I told myself I would hold back on this one. But everyone from Harvey Fierstein to Frank Rich have flogged the Rick Warren Inaugural Invocation Horse so bad, it makes the decapitated horse head in the Godfather look humane.
Getting outraged over Rick Warren speaking at the inauguration is like throwing down over the typesetting on the invitations. Rick Warren? This is nothing. It is so small, in such a long day of pageantry, on the first day of some long years of the fight ahead. In terms of the fish-frying before us, Rick Warren is a scallop, and Moby Dick, the elusive wedding-white whale, is circling us.
We'll be facing much greater forces of homophobia as old-school baller 'Man in the Middle Barry' races to stay centered like a lumberjack in a log-rolling contest. In those slippery times, Obama will really need support to stand up to chest-beating theocrats proclaiming their inflated importance.
Before the back-lashers skip the rest of this column and just start posting irate comments below, let me air my record on gay rights: I'm a member of HRC. My wedding vows opened with Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall's first lines in the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage. Our wedding ceremony was performed by my wife's lesbian sister, who got ordained specifically to marry other gay friends. My gay brother was my groomsman. Hell, ten years ago at the Gay Pride Parade in New York, I performed gay marriages in the street at the intersection of Christopher St. and Gay St. and broadcast it on Manhattan public access.
Obama unwittingly created a culture clash at a prestigious event between traditional Christian symbolism and the Oscars audience. Personally, I presume any anti-gay demagogue, Christian or Republican, to be one tweeker-turning-tricks-away from being the next Ted Haggard. (I mean, doesn't "Saddleback Ranch" sound a little Brokeback Mountain?) I could give a crap about Rick Warren, although I guess he actually has helped people in Africa, so props for that.
As such, the only thing I would even know of Rick Warren was that he was somehow empowered to host a debate between two presidential candidates, thereby legitimizing him more than Katie Couric. Asking Rick Warren to invocate or whatever was probably the most apolitical gesture in Obama's mind that would help stop the religious right from shitting themselves when he finally says, "I, Barack Hussein Obama...." That Reverend Wright thing that jumped the shark back in March, it really scared a lot of white people.
While I have a hair-trigger to call out pandering, I really don't see this as a cynical play for evangelicals or a 'you're likeable enough, gays' diss like Frank Rich dishes about. (Note to Frank: When you're so flip about how the state of New Hampshire votes, you make it easier for inexplicable polling results to go unchallenged.)
Rick Warren is going to talk for, what, five minutes? Is he going to gay bash in those highly anticipated couple of minutes? Is he instituting policy or swearing himself onto the Supreme Court? Rick was just around the corner from me, trying to smooth things over, at the West Hollywood Out of the Closet, all open arms at the gay charity. (Though if he's checking out any of the clothes I just donated there, I have a hunch if they don't fit me anymore, they won't fit him either.)
I'd suggest those at the Inauguration that can't tolerate his intolerance turn their backs while he talks. Or blow whistles. Or fully break into a Queen song, like "We Are the Champions" or "We Will Rock You."
We don't have to ruin the party because we don't like one of the guests, especially when literally the entire country is invited. Inauguration Day will be a great day for celebration, though I am not sure if it will be more for the first black president or the official end of the Bush Reign of Error. One thing it won't be like is this scene from Bush's 2004 Inauguration. (However classic)
Remember that dreadful day of a disputed election credited to stoking anti-gay prejudice proficiently.
Obama may not be the first homosexual president, but he is the first metro-sexual president, and that itself is a significant step forward. Obama did not brave the establishment's uproar over arugula for nothing. He's as cut as the steam room at the West Hollywood 24 Hour Fitness. And in throwing 10 Inaugural Balls -- almost assuredly in the hands of the top gay talent in DC--Barry has already proven he has more balls than Bush.
It sucks, but as we know well, America is a homophobic place. Actually, almost everywhere else is, too. Homophobia seems to blossom on its own, independently in every culture around the world, just like homosexuality does. I don't get it either. There is a long history of religions condemning homosexuality (or people using religion to condemn homosexuality), but then, religions have been used to burn witches, too. Homophobia--as fundamental a defiance of basic human rights as it is--it just is.
The slippery slope, I believe, is in debating the oppression of gays and lesbians in a secular vs. religious context. The true believers will feel their beliefs are under attack, and there are some biases that only die with the people that cling to them. If anyone has proven adept at gracing taboo prejudices that defy reason, Hawaiian-born American native Barack H. Obama has been a spokesmodel of keeping cool.
You want to talk about being offended by outdated ideas persisting in this Inauguration? May I ask, as an apatheist, why the HELL we have religious leaders blessing or invoking or praying or chanting anything at a formal political ceremony? Why is touching the Bible required to finally be President? That there are so many religious trappings in a country founded on a separation of Church and State, endlessly prioritized in the 'War on Christmas' Media, that feels like a gut punch.
I know where this rage is coming from. Prop 8 here in California appears to have become the national rallying call of "ENOUGH." It's sad that it had come to this, but it's a good time to show up. Make no mistake: This is the time to fight for gay marriage. So let's get on it, instead of letting this rankle in the press for weeks on end like this really was Obama's 'first big blunder.' (We'll know when that happens, believe me.)
I am fortunate to have worked as a Director/Producer on a reality series alongside Dustin Lance Black, the critic's darling who wrote Milk from scratch. The show was Faking It, wherein someone crammed for 30 days to pass themselves off as a professional. Lance happened to be documenting a sheep-shearer from the countryside studying to be a hairdresser. This hick kid did not like gays, a career hazard in that field. Lance smartly set up interactive counseling dialogues that would address this prejudice and open up the mind of this boy.
In Milk, a similar strategy is embraced when Harvey Milk stresses that the fight against homophobia comes from every gay person letting those around them know that gay people are not foreign deviants, but the people in your community, in your family. The new fight will be in the courts, at the polls, in the press, and on the streets. (Not so much at the bars anymore.)
You want to undo the damage wrought by Prop 8? Why don't we take the time to actually confirm the legitimacy of the vote for Prop 8 in light of dubious exit polls, instead of assuming the best of our beleaguered electoral system here in California?
Why don't we talk about the rampant misleading ads for Prop 8, which claimed that not passing it would allow homosexuality to be taught in school, and how we can stop false advertising in campaigns, especially fright tactics? Or investigate the millions from a religious group to wage the Prop 8 campaign?
It's just possible that the majority of Californians do not actually want to amend our state constitution with bigotry. This poses the more specific challenge to gay activists to focus on campaign financing and election reform as gay issues.
Rick Warren seems like a wedding toast compared to all that. Accordingly, people have grumbled about his poor choice in the wedding party, but everybody will be too drunk and distracted to care whatever he said anyway. Not only does the drawn-out Rick Warren flap distract from the much bigger issues down the line, it provides fresh fodder for the divisive opportunists who literally have no other card to play except the Phantom Gay Menace card, feeding tabloid news a faux controversy at a slow time of year. Moreover, we have to get ready to party, and I haven't even shopped yet.
And Obama is a metrosexual? Huh?
I thought he was a fairly traditional married heterosexual Christian. He shares that with Warren, right?
So, to you, having a powerful evangelical Christianist ideologue in a very prestigious and public spot--even if what he says is innocuous, and we'll have to wait and see just how bland he'll be, and how big a part Jesus will play--is no BFD? Well, but then you don't have to worry about your reproductive rights, do you? Nor whether you can find a condom in Uganda or Rwanda or Nigeria, or whether you will go to jail for 5 years if you are found guilty of a 'homosexual act.' It's no BFD at all.
I'm sure I'll get some negative/nasty replies to my post but I think this comic expresses this perfect. Dems proclaim to be tolerant, open-minded, non-judgemental and certainly not hypocritical...yet there are times that many are all those things.
I don't agree with Warren on same-sex marriage, but everyone has their opinion, and to simpify it down to calling them bigots and condemning Obama or anyone who even LISTENS to their opinions in any way only hurts those who oppose them...and like it or not, it is hypocrisy to do so, and extremely close-minded.
BTW, do you know where some of the money to run the rampant misleading ads for Prop 8 came from?
Check that out and don't get back to us, thanks.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28354114/
Proselytizing in the Military Likely to Continue Under Obama
Barack Obama's decision to have the evangelical megachurch leader Rick Warren conduct the invocation at next month's presidential inauguration proves that fundamentalist Christians still wield enormous power within the federal government and will likely continue to be a dominating force under an Obama administration.
Nowhere is this more apparent than in the U.S. military where, for the past several years, in apparent violation of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution, chaplains have openly proselytized to thousands of active-duty soldiers and, in some cases, have tried to convert Iraqis and Afghans to Christianity.
I am not gay. This choice is disappointing for many many Christians, Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, and every other form of spiritual worship that exists in America.
I say: the one deserving is a Native American. There are still some left.
If your answer is "yes," and this genuinely wouldn't bother you, then, congratulations, you're not a hypocrite, but you might want to consider exactly where you stand on civility and civil rights. If you answer "no," you are making a claim that some forms of bigotry are acceptable and others are not; i.e., racism is bad, homophobia, not so much, an attitude which, to put it nicely, doesn't exactly make you a spokesperson on anything regarding genuine civil rights. Ultimately, it really is that simple: if you wouldn't easily dismiss a racist or anti-Semite minister as the choice, but you'd shrug at an anti-gay minister, you're willing to treat some forms of bigotry as more convenient than others.
But my answer is "Yes", Warren's presence doesn't offend me any more than I'm already offended by the respect he and his ilk are always given. And no, I don't need to consider where I stand on civil rights.
It's time that the same thing be done for statements against gays.
You think Obama's Black supporters might have "questioned" such a choice.?
The message Obama is sending isn't that he's inclusive and conciliatory, but that he'll screw anyone to gain a little more political power. Guess that's just the Chicago politician in him.
Now, I would never say that the guys who bombed the Birmingham church in the 60's did the civil rights movement a favor, nor would I say that the supporters of Prop 8 did the gay rights movement a favor, but come on... this guy's gonna talk for a few minutes. Turn off your TV if it bothers you so much. In the meantime, go ahead and rail against Warren and all the truly feeble-minded people who are so unable to tolerate diversity. That's more than a right, it's a responsibility. But let's wait and see where Obama takes us before castigating him for this. Sure, the invocation is a high-profile appearance and a symbolic event, but in the end it's purely superficial and substantively meaningless!
Coupon Follows:
"I hereby apologize to all the apologists who have defended the choice of Rick Warren for giving the inauguration prayer on various grounds including:
-Inclusiveness of all viewpoints (no matter how vile they are to your supporters).
-Obama is the President of All - and all viewpoints no matter how inane (even if "mainstream) or offensive should be given a place of honor at this historic event.
-Complaints about the choice are shrill and childish and anyone who disagrees should just shut-up, grow-up, or go away.
-Snarky comments that due to the LGBT response they no longer (like they ever did) will support LGBT Civil Rights
-Comments that the LGBT community should just chill and accept a debate about "social issues" that are really Civil Rights - and accept a man in this historic limelight who used his position to trample on the rights of California LGBT citizens.
Print it out and I'll be happy to redeem it when Obama leads us into Happy Land - you know the one that heterosexual Americans already inhabit.
In the meantime you continue to march lock(goose)step behind in true Rethuglican style, brooking no comment or dissent.