Thank you so much for so eloquently putting my own feelings of disappointment into words. I just couldn’t figure the choice out – was it some nod to the Evangelicals because they have such a powerful base? Or some attempt from Obama to continue to “prove” his Christianity because it was challenged so often? Some appeasement for the Reverend Wright issues? Or what?
It really doesn’t matter, because it is as you said – it’s divisive and I will NOT know what to think or do when the nation is called to prayer on that day. I was soooo looking forward to this historic inauguration and now that day is to be marred.
I am a lesbian who’s parents are both Evangelical ministers. In fact, I’m pretty positive that they voted in favor of Prop 8 here in California. I get this kind of twisted “loving Jesus = shunning gays” on a weekly basis. Now to see it on the national stage is even more disheartening.
I also endured real slaps in the face as a child while, at the same time hearing “I love you.” That was confusing enough. Now it’s Obama who does the slap with one hand and a handshake with the other?
As a gay woman who very much is a believer and practicer of the New Thought spirituality and A Course In Miracles, I don’t want to become one of the angry masses in the face of this news. I will pray for a Miracle that perhaps Obama will hear the voice of those of us who feel hurt by this and somehow extricate himself politely from this invitation to Warren. If anyone could do it with diplomacy, it would be him. I pray he does.
I’d love to know anyone else’s input on how we might be vocal on this but still from a space of love. I’ve seen sites that are just viscerally angry but in a destructive way. I think anger is okay, but to find some productive “bring us TOGETHER, not apart” vibe would be better.
Well those are my thoughts…

Thought the whole Obama thing was to good to be true!

I, too, am deeply disappointed by this choice. I am a straight male in my 50s who is sympathetic to gay and transgendered rights. I have a childhood friend who came out as transgendered some years ago and was myself the target of baseless accusations of being gay in high school at a time when such an accusation was like walking around with a target on your back. I say this only to affirm that I understand.
Frankly, I would take the separation of church and state to the point where such invocations, prayers, rain dances and other shamanistic manifestations would be dropped from state functions at which they have no place. They are divisive, confusing and contradictory (as are all revealed doctrines) and simply unnecessary.
I am sorry, President Obama. I supported you, I defended you in arguments with friends and relatives with retrograde minds and I voted for you with relish. I will continue to support you as you work to undo the damage done by the worst administration in American history. I thank God that you and not the neocon-drenched McCain won this critical election. But the choise of Rick Warren to participate in your Inauguration was a mistake.
In closing, I would recommend that those spiritualists who take the Book of Leviticus as the literal word of God on the abomination of homosexuality also avoid shrimp cocktails and lobster over the holiday season and beyond, or you too will shall be an abomination. Look it up.

Name didn’t make it for some reason. Also, it’s “choice,” not “choise.” I’m a good speller, but a bad proofreader…

Ouch. Obama, what have you done? I am lost in what this means to the many members of our community especially the teens. Marianne, thank you for putting into words what pains my heart.

Yep, it’s incredibly disappointing for this Obama voter.

I totally agree with you. We need to start pushing the homophobes out of the spotlight. No responsible Christian should highlight or honor a homophobe unless he/she repents of his/her sin of homophobia. We can love the sinner and hate the sin
Seriously, though, I think homophobia is a deep heresy. Think about it: in the early days of the church, heretics were declared for adding a single letter – an iota – to the Greek word homoousios, which said that Christ was of the same substance of the Father, thus making it homoiousios, of like substance to the Father. People were excommunicated for this single letter.
If a single iota in a bit of theological arcana describing Christ is enough to make one a heretic, how much more is it heretical to make the name of Christ, He who loves everyone unconditionally, into a name of hate? How isn’t it heresy to represent Christ as standing against people of good will who just want to live normal lives free of discrimination?
Those who engage in hate toward LGBT citizens – including so-called “upstanding Christians” like Rick Warren, who’s basically Jim Dobson with a goatee – are engaging in heresy. They are portraying Christ as a figure of hate… and I think it’s time to call out what they do as sin, plain and simple. Homophobia – the advocation of discrimination of any kind against LGBT individuals – is sin, an act against God and against their LGBT brothers and sisters, and those who have engaged in it (like Rick Warren and his “Christian” Right brothers and sisters) need to repent of their sin and start working to undo the damage their hate has done.
All that said – he’s going to say a prayer. He’ll stand up, speak three minutes of spiritual platitudes with nothing even skirting controversy (I’ll be surprised if he even says “in Jesus’ name”), there will be the *thwomp thwomp thwomp* of some people clapping while wearing mittens, and he’ll sit back down. He’s not getting a Cabinet post or taking part in policy discussions.
This is a deeply offensive choice – and there are many prominent religious figures who haven’t engaged in such rank homophobia – but there’s a certain point at which proper reaction becomes overreaction. Some of my brothers and sisters on the left have crossed this line – for the right reasons, of course, and with every bit of sympathy and understanding from me, but things like “this proves that Obama is a liar” (when his position on this has been completely consistent) or “this proves that Obama doesn’t really care about LGBT rights” (when he’s taken just about every opportunity he’s had as a legislator to prove that he does care) are a bit overblown.

Hey, cool it. This is just civil religion. It is not as if anything significant rests on it. It has nothing to do with worship, or real prayer.
If Obama wants to invite a friend to perform in that venue, it is fine with me.
I don’t have to approve of an actor’s moral or political views to be able to enjoy his performance or contribution to a play or movie that is terrific.
Hang loose!

I agree with Marianne Williamson blog completely.
I don’t agree with you Asinus Gravis. This is more than just civil religion. This prayer of invocation and who prays it is a highly symbolic act. The person chosen by the president-elect to give it is supposed to represent his/her spiritual values and beliefs. Does Rick Warren represent Barack Obama’s spiritual values and beliefs? As I recall Obama disavowed his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, because he said he did not represent his spiritual values and beliefs. Now he choses Rick Warren, who works to take away the civil rights of GLBT people and likens their love and commitment to incest or pedophilia, disallows “unrepentant” gays and lesbians to join his church and offers a “ministry” through his church to “cure” them. Obama does not, according to him, believe these things. Obama also believes that woman’s reproductive rights be protected and Rick Warren does not. Rick Warren is not the person to represent President-elect Obama or the greater majority of the American people by giving the prayer of invocation at the inauguration.
BTW check out http://www.soulforce.org for resources to support and minister GLBT folks.
Simple question to ask Obama: Would Obama permit a minister who opposed granting equal rights to interracial couples to deliver the invocation at his inauguration?
Contact Parrag Mehta , President-Elect Obama’s LGBT liason on the transition team.- parag.mehta@ptt.gov and protest Warren’s invitation to give the prayer of invocation at the inauguration.

Obama offered sound, compelling reasons for his choice of Rick Warren to give the convocation. I may not agree with Warren on some issues, but I agree with Obama’s -reasoning- in this matter: and that’s the reason we elected him – he is a thoughtful, reasonable, considerate person.
Those who complain about Warren’s convocation on the basis of a single-issue are showing the exact same kind of intolerance that characterizes the politico-evangelical / neo-conservative mindset. We/you are bigger than that. Back up and look at the (far) bigger picture.
As for marriage… the bigger question is: should governments be in the “marriage granting” business at all? Shouldn’t “marriage” be left to religions? Personally, I see no reason for a constitutional government (local, state, federal) to define or sanction marriage. At all.
At best, governments should offer a “civil union” which formalizes legal rights. Religion should be the only body performing a “sacred right.” I don’t want my government meddling in religious affairs. Except…. for special cases (polygamy, underage, etc.), I think government can and should define certain -limitations- of unions. Homosexuality is not one of those cases.
I support Obama, and I support his choice of Warren. I’m contacting his transition team right now and offering my encouragement.
You short-sighted whiners need to stop looking down at your feet and set your eyes on the horizon, and beyond. That includes you, Ms. W. – Merry Christmas.

“Yet now millions of gay and lesbian Americans in this country are supposed to…what?….bow their heads and surrender to the voice of someone who they know has tirelessly worked against their rights?”
exactly…. thank you.
I have too much respect for my rights as a human being to “tolerate” someone who advocates I be treated as less.