Why not just skip the invocation? That’s my question. There was no way that President-elect Obama could not have known that picking Rick Warren would highly irritate (that’s putting it mildly) a number of his supporters. You see, Rev. Warren has opinions. That’s right, the safe choice would have been someone with no clearly stated opinions.
There are a few highly divisive issues in our national dialogue: Abortion and Same Sex Marriage are right at the top of the list. Of course, being an evangelical Christian is not a very good idea, either. You see, abortion is a on-off switch kind of issue. You are either Pro-Choice or you are not. This is a situation where you can’t be a “little bit pregnant.” And if you are not Pro-Choice, and you express your opinion, vocal holders of the Pro-Choice opinion think you shouldn’t offer the invocation at the inaugural.
And for God’s sake, if you supported Proposition 8, you are clearly a hateful bigot. Especially if you let your opinion be known. This is another of those issues. You can’t be “kind of” in favor of marriage between a man and woman only. So, the LA Times is not going to want you to pray at the inaugural.
It is amazing that the proponents of tolerance are not very tolerant of opinions other than their own. Wouldn’t it be more respectful to agree to disagree? What is the President-elect trying to say with his choice of Rick Warren to pray at the inaugural? Maybe he is trying to say, I am going to be the president of all the people, even if I disagree with them on some issues. That would be refreshing, if true.
Charlie Wear's Notes 
Leave a comment