HRC to Obama: no place for a homophobe on the stage in SC

couldn't agree more, Pam

It's pretty weasely if all Obama does is have other clergy give a little soon-to-be-forgotten talk at the opening.  I do think it is a great idea for him to have loudly LGBT-positive black clergy and talent on stage *repeatedly*.  but as you said this is a "buck stops here" moment for Obama, and ultimately unless he takes responsibility and handles the situation himself, he's not worth further comment.  I hope he takes the bull by the horns.  he has the opportunity to do a lot of good for himself as well as the very community he's courting.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 19:48:03 PM CDT

This could truly be a defining moment for Obama

I'm hoping for the best.

I find the "balance" notion offensive.  You don't "balance" Fred Phelps.

Obama needs, right now, to demonstrate skills relevant to the job for which he is applying.

---

by: KC @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 20:26:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

But this isn't Fred Phelps

You're over-demonizing this McClurkin, or else way underestimating how vile Phelps is.

This is like when right-wingers tell us we have to attack This Year's Designated Enemy because they are equal to Hitler.

 

http://kynn.com/

---

by: Kynn @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 01:22:08 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

He apparently has said that gay people, like murderers, are going to hell

http://www.waynebese...

Totally not OK with me.

---

by: KC @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 09:28:19 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Stated pefectly Pam

I wanted to support Obama so much. But condoning this kind of hate has no place in a Presidential campaign. Can you imagine if another candidate paid someone to perform and sing about "The Curse of the Jews" and "A War On Judaism"?

---

by: Ralph4159 @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 20:01:42 PM CDT

He wasn't going to sing about the curse of the gays

I haven't heard anyone cite any of his gospel lyrics that are anti-gay.

You're over-inflating this guy as some sort of evil monster of all evilness. Is he the Little Hitler now?

Just because you can make a poor analogy about Klansmen singers doesn't mean this guy actually is that bad. Don't confuse your side's own rhetorical excesses for the truth.

 

http://kynn.com/

---

by: Kynn @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 01:24:02 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Kynn, if you presume the quotes

in the Besen (http://www.waynebese...) article are accurate, do you still find McClurkin's badness to be at an acceptable level relative to Obama's using him for campaign functions?

---

by: KC @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 09:33:18 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I wonder if Obama has already found...

...a sellout, or if he's still looking.

---

by: Storm @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 20:08:09 PM CDT

Great - Obama thinks McClurkin will bring in "different elements" of society

The Politico piece also offers this choice quote "defending" the inclusion of McClurkin:  "The perspective is that he can bring in different elements of the Democratic Party and American society," the Obama supporter said.

I had a brief moment of hope that Obama would make this right and that it wasn't a calculated decision.  Instead, this quote confirms for me that, even if it didn't start out this way, it is now a very calculated, count-the-votes decision rather than trying to do the right thing.  Way to unite us, Sen. Obama!   

This is so discouraging to me. 

 

 

---

by: kt @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 21:00:03 PM CDT

so....

pastor sidden will give a "god loves us everyone" prayer at the beginning of the 3-day gig, and obama thinks he's done good by us?  wow.  stunning lack of understanding.  i'm still waiting to see what happens, or doesn't, during the actual event, but he's got to know that a few moments of kindly pastor crumbs doesn't make up for the soul-sucking remainder of the weekend.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 21:10:08 PM CDT

Why is HRC Carrying Water for Hillary Clinton

This speaks for me.....  This was posted on mydd, and also posted multiple times on Talking Points Memo.  I have also done a diary on this topic, and have been covering this on Lloydletta's Nooz.

 ******

 Following is the text of the email letter I sent to the Human Rights Campaign, after reading the news this morning that the HRC has threatened the Obama campaign that it will publicly denounce Obama if he does not disinvite black gospel singer and pastor Donnie McClurkin from singing in his upcoming gospel concert series in South Carolina:

You're Threatening Obama Now? (subject line)

This is unspeakably short-sighted and counterproductive.

I've always admired and supported the work of the Human Rights Campaign, But do you honestly believe that any other candidate in this race has greater potential than Barack Obama to move this country further along the path toward being a pro-diversity society -- a society that creates more acceptance and opportunity for everyone, including lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgendered people?

I urge you in the strongest possible terms to take a deep breath, then take a good, long look at the forest -- instead of the trees.

Of course, if you insist on going down this misguided path, you might consider exercising a little fairness in the matter.

Ever hear of Harold Mayberry? He's a black preacher, too. Like Donnie McClurkin. And he uses his giant 2,800-member Oakland, California, pulpit
to preach against homosexuality.

When asked about this in 2004, Mayberry gave the classic "love the sinner, hate the sin" defense:

    I'm comfortable in what I believe in. I'm not rejecting people. As God loves, we love. I don't reject thieves, I reject thievery.

But just this past August, Hillary Clinton met with Mayberry and thanked him for his "commitment to fighting for civil rights and equality."

Ever hear of Darrell Jackson? Another black preacher. Like Donnie McClurkin. In South Carolina. Like Donnie McClurkin. He's a State Senator, too.
And a political consultant. Busy guy.

In fact, just after Jackson endorsed Clinton in February, he admitted that he's also negotiated a $10,000-a-month consulting contract with her campaign.

Turns out Jackson's not a big fan of gay people, either. Although Jackson abstained from voting on a 2005 bill for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in South Carolina -- two of Clinton's South Carolina co-chairs, John Matthews and Linda Short, voted for the bill -- he indicated in remarks on the Senate floor that an amendment was a moot point, since most people in South Carolina -- himself
included -- already opposed same-sex marriage.

    Now, we know how we feel on this issue, and I've allowed my position to be known more than anybody else. I stand here as someone who is a pastor to a congregation of a whole lot of people, and I've said it to them and I'll say it to anyone else.
    

My personal moral position is what I believe and what I subscribe to. I don't have to come here and try to legislate it...There is little doubt in this body what will ultimately happen with that issue. That is a forgone conclusion.

How many times do you think Jackson has uttered -- or will utter -- anti-gay sentiments while Clinton is paying him?

Are you going to publicly denounce Hillary Clinton for her association with -- and endorsement by -- these people?

Or is she getting a pass, because she's "your girl"?

Please think before you act. Nobody's hands are clean here.

---

by: lloydletta2 @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 21:24:12 PM CDT

Now hold on about Darrell Jackson, lloydletta2. You are incorrect

Hold up, lloydletta,

I have to tell you that you are wrong about Darrell Jackson. He is not anti-gay. And he is NOT like Donnie McClurkin.

There are many pastors who have stood up for lgbts. You usually don't hear about them because they recognize this issue of lgbts in the black community as one that cannot be solved by soundbites. They don't seek media attention.

In the marriage equality vote, Jackson was not the only black legislator who abstained from voting. They abstained because they recognized the push against same sex marriage as an attempt to distract the state from more important matters, as well as divide the states' black and gay communities.

 Lastly, from what I understand, there was an incident in his church in which congregants were complaining about lgbts wanting to be members. Jackson told them that lgbts were welcomed in his church. He did NOT pull that "God can change them straight" crap.

I know these things because I am a resident of Columbia and a constituent of Jackson. We must be careful in this fight over Donnie McClurkin and Barack Obama that we don't act as recklessly as those who oppose us.

---

by: Alvin McEwen @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 22:39:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Are we supposed to care that Hillary objected?

God, everyone knows she's only trying to score points by criticizing Obama.

---

by: BobSimonds @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 21:25:37 PM CDT

You only hate Hillary Clinton

because she's a Christian, and you are a bigot.
(Is it trap door time for Josh yet?)

My America includes LGBT families.

---

by: Mena @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 21:40:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Hillary isn't a Christian.

You go by actions, not words. Nothing Christian about her.

---

by: BobSimonds @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 21:54:53 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Neither are you

by the same standard

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

---

by: dyssonance @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 04:03:30 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Three things:

Calling people on their bigotry doesn't violate my Christian principles, you don't know me, and I'm not running for anything, proclaiming what a great Christian I am. Thanks.

---

by: BobSimonds @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 06:19:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

A message to Obama,

  Getting Donnie McClurkin to become a LGBT supporter is about as likely to happen as John Avarosis to fully support a trans inclusive ENDA.

  It is not going to happen.  And at this point and time, I don't think I could support Obama either.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 21:28:42 PM CDT

you should read more carefully

Aravosis (the least you could do is spell his name correctly if you're going to misconstrue his statements) does support the trans ENDA but NOT at the expense of actually getting a bill passed now -- a bill that has the votes and has been DECADES in getting to this point. The trans version won't pass and everybody knows it. Some people are willing to be honest about that fact and take what they can get now to materially improve the lives of millions of people who would otherwise remain vulnerable. Others, like you, seem to be hell bent on snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

---

by: vanitysmurf @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 22:46:01 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

OOPS on the spelling, but anyway,

  Sorry to get it wrong.  As for misconstrueing his statements, I don't believe I have. He has used the same words as the religious right to discribe trans people as pointed out in many posts. (give him credit, he hasn't used she-males yet)I do not think that is supporting trans inclusive, even later down the road. That appears to me more like,"I need to beat you up and throw you over the side, run over me with the bus, toget a symbolic victory,
  but promise to pick me up later."

  As for a Victory, I and many others must seem to not see it that way.  Not only does the NEW ENDA removes transgender protections(I am mostly pissed off at that) but it caved deeper to the religious right as pointed out by NCLR. (this pisses me off almost the same)  So lets presume the watered down ENDA with its increase in size to the religious right were to pass the House, What other provisions in the bill will be stripped?  What other additions for the religious right will be included?  and then with the form it will be in, will Shrub sign it? I don't see how a split ENDA making it through the house as a victory, there was caving before debate took place in comittee on HR 2015.  That right there was a show that of weakness. The ammendments that are to be said the republican wanted to add would have killed it. What are those ammendments? No one knows.  How would they have killed it? No one knows that either.  The Hate crimes bill survived out of comittee with the republicans trying to add 20 ammendments to it. Debate was taking on the house floor and it survived.  I don't see victory, when the fight didn't even happen.

  I feel the spineless actions by the Democrats is the true loss on many LGBT issues.  I believe they are too chicken shit to engage in debate on the actual issues. and winning issues at that.

  Take Marriage Equality, a very big issue with lots of honest opinions, and frivolous BS, that during a debate would weed out the BS and bring the facts of the issues to the front.  The same would happen for ENDA 2015. Debate would remove all the LeBarbera BS out of debate, the same as was done with Hare Crimes.  IMHO Barney Frank wanted it his way, with no discussion with other house members, which Tammy Baldwin has pointed out in her statement on her home page. This is where HR 2015 is,

This bill is in the first step in the legislative process. Introduced bills go first to committees that deliberate, investigate, and revise them before they go to general debate. The majority of bills never make it out of committee

  We would all know why it passed, or why it failed. It was never given a chance, when all but one Democratic member that sits on the LoEdu Committee are co-sponsors of HR 2015 And on republican that sits on that committe is also a co-sponsor as well. My guess, it would have passed committe, the same as hate crimes did.

  Yeah, all the political backroom manuvering done by Barbney caused this mess, and he wants to point the fingures at us the trannies.  It is not working to his liking, but has caused some to belive the LGBT is split, well in a few places it is, but it is united quite well from what I see.

  The fact is, a bill that has no chance at becoming law is not a victory at all.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 00:57:17 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

No, he doesn't support trans-inclusive ENDA

Aravosis (the least you could do is spell his name correctly if you're going to misconstrue his statements) does support the trans ENDA...

Words, not deeds.

Everything he's said about trans-inclusive ENDA has been an attack on the trans community with the attempt of publicly discrediting any part of the LGBT community that supports transgender rights.

Just because he pays lip service to "we'll come back for you later" doesn't mean he actually intends to do so, and his hatred against transfolk is blindingly obvious.

 

http://kynn.com/

---

by: Kynn @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 01:27:30 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

nuh uh

He does not support a trans inclusive bill.

If one were to go through, he wouldn't comlain, but he doesn't support the original one. not at all.

If he did, then it *wouldn't matter* and he'd take the one that offers the best protections.

That mythical "later" everyone is talking about?  THat's 20 years if it doesn't go through now.

You think they'll come back and do this again? uh uh.  NOt for a constituency that at best is about 1% of the population.

OR, better yet -- let's say they *kept* the trans but *dumped* the G/L stuff.  How would you feel then?

*I* need this now.  Me, Personally.  I *remember* what the last time -- and funny enough, the players were the same...

So was the excuse.

I'd rather let it die than let it go forward.

Because then there *will* be "a later time".

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

---

by: dyssonance @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 04:11:04 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Why are we acting surprised?

I mean really...did we expect something more or better?  Maybe I have low expectations or just assume the worst but I'm SOOOOO not shocked.  In fact, I'm more surprised that it took so long.

---

by: callie @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 22:43:03 PM CDT

Callie

Off topic, but have been thinking of you.  Hope all went well with your baby and both bubby and mummies are happy and healthy. Congrats.

ALLY (ALLIE) (transitive) To connect or form a relation between by similitude, resemblance, friendship, or love.

---

by: Vicster @ Fri Oct 26, 2007 at 00:43:44 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thanks for the clarification about Darrell Jackson

I was reposting something from mydd - which said Hillary also had problematic associations.  Mayberry is certainly anti-gay. 

In my opinion, if there's an openly gay black minister at this concert - it will be a teachable moment.  

I still think HRC is doing Hillary Clinton's dirty work on this one.  And HRC board members - and people like John Aravosis should be disclosing their financial connections to the campaign.  

---

by: lloydletta2 @ Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 23:58:31 PM CDT

Andy Sidden

I am the associate pastor of Garden of Grace UCC and am honored to serve with Rev. Sidden. Believe me, he has not taken this invitation lightly and I doubt that what he says on Sunday will "soon be forgotten." This is a man of integrity and great grace and God is using him in powerful ways - including through this event.

I hope that each of you will pray for Rev. Sidden as he takes the stage on Sunday that his words will be mightier than any anti-gay rhetoric that comes afterward. 

Thank you.

Rev. Candace Chellew-Hodge

http://www.whosoever...

Whosoever Magazine: An Online Magazine for GLBT Christians

 

 

http://www.whosoever.org Whosoever: An Online Magazine for GLBT Christians

---

by: revtheodyke @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 08:11:51 AM CDT

Oh please..

If he had any self-respect, he would have told Obama point blank to get someone else to shill for him while he has an ex-gay con artist on stage with him. Right now, he's just enabling the cure-the-gays bigotry, just like Obama.

---

by: Morty @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 09:27:01 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Silence is better?

So you would rather he be silent than take an opportunity to speak up for the GLBT community? I am proud of our pastor for being willing to take a stand and speak out against homophobia. He would be crazy to turn down this kind of platform. He is out there working for us. I would hope that you would give him your support - even if you disagree.

Candace

http://www.whosoever.org Whosoever: An Online Magazine for GLBT Christians

---

by: revtheodyke @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 11:05:01 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oh totally..

To run a welcoming church for gays and their supporters - I have nothing but the highest respect and praise for that.

To be an enabler, to give a politician an excuse to have an anti-gay bigot headlining for them - sorry I can't respect that.

---

by: Morty @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 11:28:46 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oh, well

We'll have to agree to disagree then.

Candace 

http://www.whosoever.org Whosoever: An Online Magazine for GLBT Christians

---

by: revtheodyke @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 12:59:02 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

He is allowing Obama

to duck his own responsibility, that i have no argument with.  But beside that point, there is potential for Sidden to do some good here.  It all depends on what kind of speaker he is, and what the crowd is like.  I'm curious to see how it goes and wish him well.  But of course I agree with you that this should be Obama up there doing the talking.  Or at least they should be up there together.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 11:07:41 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Common Ground and Consistency of Message

This issue has caused me to do some searching and reflecting, and much of the language from this latest memo(from the African American clergy and LGBT supporters) seem to have Obama's handwriting all over it. Take a look at an interview http://www.windycitymediagroup.c...LE.php? AID=3931, from February 2004 (before he won the primary), Windy City Times (a chicago lgbt newspaper), with an interview with Obama. Notice the consistency between then and now. This is what I want most in a candidate, none of this latest news should come as a surprise to those who know him well.   Most notably in the interview.....

".....But ultimately, I think one of the questions that this community has to look at is, who’s not just going to be a good vote, but who’s going to be a passionate advocate on behalf of their issues? Who’s got the capacity to reframe the debate, who’s able to articulate and present these issues in ways that change people’s hearts and minds? That’s something that I have consistently been able to do in the state legislature. I’m not just talking the talk or filling out questionnaires, I’ve walked the walk on every single issue that’s been important to the LGBT community. And oftentimes I’ve delivered. I have never shied away from these issues. It’s that kind of consistency and willingness to fight that is what I think is needed in Washington right now. Particularly because no matter what happens in this next election, there are still going to be forces at work that are promoting intolerance and are resistant to change. One of the skills that I think I have is an ability to translate my passion for equality and justice into a language that a broad audience can relate to and understand, and I think that’s going to make me effective when I get to Washington."

Also, the LGBT community seems to have amnesia with regards to the Clintons. And yes, Hillary IS running on her experience during the clinton years, so she's responsible for what happened. What did Bill Clinton do when he was running for re-election. he ran radio spots on Christian Radio stations bragging about his support for DOMA http://thetaskforce.org/press/re...es/ pr171_101896

B. Clinton and for a LONG time (until it was politically non feasible) H. Clinton supported DOMA.  http://thetaskforce.org/press/re...es/ pr177_092396

And Hillary's reason for supporting DOMA, it was a strategic decision to repel the constitional amendment  http://empirezone.bl...

Then why what it used a re-election tool?

 Obama has always been against DOMA. 

---

by: timinchicago @ Fri Oct 26, 2007 at 13:34:02 PM CDT