|
||
Obama Got it Right and Wrong on Gay Bashing
In direct response to my column, "Obama Should Repudiate and Cancel His Gay Bash Tour, and Cancel it Now," Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama quickly issued this statement:
"I have clearly stated my belief that gays and lesbians are our brothers and sisters and should be provided the respect, dignity, and rights of all other citizens. I have consistently spoken directly to African-American religious leaders about the need to overcome the homophobia that persists in some parts of our community so that we can confront issues like HIV/AIDS and broaden the reach of equal rights in this country.I strongly believe that African Americans and the LGBT community must stand together in the fight for equal rights. And so I strongly disagree with Reverend McClurkin's views and will continue to fight for these rights as President of the United States to ensure that America is a country that spreads tolerance instead of division."
Obama's response to my call for him to reject support of Grammy winning singer and anti gay crusader, Donnie McClurkin was a big, bold, and direct claim that he will fight anti-gay phobia, and aggressively challenge religious leaders to do the same. One of those at the top of the list of religious leaders that he says that he challenged is McClurkin. But one line missing from his disavowal of gay bashing was this: "I will not appear on stage with Reverend McClurkin unless he publicly disavows his rabid anti-gay statements and crusade." Since Obama didn't add that line, this question still dangles dangerously. How hard will Obama fight as president for tolerance, specifically against anti gay bigotry? This is the supreme litmus test for any candidate that purports to champion diversity and tolerance.
It's even more of a test, or challenge for Obama, given the depth of homophobia among many mega black ministers, and many of those in their congregations. Obama desperately wants and need their votes in his fight with Hillary Clinton, who continues to widen the gap over him in the political life and death struggle to win over black voters.
The hard core black evangelical ministers loom bigger and bigger in the battle to slice away at Clinton's black support. That's even more crucial in South Carolina. An Obama win in the state would propel him skyward in his march toward the presidential nomination. Black voters make up more than forty percent of the Democratic vote in the state, and a significant percentage of them are evangelical leaning, and openly hostile to gay rights. Many are strict Bible constructionists and take literally passages that condemn homosexuality as a sin against the almighty.
In 2004, Bush adroitly tapped into that sentiment. It paid huge political dividends for him with an aroused throng of conservative black Christian church goers particularly in the Bible Belt of Northern Florida. They were not inherently hostile to Bush. They were incensed at gay marriage.
In exit polls, an astounding near thirty percent of black voters there said they backed Bush. One made it clear why, "I admire him because he's not for gay marriage and he's pro-life. He's strong in morals." By contrast, blacks in Miami and Dade County gave his Democratic presidential rival John Kerry more than ninety percent of their vote. Overall, Bush got eighteen percent of the black vote in Florida. If Bush hadn't got the phenomenal support he got from blacks in North Florida, his margin of victory over Kerry would have been much narrower. Florida might well have seen a repeat of the 2000 electoral soap opera in which Democrats and Republicans engaged in a political orgy of charges, counter charges of fraud and manipulation, and demands for recounts.
Northern Florida is a stone's throw from South Carolina, and many of the evangelical leaning blacks in the state are every bit as passionate about their faith as the black faithful in Northern Florida. A win for him in South Carolina with the aid of the black religious leaders and their congregations could resonate in the other Deep South states where the black vote is just as crucial to Hillary and Obama's success, and where that vote is also heavily influenced by religious zealotry.
Obama certainly won't openly fan the flames of religious driven intolerance against gays. He will continue to fervently denounce it. But without a direct and forceful challenge to those such as McClurkin to do the same, they're just words. And politicians are masterful at using words when they want to win.
My call still stands. Barack: demand that McClurkin repent and save himself from his gay bashing ways, or cancel your appearance with him.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His new book is "The Latino Challenge to Black America: Towards a Conversation between African-Americans and Hispanics" (Middle Passage Press). hutchinsonreport@aol.com
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
when this thread first came out, i had no idea who this mcclurkin guy was. now that i know he's a performing artist, this is a very different issue than i had thought. when you hire an artist, you hire their talent; you don't hire their political views. and if their political views are relevant, use of their talent still does not constitute support of those political views.
let's envision a much more extreme scenario: for example, what if i, a jewish person, owned a beautiful portrait painted by hitler (after all, the guy was a famous, talented artist). would i burn the portrait or insist that only nazis would show the thing? no, i'd keep it to show people as a conversation piece. if it attracted a few nazis, maybe they'd come by and find out that i don't have horns and a tail after all.
That was idiotic. Not you, just what you wrote.
do you mean the specific analogy? on that i'll take my lumps, it was a poor example thought up at five in the morning, and far beyond the scope of what we're discussing.
but if you find it idiotic that the political positions of an artist should not be the main criterion for hiring them, on that i think you would be dead wrong.
I do feel that art is supposed to transcend, yet art does not exist outside of the political climate it was created in. Art isn't created in a vacuum.
does this mean no jewish director should ever consider mel gibson for a part? not in a vacuum is one thing, but talk about mountains from molehills...
Google the "ex-gay" movement if you don't think it's political. This McClurken freak is making a pretty penny by doing the right's bidding.
i didn't say it was apolitical, just not particularly noteworthy. performing with obama would not legitimize the guy's opinion on sexuality, but might result in some much-needed education for some of the misinformed masses who share that view.
Written by an African-American Reverend on Obama:
http://www.bilerico.com/2007/10/obama_the_votewhore_with_exgay_at_his_si.php
Mcclurkan is, as anothe poster said, a "staple" on Christian TV. He probably is making a very lot of money touring with Obama. If Obama is reaching for the Christian TV black crowd, he naturally reached for McClurkan, without having really realized what McClurkan stands for. Just a popular black singer. Probably didn't even know he was anti-gay, or at least that he was a "reformed" possibly once gay person. Anyway, this is all sick.
I trust someone who make his intention clear from the beginning rather those who avoid the issue and wait to follow from where the wind blows strongest. Certainly not those who ding dong back and forth depending on the reaction of the crowd.
Trusting is one thing but whether his stand address your concern is for each indvidual to judge.
*****
QUOTE from Glenn Greenwald, Salon.Com:
*****
"The decision by the Obama campaign to issue a mealy-mouthed statement condemning the singer's views -- but leaving McClurkin as part of the tour -- only revealed how fine a line the presidential candidate is walking between his LGBT supporters and the black religious voters he covets." [note: it is wrong to covet]
"My guess is that the political cost of throwing the LGBT community on the bus was considered a fair price to pay to pick up some votes in the Palmetto State -- the gamble being it would be far less likely to rise to a significant level of controversy in the mainstream media."
"mealy-mouthed; covets; gamble, etc." these word-choices indicate the direction of Greenwald's bias, just as the vitriol and sheer volume of your own posts on this issue indicate the direction of yours. Ultimately I don't dislike Hillary, but much like Mr. Hutchinson, your support of her combined with your stance on this issue makes the motivation behind your comments extremely suspect.
Sound and fury, signifying precious little.
thanks for posting my comments!
Biblical justification for bigotry has become tiresome. Fundamentalists pick and choose among the literal laws of the scriptures. They condemn homosexuals and choose to physically assault children but they ignore the command that every fifty years, purchased real-estate must be returned to the original owners (Leviticus 25), Who's obeying that one?
If a son is "stubborn and rebelious", or a "glutton and a drunkard" (Deuteronomy 21), or if a daughter loses her virginity (Deut. 22), or are "dreamers of dreams (Deut. 13), or just gather firewood on the Sabbath (Numbers 15), then the parents should have their children stoned to death. Who's obeying these legalistic injunctions.
One can not pull verses out of context without running the risk of degrading the whole to the point of incoherence.
Every politician who claims to share Conserative Christian values, by definition, subscribes to all of the above and should be compelled to defend the position.
I sure am tired of listening to gay bashing. Wish Obama would just state that when he becomes President, he will authorize a non bias govermental scientific study to determine if gay is a result of nature or nurture. If it turns out nature, then people will stop bashing gays. If it turns out nurtured, then people can choose whether or not they want to associate with gays. I doubt most parents would want their children to be nurtured into the gay life. This subject has been talked to death. Lets end the controversy with scientific facts and get off this subject, period. exclamation point! Please, Obama,put an end to this subject once and for all!
Ummm...you are SO ten years ago.
Get with the program!
Are you going to suggest that Obama have a big study to see if global warming is natural too?
Obama is wimpier than George Bush's father.
a great deal of research on that subject is already in, and like most areas of research, the answer is much more complicated than just one or the other. Some related body and brain activity is genetic, some determined by the mother's body chemistry while a fetus is in-utero, some by childhood experiences, older siblings, adolescent development, group identification, and all sorts of other biological, psychological and environmental factors. Not that it matters, since people who are anti-gay generally don't believe in science either.
Not one environmental factor has been linked to homosexual orientation, not one. Hear me? Not one.
This is absurd. Is he supposed to cut off dialogue with every person that doesn't agree with him on every issue? Is that leadership? Why is it that we applaud his calls for dialogue with our enemies on foreign policy, but question his motives when it relates to a domestic agenda. Cancelling this speaking engagement, will do nothing to advance gay rights. Letting this congregation hearing Mr. Obama speak will.
right on..how can we say we must speak to our enemies and then cut off dialouge in our own backyard???blows my mind
Talking with them is fine but NOT featuring them (Biggots) on your campaign trail. Just like NOT allowing fool scientists who claim that Blacks are genetically inferior to share your presidential campaign stage, as an honored participant.
If Romney appeared with Anita Bryant Obama fans(like me)would be grossed out. What's the difference? DM is just as big a joke as AB is.
I was not sure exactly who it was until I saw pictures. I do recognize this man!
He is a staple on Christian TV. I am not a regular viewer, for I see him and others as I flip through the channels. I have never heard that he had been gay and now is anti gay.
He is well known and accepted by a lot of people. Anyways, I don't know if people are making more of this than they should be.
There are other stories that should carry a little more weight than this one. I am suprised as to how the Clinton china town fundraiser left the headlines. Believe me, Republicans will dig it all up if she wins.
Talk about clutching at straws...
Who gives a shit?
Why don't you want a strong leader (Hillary)?
Do you want America to fail?
I have no problem with Mr. Obama appearing with Mr. McClurkin.
Than again, I will now also have no problem not voting for him.
Everyone is free to make a choice.
.
It seems like the good people always get themselves in a box that is hard to get out of. When will we in America learn to live and let live.
What position should Obama take regarding Gay rights?
---> http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=782.
What short memories many African-American leaders have. Legions (including me) demonstrated, marched and fought for equal rights. Had I been a few years older at the time, I might certainly have been in Selma, Little Rock and the March on Washington. Many gays & lesbians not only participated in this cause but some died for the effort.
All the while, I watched in horror as my family became fanatical followers of a Texas preacher of hate who created a dictatorship that tore an historic church apart with his typically-Texan message; drove away anyone who questioned his plans; burned a beautiful landmark to the ground to make way for his own business (named a Baptist church) and built an army of followers who blindly follow & literally worship the man. In the wake, he eliminated the membership of anyone who wasn't WASP.
So much for christian love.
Several of my ancestors fought & died in the Civil War battles, particularly near Chattanooga. Seeing their names listed on the Illinois units was an important moment in my young life; I was very moved and proud that they had died for a great cause. However, during this same trip (in the 1950's) I saw that not much had changed in the South: the "white" drinking fountains; the signs indicating that "N*****'s" use the old hose behind the gas stations, etc.
How can we be a free society unless there are NO exceptions? We need GLBT equality, and it won't come from bible-verse-out-of-context hate-mongers. Shame on Obama for not standing with all Americans. More shame on these religious zealots for using this hate tactic to gain support. In spite of their screams, they owe us their support for equality.
Get out of the pockets of those who use the "hate all queers" tactics for their gain in power. It's wrong and they know it is. It is, however expedient, powerful, "sinful in the eyes of god" to borrow one of their regular sayings, and sinister to the core.
RAce, RAce, RAce.....it seems that there is rampant racism in the gay community. Obama's color has nothing to do with this debate. It's about his pledge to reach out to people that dont agree with him to open a dialogue and bring people together, yet the only response some give are based on racial hatred.
LOL! Please explain exactly what you thought was racist about DRIGerald post.
I want my candidate to have the moral courage to tell all bigots that they don't want their vote.
Even Bob Hope(Nixon's good bud) dumped Anita Bryant over 30 years ago! Can't we expect as much enlightenment from a shining knight like Obama in 2007 ??????
OH, BY THE WAY, AGAIN,I WAS A PILOT, SO I AM NOT JUST SAYING THIS BECAUSE I DEPISE THE CHIMP AND HIS VERY LIMITED MENTAL ABILITIES, DESPITE THE RHECTORIC ABOUT HIS "HIDDEN INTELLIGENCE".
Your cap lock key seems to be broken.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
