“I think this is brilliant! Dr. Corvino has insight and perspective like no one else. His thoughts are progressive and I believe his ideals will prove to be beneficial to the future of the gay community.”

You forgot to put 5 out of 5 stars

The latter can and should be challenged for such stances, and in my experience will generally be more open to change on the subject (or at the very least, cease publicly advocating their hateful positions) than civic leaders.

Civic leaders, by definition, have more resources to draw upon before coming to their good or bad positions, and have a great deal more power over the rest of us in implementing their opinions, and so I am far less charitable when they make wrong choices.

Public figures who take bigoted stances should be relentlessly hammered. Without that, we wouldn’t have had Obama’s people throwing us the (still inadequate, in my opinion) bone of “balancing” Rick Warren with Gene Robinson.

A generation ago we marginalized Anita Bryant by relentlessly hammering her on all fronts. She thus no longer has power over us. People like Warren and James Dobson, seeing the writing on the wall for their careers if they’re perceived as too stridently anti-gay, have tried to soften their images while retaining their core anti-gay stances. Hell, even the late Rev. Jerry Falwell did this in the immediate wake of the 1999 “Tinky Winky” flap.

Unfortunately, some foolish gay “leaders” such as Soulforce threw Falwell a life-line by urging “dialogue,” and Falwell just bided his time until the Tinky Winky controversy faded, and then came back with the same virulent anti-gay crap. This, unfortunately, is the same failed strategy that Corvino is advocating for us now.

If a public figure takes an anti-gay stance and tries to implement that stance through things like Prop 8, it is our duty to hammer them at every opportunity. Only if they give a complete mea culpa, including a public commitment to actively promote LGBT equality, should we let up. Any other stance in these situations demonstrates a foolish ignorance of our civil rights history.

You know what? I believe that gay men and women should be entitled to marry, but I don’t condemn people for believing otherwise. I might attack the basis of their reason for believing that marriage should be between a man and a woman (particularly if that basis is that they believe marriage is a religious institution, which it isn’t), but I support their right to disagree with me.

I wouldn’t object if every person involved in the inauguration was opposed to gay marriage. We are all entitled to our opinions and should not be punished for those opinions alone.

What I object to is the fact that Rick Warren has incited hatred against the gay community, against Jews, against Muslims, against practically anyone who isn’t what he regards as a “good Christian”.

And what I also object to is that so-called “thinking” men like yourself cannot see through his charade and see him for the cruel, hate-filled bigot he is.

Yes, there are people out there who have been unfairly labeled as bigots by some in the gay community. For example, I have heard some refer to Obama as a bigot. I don’t believe he is. I believe he is a greedy man consumed with ambition who doesn’t care who he has to walk over to achieve his goals. I believe he will support the gay community only so far as it is in his best interests – which is not at all. I do not believe, however, that he hates gays. I don’t think he cares enough to hate us.

I use the label “bigot” only for those who demonstrate bigotry, and Rick Warren is a bigot. The fact that someone with your credentials can’t see that is truly disturbing.

You are not only in not comprehending the substantive difference between the individual inalienable rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness and the Special Group Rights which a group receives by being designated a Suspect Class.

My guess is that you did not work in the original Affirmative Action programs nor have you devoted many years to different social ramifications which flow from protecting individual rights and from granting Special Group Rights.

Similarly, many Xian Thumpers see no reason for their religious dogmas should not be the basis if civil law, just as the Muslims in Great Britain are demanding that Sharia law replace common law.

People who push themselves into leadership positions have a duty to inform themselves about such issues, and like Bernie Madoff, they should realize that they have duties beyond self-aggrandizement.

http://www.americablog.com/2009/01/rick-warren-sidekick-demanded-that-all.html

Now tell me he’s just “misunderstood”.

What a load…