I have to celebrate when good news comes through CNN. I believe that what you focus on expands so you can bet your bottom dollar I really stretch good news as far as it will go. Today it has been reported that the Obama Team has invited Reverend Gene Robinson, openly gay bishop, to deliver a prayer at an inauguration event on Sunday and Reverend Sharon Watkins, general minister and president of the Disciples of Christ to give the invocation at the National Cathedral on Wednesday.
This is good news. This is very good news, however, if Rick Warren had not been asked to deliver the central invocation, it would not be news at all; it would just be another illustration, in a long list of illustrations, of inclusion in the Obama choices. So why is it news? Why is the Warren thing so BIG? Actually with these two additions of Watkins and Robinson, its easier to see. The issue is that Warren trades on exclusion, hate-language, judgment and identifying that there is an unacceptable "other."
Let me use myself as an example of my thinking. I am a Buddhist and I would never expect a Buddhist to give the invocation as it is a small minority in the US. I expected a Christian. The president-elect is Christian. Most Americans are Christian. Heck, some of my family and friends are Christian. But never in a million years would I settle for a Christian speaker to call Buddhists, Nazis. Never would it be ok for a Christian speaker to call Buddhists pedophiles. To go even further on this line of thinking, it means they wouldn't even be much of a Christian if they promoted anti-Buddhist talk and would not let Buddhists in their church.
Why is this so position controversial? Why is this even indefensible (Ms. Etheridge)? It is obvious ~ Warren is all about exclusion, trades on hate, hands out name-calling like a Vegas blackjack dealer, made millions telling people that their lives are not enough. Does he really represent Christianity to Obama? JEZZZZUS.
So don't ring me up and ask me if the invitations to Revs Robinson and Watkins make this all ok. This is not the time ~ anymore than thinking that Palin, being a woman, would make me happy when Hillary Clinton was not the presidential nominee.
If you run for office talking about inclusion, than choosing an inclusionary person to give the central invocation is really obvious choice. President-elect Obama, you are so smart - there is no denying it - you get all this. DO SOMETHING, proportional, as they say.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Warren, Watkins & Robinson.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/11337
More and more I get the impression that people who are so ardently opposed to Warren have really never heard him speak at all and have no idea what he thinks; they've just heard that he's a hate monger, so they take up the chant.
I don't agree with most things he says. I'm an atheist and think his whole religion is garbage. But I really don't see any hate speech. I see only internally consistent application of his religion.