I knew I was going to be in the minority among UUs when it came to not having a problem with Rick Warren delivering the invocation at the Inauguration. Hell….I’m already a minority in UUism 2 ways so there’s nothing new there.
Here’s the question; is this uproar because this is Rick Warren? Or would it have happened with any minister who was anti-choice and against gay marriage?
Next question……who gets to determine who gets to speak at a particular ceremony? Would you allow Rick Warren to do the invocation anywhere?
Here’s a scenario……..if I am ever lucky enough to be ordained there are two people I would want to be part of my ordination service. Both of them are against gay marriage. One of them is really anti-choice. Are you saying that I shouldn’t have them as part of my service? At what point does personal relationship trump people’s ideology.
Now back to the Inauguration…..there have been both racists and anti-Semetic ministers who have given the invocation. Anti-gay-rights ministers too. Anti-non-believers too. (And let’s not act as if there haven’t been U/U/UU ministers that fit in those categories.) How many people remember who gave the invocation the next day? And how much outrage is being used against a symbol rather than the actual problem?
I don’t think it’s wrong to voice displeasure at the choice. I think that the way the displeasure is being voiced will not get you heard. There are ways to talk to allies/friends about the hard issues in a way that does not make continuing the conversation impossible.
I don’t know if that makes any sense. I might try again later.