An ancillary concern, but one that must be mentioned: Almost immediately following Giglio’s withdrawal, social media discussions erupted, even among thoughtful people, about which “gay friendly presumed” preacher should replace him. Some of the names suggested would be very fine additions to the inaugural program, but the cavalier manner in which Giglio’s overthrow was shrugged off struck me as terrifyingly disengaged and ironic: A man who is doing good work against a difficult issue like human trafficking has been excluded from an American Presidential Inauguration because of his words from 15-20 years ago, and because of his refusal to conform every bit of his thinking to the a new and strangely narrow and illiberal standard. This would have been unthinkable only a few years ago, when “inclusion and tolerance” still made a grudging bow to “diversity of thought.” Last week, that fact was, for many who should know better but could not see past their sympathies, not even worth mentioning.
In the “land of the free” we are quickly becoming comfortable with the idea that our thoughts must align perfectly with the Zeitgeist’s, all the time, or else people become expendable, exclude-able. This, I would suggest, is a social over-correction. We are losing the idea that decent people may disagree and still be decent people. That cannot be a good thing.