Rick Warren to Deliver Invocation at Inauguration

[sauu4equality]

Just wanted to let everyone know about this. My gut reaction was to feel punched in the gut again and lose all hope for gay rights. But Rick Warren in his interview with beliefnet did not oppose civil unions. He is a step up from Dobson and even his mind seems to be changing a bit. However, he is still very anti-gay and I feel unfit for this role. I can still see this as a political move, but someone is going to feel very betrayed by the end of Obama's presidency. Now, fundies and moderate Christians who oppose full equality are going to be angry if Obama attempts to gain full equality for GLBT folks. And we are already planning on being upset because he likely will not even seek civil unions. As someone who is opposed to any rigid view of religion and is disgusted by people with "answers", having a Christian-Exclusionist deliver the Invocation is just annoying and, in my mind, un-American. A universalist should always be chosen for this honor.

[antiochian]

So, Obama's tryin' to smooch up to the religious powers-that-be? That's just what we need. Get the nutty religious leaders into the Presidential circle, and we're JWF. Had enough of that with Bush, thank you.

[Matt Algren]

You beat me to it sauu. FWIW, here's my post on the subject, with contact links for the committee members and Obama's LGBT liason for the transition team.

antiochian, this was decided by a committee of House and Senate leadership (again with the linky), not the Obama team. Frankly, it has John Boehner's fingerprints all over it.

[Steven E. Webster]

Friends,

Andrew Sullivan today 12-17-08 (see his blog at www.andrewsullivan.com) also expresses his disappointment about Rick Warren having a prominent role at the inauguration.

I think Obama's people are making the assumption that Rick Warren is a fit representative of spiritual people in America, and that he is not viewed as excluding some Americans as "second-class." This is obviously a mistake on Obama's part. We ought to let him know.

I'm not at all opposed to protesting the new administration. I voted for him and look forward to the end of the Bush dysfunctional dictatorship, but we need to keep the pressure up on the new administration to do the right thing--there will be others pressuring for the wrong thing for sure!

Steven Webster

[Unmasked]

The cards predicted anger and betrayal this election season. I was hoping that it would be just Prop 8 and similar ballot initiatives that lead to those feelings. We'll have to wait this out. Maybe it's nothing, maybe it's a play to the religious (I think either Rick Warren is going to lose favor or Obama will gain a modicum of good will at my school, it'll be a nice break from "die baby killer muslim die"), or maybe we've been had. I hope we haven't. The right to have Uncle Sam out of our bedrooms is an important one. It's creepy, having him watch like that.

[Daniel]

Why? He tried this same kind of thing during his campaign. And it was offensive then. And it's still offensive now. It's the same situation all over again. Obama didn't 'get' it that time, and he doesn't seem to be 'getting' it now.

The Obama people are released this some talking points.

http://www.towleroad.com/2008/12/obama-camp-rele.html

My response? I agree with Hilary Rosen, who made some cogent remarks last night on CNN to Anderson Cooper.

"First the glibness, that, well it's just a bunch of gays being unhappy that people don't agree with them, is wrong. You know, (at) one time the Bible was used to justify slavery. If this was a preacher, out there, using more weapons against African-Americans we wouldn't even be having this conversation, so second of all, the fact that we're even having a conversation, means that this is a mistake in choice. This is a day when people are to be brought together. There are hundreds of preachers across the country with stature and thoughtfulness and other ways to bring this country together on an inauguration day for the new president. That's the choice he should have made."

There is a disconnect going on. Having the KKK on stage would be offensive to blacks, right? So how is this any difference? Here you have a man (Warren) who believes that marriage and God's favor are reserved for straight people. The KKK believe that marriage and God are reserved for white people.

Bigotry, no matter if it is about race of sexual orientation, is- at the end of the day- bigotry!

If Obama wants to be inclusive, then he can do that behind the scenes, where this kind of thing is supposed to happen. He has his rights. We don't have ours. And for him to parade someone who doesn't want us to have our rights before the nation is not inclusiveness, it's an affirmation of the status quo.

When did our civil rights- or lack of them- become a talking point? Obama just isn't getting it here, putting out the thought we should all play nice and get along- 'you have your preacher and I have mine...what the problem?' He may think he is above all this. But guess what? This is going to bite him in the ass.

The problem Mr. President Elect, is that you have arrived at the table, and we are not happy with the scraps you can throw our way. We aren't dogs. And you aren't the master.

And we will have civil rights with or without you.