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
Is this a requirement you've placed on Mr. Obama because he is the Black candidate or because he is A CANDIDATE? Alienating himself from popular religious leaders will not serve the people. He spoke his position on human rights, on civil rights, and on American freedoms quite clearly in his statement. There are more issues of concern in the Bible Belt and around the country. Let's not push the single Black candidate into an unnecessary corner yet.
Obama got into that corner all by himself.
PLEASE, AMERICA, DON'T LET THE SIDETRACK ISSUES MISLEAD YOU AGAIN. REMEMBER THE POOR DIVERSION THAT IT LED KERRY INTO...? INSTEAD OF FOCUSING ON THE COUNTRY, THE CHIMP AND HIS SLICKSTERS DILUTED THE DEBATE TO WHO SUPPORTED GAYS AND SUCH, TO WHO WAS OR WAS NOT A WAR HERO AND SUCH NONSENSE(SWIFTBOATERS) WHEN AT THE SAME TIME MOST OF THE CHIMP'S MILITARY SERVICE, ACTIVELY OF A TOTAL OF 8-9 DAYS WAS JUSTIFIED. OH, BY THE WAY, I WONDER WHO GAVE THE CHIMP HIS FINAL CHECK RIDE IN A JET!! THAT CRAZED OR PRESSURED IP SHOULD ALSO BE INVESTIGATED FOR CERTIFYING HIM...A CHIMP FLYING A JET, YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING. HE CAN BARELY WALK STRAIGHT!!
WOW!!! An article that believes Hillary should also be called out for her anti-gay associations! Here it is:
http://www.queerty.com/news/et-tu-hillary-20071023/
And wait...here is another article on MYDD from today that clearly ask more questions about Clinton:
http://mydd.com/story/2007/10/24/83648/586
WOW!!! I just don't believe it. All of this rage against Obama, and very little of it against Clinton, who, according to Paul Jenkins yesterday, counts Harold Mayberry as her personal friend.
We need some freakin answers...some freakin' accountability...right now!!!
I'm not enraged, I'm disappointed & disillusioned.
I was a supporter of Obama's until this.
As for Hillary, I'd vote republican before I'd vote for her. Actually, it's more likely I won't vote at all, as the Dems don't have the balls to stand up for right, and Reps are just trying to build a theocracy.
Where was your equally outraged column about Hillary Clinton and Harold Mayberry? Or is it okay for her to celebrate the endorsement of someone who called homosexuality the equivalent of thievery? That's right. Queen Hillary can do no wrong. All Hail Queen Hillary!!
Hey, until will all take the last advice given to John in Revelation 22:10-11 which is let him who is wicked be wicked, let him who is filthy still be filthy, let him who is righteous and let him who is holy still keep himself holy (Which sound a lot like Let it be and live and let die by Paul McCartney.) we will be wasting our time for the next 100 years or more, when there are things that need to be fixed.
If the right could see in Jeremiah 23:33-40 that if you hold to the oracle of the lord there will be an unforgettable reproach, they may stopp throwing stones with big-a-tree in their eyes. For each Man's own words will become the oracle. That is the Liberty this Land is suppose to be about, which it isn't. Or if it was, we would have fixed healthcare years ago.
comcast.netmcast.net
Could it be...SATAN!?!
I have a lot of respect for Sen. Obama and I was very excited about his run for the Presidency. However, he is way too liberal in order to be the nominee for the Democrats. Many democrats are rightfully angry with President Bush and they are looking for a change. However, the dems are mistaken if they believe that most of the voters are going to sway to the left, specifically the far left, as an alternative to the current administration.
Issues like abortion and gay marriage are very significant, especially to people of faith in both the red and blue states. President Bush received 11% of the African-American vote in 2004. This was primarily because of social issues like gay marriage and abortion.
Donnie McClurkin is correct that being gay is a matter of choice. Such a view isn't a matter of "gay bashing" or intolerance but of absolute truth. If we say that we love our homosexual brothers and sisters, we must tell them the truth that homosexuality is a sin just as adultery and fornication are sins.
I've been following the career of Harold Ford, Jr. of TN and this young man is equally as impressive as Sen. Obama. The former Congressman received 49% of the vote in the 2006 senatorial race in TN. He nearly won in a conservative state like TN.
Sen. Obama should have campaigned to the right of both Sen. Clinton and former Sen. John Edwards. He could have been both the "anti-war" candidate while being more conservative on some social issues.
Did you choose to be straight? I mean really...did you choose your sexual orientation?
How old were you when you had your first crush? I bet it is safe to say that you were a child. Well the same is true for gay people. I was 9 years old when I had my first crush on someone of the same sex.
Do you honestly believe that a child would choose to be gay? Honestly! What child would choose to be ostracized by their family? Their community? Their schools and their churches? What child would choose to be beaten and teased? What child would embrace being a "pervert", or a "freak?"
Your ignorance and bigotry, on the other hand, are definitely chosen.
Stop forcing your hateful lifestyle on me and my family.
Nice comment, OrleansCatalan - I would put it slightly differently:
What child (or adult for that matter) would choose, looking at the future, a lifetime of dealing with rabid, homophobic freaks in every city and town through which they passed, in every community in which they settled, in every school they attended, every time they sought basic equality, be it in marraige, in the classroom, on the bus, or at the death bed.
What these people (straight people, both homophobic and otherwise) don't get is that homophobia is not just an 'issue' but a constant presence - EVERYWHERE in America.
Don't believe me? Go to the mall, with a person of the same sex, and put your arms around each other and start kissing. Walk down the street holding hands, brush your cheek against your lover's face on the bus, try to enjoy a beautiful day out in the world with the one you love.
IT IS NOT THE SAME WORLD - and the hatred and continuous bigotry of homophobes and their silent supporters makes it so. Is it any wonder so many of us gay people look at the straight world and just find it reprehensible and offensive?
And so we are accused of having an agenda. Neverending, this ignorance.
Straight people don't f**king get it.
OrleansCatalan, I don't know about the struggles of being homosexual because I'm a heterosexual. Nevertheless, because of my fear of God I make choices to abstain from immorality, includling sexual immorality.
Am I perfect. Certainly not. It's only because of Jesus Christ, my savior, that I'm acceptable to God.
Believe me. I'm not here to preach but I am here to speak to truth in love.
"Donnie McClurkin is correct that being gay is a matter of choice. Such a view isn't a matter of "gay bashing" or intolerance but of absolute truth."
Keep on bashing mister "person of faith." Your type of anti-gay, misleading statements is not bringing many new converts to your church. If you keep looking for the truth in places like Leviticus, then make sure you carp just as loudly about all the other abominations that you and your ilk so conveniently ignore.
Harold Ford Lost.
"Donnie McClurkin is correct that being gay is a matter of choice."
Religion really is a mind alerting drug!
It would be ridiculous for Obama to say that he will not appear with McClurkin because McClurkin voices his biblical beliefs about homosexuality, this is America where we have freedom of religion. Barack is not here to say what is morally right or wrong as president his duty is to ensure that he establishes policies that are for the betterment of this country has a whole and that all of the citizens are treated equally and fairly. McClurkin is not gay bashing or promoting any type of violence towards gays or lesbians. In fact he has expressed what the Bible says which is to love your neighbor as you love yourself. And please please stop comparing the gay and lesbian movement to the civil rights movement, no one is telling gays to sit in the back of buses, to use back entrances, denying them the right to vote, or establishing "Jim Crowe" like laws to make them feel as inferior human beings. It is definitely not the same! The Bible says that homosexuality is a sin more than that an abomination so as a christian you have to recognize it as such, just like fornification, stealing and murder. To refuse to be seen with someone because of their religious preference is not behavior that should be displayed by a presidential candidate, homosexuality is not the only issue in this election THANK YOU!
You are a bigot and your post proves it.
Oh my, oh my. We have got far more serious problems than gay marriage folks.
This is a wedge issue that the neoconliberal-republicrats are using to keep the energies of focused people from concetrating on far more important issues that involve millions of lives. These are not dick-in-ass issues:
Illegal wars: millions of lives.
Loss of rights: loss of republic
Personal and public debt: virtual slavery
Environment: survival of the planet
Media consolidation: control of dialogue
Campaign finances: lack of representation
The active left and active right keep on clashing, using up their energies and the energies of the rest of the country. Due to this, the middle--the important common stuff-- never gets contolled except by those who do not give a fuck either way about you and your goddamn stupuid frickin nitpickin issues.
By the way, to call the above poster a bigot is outrageous.
Lie down with bigots...
And not all Christians believe in the Bible's anti-gay crap. The Bible was also used by the proponents of Slavery.
Equality is a very important issue in this campaign for me.
I knew it all along that Barack Hussein's candidacy was just a media hype which made him a paper tiger. All fluff, hot air, no substance and no experience. The problem started when he started believing his own hype and so did a lot of his wide-eyed followers
Now? A majority have started seeing through the fluff. His running-away-from-votes-record in the Senate is "outstanding"! Not only does he lack experience but his voting record clearly indicates what he has been trying to do in his campaign: try to please everyone in every which way! Just don't take a real stand but pretend and posture as if you are taking one!
This recent kootchie-kooing with the gay-bashing-bigot is JUST that example. Even the Afro-Americans have started deserting him in droves. So, get out the traditionally right-wing nuts! How can you possibly pander to BOTH left AND right wing looney fringes at the same time and think you can get away with it?!
Maybe and only if you are just fluff and live in that world of fluff ...
There you are.
ABOUT REVEREND MAYBERRY AND HILLARY:
In this game, all candidates have been associated with homophobes. For instance, Hillary Clinton recently trumpeted her friendship with Harold Mayberry, of the First African Methodist Church in Oakland; her press release on the meeting/endorsement left out the fact that Mayberry believes homosexuality to be comparable to thievery.
REVEREND's ENDORSEMENT POSTED ON OFFICIAL HILLARY CLINTON WEBSITE:
"Senator Clinton has an excellent concept about how she plans to address issues surrounding crime and education. She described how she has partnered with leaders in New York to create a charter school specifically for African American men and notes that the Allen Cathedral AME Church charter school in Jamaica Queens, New York could be used as a model of how to help educate African American young men. Her mentioning of the school shows that she's aware of outstanding successful examples of education in this country. The way she addressed the need for the federal government to partner with inner cities suggests that she's not just focusing on international issues but that she's concerned with domestic ones - particularly crime and violence in our communities. I want a president who knows how to strike a balance between addressing international and domestic challenges facing this country," said Reverend Dr. Harold R. Mayberry, Senior Pastor of First African Methodist Episcopal Church and Chairperson of Network for Interfaith Action."
Sounds like she apprecites the endorsements of what you call Bigots and Gay Bashers.
I konw. I have always been like there is no way this guy is going to get elected president! He may be a good guy, but there is just no way. There was a big to do about his backers in the controlled media reporting on another sector of the controlled media. It was good press. They got to look all fair an egalitarian, but alas, these folks are snakes. Their real intention was to flush the democrats with someone the country is not ready to accept so that their real program of marching forward neo-liberal, neo-conservative figureheads could go through. As well, Obama represented another handle with which to try and control the process. Fianl comment: Bush has been the perfect figurehead and I has succeeded beyond the plutocracy's wildest hopes, even going so far to steadfastly claim he is "the decider." Truth is he is doing this at the behest of his handlers.
While McClurken's at it he might want to mention the stuff about the duties and obligations of slaves.
And so it begins. The race is heating up and there are those who will use any ammunition to fan the flames. The Republicans will start their dirty "hit below the belt tactics" and who ever gets in their way will fall. For once, I'd like to do as others have suggested. Just "For God's sake live and let live.
If you know who you like; Vote for them and to hell what anyone says.
The real issues float to the TOP, and this brings it to a head: BULLETIN: Without question the #1 issue of the LEFT is HOMOSEXUALITY. . . believe it!!!
I'm surprised you didn't use the term "homosexual agenda!"
Equality has been an American value for a long time, and it ain't just a Democratic issue.
I'm an independent.
Why does is the right so afraid of homosexuality? Why do they think that the Bible is our guide to governing? Homosexuality should not even be an issue. It is because the right is terrified of anything that they cannot understand. Their religion has taught them what to think. It's a shame that no one has ever taught them how to think.
As long as narrow minded pinheads are willing to let religion and ignorance rule, the left will be there to defend equality by reason and logic.
Since most bloggers who are loyal Huffington Post readers are Democrats/liberal/left-of-center politically, (their are exceptions to that rule of thumb, of course!) it is interesting to see why the Republican party almost always win the Presidential national election every four years.
Like an insect colony, the Repubs in the national election come together and vote for their chosen candidate for President, and defeat the chosen candidate of the Democratic party, because of one main reason: The Demos devide and break-up into different ideological groups, one group of voters on one issue agendas, another group on race, or yet another on religious/moral grounds. Demos, eventhough in registration to vote in national elections, outnumber Repubs by almost 2 to 1, usually end up losing to the Republican cndidate every four years. Since 1952, Repubs have won 9 out 14 presidential races.
In order to defeat the stale, boring, antiquated, status-quo, brain-dead Republican candidates for President in '08, (Gosh...when you watch/listen to these candidates speak on a debate forum together, i can't help but equate this experience as a sequel to that campy "Night of the Living Dead" horror movie of decades ago) we need to come together as a large voting block and compromise on our self/interest priorities for now, for the greater good. Then once in office in Washington D.C., the "bully-pulpit" of the Executive office of the President of the United States can put into action the needs of all the various interest groups for change in Congress.
To win the Presidency in America takes 50 States in this equation, and approximately 190 million voters that can potentially mark their ballot, so team work is needed. That's why the Republican party is so good at their public relations and tactics in winning, and if the Democrats follow that strategy closer and emulate, The Democratic candidate will WIN THE PRESIDENCY IN '08!
"The Demos devide and break-up into different ideological groups, one group of voters on one issue agendas, another group on race, or yet another on religious/moral grounds."
I can't disagree with your post but I believe the left operates the way a democracy (or republic) is supposed to operate. The right has managed to gain an unbelievable amount of power by becoming an almost cult-like force. Consider where that has taken them after their efforts were fully realized, in control of all branches of government, it has brought destruction down on them. I also think it has finally fractured them, in a healthy way, they are more like the left now. Just look at the religious right, threatening to boycott the GOP, it's wonderful thing, democracy.
Yes, KYZipster, democracy is a wonderful thing when it is a truly healthy government that works in the balance of power with the majority and treats the minority with their interests with "inclusion". As you so stated, what is bringing down the right-wing control of our federal Government in all its branches, is the intolerance of "inclusion"...all power eventually corrupts. And in this case with the Bush/Cheney neo-cons of recent past, this is happening!
But the lesson to learn from the right-wing of the Republican party, is to not repeat this selfish and pig-head grab for power, and turn into the same self-righteous left leaning demo's that repeat that self-destructive behavior of the Repubs right-wing fascists.
the only way the Demo's can win the presidency in '08, is to bring all the different factions of its big and wide party together and vote for hopefully a unified candidate for President in '08.
The problem i see with the three leading Demo candidates presently, Hillary, Obama, and Edwards, i'm not sure they have enough 'universal' appeal to gather all the tribes in the Demo party needed to defeat the obviously right-wing Republican. I still believe the only potential candidate that can do this for the Demos is Al Gore...draft him folks. The leading Repubs were polled a few months ago who are consultants and advisors to the RNC (Repub Nat. Comm.) stated Al Gore would be the most difficult to defeat for President, and the easiest, either hillary or Obama.
Once again, the Obama want to hit him on this, but fail to mention some an issue explained in this article http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/2007/10/23/obama-takes-heat-from-gays-on-gospel-tour/. In fact, here is a good passge:
"However, it turns out Obama isn’t the only presidential hopeful who has crossed paths with McClurkin. He performed for Democratic presidential front runner Hillary Clinton’s husband Bill Clinton in 1992 during the Democratic National Convention".
He performed for Bill Clinton in 1992.
This issue has been blown up way out of proportion.
The DNC was wrong then too, just like Obama is today.
Hillary Clinton was endorsed by the Rev. Harold R. Mayberry, senior pastor at First African Methodist Episcopal Church in Oakland - her persoanl friend. Mayberry ccompares homosexuality with thievery.
This article contains his views on homosexuality:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/03/14/MNGJB5KB9N1.DTL&type=printable
I thought you might want to know this!!
Is Hillary wrong? I mean, the announcement of Mayberry's endorsement went out on official, campaign letterhead. WOW!!! Go Hillary, bragging about being good friends with a guy who believes homosexualtiy is equal to thievery.
When Obama panders his supporters rationalize it by saying that in his case it's "negotiating" or "building bridges". They also add that Clinton is no better.
That's not really an answer. When Clinton panders to the right wing she is rightfully excoriated. When Obama panders to people like McClurkin he'll just have to live with it. If his supporters want to ignore what he is doing, they can live with it also.
You pulled this BS out in the last thread as well Sean. Stop it, you disgrace yourself. I have provided the full paragragh for everyone here, directly quoted from the link you provided. You need to do better than this if you are going to try your hand at smeer and jeer tacticts. Perhaps you are involved with the Obama campain: it would make sense why they were so sloppy as to include McClurkin to begin with. Not ready for prime time indeed!
"However, it turns out Obama isn’t the only presidential hopeful who has crossed paths with McClurkin. He performed for Democratic presidential front runner Hillary Clinton’s husband Bill Clinton in 1992 during the Democratic National Convention — but that was before McClurkin’s views on homosexuality became well known to the public in a 2001 book."
"Perhaps you are involved with the Obama campain"
I wish I was. If you know how I can contact Senator Obama first hand and get on his payroll to attack the mountain of hypocrisy and ignorance I see on this thread, please shoot him my number. PLEASE DO!
I take it as a compliment that she think I'm apart of his campaign, but no, I am just an Obama supporter.
And I will continue posting info about Hillary to get folks like you and others to condemn Hillary the way you condemn Obama.
For what its worth, I think both candidates - Obama and Hillary - are doing what is necessary to reach out to voters, and constituencies that do not agree with them on 100% of the issues. What's wrong with that? Absolutely nothing.
But what I am angry about is how folks on this thread want to rip into Obama, but give Hillary a pass. They want to have it both ways: "Hillary was endorsed by the homophobic minister but won't be on stage with him like Obama is going to do." Huh?! That is clearly having it both ways.
Why should it matter if McClurkin and Mayberry are standing next to their candidates on a concert stage instead of a bowling alley? Hillary's supporters are saying that being on stage with McClurkin is worse that say, sending out a press release on official campaign letterhead trumpeting the friendship of Harold "homosexuality is equal to thievery" Mayberry. Uh, right. Try again.
Both candidates are doing what they think is necessary to expand their base and create common ground on issues for the American people - isn't that what you would expect from someone seeking the highest office in the land?
It sure is fun seeing the hypocrisy on this thread.
As always...
OBAMA '08
And for the record BrianZ, you have yet to condemn Hillary for her friendship with Mayberry.
Maybe you work for Hillary's campaign.
Hmmm?
WNot ell known but known, He had openly testified of this prior to the book.
If Obama would also appear at an event with white supremacists or anti-semites calling for a "war" on the "curse" of blacks or Jews, then I have no quarrel with his choice. You can't have it both ways--either you're truly open to "dialogue" with bigoted people you disagree with, or you're not. You don't get to pick and choose which minority you can afford to insult based on their voting power.
Otherwise, he's a hypocrite and fraud.
This is so far down the list of important issues facing this country that it is not worthy of one column inch of media space. The RNC would love for this to become an issue again. It plays into the hands of its lunatic fringe, which now has become its base. Drop it like a piece of tissue in a mens room stall.
Why? So Larry Craig could try to pick it up for us?
Obama's refusing to absolutely distance himself from this guy has made it simple for me:
No money to Obama, no support, no vote.
Buh-bye, Obama
Hutchinson's first piece on the subject made it seem like McClurkin was Fred Phelps and that Obama was joining him on a wandering tour through South Carolina, megaphone in hand.
Now that Obama says he doesn't agree with McClurkin's views, Hutchinson claims that the issue is that Obama shouldn't appear with him.
Can somebody tell me the source for the knowledge that Obama is appearing with McClurkin?
I see all of the info that says that McClurkin is one of the acts one one of three days of gospel concerts in South Carolina, and that the Obama South Carolina campaign is sponsoring those concerts, and I see plenty of outrage that despite his public disavowals, Obama is pandering to homophobes by appearing with McClurkin, but I don't see where it says that he's actually appearing, sharing a stage, or anything of the sort.
Has anybody seen anything of the sort?
Appearing or not. It is an Obama campaign event paid for with campaign contributions.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/scembrace
I'll take my vote, support, and money elsewhere.
"It is an Obama campaign event paid for with campaign contributions."
Is the event itself homophobic? Do we buy Hutchinson's insinuations that because it's a concert of gospel music performers that gay bashing is on the program?
See YA!
I know Obama wants the religious vote, but refusing to tell the gay bashers to get lost is nothing short of hypocritical.
Would Obama stand on stage with a well-known member of the KKK? I don't think so, unless that KKK members asked for forgiveness and repented for his sins and promised never to hang another person simply because of the color of their skin.
Seems to me that the actions of Obama must think it is okay to bash gays, just as long as you don't say the N word.
I am not gay---but I don't tolerate discrimination of any kind. Obama's refusal to divorce himself from gay bashers just gives me another reason to vote for Hillary. Face it, you can't expect to get the votes of the gay crowd along with the votes of religious leaders, especially if you are dumb enough to put yourself in the position that Obama is in right now. Now I question how smart this man really is and if he really deserves to be in the White House.
Obama has said that it is his "Christian" beliefs that lead him to be unable to support the rights of gay marriage.
It turns out that the Church that he belongs to, the United Church of Christ, supports gay marriage.
Obama doesn't support gay marriage because he doesn't support it. Period.
Hillary doesn't support and John Edwards doesn't either. So what your point?
They are all wrong...
"I am not gay---but I don't tolerate discrimination of any kind. Obama's refusal to divorce himself from gay bashers just gives me another reason to vote for Hillary."
-Tort
What position, exactly, is Barack in now? And if you are going to change your vote on this matter,
what are you going to do when you get some insight on the Hill? All those dead folk in her and Slick Willie's wake.
Why is the Black candidate always held to a much higher standard? I asked before, are Hillary and John and whoever else going to pursue the Black evangelist's vote?
Is this really about McClurkin? More than half the posters here never heard of the cat until this matter.
No wonder all the candidates that emerge in this mess are garbage. Something about traditions, you know?
Hillary never has had the guts to say the word “gay” in any speech she ever gave to a broad audience; she saves it for fundraisers to gay civil rights group. In Obama’s first speech to a national audience, when no one would have demanded that he address the point, he did anyway on his own, because that’s where his heart is. He famously said, “We have gay friends in the Red states,” trying to get everyone to see the humanity in others.
She used it on the you-tube debate and in press releases --you a lie. I heard the "My Gay friends to told me" line acouple of times on TV.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
