Upon further reflection, I share these thoughts...
In his book, "The Audacity of Hope," Obama explains the connection between his personal values and the role that political policy should play. He is a pragmatic leader who has repeatedly said that politics should not be driven by religious or other ideologies. Therefore, ideology does not trump The Constitution of the United States or have a place in politics. Just the same, ideology is a reality of an open society. We are entitled to our opinions after all. I will add here for the purpose of transparency that my personal views are that government should not legislate or regulate our personal choices about marriage partners, sexual partners, the right to choose or the forms that family takes.
The debate between the conservative right and the Lesbian-Gay community and those of us who consider ourselves "social liberals" has traditionally take the form of hard-line positions - something difficult to avoid in social issues with controversial moral implications. Conservative hard liners take the position that same sex marriage is "immoral." Social liberals, believe that government interference in personal choices, be that our faith choice, who we have sex with or marry and how we treat our bodies, are unconstitutional. I won't go into the logic of either argument at this time. The point is that both positions are polarizing "debates" based on ideologies, rather than mutual dialogues based on mutual respect.
Ideological debates will not be solved by turning away from each other. The best we can hope for is a tolerance for opposing perspectives and an agreement to separate our religious ideologies from our political policies.
Presidential inaugurations should not be a political statement. They should be and are both a social tradition and an official swearing in of new political leadership to which all Americans are invited. All I know about Rick Warren is his religious ideology. I visited his website and don't see any political diatribes related to his religious proclamations. I admit this is an incomplete exploration. That said, if Warren is willing to seriously entertain a separation between his religious ideology and the sanctity of the American Constitution and Bill of Rights, I consider offering an official role in a public ceremony both a courageous decision and a powerful way to invite us toward collaboration with those who think differently.
One final thought: we are used to suspecting anyone in the public eye as manipulative, and with good reason. It will take time for us to trust that a public collaboration could actually be sincere. The conflict of interest and transparency policies of the Obama transition are the right place to begin, AND we will all have to let go of some of our own biases in order for change to take hold. I, for one, am ready to give it try.
