Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Shock: Evangelical Leader Believes in Gay Civil Unions, Says OK to Vote for Obama
www.lifesitenews.com ^ | John-Henry Westen

Posted on 12/03/2008 10:19:06 PM PST by voiceinthewind

Shock: Evangelical Leader Believes in Gay Civil Unions, Says OK to Vote for Obama

By John-Henry Westen

WASHINGTON, December 3, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Chief Lobbyist and Vice President for Governmental Affairs for the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) gave an interview to National Public Radio yesterday in which he admitted to shifting on gay “marriage,” voting for Barack Obama and having a marked distaste for Sarah Palin. Richard Cizik, spokesman for the NAE, which represents 45,000 US churches, told NPR yesterday that he voted for Obama in the Virginia primary but didn't want to reveal how he voted in the general election.

"I happen to think in the primary he was the best choice," said Cizik of Obama. Cizik explained that he held party philosophy and the character of the candidate above particular issues. He thus suggested: "It would be possible to for Evangelicals to disagree with Barack Obama on same sex marriage and abortion and yet vote for him."

Cizik expressed an obvious distaste for Sarah Palin, citing her stand on the environment as "ignorance" and accusing her of lacking in humility, a trait which he says he admired in Obama.

Asked if he had changed his mind on homosexual “marriage,” Cizik replied, "I'm shifting I have to admit. In other words I would willingly say that I believe in civil unions. I don't officially support redefining marriage from its traditional definition I don't think."

He advocated that Evangelicals change focus away from the homosexual “marriage” debate. Revealingly, he said on the subject, "Maybe we need to reevaluate this and look at it a little differently. I'm always looking for ways to reframe issues. Give the biblical point of view a different slant."

Cizik said he would "absolutely" support Obama in his scheme to reduce abortions by "government supplying contraception." He explained, "We're not Catholics who oppose contraception per se."

Listen to the NPR interview here: http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=...


TOPICS: Current Events; Evangelical Christian; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last
To: voiceinthewind; xzins
Richard Cizik, spokesman for the NAE, which represents 45,000 US churches, told NPR yesterday that he voted for Obama in the Virginia primary but didn't want to reveal how he voted in the general election.

Another Evangelical leader I have never heard of before.

My own litmus test is that no Christian could vote for Obama under any circumstances. His abortion stand is simply demonic. So, while this guy may be an evangelical, he is not a Christian.

x, is your church a member of this organization? Have you ever heard of this guy before?

21 posted on 12/03/2008 11:08:20 PM PST by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Leland 1789

The Bible Presbyterian Church looks a little fundamentalist for me, but I could certainly go with the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. It is probably as conservative, but in a more Calvinist than fundamentalist way.


22 posted on 12/03/2008 11:09:28 PM PST by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

Goodness, he’s on Time Magazines List of 100 influential people for 2008. I really should read more mainstream stuff.


23 posted on 12/03/2008 11:14:05 PM PST by voiceinthewind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: voiceinthewind

The NAE is well known. I don’t consider them leaders, but followers . . . into apaostate Christendom. I have a lot of respect for Dr. Dobson as a man. He is much more sound than the “evangelical” movement in general.

I do not use the modern term “evangelical” for myself, either. That term 100 years ago, and even through WWII was equivalent to “fundamental” or “fundamentalist” (1950 to the present). Moody, Torrey, Billy Sunday, Wilbur Chapman, Donald Barnhouse, Riley, Haldeman, and other such men were all called “evangelical,” but I doubt seriously that they would use the term if they were living today.

I view the current “evangelical” movement as liberal and apostate in general.

There are still some fundamentalists who use the term “evangelical” for its connotations of 75 to 100 years ago, but I would not use it.

I use the the term “fundamentalist” now sparingly as well. I prefer to use the expression “Bible-believing.”


24 posted on 12/03/2008 11:15:18 PM PST by John Leland 1789
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo

Well, “fundamentalist” is supposed to mean, adhering to the fundamental tenets of the Christian faith. Does the Orthodox Presbyterian Church not adhere to the fundamental tenets of the Christian faith? If they do, then would they not be “fundamentalists”?

If you have the idea that “fundamentalist” means more, for example, more separated from worldliness and apostasy, then that is precidely why I would recommend them. I mean, I would more likely recommend them to someone of Presbyterian persuasion in church order and government, than any movement affiliated with the NAE or the NCC or WCC.

I reckon that the NAE is going the direction of the apostate NCC and WCC. (National Council and World Council of Churches).


25 posted on 12/03/2008 11:23:18 PM PST by John Leland 1789
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: voiceinthewind

The MSM (unfortunately, in this case, Lifesitenews as well) loves to portray the ‘Evangelicals’ as a monolithic block who vote 90% Republican in the same way Blacks vote 90% for Democrats. They’re not. Even Bush, who is seen as ‘the most Evangelical candidate’ in recent memory only received around 60%, IIRC. Just also remember that Carter was considered Evangelical as well.

So, it’s not shocking at all that there are many Evangelicals who vote Democrats. Note that whoever the guy this article mentions voted for 0bama. He never claimed himself to be a Republican.


26 posted on 12/03/2008 11:27:07 PM PST by paudio (Conservatism is a word with various meanings. To win, we need unified issue and message.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: voiceinthewind
Asked if he had changed his mind on homosexual “marriage,” Cizik replied, "I'm shifting I have to admit.

I'm thinking these two guys may have shared a stall in an airport men's room recently.

27 posted on 12/03/2008 11:30:42 PM PST by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: paudio

He said in a recent interview that he was a Republican.


28 posted on 12/03/2008 11:37:23 PM PST by voiceinthewind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: voiceinthewind

An evangelical who is in a position to give an interview to NPR is probably a leader of left wing self styled evangelicals of small numbers.


29 posted on 12/04/2008 12:43:00 AM PST by arthurus (Old Age beat itself with its ownguile and lack of enthusiasm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kcvl
Whoever made this here quote sure does know what they're talking about! ---

"Cizik is a... Bible-brandishing reverend zealously opposed to... gay marriage..."

Well, gee, I haven't checked up on the definition of "zealous" lately. But let's look at Cizik's own words above to get a better idea of what "zealous" opposition to gay marriage sounds like. Here's what he says:

"I don't officially support redefining marriage from its traditional definition I don't think."

He doesn't think? Wow!! Is that the very definition of "zealous opposition" or what?

Think I'll go with the "or what".

30 posted on 12/04/2008 1:21:47 AM PST by CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC (If my kids make a mistake in the voting booth, I don't want them punished with a community organizer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: paudio
Just also remember that Carter was considered Evangelical as well.

My dear old Aunt Olive couldn't stand Jimmyboy / Mister Teeth / Peanut Farmer / Playboy Feature / Lust-In-His-Heart / Wear-A-Sweater-To-Fix-The-Energy-Crisis / National Malaise / Killer Rabbit Victim, when he ran in 1976. But many of her older lady friends in her church in Louisville, KY were set to vote for him. They were just so tickled pink that for the first time ever, someone calling himself "born again" was running for Prez.

They would say repeatedly to her, "But Olive, he's Born Again!"

To which Aunt Olive replied, "A born-again turkey is still a turkey".

31 posted on 12/04/2008 1:34:52 AM PST by CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC (If my kids make a mistake in the voting booth, I don't want them punished with a community organizer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: narses

Cultural sickness.


32 posted on 12/04/2008 4:06:37 AM PST by big'ol_freeper (Gen. George S. Patton to Michael Moore... American Carol: "I really like slapping you.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: voiceinthewind
"...and accusing her of lacking in humility, a trait which he says he admired in Obama."

Uh...Palin...lacking in humility...a trait he admires in Obama??? The guy's an IDIOT. Fire his stupid @ss and get someone in there that has a brain cell.

33 posted on 12/04/2008 4:33:59 AM PST by XenaLee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo

Jesus:
“So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.”
—Revelation 3:16


34 posted on 12/04/2008 4:40:52 AM PST by XenaLee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: voiceinthewind

Ted Haggard....please pick up the white courtesy phone


35 posted on 12/04/2008 4:44:42 AM PST by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: voiceinthewind
Civil Unions "might" be a valid compromise between the two extremes on marriage, but it's never your starting point. If you want to defend the marriage and the family and you start there, then you will end up loosing the debate.

This guy sounds like a lightweight, who just wants to be liked.

I lost all respect for the NEA years ago.

36 posted on 12/04/2008 5:34:59 AM PST by Sci Fi Guy (Brian De Palma hates America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: voiceinthewind
Cizik said he would "absolutely" support Obama in his scheme to reduce abortions by "government supplying contraception." He explained, "We're not Catholics who oppose contraception per se."

Fool, He thinks promoting premartial sex among immature high schoolers and junior high students will reduce abortion.

37 posted on 12/04/2008 5:37:44 AM PST by Sci Fi Guy (Brian De Palma hates America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: voiceinthewind
Believe it or not, there are evangelicals who still think women should be seen, not heard, and home barefoot and pregnant. Looks like this jackass is one of those. Any 'evangelical' who would pick Obama and gay marriage over Sarah Palin is severely misguided, not a conservative, and questionably a Christian.

Ironically, when I read the headline, I thought this was about Huckabee.

38 posted on 12/04/2008 5:39:04 AM PST by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: voiceinthewind
Richard Cizik,

"Another Evangelical leader I have never heard of before." -- P. Marlowe

ditto.

I am, I guess, an evangelical, of sorts. As with many, less happy with the label of late. This guy doesn't speak for me, any more than Ted Haggard did, back in his day.

BTW, this guy actually has his own Wikipedia entry.

Issues, Etc. talked about him on on Monday. Worth a listen, in my opinion. Mr. Cizik has a tendency to present false alternatives. "We can let her have an abortion, or we can give her contraceptives." Can't think of anything else Mr. Cizik?

39 posted on 12/04/2008 5:42:46 AM PST by Lee N. Field (Dispensational exegesis not supported by an a-, post- or historic pre-mil scholar will be ignored.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: voiceinthewind
Cizik expressed an obvious distaste for Sarah Palin, citing her stand on the environment as "ignorance" and accusing her of lacking in humility, a trait which he says he admired in Obama.

"I for one welcome our new Chicago overlords." -- R. Cizik

40 posted on 12/04/2008 5:45:10 AM PST by Lee N. Field (Dispensational exegesis not supported by an a-, post- or historic pre-mil scholar will be ignored.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson