I am fierce advocate for equality for gay and -- well, let me start by talking about my own views. I think it is no secret that I am a fierce advocate for equality for gay and lesbian Americans. It is something I have been consistent on and something I intend to continue to be consistent on during my presidency.i actually agree with some of what he says in the last paragraph. not everyone has to agree with me or obama on all issues. i acknowledge that rick warren and his ilk exist and that we should express our disagreement with them without being "disagreeable." but, i might add, not being "disagreeable" doesn't have to mean we can't forcefully defend what we believe. being assertive is not being "disagreeable." i am perfectly willing to sit down with mr. warren and have a passionate debate with him without crossing the "disagreeable" line. that is, i won't call him an asshole or whack him over the head with a chair. i won't go out of my way to be mean to him, but i'm not going to temper any of my positions just because he's there or try to placate the guy.
What I've also said is that it is important for America to come together even though we may have disagreements on certain social issues.
And I would note that a couple of years ago I was invited to Rick Warren's church to speak, despite his awareness that I held views entirely contrary to his when it came to gay and lesbian rights, when it came to issues like abortion.
Nevertheless, I had an opportunity to speak, and that dialogue, I think, is a part of what my campaign's been all about, that we're never going to agree on every single issue. What we have to do is create an atmosphere where we can disagree without being disagreeable, and then focus on those things that we hold in common as Americans. So Rick Warren has been invited to speak, Dr. Joseph Lowery -- who has deeply contrasting views to Rick Warren about a whole host of issues -- is also speaking.
but all that has nothing to do with who gets to be an honored speaker at the inauguration. we're talking about a special privilege, not a right to participate in the overall debate. it's not being "disagreeable" if you avoid going out of your way to honor someone. the inauguration festivities isn't a forum for debate. the speakers and performers who are invited enjoy a special honor that 99.99999% of the country does not get. had obama not invited warren to speak, it wouldn't have been "disagreeable" at all. if it were, obama is insulting almost everyone in the country by not inviting each one of them to speak.
there's no question in my mind that if warren had spoken about black people or jewish people in the way he has spoken about gay people, he would never ever have been invited to give the invocation. if he had compared hispanics to child rapists, do you think he would be anywhere near the podium on january 20th? which is why, contrary to what obama says in the first paragraph above, the choice does indicate that obama is not quite so fierce an advocate of equality for gays and lesbians as he claims. his defense doesn't address the real issue at all.
