This is such a none issue. It has no traction and it is going nowhere. McClurkin is one of the most popular gospel singers and blacks love him he has numerous awards. He will support Obama and remain on the campaign.

Greg, how about you tell us where Obama and Hillary stand on the telecom immunity issue.

Write about important issues. Constantly putting this up is just absurd.

Blacks in the South not only love McClurkin but they also agree with him.

Besides, McClurkin was raped as a child by his Uncle, his faith is how he deals with his sexual demons.

Give it a break.

Obama's statement was clear and we know where he stands.

Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME OPULENT? YOU DON'T THINK THIS GUY IS A HOMOPHOBE? THIS IS BENEATH CONTEMPT THAT AN AGGRESIVE HOMOPHOBE IS PRESENTED AS A VICTIM. OBAMA IS SHOWING HE' JUST ANOTHER RUN OF THE MILL GUY IF HE ALLOWS THIS PIECE OF HATE-MONGERING TRASH TO BE AFFILIATED WITH HIS CAMPAIGN. WHY SUPPORT OBAMA IF HE AND HICKABEE ARE ON THE SAME PAGE?

Just get it over with, dump this guy and then move on.

Greg-
If you want to prove you are being fair about this story, please send an email or call Hillary's campaign right now and ask whether Senator Clinton has decided to disavow the endorsement that she sought and then received from anti-gay African American minister Mayberry out in Oakland, CA.

Then, if her campaign does not respond within three hours, post a big headline: "HILLARY REFUSES TO DISAVOW ANTI-GAY SUPPORTER" Then keep posting updates on that "story" until you reach closure.

My God, the hypocrisy on this story is astounding.

The proof of how far off track it's gone is that a commenter says Obama = Huckabee, even though Obama has consistently spoken in favor of gay rights, opposed the Defense of Marriage Act, opposes a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, and Huckabee has been on the opposite side of all of these issues.

The game of tarring candidates by scrutinizing everyone who even SINGS for them is a game that Dems themselves should not wish to play. Judge the candidates on what their own beliefs and programs, not on whom they allow to sing on their behalf.

Obama must not cave to the reactionaries who call for him to dump McClurkin. These people are fools playing predictably into someone else's agenda. If McClurkin goes, so probably will the other gospel performers along with the voters Obama has been working so hard to build bridges to. Just think for a second about WHO would benefit from breaking apart this nascent progressive coalition.

RESIST.

Its not like the gay community was rallying behind Obama prior to this event. This is no loss for Obama.

On the other hand, if you support Obama for a myriad of other reasons, but drop support because of this... then its unlikely he would be able to keep you through Nov 2008 anyway. (I don't think there are many people in this category. Most of those who are jumping off his bandwagon were never really on it.)

McClurkin's views are probably shared by many of the other artists, so those telling Obama to cut the singer might as well tell him to cancel the show. This should be an eye opener for gay activists that they need to spend more time "changing minds" in the black community (hard long term approach) instead of criticizing them (easy short term solution). As a black Christian myself, it was a nontrivial process (several years) for me to come to support gay marriage.

Gnaster:

I think your analysis is spot on. Obama should try to get both sides to come together and start a dialogue that pierces the ignorance and demogaugery on both sides of this issue. At least something productive can come out of this insanity.

Its not like the gay community was rallying behind Obama prior to this event. This is no loss for Obama.

I disagree. Obama needed this like he needed a root canal because of how he has portrayed himself throughout this campaign. Tolerance of bigotry of any kind is inconsistent with that portrait, so the best thing for him would have been to dump the whole lot and move beyond it quickly. Now it has sucked up all the air for several days. That, along with his continuous rant on the war votes that he never cast, will undermine whatever remains of the rationale for his candidacy. I predict that after this fiasco, polls will show him losing ground. He lost ground after his series of FP gaffes that allowed HRC to paint him as an inexperienced political novice from which he is yet to recover. The current fiasco, which is of his own making, will seal his fate...

dcshungu:

He's not tolerating, fostering, enabling, endorsing, solicintg, championing or otherwise support bigotry.

gnatster wrote on October 23, 2007 12:34 PM:

This should be an eye opener for gay activists that they need to spend more time "changing minds" in the black community (hard long term approach) instead of criticizing them (easy short term solution).
_____
Many Progressive activist groups could benefit from that advice. Environmental activists that are silent regarding dump sites placed near poor communities and environmental toxins increasing the incidence of sthma in Black children could provide one starting point.
The animal activists who carried signs like "Castrate Michael Vick" outside of a virginia courthouse in the city that was the capitol of the Confederacy demonstrated a marked lack of context.
Your advice is wise, but will likely be ignored.

donna wrote:

Obama must not cave to the reactionaries who call for him to dump McClurkin. These people are fools playing predictably into someone else's agenda. If McClurkin goes, so probably will the other gospel performers along with the voters Obama has been working so hard to build bridges to. Just think for a second about WHO would benefit from breaking apart this nascent progressive coalition.

Oh, please don't leave us hanging. WHO would benefit from breaking apart the coalition of bigoted homophobic christians and the O-Bomb-A campaign?

gnatster wrote:

Its not like the gay community was rallying behind Obama prior to this event. This is no loss for Obama.

Um... it wasn't too long ago that gay billionaire David Geffen was pulling in big bucks from gay Hollywood to raise millions of dollars for dumb-ass Barry. Or how about Oprah, playing on both sides of the fence, Winfrey? You need to make sure your mouth is loaded, gnaster, before you go shooting it off.

gnatster wrote:

This should be an eye opener for gay activists that they need to spend more time "changing minds" in the black community (hard long term approach) instead of criticizing them (easy short term solution).

Oh cry me a fucking river. There really is no excuse for homophobic black christians other than they are utterly lacking in integrity, with ignorance running a close second.

We live in the 21st century. Over 35 years of objective, well-designed scientific research has shown that homosexuality, in and of itself, is not associated with any mental disorders, deviant behavior, or other emotional or social problems, and for more than 25 years, both the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association have urged all mental health professionals to help dispel (not reinforce) these fallacies.

Regarding reparative therapies themselves, in 1997, out of concern that such "gay-to-straight" conversions" held much potential harm to patients, the American Psychological Association passed a resolution affirming opposition to such schemes as fraudulent.

THE FACTS:
1. Regarding Reparative Therapy:
“The most important fact about "reparative therapy," also sometimes known as "conversion" therapy, is that it is based on an understanding of homosexuality that has been rejected by all the major health and mental health professions.” http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/justthefacts.html#2

2. Regarding Transformational Ministries:
“Transformational ministry" is a term used to describe the use of religion to eliminate homosexual desires.

Unlike bigoted black christians (and their apparent utter lack of any sense of historical rights and wrongs), many deeply religious people and religious congregations and denominations are supportive and accepting of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people and their right to be protected from the discriminatory acts of others. For example, the following organizations have endorsed passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would prohibit employment discrimination based on sexual orientation:
American Ethical Union, American Friends Service Committee, American Jewish Committee, American Jewish Congress, Church of the Brethren, Church Women United, Dignity/USA, Episcopal Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Hadassah, WZOA, The Interfaith Alliance, Jewish Women International, National Council of Churches of Christ, USA, National Council of Jewish Women, North Georgia United Methodists, Presbyterian Church (USA), Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, Unitarian Universalist Association, United Church of Christ, United Methodist Church, Women of Reform Judaism, Young Women's Christian Association.
http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/justthefacts.html#3

O-Bomb-A is tanking in all the polls just because of these sorts of bone-headed, dumb-ass campaign gimmicks. Thank goodness that pretty soon he'll just be an asterik, if that.

Bye-bye Barry. So glad to see you go!

All this ranting raving from both sides is, to my mind, missing the real opportunity. For better or worse, this controversy has pushed this issue to the forefront. Obama can try to distance himself from the controversy or he can demonstrate that he is in fact the agent of change who doesn't tell a group what they want to hear, but what they need to hear. This is the point where he walks the walk, or is exposed for just talking the talk.

Elrapierwit:

I'm going to have to take issue with this notion that gays, basically, need to grin and bear it. McClurkin's views are borne of ignorance and his own terrible experiences. That doesn't excuse them or justify them. He needs to be called on the carpet. LOUDLY. At some point, someone needs to speak truth to power. Homosexuals are people, with feelings and rights. No amount of prayer, wishful thinking or willful ignorance is going to make them less real. They deserve a place at the table.

Anon: I agree, Obama has a real opportunity to DEMONSTRATE that he is an agent for change. It's always easy to portray yourself as a change agent; it is much more difficult to have the intestinal fortitude and conviction to put that change into practice.

Opulent:

You are missing the point and further supporting the implied notion that this was a move calculated by Senator Obama to speak to the bigotry rampant in the church. I reject that notion based on the man's record and strong stance on LGBT issues. Donnie McClurkin is, by all accounts, a great gospel singer. His views on homosexuality, however, are frightening. He needs to be called to task on it. Ignorance is a powerful enemy to democracy.

Keith,
I do not think gays should grin and bear it. I think that McClurkin and what he beleives is a non-issue. McClurkin is not spewing hate nor exhorting people to attack gays or deny them any rights. He is simply preaching his own beliefs about how homosexuality is a choice. He has that right.

There is no data that demonstrates what McClurkin's views are ignorance rather to the contrary the data supports that human beings can and DO choose what they will do regarding sex. Sex is something people do it is not something like race or gender. It simply is not the same.

Heck, folks choose to be celibate, promiscuous, bisexual, sado-masochistic, there are lots and lots of sexual choices and people make them all the time.

For centuries, people have committed to celibacy based on faith so they can surely make other types of sexual choices based on faith as well. Nothing ignorant about that belief at all. That is what faith means to people who beleive in religious. They can do all things through faith..that is McClurkin's gospel and he has a right to stand up for what his faith and beliefs are. He is not hurting a friggin soul.

So to keep up all this noise about something no one is being prohibited from doing in their own homes is absolutely nonsense. Gay folks civil rights are not being stripped. Voter fraud is aimed at black folks not gays.

Homosexuals have always had a place at the table, they have always lived and worked where they wanted as well. The only thing different today is their need to make their sexual choices known to every friggin body OTHER than their partners.

MCClurkin is not denying gays any civil rights whatsoever and for them to HATE on him like they are is absolutely wrong.
The gay agenda wants the world to accept them but they cannot accept others making different choices from them. How much clearer can it get to be so hypocritical? The gay agenda is intolerant of others choices. That is hypocrisy. McClurkin has not uttered any words of hate at gay people yet this site along with Fox news are labelling him ANTI-gay?

This is going to cost the Democrats the election...black folks are not going to vote Democratic.

Leave it to the gay agenda to bash two black men and religion in South Carolina no less. This is not going to end well for Democrats. It just isn't. Gays are biting off their nose to spite their face. Obama took a clear stand in support of homosexuals and their civil rights but that is just not good enough for the gay advocates. See, Keith this is not about a seat at the table the gay agenda wants only their mouths at the table. It is real simple, just so they can move everyone to a different table.

Gay folks have lost the democrats the black vote. And for what?

McClurkin is still going to be singing, the blackcommunity is still going to believe homosexuality is a choice and black ministers are still going to preach the same thing in their churchs.

Only the Democratic party will suffer.

Romney or Guiliani in 08...courtesy of GBLT community.

elrapierwit:

I'm sorry that you don't see that this is a real issue, affecting real people. Homosexuals, last time I checked, are citizens with the same right to the table as heterosexuals and bigots. They have the right to champion issues that are important to them, including the inclusiveness (or lack thereof) of our society. They don't, however, have the right to exclude someone from the table.

I don't believe that Senator Obama is trying to appeal to bigotry, but to their spirituality. I continue to believe that there is a real opportunity for him here to start actively addressing this issue. If that means he loses the primary or that he doesn't get the black vote, I think that's just the sacrifice that principle demands.

opulent and elrapierwit:

What's up with the "costing Dems the White House" rhetoric? Last I checked, this was still the primaries. Is camp Obama now adopting the Clinton-style presumption of inevitability: no questioning of the once-and-future monarch will be permitted.

DTM:

I've seen his statements on this subject, which I applaud. But I also see that people are clamoring for more. He can't simply claim the mantle of change or uniting America. We are all in this together, whether we like it or not. Once we start accepting that fact, we can get about the business of moving America forward.

Keith,

What is the "more" that you have in mind for candidates like Obama to do? Because I think that "more" is where the potentially very serious problems for the Democratic coalition could arise (if, for example, that "more" includes the candidates not just speaking out to make clear that they disagree with those views, but actually refusing the support of any person who has expressed such views).

Opulent:

There is an opportunity for a win-win situation, for both homosexuals and Obama. African-Americans are not a monolithic group that is impervious to change. In fact, I suspect if we are engaged with logic and reason, we tend to move along the path to enlightenment fairly easily. As an African-American, born in the south and raised in a Southern Baptist church, trust me when I say it is largely an issue of ignorance and exposure that we are talking about here.

People, of all races, are resistant to change and certainly where it is shouted at them. I'm not advocating that Senator Obama kick him off the tour Donnie McClurkin or endorse his position. What I am saying is that given his acceptance in both communities, he has an opportunity to BRIDGE THE GAP. HRC can't do it. Edwards can't do it. He is uniquely qualified to do so.

Keith,

If I understand you correctly now, you are talking about a longer term project, not so much this particular event. I note this just because I think some people, including me, may have been confused.

We are not really speaking of the black community in entirety here. This is the religious gospel loving black community and that is why it is impervious to change.

Logic and reason do not prevail when it comes to faith.

This being an issue of faith is the main reason it is a lose-lose situation. The gay political agenda is not going to change views which are based on faith. It simply is not going to happen. It also goes to the fact that it is a fundamental right of all Americans to worship as they choose and that the government can make no laws abridging that.

If these communities were taking some active stand against gays, I could see how logic and reason might prevail, but that is not what is going on here.

What gap do you see Obama bridging that is not already covered by the statement he has made.

Obama cannot tell people what to believe in terms of their faith so there is no other bridge he can build here.

Besides, recall the black community is opposed to gay marriage not gay rights and especially not when it comes to employment, housing and education. Blacks are not opposing those civil rights as gay. Marriage is a religious rite and as such many, many, many Americans of faith oppose gay marriage.

Why does this even have to be an issue for the Democrats. Obama supports civil rights and laws in support of gays.

This is a wedge issue that only results in the GOP siphoning off votes due to people's faith.

Haven't we learned from that yet?

This has been typical of Obama's campaign: He just launched several new ads that should be focusing people's attention on his message, but instead when his face would appear on TV, people would almost certainly start discussing the McClurkin fiasco, which has been the flavor du jour for a few days and will remain such until Obama dissociates physically from the singer...