From Playbook:

BREAKING: The Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, who became the Episcopal Church’s first openly gay bishop in 2003 and last year entered into a civil union with his gay partner, will deliver the invocation for Sunday’s kickoff inaugural event on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, with President-elect Obama in attendance. The event is free and open to the public.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it, Rick Warren!

Oh, by the way, according to the transition, the move has absolutely nothing to do with Rick Warren. Also from Playbook:

An Obama source: ‘Robinson was in the plans before the complaints about Rick Warren. Many skeptics will read this as a direct reaction to the Warren criticism – but it’s just not so.’

No word yet on whether Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s witch-hunting pastor is planning to come to Washington to protect Obama from black magic.

Let’s hope that the decision is just arrogance, as opposed to bigotry or political expediency. Bigotry would be a slap in the face to minorities of all kinds that worked so hard to get Obama into office; political expediency would put the lie to Obama’s claim that he’s all about change.

Unfortunately, Obama’s justification that he wants this “to be the most inclusive inauguration ever” is wholly unconvincing. “We can disagree without being disagreeable,” he said of the invitation to Warren.

But can we?  Aren’t there some views that are so bigoted and dangerous that they ought to be denounced?  Would Barack Obama invite a prominent segregationist to speak at his inauguration? Aren’t there some views that simply don’t deserve a seat at the table?

Surely, Obama wouldn’t have given such an honored position to a pastor who equated interracial marriage to immoral and criminal behavior, though historically that was the prevailing view and some people likely still see it that way.

Perhaps mainstream society isn’t as far along in its support of gay rights as it is in support of the rights of other minorities — as we learned from the passage of the arguably illegal Proposition 8 in California in November. But wasn’t Obama elected to lead the country to a better place? And as a member of a group that has suffered the humiliations and violence that accompanies the sort of discriminatory views Rick Warren now espouses about gay people, shouldn’t we expect him to know where to draw the line between a political disagreement and hateful bigotry?

Sure, Warren has been an important and influential advocate on issues like poverty, climate change and AIDS, and a prominent advocate on those issues should be included in the inauguration.  His unfortunate views against abortion and stem-cell research could arguably be considered religious or political disagreements.  But hateful discrimination cloaked as an acceptable moral and political position steps very clearly over the line.

It’s not just the gay and lesbian community that’s going after President-elect Barack Obama for his choice to have Rick Warren, the socially conservative evangelical minister, deliver the inauguration’s invocation. Blogging for Congressional Quarterly, David Corn, Washington bureau chief of Mother Jones, says Obama has “stepped over a line…even if this is a symbolic gesture.” From the CQ blog:

By all means, Obama should work with Rick Warren when there is common cause. For political reasons, he should not eschew Warren because of his anti-gay views. Warren can be a powerful ally when it comes time to persuade the public to support climate change legislation. Success in governing often depends on forging coalitions with those with whom you disagree.

But Warren’s opposition to gay rights is more than a mere policy dispute. It is an act of bigotry. Sure, Warren does not believe he is being discriminatory. But that’s what it is. He is denying rights to certain Americans because he disapproves of how they love. By handing Warren this prime slot at the inauguration, Obama is saying that he recognizes Warren as a spiritual leader and is reaffirming Warren’s position as such. This is an insult to gay Americans and those who support equal rights in this nation.

As Laura pointed out earlier, Obama defended his choice this morning, saying that he’s a “fierce advocate for gay and lesbian Americans.” Tapping Warren, he added, is part of his campaign promise to reach across the aisle to end the partisan bickering that poisoned Washington in recent decades. The left is going nuts that the process would include the acceptance of a guy like Rick Warren. Then again, what did liberals think bipartisanship would look like?

Warren, a leader of the evangelical Saddleback Church in Orange County,Calif., came out in favor of Proposition 8 — a ballot initiative that stripped gays of the right to marry in the state. The hot-button initiative narrowly passed, setting off a firestorm among gay rights advocates who took to the streets in protests across the state.

Obama, who often mentioned his support of gay rights in stump speeches, though not gay marriage, said today that he is a “fierce advocate for gay and lesbian Americans,” adding, “It’s something I’ve been consistent on.”

When pressed by a reporter on why he would invite someone with opposing social views to speak at his inauguration, Obama responded: “It’s important for Americans to come together, even if we have different social views…that dialogue, I think, is what my campaign has been about.”

For those who see gay marriage as one of the great civil rights struggles of this era, the “coming together” message doesn’t take away the sting.

California gay rights activist Rick Jacobs said to Politico:

“Can you imagine if he had a man of God doing the invocation who had deliberately said that Jews are not going to be saved and therefore should be excluded from what’s going on in America? People would be up in arms,” he said.

Obama, who has been commended for a near-flawless transition, might have just made his first major misstep.