A few words about Obama's selection of Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at his inaguration.

[Skinner]

It should come as no surprise that President-elect Obama's selection of conservative minister Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at his inauguration has been controversial here on DU, and it should come as no surprise that it has generated a lot of very heated discussion. This website will continue to host very passionate discussions about this issue for as long as our members want to talk about it. With this in mind, I would like to make a few comments, in hopes that we might be able to nudge the discussion in a slightly more productive, and less disruptive direction. Perhaps we can foster a little mutual understanding.


Reasonable people can disagree

I think we all agree that Rick Warren -- who compares homosexuality to pedophilia and bans gays from his church -- is an anti-gay bigot. Furthermore, Democratic Underground would not, under any circumstances, permit our members to use this website to argue that homosexuality is like pedophilia, or that gays should be banned from church. But that is not the issue here, because as far as I am aware no one has been making that argument here on DU.

The issue here is whether President-elect Obama should have selected Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at Inauguration. To me, this seems like an issue where reasonable people can disagree. Even those reasonable people who fully support gay rights (as DUers are expected to do).

I have not publicly taken sides on this issue, and I do not intend to. But I am going to briefly share my understanding of what both sides are saying. Perhaps people might be more inclined to listen to the other viewpoint if it comes from me.

Those who are criticizing Obama's selection of Rick Warren to deliver the invocation argue that a known anti-gay bigot (and conservative extremist on many other issues) should not be given such a position of honor. Selecting Warren legitimizes his bigotry. It is a slap in the face to the GLBT community. It is the opposite of the unity that Obama promised, because Rick Warren does not preach tolerance and unity -- he preaches division.

Those who are defending Obama's selection of Rick Warren to deliver the invocation argue that inviting a known conservative sends a powerful message of unity. It shows that Barack Obama is willing to reach out across the partisan and cultural divide, even to those with whom he disagrees. Doing so is not comparable to offering Rick Warren a cabinet position or other government post -- he will not be able to make policy, and the "appointment" lasts for about two minutes. Obama's public overtures to social conservatives could provide him with some measure of political cover in the future if/when he tries to enact pro-gay policies like adding sexual orientation to ENDA or repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell.

Both of these viewpoints seem reasonable to me. I believe that supporters of gay rights could hold either point of view -- or some combination of the two. Indeed, many DUers have expressed their strong disagreement with the selection, while at the same time arguing that it does not mean Obama has abandoned gay rights.


A word about expectations

I think some people may have unrealistic expectations about how Democratic Underground moderates these discussions. According to our rules: "Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office."

On one side: If you think that Democratic Underground would not or should not permit our members to criticize the choice of Rick Warren, an anti-gay bigot, to speak at Inauguration, then your expectations are not realistic.

On the other side: If you think that Democratic Underground would not or should not permit our members to defend Barack Obama, a Democrat and a supporter of gay rights, then your expectations are not realistic.

Of course, if someone posts something that is anti-gay, by all means click the "Alert" link to let the moderators know. Bigotry -- anti-gay or otherwise -- is not welcome on Democratic Underground.


A plea to dial down the rhetoric. And to listen a little.

I think most DUers understand and can accept the points I made above. You understand that reasonable people can disagree on this, and you understand that there is going to be disagreement here on DU. Disagreement does not necessarily make a person anti-gay or anti-Obama.

I hope that everyone will make an effort to calm down the overheated rhetoric a little, and make an effort to be more respectful when you post. Avoid deliberately misrepresenting or overstating what other people post. Resist the urge to put the worst possible spin on the other side. Please make an effort to see the other side. Do not insult fellow DUers who hold a different view. Do not paint entire groups of people as single-issue purists or bigots. And in particular, I think people need to understand that for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered DUers, this is a very personal issue. If any of us did not enjoy full and equal rights, it is unlikely that we would consider equal rights to be a minor issue.