filkertom | Rick Warren

I've been thinking a lot about this one.

I don't know that I have an answer. But I've got a direction.

If you don't know what the controversy is, well, there's a whole lot of detail to it, but the short form is: Barack Obama's inauguration will feature an invocation by Rick Warren, leader of a California megachurch. Pastor Warren is looked upon by some as being much more open-minded than, say, James Dobson. On the other hand, he is vehemently anti-gay-marriage, and his selection is viewed as a slap in the face to the entire gay community.

Like I said, there's a lot more detail out there, including a number of other positions Pastor Warren has taken that I find at best idiotic and at worst reprehensible. But that's what it boils down to.

From what I can see, Obama is trying to reach out both politically and socially to the other side. And I'm good with that. I've been saying for years that we want to save the country for all Americans, not just the ones who agree with us.

But it does come back to a fundamental problem I have with religious activism: It can't leave other people alone.

Rick Warren worked hard to push Proposition 8 down everybody's throat in California. And now he is working to nullify the 18,000 gay marriages that have taken place there since May.

And nobody, nobody, has come close to convincing me that any of those marriages affect Rick Warren or anybody else in any way besides being Ewww Teh Icky Gay.

My problem with religious activism is that it insists we all have to follow the moral codes of a particular God. Given that separation of church and state is in the freakin' First Amendment of the Constitution, and given that these moral codes tend to be along the lines of These People Are Different And Therefore Bad, you'd think there might be a little more public outcry.

Rick Warren and his church have joined with other forces such as the Church of the Latter Day Saints to deny rights to a bunch of people because they're different from him.

And that, really, is all that matters.

Civil rights laws are supposed to protect people from "the tyranny of the majority". This is a perfect example. Being gay is not a choice. Opponents of gay rights keep saying that it is, as if it will eventually make it true. I feel safe in saying that very few people would choose to be cast out by their families, beaten up by their former friends -- or for that matter, by people who don't know them -- denied rights and protections, jobs and housing, and generally shunned, just because of the gender of those they are physically attracted to.

Obama's campaign for the presidency dealt heavily with symbols -- symbols of hope, of inclusion, of bridging the gaps between us all. He was, and is, verbally very strong in his embracing of gay issues and the gay community.

Rick Warren is a symbol as well... of unthinking divisiveness and bigotry. Of superstition over fact. Of hatred disguised as love.

And I want to tell myself that his five minutes of the inauguration will be over and done with and that'll be that... but I find that I can't.

By having Warren speak at the inauguration -- no matter what he says -- Obama, and our government, will be lending him credibility, making him more "mainstream". Making it more acceptable to be anti-gay.

And that is simply wrong.

I don't know of any politic way that Obama can withdraw the invitation to Pastor Warren. But I think he should. At the very least, he should say: Pastor Warren's position on gay marriage is not acceptable. Like any other marriage, a gay marriage affects no one except the people involved. It's no different from any other marriage. And we can't change the country, save the country, if we keep dividing ourselves into Us and Them.

Thoughts?