Many people in the LGBT Community have expressed their outrage over the choice of Rick Warren to give the invocation at the inauguration of President-Elect Barack Obama.  Mr. Warren, being a conservative pastor at Saddleback Church, has expressed opinions against abortion rights, same-sex marriage and stem cell research.  Because of his conservative viewpoint and exclusionary attitude toward non-heterosexuals, LGBT activists have shown deep outrage over his selection.

But the real questions shouldn’t be why Mr. Obama chose to have Mr. Warren deliver the invocation, instead we should be asking, why, in a country with separation of church and state, an invocation is being said at all to kick-start a Presidential Inauguration?  It’s simple.  In spite of the ideology of separation of church and state, the United States of America has become increasingly theocratic.  Legislation and regulations are no longer based upon what is just and right in the eyes of man, but what is just and right in the eyes of the church.

Obama has defended his selection of Mr. Warren stating that it is part of his political promise to include all Americans during his presidency; however, he has not made any statements regarding allowing religion to be part of an otherwise political ceremony.

See: Obama Defends Invocation by Conservative Pastor | 44 | washingtonpost.com.

Few realize that due to Puritan influence in the 1600’s, Massachusetts banned Christmas.  The rationale behind this was three fold:

1. The ritual reminded the Puritans of the Church of England, which they were escaping;
2. They didn’t consider Christmas as a religious holiday as it did not coincide with the birth of Christ as purported; and
3. The Puritans frowned on drinking, feasting and playing games - which was a big part of the Christmas holiday.

The law was only active for 22 years and read:

For preventing disorders, arising in several places within this jurisdiction by reason of some still observing such festivals as were superstitiously kept in other communities, to the great dishonor of God and offense of others: it is therefore ordered by this court and the authority thereof that whosoever shall be found observing any such day as Christmas or the like, either by forbearing of labor, feasting, or any other way, upon any such account as aforesaid, every such person so offending shall pay for every such offence five shilling as a fine to the county.

So to all those proposing religious influence within our government by banning same-sex marriage, I say:

Merry Christmas.

Recently, a group of “Christians” were run out of San Francisco’s Castro District by a “Gay Mob”.  I love the elevation this story has received in calling it a “gay mob.”  Video footage of the incident shows a group of people being escorted by police while a group of homosexuals (and/or those supporting homosexual rights) are chanting things such as “stay out of our neighborhoods if you don’t like us.”  Christian right-wing organizations are appalled and outraged that they were not allowed by this mob to express their religious freedom.  Well, there’s a taste of your own medicine for you.  This incident has inspired this issue of “Stupid Things People Say About Gays”.

Cute how they tell us to “stay out of our neighbor hood if you don’t like us” My response, stay out of my country if you don’t like us! OUR country was Christian before it was filled with fags.
They are allowed to be disgusting in public, we are allowed to pray in public.

We have the last laugh in all of this, they’re the ones with no future. — genesis311311

First, I feel the need to say (although it may be considered a “bounces off me and sticks to you” sort of argument) that the welcoming of the “Christian” group into the Castro District was very similar to the welcoming bestowed upon homosexuals by “Christian” churches.  Everyone is welcome in the “Christian” church as long as you become an “ex-gay.”  The torment the “Christian” church berated on the homosexual is far more horrifying than “stay out” if you don’t like us.

Secondly, your comment stating “stay out of my country if you don’t like us” and using the argument that the United States was founded as a “Christian” nation obviously demonstrates that you have never been to a history class outside of “Christian” school (or just didn’t pay attention), never read a book not acceptable by the “Christian” teaching and have never had an independent thought which did not conform entirely to the way you are taught.  Examples of the founding of the United States not being on behalf of “Christianity” include:

• The Declaration of Independence begins, “”We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”  I note that is says “they are endowed by their Creator” rather than they are endowed by my God.  Although it is unarguable that most of the founding fathers were “Christian”, it seems that they intended to leave God out of the letter of the law.
• The United States Constitution fails entirely to mention God.  It is an obvious omission and certainly was not an error.  Most historians and even theologians believe that the omission was intended to prevent a theocracy wherein the church would have more power than the President - as was the case with the Catholic church’s involvement in politics in Europe.
• “In God We Trust” was placed on currency in the U.S. during the Civil War, not upon the founding of our Nation.
• “Under God” was not in the Pledge of Allegiance until the McCarthy era [1954] when it was added.
• The Treaty of Tripoli, signed in 1797 (note: that was not long after the 1776 “founding” of our nation) by Pickering and then President John Adams  states, “As the Government of the United States…is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion–as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility of Musselmen–and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.” [emphasis added]
• In 1786, an Act for Establishing Religious Freedom (Jefferson again) was passed in the Assembly of Virginia.  It stated, in parts:

…that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions…

…that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavoring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world…

…that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles, on the supposition of their ill tendency, is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of that tendency, will make his opinions the rule of judgment, and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own… [emphasis added]

…that the rights hereby asserted are of the natural rights of mankind, and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right.

See: “The Writings of Thomas Jefferson Memorial Edition” (ME), Andrew A. Lipscomb and Albert Ellery Bergh, Editors, 20 Volumes., Washington, D.C., 1903-04. Volume II, Appendix, pp 300-303

I highly recommend those that feel the United States was founded as a religious nation to see Our Godless Constitution, by Brooke Allen and the countless books, articles and information available (and cited above).  I also refer them to the U.S. Constitution for more precedence regarding this issue.