Will anti-gay Donnie McClurkin, Mary Mary et al be entertaining at Obama events in So. Carolina?

The anti-gay singers ("God delivered me from homosexuality! Homosexuals are trying to kill our children!) were featured just a few months ago and an Obama staffer said they got "what they needed" by having them appear on behalf of the Senator. Will they continue to entertain at rallies?

Bigotry is bigotry. Obama needs to address his support of this man.

hopeful...

He will change our party's decades old policy of tolerance for the Republican strategy of divide and conquer.

the catering and decorations will really suck.

as to the ownership of a cat.

Headliners for "Obama '08: Erase The Gay" Tour:

Ted Haggard



Al Reynolds (Mr. Star Jones)


Jonathan Plummer (ex-Mr. Terry McMillan)


David Gest (ex-Mr. Liza Minelli)


(hell, take your pick of any of Liza's ex-husbands)

I'm sure the usual suspects will be here soon to tell you to "get over it" or "get a life."

:eyes:

Riiiiight... :rofl:

All one has to do is look at that "Day 60" thread to find several examples of it.

:silly:

Amancio Corrales



Chanelle Pickett



Danny Overstreet


Jason Gage



Michael Sandy







Oh yeah, they can't. They were all murdered by homophobic/transphobic bigots.

Thanks for the visual reminder of what we fight for.

Hillary will deal with this in a positive way, I am absolutely certain.

:hi:

Much sound and fury, signifying nothing...:eyes:

Bake

And it would not surprise me.

It's safer in there!

Bake

:eyes:

Just the way Donnie likes it

.....

:silly:

But feel free to elaborate any time you see fit.

Cheers.

But it would make sense that a rhetorician would support Obama. Not a fan of the Sophists. Sure they got a bad rap. Still not a fan.

Any time you care to elaborate, I'll be here.

Whatever the deal is, you guys need to talk to Obama, get a statement from him, work it out, or switch to Kucinich or Edwards.

Because 8 more years of the BUSH-CLINTON-PNAC-AIPAC-WARMONGERING-CONSTITUTION SHREDDING DYNASTY is not worth it, all over one self-hating closet case singing a stupid song.

Maybe he should have decided before inviting "Pastor Donnie" that "one self-hating closet case singing a stupid song" wasn't worth losing the LGBT 5-7% of the electorate.

We "talked to him" and he refused to pull the anti-gay singers (there were FOUR anti-gay acts, not "one self-hating closet case"). Furthermore, he did not "sing a stupid song", he gave a half hour sermon against homosexuality DURING THE EVENT. Finally, as far as "switching to Edwards", I proudly voted for him in NH on Tuesday, so please stop with the delusion that every post has a Clinton behind it. Thank you.

You're a rare exception. And I'm not an Obama supporter by default, obviously. My candidate is for full equality, as am I. Edwards is my next choice of those still in the race. Obama is really my last choice, because another Bush-Clinton is no choice at all.

I know most of the LGBT folks on DU and some I've met in person and the majority are for DK and Edwards.

I'm on your side.

But we're really pissed about this. It's not some fabrication from Hillary supporters. It's a huge insult.

and I'm damn pissed off about a Democratic candidate pandering to bigotry. Got a pocket evaluation for me?

and they invited me to start some sort of Obama fan club because there wasn't one yet where I live.

I did what Obama should have done with McClurkin and said "No way."

just saying.

Ya gotta love gospel music.

As we were informed by a poster who is no longer with us, Donnie was a POWER TOP

:rofl:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/27/AR2007042702027.html

So much for getting out of Iraq, apparently the PNAC are cool with Obama. Maybe this is the bipartisanship we can expect.

:silly:

Now is everybody sure Edwards ISN'T?

Or do we need to do a nationwide assault on polling places, smash every last fucking machine, and do whatever it takes to ensure a Kucinich sweep on Supercalifragilisticexpealidocious Tuesday??

But if Edwards loses, we'll be sure he's not. I'd say Kucinich isn't, but his endorsement of Obama in Iowa completely flipped me out. I had no idea what to believe anymore. Edwards seems like he's not. But I'm not sure of anything anymore.

Edwards is the one (other than Kooch) who I believe is least likely to be a neoconservative tool. So I'm voting Edwards come hell or high water.

Wow, learn something new everyday. :sarcasm:

'They can come to the concert I'm going to hug them just like I hug everybody else. They have issues and need somebody to encourage them like everybody else - just like the murderer, just like the one full of pride, just like the prostitute, everybody needs God. What your struggle is may not be what my struggle is, but we all need Him.'

"Wow", is that little tirade supposed to be pro-gay? :sarcasm:

"Wow", is that little tirade supposed to be pro-gay?


It's not like Mary Mary went all-out on the homos with an Uzi or anything, is it? Stop being so sensitive. :sarcasm:

So is this a question of being pro-gay or anti-gay...?

I get confused.

I am beginning to think this is about being pro-gay and lord help anyone who doesn't fall in line with that agenda.

How transparent.

Actually I talked to a friend that runs a gospel site. She's a Christian hip hop artist and she was very dismayed by the assertions that Donnie McClurken is a hater of the Gblt community. That is, to her knowledge, not the case. She explained that she feels the issue is, that he is going around asserting that he was able to "change" his sexual orientation through his spirituality and that is the bigger issue at play.

It already makes him public enemy number one in the eyes of some in the GBLT community.

I, personally, can understand that logic. What I do not agree with is how it is being distorted and used to smear Barack Obama's candidacy. I also do not agree with the idea that every interest group can bully and harrass a individual to bow to their demands. It doesn't work when Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson Sr. does it (in recent years) and it surely should not be acceptable when others do it.

I have more to think about on this topic, however the animosity I have felt for the vile comments and half-truths strewn about on this subject has left a bitter taste in my mouth and I feel my opinion would be wasted on what is an embedded group think that cannot be penetrated. The only recourse some on the subject, have, is to call people homophobic and bigots.

So be it, however don't be surprised when I takethe liberal GBLT community to task for their own skeletons steeped in bigotry and intolerance. The knife cuts both ways.

You tell me, but anyone that says that an individual cannot have a personal issue or disagreement with homosexuality seems questionable and that points to something very different than being anti-gay.

I am heterosexual, I am a woman who sexually likes men. However, I do not run away from or try to impede the rights of those who feel differently from me.

Same with a racist. If someone is racist against my race, I say, that's their issue. I do not have to associate with them and they are more than welcome not to associate with me. However, once they attempt to step over my rights that is where we have a problem.

If Barack Obama was stating he wanted to deny the gblt community's rights because he did not believe in Homosexuality that would be different, however that is quite the opposite and his record on the issue reflects that.

Donnie McClurkin is irrelevant and this is about hurt feelings. Which I know all too well, in regards to subjects that have come up with the black community. When someone feels slighted by something deemed insulting or bigoted the automatic response is to call for blood a la Don Imus.

It's ironic that many felt the black community (especially black women) were wrong in their outcry.

but in this the battle for apologetics seems a tad misguided in how it is being executed.

Barack Obama called for Don Imus to be fired after he made the racist remarks about the Rutgers University Basketball team.

Barack Obama called for Voting Section Chief John Tanner to be fired after he made racist remarks.

After doing that Barack Obama used at least five virulent homophobes for his Embrace the Change gospel tour. One of them was Donnie McClurkin, who emceed the event and gave a 30-minute anti-gay sermon at the end.


Why should we dismiss Obama's blatant hypocrisy? Racism is so bad that it must be silenced, but homophobia can be given a stage and a microphone?

And if Hillary Clinton, John Edwards or another candidate had hosted a campaign fundraiser concert with an act like Prussian Blue would you or others be telling black people to "get over it"?

I've never ever told you to get over the sentiment, I said that Obama is not homophobic so get over trying to categorize him as such. I have stated that Senator Obama is not Homophobic or against gay rights which has been asserted repeatedly. However I got dragged into this debate about what is considered bigotry. Which according to some of you falls under a wide umbrella that even, I, as a black American cannot sign onto and I gave some examples to back that up.

As for Prussian Blue I have no clue who they are but I take it they are racist so...

of course I'd be upset, let's not be ridiculous. I never told you, you have no right not to feel how you do! However to make false statements about Obama who has proven, in his actions to push legislation protecting gay rights...how can you co-sign to that?

My issue has never been anti-gay rights, it has been about categorizing Obama as something he is not.

How many times must that point be reiterated?

But he uses homophobia as a tool to win votes while denouncing racism. That is outright hypocrisy.

He states outright that he believes that marriage is between a man and a woman, which he blames on his religous beliefs. Bigotry is bigotry whether it comes from ones religious beliefs or any other excuse.


And Prussian Blue--Google them. It will make you sick.

So true.

Let me ask you something, would you or your friend support an organization that promised you could pray away your heterosexuality?

Neither would I expect that of a gay man, lesbian woman, bisexual or Transgendered individual.

My issue is not with Homosexuality or whether you choose to vote for Barack Obama. My issue, as I stated before, is that some of you, here on this forum, are using Donnie McClurkin's comments and personal opinions to disparage Barack Obama. Furthermore, the assertion that Donnie McClurkin hates gays seems, from what I have gathered, to be a distortion in itself.

He is obviously a disturbed individual who may be dealing with issues of self-hate, but to use his personal issues as a platform to state Barack Obama is Homophobic is quite a stretch and flat out disingenuous.

Especially since, Barack has a Illinois State Senate record that proves he has been a do'er in working for gay rights as he as stated he would do if President.

However, you are entitled to feel however way you want. I cannot change your mind, but I will continue to challenge what I deem to be slanderous and false.

In fact, I don't think he is homophobic. But his campaign went out its way to schedule multiple events hosted by an "ex-gay" and whose performers have previously made public anti-gay remarks. This is pandering at its worst, especially for a candidate with a solid pro-LGBT record. To me, that's turning your back on a commendable record. I would rather support a candidate that may have once been anti-gay that had a change of heart and admitted that mistake, than a candidate that takes two steps backyards to score some cheap political points. What did his campaign say after the event?

I'm all for creating timelines, rather than doing some Monday morning quarterbacking. I suggest you go back and figure out how this all transpired. You've left many things out.

McClurkin used his so-called "personal issues" to deliver an ant-gay rant at the end of the concert. The fact that Obama didn't fully repudiate this screed is rather unfortunate, especially when he promised nothing of the sort would transpire.

And one last thing...could you please clarify what you mean by the following statement:

"I am beginning to think this is about being pro-gay and lord help anyone who doesn't fall in line with that agenda."

Once again, I recall Obama's statement was that he totally rejected Donnie McClurkin's statements at the event. Maybe the issue is that Obama needs to make a bigger show of the fact that he repudiates the comments and reiterate his record on Gay rights.

I wasn't specifically meaning, you, called him a Homophobe, but as you may very well know, many on DU have stated that.

The sentence you quoted is simple.

There is a atmosphere of intolerance among some radical individuals (or groups) in the GBLT community. I guess there is no way of comparing what I mean but to put forth the example of the Nation of Islam (but of course to a lesser degree) or maybe PETA. That is, if you do not agree with my beliefs, feelings and ect you are a uncle tom or racist; you are an animal killer, murderer and ect therefore that justifies my bigotry, intolerance and racism.

Does that make sense?


Say a Christian (which I am not), does not agree with living a homosexual lifestyle due to their spiritual and personal beliefs... Because they state that feeling, does it automatically make them a bigot or homophobe?

If a person does not want to interracially date due to reasons of non-attraction (to another race outside their own) or some other personal choice, does that make them a racist or a bigot?

EDIT: On a sidenote, thank you for taking the time to actually ask me for clarifications on my views instead of out right labeling me or painting me a homophobe or the like. We don't all have to agree but it's nice to have some sort of civil discourse here. I have to admit I have not engaged in much of it since joining DU (partially my own fault)

The best to you.

to be up there among some of the best Clintonian triangulations on record. But my two biggest beefs about this situation was that LGBT organizations asked Obama to rethink going forward with this event and he declined, and that his campaign gloated about getting what they wanted out of it afterward.

You bet there's a level of intolerance among LGBT groups. We finally started asking for equality over 50 years ago, so there's a level of frustration among us that the party that has held the carrot in front of our face during recent elections doesn't come through with the goods when we expect them to. I would say, in all fairness, that Rosa Parks was probably considered a radical back in the day. Can't even begin to tell you how much respect I have for her to finally show everyone that enough was enough.

This is about civil rights. So when a presumably "liberal" candidate who all of a sudden starts organizing events dominated by ex-gay and anti-gay performers, it's going to raise a few red flags.

And to answer your other questions: Yes. To both.

"You bet there's a level of intolerance among LGBT groups. We finally started asking for equality over 50 years ago, so there's a level of frustration among us that the party that has held the carrot in front of our face during recent elections doesn't come through with the goods when we expect them to."

I am beyond clear on your first point.

The rest of this paragraph I can relate to, I feel the same in regards to the DNC and their dismissal and indifference towards Black Americans (except of course when they are paying lip service to garner our votes).

However, to co-op the past civil rights movement by mentioning Rosa Parks is a peeve of mine. I do not dispute that the gay community has had their own battles for equality, however, the comparison was a little off. You can state that metaphorically you've been asked to ride on the back of the bus but in reality you've never had to.

Equal protection under the law and the freedom to pursue your life without others impeding on your rights. What's wrong with that, absolutely nothing. As a human being it is your right. Get married, be happy, have children...doesn't impede on my rights so why should I care?

No one belongs in your bedroom but you.

However we have some differences. I do not have time to worry about whether someone accepts me on a personal level but obviously it seems some in the GBLT need that validation...why? Or is there something I'm missing? As I see it (and I feel too many black folks worry about what white folks and others think of them), if you do not like or want to be around me that is your issue, not mine, but once you are stepping over me and on my rights...we have a problem.

That's why my question of whether someone is a bigot if they are not attracted to someone of the opposite race. That's too broad a brush to paint and it also points to what feels "natural" to an individual, which as in homosexuality and heterosexuality...it seems that is something you just can't change.

As for Senator Obama, as it is my right not to vote for Hillary, it is your right not to vote for him. I disagree on your implication that he purposefully decided to out of the blue, despite his record, to co-sign the equivalent of a ku klux klan rally against gays. However I'll digress, you have the right to your opinion and I think I've stated my position clearly. It's up to everyone else to decide which side of the fence they fall on in this issue.

Best of luck to you and I do support Gay Marriage! Just more people to hike up the divorce rate.
-bitter divorcee :sarcasm:

Obama has not specifically apologized for Donnie McClurkin's unforgivable homophobic rant at his own concert

Rationalize it all you want...we have a so-called "progressive" candidate who welcomed an "ex-gay" bigot to his campaign event despite the protests of numerous LGBT groups (beyond the "radical" fringe you curiously mentioned) and refuses, to this day, to apolize for the homophobic filth this bigot spewed at his event.

"God delivered me from homosexuality" That's the money quote from this bigot's rant. Where the fuck is Obama on this?

And, to answer your question, yes....someone who does not agree with a "homosexual lifestyle" is a fucking bigot because:

IT'S NOT A LIFESTYLE!!!!!!! IT'S A LIFE!!!!!!

I know you weren't saying that I was calling Obama a homophobe, but some around here do conflate any disagreement with the McClurkin incident as automatically calling Obama a homophobe...just to play fair.

If I don't like the KKK, is that bigotry? Hell no, that's being against intolerance. I don't give a flying fuck what the motivation is for some people to not "approve" or "agree" with the Homosexual "lifestyle", they are homophobic BY DEFINITION. And calling them out on their bigotry is not only right, but the responsibility of every single person on the planet who believes in equal rights.

I have no clue what you are talking about.

Let me break it down for you. Each individual has a right to feel the way they want. That does not mean they have the moral high ground. However in regards to my statements I said if an individual does not agree with living a homosexual lifestyle. There are gay individuals, whether due to Christianity or some other belief that may be gay but do not engage in acts of homosexuality. Does that make them a bigot? If they are not spouting anti-gay rhetoric or impeding on your life...does that make them a bigot?

If a man of another race (let's say...uh...caucasian) is not attracted to me (a black woman) does that make him automatically a bigot? Although he is not waving the confederate flag, spouting racial epitaphs or screaming death to darkies.

Was it really neccessary for me to be so specific about that??

It's called looking at a wider view of things. No one is saying anti-gay rhetoric is right or hate is right (moral or just) whether it be from McClurkin or anyone. but, someone's personal life and how they choose to live it, feel or whatever is no concern of anyone else (unless it impedes on another's rights and person).

I thought Obama addressed the issue but to some, not good enough. You are entitled to feel the way you do, but I disagree.

Christ's sake! Not to mentioned you compared homophobia to personal preferences in dating, real classy there. :eyes:

Are you serious, obviously you just read whatever you want to because any clear thinking person would not come away with that conclusion. However I edited the above comment and broke it down for you. As much as it annoyed me to do so.

If you refer to a Christian who is straight, well, they wouldn't hook up with someone of the same sex anyways, so I don't see what the point is there. If they are a Gay Christian, and they believe that their sexual attraction to the same sex is somehow immoral, well, they have a couple of choices, one is celibacy, which may or may not bring happiness, the other is to try to hook up with someone of the opposite sex, which usually leads to living a lie, unhappy marriages, and unhappy families.

The comparison to people who aren't ATTRACTED to people of different races is also irrelevant, because such feelings are generally innate and unconscious to begin with. Its the OTHER things that make you a bigot, for example, if you aren't attracted to people of the same sex and/or a different race, AND you disparage them because of their orientation or race, that makes you a bigot.

Donnie McClurkin is a classic example of this, if he's truly struggling with his sexuality, and decided to stay celibate or live a lie, whatever, that wouldn't be that big a problem, because we simply wouldn't know. The problem I have with him is he gives false hope to people that they can change there sexuality through either faith or therapy. This is simply too dangerous to ignore, LGBT teenagers, that struggle with their sexuality are already 3 times more likely to commit suicide compared to straight teenagers. We don't need people like McClurkin to actually INCREASE those numbers. He does too much harm to not condemn him for the asshole he is.

For Mary Mary, its simple homophobia, their comments are classic homophobic remarks, and I'm frankly surprised you don't recognize that.

I want to address your last comment first. I don't listen to Mary Mary, I saw them on Oprah once and I am familiar with the one hit song they had but that's about it. If they didn't make those comments on their Oprah appearance (and they didn't), then I wouldn't know. That's sadly the truth, I'm not up on gospel music or the artists.

Well as for a Christian who is straight, maybe not hook up, but do they have the right to feel the way they do? It's as simple as that...and I made it clear (without disparaging others). I have the right as a heterosexual woman to feel adverse to engaging in lesbian acts, that does not mean I have to spout off about it to everyone I see. Does that make sense?

or is it the feeling, whether articulated or not, that is the issue? Am I a silent bigot or does it only have to be vocal to be considered bigotry. Wow this is complicated.

You are right about the dangers of preaching hate. That I do not dispute. Especially to teenagers. It's hard enough being a teen and going through that sort of awkward existence and then have people tell you there's something wrong with who you are.

Someone very important to me died in 95' he was like my older brother and he was gay. His dad kicked him out of the house at 15 and he had been on his own for years. He had the best heart of anyone I ever knew (and have known) and I saw how that rejection from members of the family really led him to seek love and material things that eventually led to his death. It does something to an individual to be told there existence is wrong and they must change (when they can't).

It's why to me especially I often find it's the hardest among black men and women who are gay or lesbian. I can't imagine how it feels, the potential isolation from family and basically the world Because you have two hurdles to overcome in how people view you.

Who do you turn to if both communities reject you? I've heard instances of this which is why when I addressed this issue (on DU the first time) a few days back I was steamed. I thought it was another point of hypocrisy.

makes you a racist against other races. We aren't talking about feelings of sexual attraction or anything of the sort. That's an innate trait, unchangeable without some type of dramatic medical intervention, as far as current science tells us. A heterosexual will naturally not want to engage in sex with a person of the same sex, the same as a homosexual will not want to engage in sex with a person of the opposite sex. Those the the very definitions of sexuality, people generally will not engage in sex acts with people they are not sexually attracted to.

This is simple biology, sexual attraction can be very individual, some people only feel attraction towards people of a certain height, weight, body type, hair color, skin color, eye color, etc. Whether this is influence by the culture they are raised in, that's a question for scientists to figure out. Other people are less particular about who they are sexually attracted to as well.

You are confusing this with overt acts or words of homophobia, if you yelled from the rooftops that you were straight, most people, gay or straight, would say "big deal". and leave it at that. If you proclaim that you are straight, AND you hate gays, or that they are immoral, etc., then many people, gay and straight, will say "we have a problem here".

If you are not sexually attracted to other women, great, that makes you straight, no one gives a fuck about that, and therefore, that's not the issue.

Black LGBT people have a particularly daunting challenge, it generally depends on the area, some LGBT communities are less racist than others. Its not so much hypocrisy as it is just a reflection of our racist culture, as far as I can tell LGBT communities don't have that much a greater instance in racism as the rest of America. This doesn't mean it isn't a problem, just an observation. Doesn't that mean that we should concentrate on reducing racism and homophobia at the same time?

What's wrong with being pro-gay? (What ever it is you mean by that, anyway?)

I've already clarified that.

The "gay agenda" is a code word that has been used as a weapon against the gay community for a very long time, and putting pro in front of it, doesn't clean it up.

Well why didn't you say that to begin with? Because you were waiting to see my response so yet you can put up another argument or (gotcha moment *hello Hillary*) to fit me into a category that justifies your views?

No, I state what I mean and when asked to clarify I do just that. I stated it clearly. reread the post.

Now if honesty is truly your objective then you should not dismiss that there is a agenda amongst some and it's not exclusive to the gay community. It is a fact, in regards to certain segments of all communities, from black, latino, white, asian and beyond.

You do not corner the market on passion, frustration and "victimization".

However, if you feel your issues are more important than my issues or others issues then I would disagree and leave it as that because at that point discourse is pointless.

:sarcasm:

Seriously, WTF?? YOU'RE going to "take the liberal GBLT community to task" are you? Exactly what are you trying to say? The "knife"...care to elaborate?

I think your post is bordering on more than vile.

I only have rabid Obama supporters on ignore. It'll be fun to track the homophobic bullshit. I believe there are DUers who are very happy about the McClurkin concert. They "hope" that Obama is more anti-gay than his white papers suggest.

Maybe you should exercise the silence by not commenting on shit you haven't bothered to read.

Ignorance is truly bliss. Which is why I never use ignore. I'd rather know what I'm railing against.

America's finest in full force.

And none of them know about this. When told about, they said it didn't really affect them either way. Maybe that has something to do with being New Yorkers, who don't blink at very much, but that's what every one of them - without exception - said.

Please. About half the gay people I know in my circle don't even fucking know that Bill Clinton endorsed the Defense of Marriage Act.

And so what if people don't know? What does that prove? That you can get away with sending 'dogwhistle messages' to homophobes with no one paying attention? Oh well, that makes it different. :crazy:

for Log Cabin Republicans.

then i was pretty grossed out. show them the video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dUp16hFzY8
start on 1:16

not McClurkin's own concert.

If I was EVER told that a Democratic candidate would feature a sermon like that in 2007 I would have laughed. Now I am just dumbstruck.

your point?

For many years I bartended at a neighborhood gay bar. I became the "political one" because mostly what I said fell on deaf ears. Our community, yet again, is not that much more different that the straight community. Most American's don't care about the political process and its repercussions.

To the few that did feign some interest about my politics during my shift I offered the following: "Gay boys won't start paying attention until the government makes it illegal for them to have a Pottery Barn credit card."