The debate is between Chris Crain and Leah McElrath Renna. Both are members of the gay community. Crain defends Obama's choice of Warren, and Renna opposes it.
Crain has a number of thought provoking posts about the kerkuffle over Rick Warren. If Obama decides to move on DADT because he alienated gays with this choice of Rick Warren to speak at the inauguration, in my opinion we've moved the ball forward.
Let me be clear. Warren's viewpoint about the nature of sexual orientation, at least of the homosexual variety, is cramped and mean-spirited. He has to "reign in" his desire to sleep with every beautiful woman he sees, and we have to "reign in" ever having at any point in our lives any romantic, loving, sexual relationship with the gender with which we are attracted to biologically. How apples and oranges. How unfair and how cruel.
Also, however, how typical. Warren's viewpoint is shared by the Roman Catholic faith and most mainline Protestants -- except for Southern Baptists who are worse, and Mormons who are even more worse. Don't even get me started on Islam, which rejects the whole idea of homosexuality as a Western perversion.
So faith leaders from all these traditions should be excluded from the inauguration on our behalf? The Constitution prohibits "a religious test" for public office, but we gays sure do want one for important public ceremonies! We're on the wrong side of this issue, folks.
On a lighter note, you gotta love the NBC edit on the video, specifically the look Ann Curry cuts Rick Warren when he claims it is his "natural inclination to sleep with every beautiful woman" he sees.