Although I consider myself a pretty ardent supporter of gay rights, I have found that I can’t muster outrage over Obama’s choice to have Rick Warren deliver the invocation at his inauguration.

I’m not sure why I’ve run counter to many gay rights activists on this issue. I don’t know a lot about Rick Warren, but I don’t think his career is necessarily defined by his opposition to gay marriage; like many Christians and even democrats, he opposed prop 8 in California, but it doesn’t appear to be what defines his mission.

But that wasn’t the reason for my indifference.

In the past eight years, I’ve seen the Bush administration rule through ‘with us or against us’ mentality, closing his mind to those who opposed him, stubbornly giving the silent treatment to anyone -domestic or foreign-who didn’t see the world through the same narrow lens as he does.

To shut out the entire right wing, to not invite to the table the people whose views you don’t agree with … wouldn’t that be continuing a mindset that we liberals are so anxious to break away from?

I wish Obama hadn’t chosen Warren. But perhaps by doing so, instead of spending their time finding ways to undermine and oppose him, people who believe differently will perhaps come to the table, and realize that really both sides are not so different.

To shut out Warren and everyone who doesn’t see the world through our own narrow lens (yes, I like to think it’s a ‘progressive’ lens, but it is my own lens), would be to repeat the mistakes we suffered through in the past.

Maybe I’m being naive, but I’d like to think that the Warren pick is getting rid of ‘more of the same’ in Washington.