Obama’s inauguration choice spells equality

When President-elect Barack Obama said he would have a diverse team, he definitely meant it. Obama has brought together a team of men and women, black, white and brown, Democrat and Republican and at least one gay.

So it should not have been a very big surprise that Obama put in some religious inclusiveness to his inauguration when he announced that California’s evangelical pastor Rick Warren would give the invocation on Jan. 20.

While many Americans oppose Rick Warren’s participation in the Obama inauguration because they strongly oppose the views Warren takes on a social front, we must actively recognize that when we elected Obama we did not vote for a self-interested prizefighter for only one side of any argument.

We voted for someone who could, and will, responsibly govern this country. So far, Obama has done just that, keeping his word that “There is no red America, no blue America, just the United States of America.”

Many people are familiar with the fact that Warren, a Southern Baptist, is known for issues such as fighting global warming, poverty and HIV/AIDS. He is also someone who is consistent with holding a very conservative, fundamental Christian perspective on social issues. Thus, Obama’s choice of Warren is, of course, controversial.

During one interview, Warren linked same-sex marriage to incest, statutory rape and polygamy. And yes, he has compared the Holocaust to abortion. But that is not the point. The point is that having this Christian view will move America forward because it is not being ignored.

The point is that there are people in America who agree with Warren and you can’t cancel them out. Seeing some views as right or wrong, good or bad is a mistake that has already been made, and the reason why Warren was a smart choice for Obama is because Obama is, in fact, engaging every view, every background and every color in his office because this way there is more representation.

Considering that Obama has faced questions about his own religious beliefs, he made the smart choice to choose someone from the American religious background. Although Obama’s father was a Muslim—and it was rumored that Obama too, must be a Muslim—the participation of Warren in Obama’s inauguration will only disprove the concerns about the president-elect.

Obama himself knows that there is no perfect choice, and has said he disagrees on some important issues with Warren. However, they agree on the importance of fighting against poverty and HIV/AIDS, and the question of civil unions for gays.

Some members of the LGBTQ community who supported Obama feel it goes against their views and it proves that Obama does not actually support their causes. Other Americans are comparing Bill Clinton’s promises to the gay community, such as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the “Defense of Marriage Act,” and think Obama’s claims are falsely advocating for equality, too.

However, in order to responsibly govern the country, there is a requirement that there be an understanding of differences of the entire nation, especially for a nation as diverse as the United States.

Obama choosing a Christian leader who sides with a percentage of people’s views is not less dividing or more. You might think it alienates a huge population of people in America who have a certain point of view because you might disagree with it, but if you were comfortable with Warren’s views you would think otherwise. Whether Warren was a Christian or not, someone, somewhere, somehow, would disagree to the same extent as someone who agrees with him.

You cannot simply push away a viewpoint in order to move forward. Instead you should understand it and educate yourself about it, because in order for everyone to get along, you must engage all viewpoints, which is what Obama has done with his choice of Warren.