That Warren+Obama Thing

Since the news broke that president-elect Obama asked evangelical Rick Warren, notorious for various anti-gay remarks he has made in very public ways, not to mention his vocal support for the anti-marriage-equality proposition 8 in California, to give the invocation at Obama's inauguration, I've been on the side of the incensed gays and pro-choice and etc. people who felt it was somewhere between insensitive and insulting on Obama's part.

Obama's "clarifications" since then have not really changed my opinion that it was a stupid move on his part, politically lose-lose despite the president-elect's inclusiveness rhetoric. We haven't notice any white supremecists invited to take visible parts in the inauguration ceremonies at which America celebrates a new president and at which, Obama incidentally celebrates becoming the new president. Note that I feel the emphasis should be on America's celebration.

To all appearances, Rick Warren is a smiling evangelical preacher who, like virtually all other smiling evangelical preachers, claims to love gays, to love the sinner but hate the sin, but in fact is an unrepentant homophobe who feels slightly uncomfortable when that fact about them is revealed but, nevertheless, steams ahead behind a cowcatcher of tough love and biblical righteousness, often because of their own internalized homosexual conflicts.

Although I am old and set in my ways, curmudgeonly and almost entirely cynical, I am filled this week with bounteous, atheistic holiday spirit because of the winter solstice and the welcome return of the sun, and I believe I can entertain a middle-ground theory about Mr. Warren.

Okay, barely conceivable all taken together, but just possible, given my spirit of solsticeic good-humor, that that string of conceivables is actually possible.

These possible conceptions arrive, unbidden, because of some activities in more recent days. Hateful language telling gays and lesbians that they are not, and never would be, welcome at Mr. Warren's church has disappeared from that church's website. Mr. Warren was recently nice to Melissa Etheridge when they saw each other at some public venue. Mr. Warren himself seems to be seeking out opportunities to be seen with as many gay and lesbian people as he can arrange.

Now, the cynical me of the 51 weeks of the year not filled with atheistic holiday spirit would see all these activities merely as cynical activities on Mr. Warren's part to arrange some gay photo-ops to demonstrate that he's not just another smiling evangelical preacher who, like virtually all other smiling evangelical preachers, claims to love gays, to love the sinner but hate the sin, but in fact is an unrepentant homophobe who feels slightly uncomfortable when that fact about them is revealed but, nevertheless, steams ahead behind a cowcatcher of tough love and biblical righteousness.

Therefore, in this one week filled with atheistic solsticeic good-will and cheer, I choose to believe, tentatively, that Mr. Warren has indeed been surprised to discover that, contrary to his internalized beliefs, he has not been acting or speaking in any way that might be seen by any stretch of the imagination as loving, let alone friendly, towards his many gay and lesbian friends and much-touted commensals–none of whom have stepped into the public spotlight to proclaim the receipt of feelings of love streaming towards them from Mr. Warren–and that he is honestly, in good faith, trying to make amends now that the truth has been revealed to him.

That would be a good thing. He may continue to demonstrate that he has realized his shortcomings by continuing on his current goodwill mission. Meanwhile, we of teh gay, will try to be generous in suspending disbelief and at recognizing that lifestyle changes among smiling evangelical preachers is at least conceivable.

Posted on December 23, 2008 at 18.53 by jns · Permalink
In: All, Current Events, Faaabulosity

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments via RSS

  1. Written by S.W. Anderson
    on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 at 02.57
    Permalink

    As I commented elsewhere, good people make bad moves, and Obama's Warren invitation was a very bad move. If reaching out and being inclusive was really the goal, Obama could've invited Warren to the White House for lunch and a chat. He could've hosted a forum of people with different views on social issues, with Warren included.

    Symbolism matters. Inviting Warren to give the inaugural invocation highlights someone who, ironically, has fallen very short when it comes to inclusiveness — e.g. Saddleback Church being off limits to people unrepentant for a major element of their most basic nature.

    Your giving the benefit of the doubt is commendable. As for Warren's late-breaking efforts to avoid the appearance of bigotry, I'm unimpressed.

  2. Written by jns
    on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 at 10.21
    Permalink

    As I've thought about it, the only answer that comes up is that Obama is a bit too hypnotized by his newfound ability to get celebrities to do things, and Warren is certainly that, but he was an awful choice symbolically, and symbolism matters tremendously–witness the current squabble over the mere word "marriage" and the right for everyone to marry, which is clearly about so much more than mere wedlock.

    Here's a timely opinion piece on the subject I think I'd like to keep track of: Derrick Z. Jackson, "Obama's bad judgment on Warren", The Boston Globe, 23 December 2008.

Subscribe to comments via RSS

Leave a Reply

To thwart spam, comments by new people are held for moderation; give me a bit of time and your comment will show up.

I welcome comments -- even dissent -- but I will delete without notice irrelevant, rude, psychotic, or incomprehensible comments, particularly those that I deem homophobic, unless they are amusing. The same goes for commercial comments and trackbacks. Sorry, but it's my blog and my decisions are final.