Religious right figures are FURIOUS over inauguration controversy

Because of the controversy involving Obama's inauguration and the pastor (Louie Giglio) whose invitation was rescinded because of his anti-gay feelings, the religious right has a new victimhood spin. According to the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins:

What a difference four years makes! In 2009, when the Left was in an uproar about Pastor Rick Warren's prayer, the President was quick to come to his defense. "We have to disagree without being disagreeable and then focus on those things we hold in common as Americans." Now, having revealed his true position on same-sex "marriage," the President seems determined to create even more division. If anything, this pulls back the curtain on the Left's real agenda. And it's not about tolerance. It's about forced acceptance. Americans need to wake up and realize that the homosexual movement cannot be appeased--not by marriage, not by special benefits, not by anything but the sanitization of Christianity from the public square. 

But believe it or not, Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association wins the award for the best hysterical spin:

 

Maybe I slept a bit during history class, but I don't recall Rosa Parks having her own radio show and a national audience where she whined about being victimized.

 You see the spin here, don't you? If you don't, you will because I am guessing we will hear more about it. It goes like this:

 Thanks to Obama, Christians are being discriminated against. They no longer are able to speak freely in the public square without some form of persecution. 

Nonsense. Giglio got into trouble because of an anti-gay sermon.  That's what Perkins and Fischer are missing. This has nothing to do with their religion, but their hate. When they use the phrase "public square," they seem to forget that the "public square" doesn't encompass them solely. Gays are a part of the public square and gays have every right to voice our opinion if we feel we are being disrespected. Although I did disagree with how some of us conducted ourselves (i.e. directing all sorts of unfair animus to Obama before we knew all of the facts), the fact of the matter is that tolerance for someone else's opinion is not the equivalent of being a doormat. We shouldn't sit with cracked smiles on our faces while  credibility and honor is given to someone who attacks us because he sees us as commodities in his ridiculous game of "Who gets to go to Heaven" instead of human beings.

And if you want respect in the public square, you need to show respect. To wit, don't use your interpretation of your religion as an excuse to keep people who you attack and insult from giving you hell.

In other words, Giglio is not a victim and this situation has NOTHING to do with the so-called persecution of Christians. Lastly (yes this is a cheap plug), if you want an idea of just what type of Christianity Perkins and Fischer endorses, check out the booklet on the right - How They See Us.

My suggestion to both Perkins and Fischer is before whining about persecution, they need to work on how they conduct themselves as Christians because in that regard, they are both extremely lacking.