Inauguration 2009

Again, What's the Prize?

I slept on it, but I still can't see an upside in this thing -- political or otherwise. Rick Warren is such a terrible, terrible idea. Conservative evangelicals won't budge on abortion or same-sex marriage simply because Warren got a speaking part in the inauguration. And it only serves to piss off the gay community again. Not to mention those of us who are exhausted after eight years of Christian conservatives dictating American policy from the pulpit.

Here's a better choice.

Adding... Another Rick. Rick Santorum:

In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be.

And Rick Warren:

I’m opposed to the redefinition of a 5,000-year definition of marriage. I’m opposed to having a brother and sister be together and call that marriage. I’m opposed to an older guy marrying a child and calling that a marriage. I’m opposed to one guy having multiple wives and calling that marriage.

This should disqualify a guy from having a speaking part on the inaugural dais.

Futhermore... Adding to what Benen wrote (he also 'slept on it'), I'm not convinced this is a big enough spot to impress conservative evangelicals. It's just the invocation, and it's likely the far-right will consider Warren to be cancelled out by Rev. Lowery's benediction. However, it's definitely big enough to alienate a lot of Americans who are stinging from Prop 8 and the broader Bush/Evangelical axis. This is one of those cases when, to quote John Adams, the middle way is no way at all. Just downside.