Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
RICK WARREN TO DELIVER INVOCATION AT OBAMA INAUGURATION.
As I was in the middle of writing a different post about the pitfalls of the Democrats' religious outreach, the news comes from People for the American Way's Right Wing Watch that Rick Warren, who just this week equated gay marriage with polygamy and incest, and who thinks that Christians who work for social justice are Marxists, will deliver the invocation at Obama's inauguration.
I am speechless.
--Sarah Posner
COMMENTS (21)
But the Media Village proclaimed Warren to be America's Pastor. You can't fight that.
Posted by: ed | December 17, 2008 2:28 PM
I certainly wish Obama had picked someone other than Warren. On the other hand, I suspect Warren's supporters wish Obama had picked someone else too.
Posted by: AndrewBW | December 17, 2008 2:35 PM
Would the same outrage be expressed if Obama had invited a Muslim or Jewish cleric opposed to homosexual practice and homosexual “marriage”? What if the anti-homosexual Dali Lama were invited? One hopes that homosexual extremists and Jewists are willing to treat all opponents of their causes equally, rather than singling out the adherents of traditionalist Christianity.
Posted by: Jack | December 17, 2008 2:40 PM
I'm stunned too, Sarah. I can't imagine with a world of progressive religious leaders to choose from that he would do this. I admit to feeling betrayed. Rev. Warren urged his congregants to vote for Prop 8 and has been consistently anti-choice. Let us pray that this is not the beginning of retrenchment on sexual justice. It feels a little too much like bait and switch.
Rev. Debra W. Haffner
Posted by: Rev. Debra W. Haffner | December 17, 2008 2:44 PM
How do we get them to change this? Coddling bigots is not the same thing as being bipartisan. If we're going to have a priest at this celebration can't we at least ahve one who is on the side of the angels?
Posted by: Matt | December 17, 2008 2:49 PM
can't we at least ahve one who is on the side of the angels?
Peter Beinart?
Posted by: ed | December 17, 2008 2:52 PM
What if the anti-homosexual Dali Lama were invited?
There's an anti-homosexual Dali Lama? Did he or she actively and deceitfully campaign against Prop 8? Did he or she covertly support Republicans?
Posted by: ed | December 17, 2008 2:54 PM
....er...for Prop 8...
Posted by: ed | December 17, 2008 2:59 PM
I really can't seee where Mr. Obama is heading! It does seem that he wants the broadest possible coalition, but RICK WARREN!
This is going to be a fun four (eight?) years to be a citizen.
Posted by: R. Howe | December 17, 2008 2:59 PM
Aha! I see Aretha Franklin and Yo Yo Ma are also appearing at the inauguration + Itzhak Perlman + Joseph Lowery. I don't feel like Warren represents any kind of betrayal.
Posted by: R. Howe | December 17, 2008 3:11 PM
I understand the dismay, but don't see why anybody should be surprised by this. Obama and Biden emphasized during the campaign that they are against gay marriage. That Obama put out a statement on the eve of the election that he's against a law outlawing gay marriage is hardly a reversal of that. So he's not in favor of gays marrying, he just won't make it illegal for them to do so. This may be a minor step forward from DOMA, but it's hardly a profile in courage. Between this and his reversal on FISA, I have yet to see that there are any principals that Obama is willing to take a stand in favor of.
Posted by: not the one | December 17, 2008 3:44 PM
On the other hand, I suspect Warren's supporters wish Obama had picked someone else too.
Yeah, according to the WSJ, the Obama administration will likely act promptly to reverse BushCo's latest salvo of antichoice regulations, even with Rick Warren giving the inaugural invocation. This should be considered more of a blow to Warren than Obama. Unless those invited to give the invocations in the past have become the President's most powerful policy advisor, and I've missed it.
Posted by: mds | December 17, 2008 3:49 PM
Talk about reaching across the aisle...just not the political one.
Posted by: Dan | December 17, 2008 3:49 PM
Comments to Obama can be made at www.change.gov
Click on "Contact" at the bottom of the page.
Posted by: Vicki Linton | December 17, 2008 4:04 PM
Obama = change.
Posted by: Anonymous | December 17, 2008 4:24 PM
I am just absolutely livid about this. This is an incredible betrayal. This is not reaching across the aisle, this is rewarding one of the truly bad guys. I do not want pro-life, christianist, anti-gay wakos in my Democratic party. This is exactly what happened to the Republican Party - once these people are let in the tent they take it over. This is not change, this is baloney.
Posted by: Miriam | December 17, 2008 6:18 PM
"One hopes that homosexual extremists and Jewists..."
What the hell is a 'Jewist'?
Posted by: Miriam | December 17, 2008 6:24 PM
Jewists, Christianists, they're all happy burning down each other's houses of worship, genociding Palestinians and Ukrainians and Armenians, crafting totalitarian systems, that sort of thing.
Posted by: Jack | December 17, 2008 8:10 PM
For that matter, who says "genociding"?
Posted by: brian | December 17, 2008 9:04 PM
According to Mike Madden of Salon.com's War Room today, "The decision to get involved with [Warren] was actually not Obama's. The Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, run by the House and Senate, put together the program for the swearing-in ceremony. Congress, not Obama, invited Warren."
Posted by: Swift Loris | December 17, 2008 9:45 PM
rolex replica rolex replica
Posted by: replica rolex | December 19, 2009 7:56 AM