A prayer for Obama

I am proud to have written a number of columns in support of gays being allowed to marry. I am also no supporter of conservative evangelical ministers, who strike me as posing a greater threat to the freedom of Americans to live their lives as see fit than almost any other group in the country.

Yet I find the controversy about Barack Obama's choice of the Rev. Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration to be without merit.

According to the story in this morning's PG, the Human Rights Group - a group advocating for gays, lesbians, bisexual and transgendered people - have lodged a protest. The group believes the minister should not have been invited because he supported Proposition 8, the heartless amendment that stripped gays of the right to marry in California.

But suppose Rick Warren, who is anti-abortion, should refuse the invitation because of Obama's pro-choice position? I think it is a fair bet that the same people condemning his selection for the inauguration would be screaming bloody murder. How dare he tie this to a single issue!

Yes, but that's just other side of the coin to the current complaint: How dare Obama invite this minister and ignore a single issue?

He did so because he believes in establishing a dialogue, believes in breaking down barriers, believes in finding common ground. And that is entirely wise and proper.

Liberals who are not liberal should shut up already and leave the single-minded obsessions to the conservatives.

 

Posted Dec 19 2008, 05:16 PM by Reg Henry
Filed under: ,

Comments

little_minx wrote re: A prayer for Obama
on Mon, Dec 22 2008 11:03 AM

The larger issue, not mentioned here, is the inappropriateness of injecting religion at all into the orderly installation of our next President, no matter the pastor's identity.  There ought not to be any prayer at what is essentially a Constitutional event, namely the transition of executive power.  Likewise, the oath of office ought to be taken on the Constitution (remember that God isn't even mentioned anywhere in that document), not a religious tome.  Anything religious in this event is reasonably a violation of the First Amendment, since by its very occurrence the Presidency accords an endorsement of sorts upon the speaker (i.e., an informal establishment of religion).  The inauguration should be strictly a secular, Constitutional occasion.