian faith because they both publicly profess to be Christians. If they we Jewish, Muslim, Hindu or any other religion, I'm sure he would have asked them what that faith meant to them. I don't know why he says millions who tuned in will be disenfranchised because of this,
anyone who cared enough to watch is very likely to know these candidates
consider themselves Christians.
You, my friend, are a cockalorum. It appears, at first, that you fail to see the big picture. We finally get to see an unscripted look at both candidates to find out what they are really like, and you start criticizing Rick Warren. Classic liberal deflection. Good work.
Finally someone speaks for me. We are on a very slippery slope, which is in all but name, a theological litmus test for office when a forum like this is held.
I agree with the comments saying that this is indeed a slippery slope. I believe America already had a "pastor-in-chief", George W. Bush, and we all know how that's ending. I believe America needs a commander that's going to project its basic democratic and moral values to the new millennium
I really liked the format; one candidate goes first and then the other, both being posed the exact same questions. It was revealing to me not only the answers but how both answered the same question differently. I did not like the religious aspect of the forum (atheist) but isn't that what America is all about. If a religion want to host a forum and ask religious based questions and the politicians want to answer them, that is the beauty of America. I just hope what comes from this forum is not an excuse for some to crucify one candidate over another based on religious belief, but instead to realize the forum works. The nation needs more of these.
80% of the U.S population saying that the country is going in the wrong direction. Let focus on how to survive each day and next day. How to pay for your mortgage, how to pay for food, energy, healthcare, and education, etc? Thus, let elect someone that know how to solve these problems, someone know how to communicate and respect by foreign countries. Leave personal emotion, such as religion and abortion to yourself. This is your personal and family value, please don't mix it with politic, haven’t you have enough in the last 8 years? Has the president that you elected in the last 8 years help you pay for your mortgage, food, energy, healthcare, and giving your child a better education? Why repeat the same mistake that you had 8 years ago? What has it done to your pocket at the grocery and gas stations, and perhaps your home being in foreclosure? Aren't you having enough? Not to say that, U.S has more prisoners than the whole China & Russia combine, and yes, we want to lead by example? Is it sympathetic? Is this right? Do we have this many evil in U.S than the whole China and Russia combine or simply we have bad leaders that we elected.
One thing that I am completely sure of is that McCain has a very personal relationship with God. This is evident in his actions and votes. He doesn't tell you to go adopt a child, he sets by example. He may have made a tragic mistake many years ago, but the fact that he adopted his first wifes children and he never brags about himself is enough for me. Personnally, I think he said it all when he told the powerful story of the prison guard who drew the Cross in the sand. God is everywhere and he was obviously what gave John McCain the strength to survive and come back home. I have no doubt that he was saved.
I think some people are missing the point that this interview was mainly geared towards Christians, who happen to be voters just like everyone else. Whether it was conducted in the right place or not does not matter to me, personally. The fact of the matter is, questions to important issues were asked, and their answers needed to be put on the record once and for all because the Evangelical vote, as it is being called, will depend on their answers. Whether or not they answered the questions clearly or directly... I think where they stand on certain issues is obvious.
I think the reason both candidates realized this interview was crucial to their campaigns is because John McCain leads Barack Obama in the Evangelical vote by a large margin. It has been reported that 68% of [white] Evangelical Protestants believe abortion should be illegal. 71% of Evangelicals oppose gay civil unions. Furthermore 60% of Evangelicals believe the Iraq war is legitimate.
Again, whether you embrace Christianity or not, Evangelicals are voters just like everyone else. You don't have to like it or agree with it, but it's a reality. Even while there is a strong movement to eradicate Christianity and its teachings from the public forum, we still remain as a strong, decisive voice. People want and need our votes.
Rev. C. Welton Gaddy writes that there is no religious test for public office. The religious test is defined as being a member of a specific religion or denomination. The Constitution of the United States defines the requirements to be President: 35 years of age, natural born citizen, and have lived in the US for 14 years. However, no serious political citizen would vote for merely anyone who fulfills these three requirements. The secret ballot defines our national and local elections. This allows the individual to create any qualifications they want for an elected leader. Oddly enough, each election cycle we hear of the many and varied friends who say they voted for Candidate X because his hair looked better, or "I just voted for X because he's a member of Political Party Y, or is for idea Z." If these Christians want to create - in their minds only - a "religious test" it shouldn't be attacked as a religious test.
I notice that some knock McCain's stand against Islamic extremism and Osama Bin Laden. Just shows what some decide their vote on. Too bad.
I'm amazed at both of the included comments from Clergy. It's dumb founding, truly, the lack of understanding illuminated by each of the comments. For Protestant believers, there is no such thing as a "holy building" in which such a forum being held could be considered "inappropriate". For Protestants, the physical details of the OT were ushered out, and the spiritual truths and realities of God were ushered in by Jesus Christ Himself. No longer is a building the Holy meeting place where God meets with man....but due to the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, instead, the Holy dwelling place where God meets with man today, is within man. God dwells with man today, within man today. The physical "temple" or "tabernacle" of God, today, is within His people......not in some building. This is a HUGE difference of belief between Protestants and Catholics. For Protestants, buildings are not made Holy by God today......but people are made Holy by God today. The veil was torn. The separation between man and God exists no longer.
Regarding the second comment criticising certain questions as having crossed some line. The lacking understanding this comment reveals, is that both men DO profess to be Christian. Therefore, the appropriate question about their personal faith, must then of course be "What does it mean to trust in Christ?", or woud you expect a Christian to answer "What does it mean for you to trust in Muhammad?". Point being.....they don't follow Muhammad, they make no public profession of believing in Allah, or Buddha, or any one else. They claim Jesus Christ as the one they follow as they seek God.....so it is clearly appropriate to ask someone who holds such a world view as that, specifically what they mean by making that puclic description of themselves. The question Warren asked, allows for the public to understand what their past claims actually mean, in a day and age where claiming to be a "Christian" can mean any one of a variety of even non-compatible responses. People want to know what world view these two potential Presidents of the US view the world and it's issues from. It's actually a completely appropriate, fair, and very responsible question to ask.
I was impressed with Warren's questions.
While Obama admiited his "moral" failings with some specificity, McCain glossed his failings while he was married to his first wife. He didn't go into any detail at all about his infidelity, his adultery while still married to wife #1. This first wife stayed loyal to him during his time as a pow, then upon his return from captivity he had at least one affair (with Cindy, his current wife) during the time that his faithful first wife was in an accident resulting in her acquiring a limp. He dumped his limping first wife for the heiress Cindy. (It's interesting how the press is so silent on this issue.)
As for McCain's leadership abilities, his bad temper is notorious in Washington, DC. He is too close to the oil industry and has already shown poor judgment in running inaccurate ads against Obama designed to promote misinformation and prejudice.
McCain is NOT my choice for president.
As a conservative Republican, I am thrilled there is so much information regarding the faith of Barrack Obama in the face of recirculating rumors to the contrary in this election season. I applaud Rick Warren for holding this forum that highlights the faith of the candidates as it would would be relatively untouched in public debates within our political climate. I hope this leads the way for closet Christians within the Democratic party to come forward & allow their moral beliefs to be considered in the setting of the party platform. The polarization of the parties forces the Democratic Christian to hide his/her political affiliation or to feel ostracized within
Christian community. Although it may be true that some platforms of the Democratic party are inherently non-Christian, there are platforms of the Republican party that also should make the Christian voter cringe. Thank God talk of faith within both parties is finally becomming politically correct. I hope this trend continues & changes our country. To the blogger questioning McCain's ethics, the man is a sinner, hopefully saved by grace, as we all are. Pride in righteousness has no place in the church and Christ , personally, is not on the ballot. We are forced to choose between humanity.
Saddleback Church thanks for using your infuence to faciltate a candid discussion between the presidential candidates. One of the central themes of Jesus's message is to bring heaven down to earth. Once we've worked out our destiny and we know where we're spending eternity, our focus is to use our influence to make earth like heaven. I was intrigued by the candidates answers and their kingdom perspective in regards to showing the love of Jesus. In regards to social issues the role of the church is to teach and encourage acts of kindnes and for government to incentitize us to be kind.
I am a christian that wanted to keep an open mind last night. It was made clear by both Presidential cannidates that they are christians. However, I can't understand how obamma can say he is a christian, (one who follows Christs teachings and commands) and then says he is pro choice! (in other words abortion is ok if it fits the need.) I know this is not the person that I want to lead this country.
Listening to McCain's responses (many which he provided before even giving Rick Warren the courtesy of completing his questions) brought home the message to me that Senator McCain is a George W. Bush reincarnated!! His quick, rapid responses gave me the impression that he saw the world as black or white. Last thing we need is a President who believes that carrying the big stick and playing "macho man" is the way to tackle the difficult national and international issues confronting our nation. Even scarier is the likelihood that he will surround himself with people who are as hawkish as him. What our nation needs is a person capable of building bridges with diverse people and nations for the purpose of advancing the long-term well-being of our nation. Some believe Obama's reasoned responses came across as too academic in nature. I'll take a President who has given careful study, thought and analysis to domestic and international challenges any day vis a vis one who responds so simplistically to very difficult, complex issues. McCain may have pandered to his audience, but he did not win over any of those who are yearning for more reasoned, well-studied or debated strategies by a President for tackling our nation's major current and long-term challenges.
Most Protestants are uncomfortable calling their auditoriums "sanctuaries" because they know God doesn't live in the room. A church is a group of people, not a building. I'm shocked that the Catholic clergy have not figured that out.
I am more comfortable with a candidate that can sing "Bomb, Bomb Iran" to a Beach Boy's score than a candidate that has a different view than myself on abortion, aren't you? After all, isn't one's ability to demonstrate his right wing fundamentalist Christian bona fides the most important qualification for transforming the world into God's Kingdom?
The stark contrast of the forum reveals one of Obama's strongest advantages: that he is completely different from George Bush, whereas John McCain is much like him. John McCain’s crisp, clear answers to Pastor Rick Warren’s excellent questions, are just like President George Bush's – not only in style but also in substance. Especially, McCain’s belief that evil can be defeated. While such sure-headedness in a leader may give comfort, it should also give pause, because it was such simplistic, single-minded thinking that allowed Bush to declare his “war on terror” against an “axis of evil.” Based on such rhetoric, we launched the war in Iraq, the greatest foreign policy blunder in US history. Senator Obama’s analytical and nuanced approach should allow us to revisit not only the decision to invade and occupy Iraq, but also the disastrous domestic and economic policies that have been implemented during the recent Conservative Era.
The Warren, Obama, McCain format was fair to both candidates, Each answered the same question. It gave them an opportunity to tell the TV audience how their faith would help them solve so-called secular problems. Problems like protecting our men, women and children; stewardship of the planet we live on; taking care of those who need help - the sick, the hungry, those shunned by society,etc. l think that using the Judeo-Christian principles, which the founders of this country used to build a firm foundation for our republic, will help decision makers arrive at fairer and more equitable solutions to many of our current national problems. God does bless America. Let us make sure that forums like the Warren interview will always be permitted in this great country of ours. ----Kal
An agreement was made between Rick Warren, Barack Obama, and John McCain to discuss their Christian beliefs in a public forum and explore how thjese beliefs may impact their prospective presidencies. Whatever a person's beliefs or biases (many of which are expressed in the sentiments I read here, how can one not say "Amen" to the religious freedom that allows such a spectacle! In a democracy we respect the right of each voter to make choices based on the information he has. Were the candidates completely truthful? Did they formulate their answers to appeal to key voter blocks? Will their views change over time? These are questions for each voter to decide. Having read "the Purpose Driven Life" and witnessed Rick Warren trying to lives out his vision in a consistent manner, I am thnakful to him and to the two candidates for giving each of us a futher glimpse into their souls. My thanks to all of them for that. It was an incredible event. If only therecould be similar events organized by visionaries in the other areas of our lives that are of vital importance to all Americans.
Twenty minutes into McCain's interview, he asked Pastor Warren "Are we going to get back to the importance of Supreme Court judges or should I...." Warren said Twenty minutes into McCain's interview, he asked Pastor Warren "Are we going to get back to the importance of Supreme Court judges or should I...." Warren said "No, we're going to get back to that."
BUT McCain and Pastor Warren had NOT YET TALKED about Supreme Court judges. ONLY Obama had already talked about it with Pastor Warren.
This indicates that McCain either knew the questions in advance or heard Pastor Warren's questions to Obama and Obama's answers when McCain was in the "cone of silence."
Pastor Warren may be smart, but he does not represent me or the youth of America. He is grossly overweight and he dyes his hair and beard. Frankly have a hard time looking and listening to people that look like him Dude loose some weight and let your hair go the natural color gad wants it to be.
Jefflz, like many others in this country today have bought into the misrepresentation that America was founded on seperation of church and state. This country was founded on religious FREEDOM! Seperation of church and state was a concept designed to keep Government out of Church affairs.. NOT Church out of Government affairs. Our Founding Fathers were Christian and built this country on Christian principles. While I respect other religious beliefs, I also expect them to realize that they are and hopefully always will be the minority in this country!
the comments of tom reese, the roman catholic priest, are pathetic yet so typical of the roman catholic church. if jesus were alive today the roman catholic church would tell him he could not deliver a sermon on the mountain.
they are fools. jesus wasn't into rules. he was into relationships.
i am delighted to be an ex-roman catholic christian. (though i will always be thankful for my jesuit education)
rick warren's interview was a wonderful event for christians and folks of all faiths.
i was pleasantly shocked at obama's bold testimony. his testimony went a long way in earning this 50+ die-hard republican's vote.
i was equally disapponted in mccain's lack of boldness and transparency. very disappointing.
thank you rick warren for your leadership and vision.
I believe that a true Christian will adhere to the 2 greatest commandments of the Bible... Love the Lord God with all of your soul, might strength and heart and # 2 love your neighbor as yourself. Obama's responses gave indication of a relationship with Christ vs. religion. His speeches call for unity between Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Buddism, Hinduism, and so on. I believe that if the leader has the thought in his mind, speaks the words of his mind, and act on his words; we will see the benefits. Unfortunately, from McCain, I heard religion.
And now we are told, some 18 hours later, that McCain was NOT in the sound proof room at all but was outside in his limo, More than likely taking a refresher coarse of the guestions on his laptop!
I believe this kind of information should have been given to the general viewers.
The writer needs to check his facts. The new president of Paraguay is a Catholic Priest given dispensation by the Pope to run for and fill the office of president of his country and to to return to his full duties as a priest when he leaves the presidency.
I find the Catholic church very involved politically in most of the latin american countries and some of the European countries.
At least there were very few of the softball questions usually asked. I don't think we need any more, "Senator Obama, what's your favorite flavor ice cream?" questions.
The format for the candidates was fine, but I would have liked some follow-up questions. It's not informative to allow Obama to get away with saying he would consider restrictions on late-term abortions if there are exceptions for the "mother's health." To many, that response almost makes him sound reasonable. In fact, Obama's definition of "health of the mother" includes her "mental health." That's the game liberals play... have the bill include protection for the mother's "mental health," which can mean just about anything, and thus allows abortions to continue when the woman is physically healthy but would be "emotionally unhealthy" if she had to care for a child."
Pastor Warren should have known better than to have allowed himself, and the American voter, to be duped like that. If you can't come up with your own tough questions, try the list at: www.colony14.net
I do not want Catholic cardinals or clergy publicly getting involved in partisan politics. I am happy that canon law and tradition restrict political activity by Catholic clergy. I just wonder if there is a double standard here." Rev.T.J.Reese
I guess The Rev. Thomas J. Reese, never heard of Father Pfleger....
I don't know much about Rick Warren. I've only seen photos of him years ago... and he was kind of bald, now he's got all this hair. Can someone explain this, it's looks kind of silly and makes him look like a used car salesman.
If God made him bald, then shouldn't he accept that? It sort of goes against God's will right off the bat.
Sorry just my perception.
Listening to both candidates has forced me to conclude that only Obama was responding to questions without knowing in advance the answers he was going to give. I'm not sure how this sham was perpetrated, but McCain obviously knew in advance what he was going to say. I've seen him respond off the cuff to questions propounded. But on the Candidate Forum, he never struggled with thought processes or word selection. He knew exactly what he was going to say and he knew which stories and self-serving anecdotes he was going to use. And, yes, as the previous comment (No. 82 currently) indicated, he even started his response before Rick could finish asking the question!!!
Shame on you all for perpetrating this fraud on American voters!!!
Shame on you for putting this fraud over on American voters!!!
Warren is certainly taking a lot of heat here. My thought was primarily how much better the line of questioning was than the drivel we put up with from ABC and the other major media outlets in the earlier debates.
Obama proved that he is not ready for prime time. His responses were nuanced and didn't connect with average voters. His explanation of evil was very weak and he didn't have his facts right about abortion statistics. Sorry liberals, but he has no chance of winning a general election campaign because this is a center right country and he is far left.
I find it interesting that people distort the first ammendment to the constitution by saying it calls for the separation of church and state. It doesn't:
"Ammendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
This nation was founded on Judeochristian principles. Everyone should visit Washington, D.C. and look at the multitude of inscriptions on our public buildings. Look at the inscriptions at the Lincoln Memmorial. All very much reflect the designs and desires of our nation's founders.
Rick Warren asked the questions that our mainstream media has been derelict in asking. The answers by both Senator Obama and Senator McCain were reflections of their character in this venue. It will be interesting to see if the answers remain the same under different venues.
I go to Saddleback Church and know that the Worship Center (which many of you are calling the sanctuary) was built as a multi-purpose room. We meet in the room for worship services, but also for banquets, concerts, seminars, other civil forums, and the community uses it for special events like concerts for young school children. We do not have the same vibe that a Catholic Cathedral might have, and the appropriateness of having the forum in a cathedral vs. Saddleback's worship center might be different for people from a Catholic church or people from Saddleback. We believe that where two or three people are gathered in the name of Jesus, Jesus is there in their midst. SInce Jesus was comfortable being with all kinds of people, including government officials, I think that our worship center was very appropriate for this kind of a forum.
Sorry, but I don't believe one word that Obama utters from that crooked mouth of his. He would lie his way into hell now if he thought there were votes there for him.
I don't know why Thomas Reese thinks we need his permission to have a questioning session in a church. On a better note, i think Rick Warren did a great job.
I expect McCain to pander to the weak-minded religious sector, but I'm disgusted by Obama; it just proves that he will say anything to get elected.
to Rick Warren: I felt you were overly pandering to Obama helping finish his stammering answers. Also he did not answer some of the questions directly and yous did not ask him to "how did you arrive at difficult decisions" John Mccain answered "with much prayer". As a christian that is what I needed to hear. Also it was offensive for Obama to use Jesus words"to the least of these..: and then state his choice for abortion. Is not what Jesus meant the least being the unborn?)And Obama saying actions being more than words, is not his votes and action s eeifor Roe V Wade an action that Jesus may not agree . He is right; his actions speak louder than his word.s. I would like to see a resume of both men on the ballot. Also, Why did you Rick ,feel the need to talk about playing poker,not funny! I did honestly w/ prayer feel you were trying to sway us christians w/ you're influence. Although I love what you have done for the church and I have even completed a course of yours for lay counselling ministry I was disappointed you tried to use this forum to help promote barak obama to your believers, however it did backfire, Mc Cain came out w/ the best answers.
Barak is charming and we all know what the Bible says about charm.
Please consider this...John McCain was a POW for approx. 5 years. Thank you. As in finance, past performance does not guarantee positive future outcomes. During his time of captivity, he has had practice the art of deception, coyness, sneakiness, in order to tell his tormentors what he thought would give him the best advantage...you get the picture. During last nights debate, I felt that he was pandering in overdrive. When he said, "My Friends", it made me feel also that he has, over his 72 years, rehearsed and perfected ways of getting around the truth in an attempt to get what he wants or tell us what he wants us to know, with a joke or anecdote. I needed to hear more about who John McCain is. Additionally, he has associated himself with Carl Rove, a man who has shown us all that he is above the law and even Congress had better not touch him. Phil Graham who has called the American peoples a bunch of whinners. There are too many secrets abut John McCain. I am not convinneced that he has a cue of what to do in the oval office. John McCain is not the only Veteran who has served our country. In fact 95% of the men in my family have served in wars! This should not be a deciding factor of John's ability to lead this country. He has said that he would not raise taxes. He will. He has too. Consider this, what other sensible alternative will me be able to eradicate the trillion dollar debt that the Republicans have saddled us with? What about our teenagers who will be going off to college this years? Should they be responsible? Please do not be deceived, John McCain will raise taxes.
Now for Barack Obama. The idea of change is the only way to go. Our economy can not continue as it is. There have been 43 or 44 presidents before Barack Obama who have contributed to the sad state of affairs that our country is in. I want to try someone new. Someone who is not entrenched in the greedy old boys network. Have you ever wondered how some of these political people leave public office RICH? Let us try something new because what we are working with right now is not working. If in four years it is more of the same, we get to vote again. Right now, we have too many people that are unemployed and can not find a job...NAFTA. The republicans are rewarding companies for taking our jobs overseas..and are paying them with our tax dollars? We need a strong economy, better relations with the world, and saving the earth from more man made disasters. For the record, I do not dislike John McCain, I dislike what he stands for. I dislike his representation of more Bush policies.
Michael Sprague (one of the posters)- You are actually attacking Obama for quoting the Bible at a forum on faith. How can you be so false to your own religion that you would try to use Obama's knowledge of the bible against him!!! At least he knows what it says. McCain didn't quote the bible because he doesn't know it. And yet, you used Obama's quoting of the bible at a Christian forum against him. Everybody in that entire audience knew that the quote he presented was from the bible. You are the only one who thinks that they would be to stupid to understand. What's next, are you going to say that Obama's ability to quote the bible is proof that he's a muslim. Just admit it. Obama's actually more committed to his faith than McCain. The forum showed it, but you guys just don't want to vote for a Black candidate. He could recite the whole bible backwards and forwards and you'd still call him a muslim. Michael, your attitude is very unChristian
For many, and as a christian, I have been advocate for anti-abortion. However, one day, and I don't use the Lord's name lightly, so I will say that it was strongly impressed upon me that the Lord gives us all a choice to serve him or not to serve him. By this I mean that anyone who is in a position other than what the Bible says, has a right to make a choice. A women who is faced with the decision to go full term or to abort her baby (at conception) has a choice. I am paraphrasing when I say this, but there is a scripture that says, I place before you death and life, choose life. We are clearly given the answer of what the outcome should be. Choose life. But a great, kind and loving God allows us to choose. So, I would prefer that the baby goes full term and is placed for adoption. But, like it or not, God gives us all choices. We may not agree with it because of respective religious convictions/teachings, however, it is their choice...it is from this perspective that I feel Barack Obama was speaking. Hhis beliefs on abortion are also between him and God.
To 81. Give unto Caesar that which is his. Give unto the Lord that which is his. You can be a pro-choice Christian. I believe that we live in a free country. Nothing is a bigger imposition on individual liberty than mandating what MUST happen after conception. Living in a free country means giving the right to choose. Abortion has been practiced since before Christianity (The Sumarians, Greeks, and Romans practiced herbal abortions) Folks would find a way to exercise that choice. So any change in the law would create an enforcement nightmare that would lead to back alley abortions, filling the prisons with women who made mistakes or didn't make preparations, and looking up doctors who don't agree with the law. Give unto Caesar. Give unto the Lord. Keep the two separate.
Abe Lincoln talked about his faith in the context of the American political process on many occasions. He called for a number of national day of prayers. Having a "secular" goverment does not mean that Christians running for office/in office ought not talk about their faith. I am confused about the accusations of pandering to the weak every time a candidate talks about God. I doubt anybody would consider Abe Lincoln pandering to weakly minded religious people. I assume that the absence of religious discussion would then be attractive to the weakly minded secular-only sector.
Nicolle Wallace, a spokeswoman for Mr. McCain, said on Sunday night that Mr. McCain had not heard the broadcast of the event while in his motorcade and heard none of the questions.
“The insinuation from the Obama campaign that John McCain, a former prisoner of war, cheated is outrageous,” Ms. Wallace said.
Honestly: Since McCain has been able to cheat on his current and former wife, he can cheat anyone.
As for Obama being nuanced therefore not being able to reach the average voter: I am sick and tired as being treated as though I, as a voter, am mindless and too stupid to understand that nothing in this world is cut and dry. These are incredible issues that we are dealing with and to think that there is some easy answer for them is simply ridiculous. Obama's answers are nuanced because he is not afraid to address the gravity of the issues. I am not saying that McCain is unintelligent or that he does not understand the nuances of the questions, I just honestly think that he has been in politics so long that he has been trained to speak to we as voters as idiots. And turns out the news stations as well as some voters only promote this. Reach us on a level we, as idiots, can understand because we're too stupid to see that these issues are difficult to answer and don't always have a straight forward answer. Do not think that either candidate has all the answers, because they do not. I just wish that we would stop making them talk to us like we are five year olds.
Regarding Obama on pro choice. Obama said he wants to lower the number of abortions. How anyone can take from that that he thinks they are fine is beyond me but then again I think so many people hear exactly what they want to hear.
Ultimately I fear as I always fear that democrats will vote for democrats and republicans will vote for republicans and they will always do so because they just don't take the time to make a real opinion, rather they just accept what is handed to them by new stations that spin the news to what they want to hear. Please, I beg you, don't let that be you this election. Vote for a candidate, not a party
All, I have ready many angry blogs on other sites and have been heart broken by some of the distasteful comments. However, it is a pleasure to read some of your comments and I am thankful that the majority of your views, pros and cons, religious and non-religious are thoughtful and respectful. THANK YOU!
To Rick Warren, I thank you for your initiative in coordinating Saturday evenings forum. I appreciate the candidates having an opportunity to answer questions without the nasty verbal sparring. I have one comment, when John McCain was in a room and unable to hear the questions, was he allowed to have a cell phone with him? #98 I agree with you observation.
Let's have more Q&A sessions like this one in the future. I agree with all of you who did that you too appreciate the the non-gotcha forum!
When I think about people relations in the US, I am trying to come up with solutions as to how we the people can all get along. So with this election year, what can we the people do to make this world better, and send a clear message to the political parties that we want a civil election?
I would remind this catholic guy that the church is the people; not the buildings. It would be weird if the church allowed nude dancing on weekdays, but a political forum is fine. Even good, imo.
When does life begin? It goes back to eternity. It never began, it IS.
Certainly the eggs and sperm are alive right now, before they even leave the body. I am no expert, but I'm told females are born with finite eggs, and they regularly eject them to certain death! Are they punished for this?
But guess what? Jesus said the flesh counts for nothing! It's the spirit that gives life!
Is the Lord pleased with rivers of olive oil? Mountains of gold? Hoards of babies? NO, what pleases God is a repentant heart, someone who seeks to know him and helps others to. John the Baptist spurned humans who were alive and standing before him, telling them that God could raise up Abraham's REAL children from the rocks.
As Jesus dragged his bloody and beaten body to the place he was crucified he said that "it will be said some day, 'blessed is the womb that never bore a child'". Meanwhile various folks act like God told them, personally, to have as many babies as possible.
This is a very difficult and confusing subject. I find it absurd that so many people are convinced they know best how to order others around and dictate to them how to act, when it's still a mystery. When does the spirit/soul enter the body? In Genesis it says it's when breath enters the lungs, NOT at conception.
Did Jesus tell us to boss others around? Did Jesus tell us to lay heavy guilt trips on others? NO. He said you talk to them privately, if they ignore you, bring in another person to chat with them, and finally if they continue to ignore what you consider right, then ignore them. He DID NOT say to create laws subjugating them, dictating what we can put in or take out of our bodies. Didn't Moses say not to add or subtract from the laws he gave?
Similar to patterns throughout history, every so often, it seems a bunch of self-righteous folks rise up and feel the need to henpeck everyone else over all sorts of things. Dunking them in water, calling them witches, torturing them in to switching religions...
If what I've written is a mystery to you, I highly suggest you familiarize yourself with the Bible, especially if you're going to thump it on my head.
We'll all know, sooner or later.
Thank you Rick (#79) for your comment. I have felt ostracized within the church for not being a Republican.
what ever happened to separation of church and state ?
Okay, so we now know what the candidates want us to believe about their Christian beliefs. Good. Now, how about a debate hosted by two military leaders and two representatives of foreign policy?
Religion is mind control, the leaders lead you and your money to where THEY want to go. They are in control of the sheep. If the sheep dissent they are asked to leave.
There is no accounting body to make sure where all the money goes in churches, church leaders take the money and go.
Do these "large church" members ever get to see the books? Seems religion and politics are very similar endeavors designed to appear without reproach, while disguising true motivations. Most people that want to lead(have power) are basically hypocrites.
Now if we could only get any politician to practice what they believe or preach. Lord have mercy.
In the article reporting about the Rick Warren interviews: there is misunderstanding of terms: I.E. a Protestant Pastor/Minister/Preacher/evangelist is NOT THE SAME AS a Catholic PRIEST. Therefore there behaviors should not be equated and debated in regard to "should's and should-nots".