Living in a box

Wow, it's been a while, blog. i've missed you.

It's finally Christmas break, and i have to some to sit and be still and contemplate the many mysteries of the universe. i had a pretty fantastic semester at UNC with the Achordants and the small group, and the friends, and the classes, etc. But now i'm home, which means i can read Newsweek articles on msnbc.com and then post my commentary here. i just took a trip to London to see some plays, and i'll be back to talk about those later, but this struck my fancy, so i thought i'd get it out of the way while i'm around.

Barack Obama has selected Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inaugural ceremony. This has apparently upset some members of the gay community, because Rick Warren, a Christian (zoinks!), is less than supportive of gay rights. To help settle this, Newsweek had two gay writers do a sort of article debate about it - Chris Crain in support of the decision, and Leah McElrath Renna against it.

Basically, Crain insists that we look at what unifies us, rather than what divides us, claiming that Warren represents the beliefs of many Americans, including the foundational Christian beliefs shared by President-elect Obama. Renna, on the other hand, claims that by selecting someone who doesn't recognize gays and lesbians as spiritually whole people, but as people who choose to be sinners, Obama has selected an inappropriate person to be the "spiritual representative of our nation as a whole."

For the most part, i side with Crain on this. Although i understand the complaints of those who may call him an appeaser and maintain their frustration with Obama and his selection, his arguments at least focused on the unity that Obama has been emphasizing, and he calls out Renna for encouraging disunity among Americans, gay and straight alike (an accusation i have been more than happy about making towards the many many Obama supporters who have managed to live through the cognitive dissonance it must have required to actually be an Obama supporter, seeking change and unity, except for, you know, that other half of the country, eewww).

i just wanted to point out that Renna fails to take into consideration the fact that Warren very likely believes that no one is spiritually whole, and that we are all sinners because, that's sort of what Christians believe. Not that Renna went out of her way to actually talk about or even speculate on what Christianity itself actually holds to be true. She mainly just focused on what she thought. Furthermore, i'm bothered by the fact that she gives the position of giving an invocation at the inaugural ceremony so much credibility. i was a bit surprised to discover that America even had a spiritual representation of our nationa as a whole, our very own direct line to God, who must be an American. i mean, if he wasn't an American, why would it be so important to represent the entire nation to Him?

But then, i wonder who Renna would have selected as a better "spiritual representation"? Is there anyone out there is atheist, agnostic, Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Jewish, and Hindu out there? Also, if that person could be gay and straight, black and white (no, wait, Obama's got that one covered already), a man and a woman, American and...well, no, only American (since that's apparently all that matters to God), then will that person please stand up, because i bet you meet Leah Renna's standards for who would be best to give the invocation at Obama's inauguration. Or no, how about this? If you can just be a Christian who agrees with Renna's opinions on this one particular issue, then i bet the entire gay community would feel better. Kay, thanks :)

Do you see, Leah Renna? No one will ever make you happy, which actually makes me kind of sad. Your sadness is a virus, and it is infecting me, so i'm going to leave now, before it spreads further, but before i do, i thought you should know, that gaping (cross-shaped?) hole in your soul cannot be filled by a woman. Or a man. Or a pro-choice, gay-rights activist Christian. Or Barack Obama. Or debating issues that have little importance aside from what you assign to them. i hope you've figured out what i'm getting at by now because i don't really feel like spelling it out any more.

Just because you put yourself into a box doesn't mean you have to make everyone else live in one, too.

(And before anyone does try to put me in a box on this, please feel free to get in touch with me about anything you'd like me to clarify about my faith, my opinions on Obama, who i actually don't mind very much, my views of homosexuality, etc. i can't guarantee i'll have very good answers, but i'd rather talk to you about them than let you draw conclusions based on this one entry.)