Box Turtle Bulletin
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobby“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobbyDecember 18th, 2008
Rick Warren claims he’s not a homophobe because he has “many gay friends” and has “eaten dinner in gay homes.” And yet, he still believes that his friends’ relationships are no different morally from child rape, incest or polygamy.
I wonder. How many child rapists, polygamists or incestist (to coin a word) has Warren broken bread with?
Latest Posts
Featured Reports
In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.
When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.
In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.
On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.
Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"
At last, the truth can now be told.
Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!
And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.
Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.
Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.
Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.
The FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.
“Google” is a trademark of Google Inc.
© Box Turtle Bulletin. All Rights Reserved.
Posts 
Posts via daily email:
Ken
December 18th, 2008
As I’ve said elsewhere, the offensive thing is that Warren and his ilk apparently think it is a mitigating factor that he counts some gays as friends and has broken bread in their homes.
I differ. If I tell people to their face that I am their friend, accept their hospitality and their bread and salt, and then turn around and tell the world they are the equivalents of child-rapists, I think that’s a mark of bad character, not a mark of tolerance.
MR Bill
December 18th, 2008
How many child rapists, polygamists or incestist (to coin a word) has Warren broken bread with?
If it’s like most large congregations, quite a few.
Just sayin’…
Benjamin
December 18th, 2008
Rick Warren is coming to the table of Barack Obama who is deeply and fiercely committed to GLBT equality so the table has to be turned around as well. Barack is seriously considering William White as Navy Secretary so that speaks volumes (including other gay people who are filling Barack’s cabinet) about Barack’s commitment. We need to hang on and trust that this is far more for Rick Warren and his follower’s to better understand that we are not the great satan that they seem to think we are. We are their doctors, their lawyers, their police officers. We teach their children. We are their children, parents, brothers, sisters and in some cases we are them. Demonizing them and pushing them away will further polarize and will only continue the rift. If we act like the true Christians they are not then hopefully many of them will eventually come around. It’s a win win situation.
SharonB
December 18th, 2008
If Warren had eaten at my table, and then publicly tried to use my friendship in this manner, while sliming my people, I would publicly call him out on it; announcing that he is no friend if this is how he uses his friends – as props in his narcissistic power plays.
Dave
December 19th, 2008
That isn’t what Rick Warren said in the quote you point out.
Warren was discussing other forms of marriage, all of which have existed in history, which he would oppose being legally recognized in the U.S. just as much as he opposes same-sex marriage. That does not require him to morally equate, or even make any moral comparisons amongst, those four different types of marriages.
Timothy Kincaid
December 20th, 2008
No Dave,
Warren was not just “discussing other forms of marriage” which he would oppose. He was equating these forms of marriage to same-sex marriage. That was his only purpose in bringing them up.
Suppose I were to say, “I disagree with Dave. I disagree with Hitler. I disagree with Stalin. I disagree with Nero.”
Absent any other discussion of these tyrants, one would have to believe that I was equating you to Hitler, Stalin and Nero. It would be disingenuous to suggest that I was just discussing various people with whom I disagreed.
Dave
December 21st, 2008
Actually, since you are discussing rulers, you’d be suggesting that my public policies, or proposals for governmental policy, are as undesirable — at least for our country — as those rulers actions were.
One has to make a leap in logic to assume you consider all three dictators as morally equivalent, let alone that I am “no different morally” than they.
Jim said that Warren considers the love lives of his gay friends to be morally equivalent to “child rape, incest, or polygamy.” Warren never said that, nor was it directly implied by what he said.
Warren was discussing forms of marriage he considers undesirable for society. What he clearly meant is he considers changing the institution of marriage to allow same-sex marriages to be as bad for society as allowing sibling marriages, child marriages, or polygamous marriages.
You may strongly disagree with his opinion, but it is wrong to say he is saying that these four marriage forms are morally equivalent. To go even further and say Warren considers all gay relationships to be as bad as incest or child molesting is simply absurd.
Timothy Kincaid
December 22nd, 2008
Dave,
As I insinuated above, you are being disingenuous.
You are splitting hairs and making distinctions where none exist. I’ve no idea about your motivation for arguing this point, but I suspect it is simply a matter of being contrarian.
And just to set the record straight:
Oh? Then I guess you disagree with Rev. Warren about exactly what he meant:
Dave
December 22nd, 2008
I am not being disingenuous nor is it my point to be merely contrarian.
I simply do not see any good in going beyond exactly what was said to give the man’s words the worst possible interpretation. The only purpose that can possibly serve is to make dialogue with the opposing side impossible.
I was well aware of the exchange between Warren and Waldman you now quote. It doesn’t tell us anything other than Warren considers same-sex marriage to be as bad for society as those other three forms of marriage.
John
December 22nd, 2008
Dave does this sort of bizarre hair splitting all the time. Rick Warren is perfectly comfortable throwing gays in the same morally equivalent group as child molesters. In fact, when given the opportunity to clarify, like the proud bigot he is, he held firm.
I would have to agree with Timothy that Dave just wants to be contrarian by making up distinctions where none exist and going round and round on it. He has done this on so many threads. It isn’t even really challenging; it is just tiresome.
Jim Burroway
December 22nd, 2008
Dave, I think it’s fair to take Warren at his word:
He was asked point blank if child molestation, incest and polygamy were equivalent to gay marriage, and Warren said quite simply, I do. You may wish to believe that “I do” means something else, but I really don’t see how he could have been any clearer. “I do” is as clear as it gets.
Dave
December 23rd, 2008
Jim,
He was not asked if child molestation and incest were the same as gay marriage. Following up on his statement, he was asked if adult-child marriage and sibling marriage were equivalent to same-sex marriage. It was that question he answered yes.
It was a foolish thing for him to say, but you shouldn’t criticise him for saying more than he actually said. Given the context of the discussion — marriage and marriage laws — it was obvious that Warren meant that all four of these marriage forms, same-sex, sibling, adult-child, and polygamous, represent equally bad changes in our country’s marriage laws. Nothing he said indicates he considers polygamy to be the moral equivalent of child rape and incest, let alone that he considers gay couples to be so equivalent.
There is a difference between objecting to changing marriage laws to allow same-sex marriages as much as you object to changes that allow sibling marriages, and comparing gay relationships to incest. Warren explicitly did the former and not the latter. This is my entire point.
Gay activist often read a far more damning intent into their critics words than was actually present. Conservative Christian activists do the same to gays. It’s not a good thing.
Timothy Kincaid
December 24th, 2008
Ahhh… distinctions without differences.
Priya Lynn
December 24th, 2008
Dave said “Warren meant that all four of these marriage forms, same-sex, sibling, adult-child, and polygamous, represent equally bad changes in our country’s marriage laws.”.
That’s just another way of saying he considers incestuous and pedophilic marriages to be the equivalent of gay marriages – you’ve just conceded the point.
Dave
December 24th, 2008
No, Timothy. I am making distinctions with differences. It is not my fault that you don’t want to see the differences.
You want to portray Warren in the worst possible light; to that end it is best for you to think of him in the worst possible way.
John
December 25th, 2008
Spinning like a top, Dave. Spin, baby, spin.
Leave A Comment