17 December 2008
Rick Warren and the Inauguration
Lots of people are in high dudgeon about the Inaugural Committee's choice (with, one presumes, President-Elect Obama's consent) of Rick Warren to deliver the Invocation at the Inauguration.
Get. Over. It.
If you didn't understand what Obama was talking about when he discussed a politics of inclusion, you have no one to blame but yourself. You were told the us-against-them rules were going to change.
Treating people as persona-non-grata because you disagree with their opinion on a matter near and dear to your own heart is not an effective way to change their opinion. Impacting them in ways that leads them to change their point of view is desirable. There are ways to do that beyond holding them up to ridicule, scorn, invective, and dismissal. Engaging them as a human being that you care about, that you care to influence their opinion about, is an approach that yields substantive change both in the short and long terms.
It's better for Warren to be there on the platform and to hear Obama's inclusion of LGBT folk into the national fabric in his inaugural address than it is for him to hear it on a television somewhere. It draws him into the discussion. It makes him complicit in Obama's point of view.
We (LGBT folk) have to engage the church-going population, and not just the liberal church-going population. We have to hear their fears and concerns; we have to address them. Being right just isn't enough: we have to bring those who disagree with us along somehow if we are going to get to the point that they respect our rights from an understanding point of view.
Get. Over. It.
If you didn't understand what Obama was talking about when he discussed a politics of inclusion, you have no one to blame but yourself. You were told the us-against-them rules were going to change.
Treating people as persona-non-grata because you disagree with their opinion on a matter near and dear to your own heart is not an effective way to change their opinion. Impacting them in ways that leads them to change their point of view is desirable. There are ways to do that beyond holding them up to ridicule, scorn, invective, and dismissal. Engaging them as a human being that you care about, that you care to influence their opinion about, is an approach that yields substantive change both in the short and long terms.
It's better for Warren to be there on the platform and to hear Obama's inclusion of LGBT folk into the national fabric in his inaugural address than it is for him to hear it on a television somewhere. It draws him into the discussion. It makes him complicit in Obama's point of view.
We (LGBT folk) have to engage the church-going population, and not just the liberal church-going population. We have to hear their fears and concerns; we have to address them. Being right just isn't enough: we have to bring those who disagree with us along somehow if we are going to get to the point that they respect our rights from an understanding point of view.
Labels: gay rights, inauguration, obama, rick warren
08 December 2008
"I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take Jay Leno at 10:00 p.m."
From the New York Times, here:Only Monday Mr. Zucker appeared at a UBS lunch in New York and suggested that in the future networks might have to cut back on the hours of prime time they program. The daily program with Mr. Leno would effectively cut back the number of hours NBC needed to fill each week from 22 to 17.UBS?
UBS was the network in Network.
03 December 2008
Proposition 8, The Musical
