What's the right response if your invited guest announces "God delivered me from homosexuality" from

the stage at a campaign event where you invited him to participate in the event?

Do you apologize or do you exploit it as a Sista Soulja moment?

Final Word: Obama’s Anti-Gay Gospel Tour by Greg Hambrick for Gay Charleston:

So, there was a small group that protested the show last night and McClurkin apparently didn’t disappoint his fans.

He approached the subject gingerly at first. Then, just when the concert had seemed to reach its pitch and about to end, Mr. McClurkin returned to it with a full-blown plea: “Don’t call me a bigot or anti-gay when I have suffered the same feelings,” he cried.

“God delivered me from homosexuality,” he added. He then told the audience to believe the Bible over the blogs: “God is the only way.” The crowd sang and clapped along in full support.

While the events may help get some blacks to take another look at Obama, the negative impact in the gay community will go much further than South Carolina. Obama has a progressive stance on gay and lesbian issues and he can’t afford to miss any opportunity to get the word out. For now, all the LGBT community can hear is that crowd singing and clapping along with McClurkin.

How many threads on this have you started? At this rate, you're going to a puddle on the floor by Tuesday night- and god help you if JE comes in third.

approx a dozen Obama bashing threads in the last day or so.

last day about Obama, not "approx a dozen."

This thread is the second, which I posted because you were propagating a factual error in the other thread and I thought your error warranted correction.

campaigning exploits a real problem which is simmering anti-gay prejudice in the black community. He knew what he was doing and it got the results he was hoping for.

:puke:

They keep mentioning McClurkin -- but NONE of them do a side by side analysis of Obama's actions while in office, and promises while in office, next to Edwards.

That's the beef.
Maybe they don't care.

That's dishonest.

What do you wish to know about me?

Anyway, I'm happy to report that independently of my asking in this thread, DU member Zulchzulu has created this thread:

<a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3954660">Thoughts on Barack Obama, McClurkin's performance and the future of LGBT rights</a>

I'm glad Zulch did.

I'm tired of the character assassinations against Obama. I think
it doesn't help Edwards' to have his supporters harp on this without
providing the tools for critical thinking, and placing the incident
in context. If after reading a thread like Zulch's one makes up
one's mind Obama is still homophobic and anti-GLBT, one can go from
there. One can even provide counterpoints to Zulch's research.

This thread, in contrast, is just a hit piece.

if all us pesky gays would just shut up and go away..all would be well in Obamaville.
Guess we don't know our place.

I guess now that you've trotted out that cliche this conversation is over. :eyes:

Lots of people believe lots of things that are harmful. Lots of DUers believe things that make life painful and more difficult for others. That's just the way it is.

Unless you support Richardson. Oh wait, he thinks homosexuality is a choice.

I wouldn't have risked alienating a large pool of supporters.

It's that simple! This was done to try and grab some of the rabid religious bigots - otherwise known as pandering to the religious right.

just the way we are unless we are actively looking for help in changing things we don't like about ourselves.

That's just me, though.

"Can God deliver me from heterosexuality?"

If you have any restrictions for the stage work, the time to say something about that is BEFORE they get on stage. If they get on stage and do their schtick, which involves their spiritual belief in something that you disapprove of or which hurts others' feelings, well...they have a right to those beliefs. But I just wouldn't ask that person again.

I wouldn't apologize for it, though. I probably would add a caveat to the end of the ceremonies, like, remember that everyone on this stage has been welcome to state his or her beliefs. Those beliefs are not necessarily my beliefs. You know..that standard disclaimer. No need to apologize, though.

Give it a rest. It ain't that big a deal. Any more than if he had gotten up on stage and said that his religious beliefs dictate that his wife is supposed to submit to him, according to the Bible, that he is named by God to be head of his household. It's a common religious belief which I, as a woman, find aborrhent. But people have a right to believe that, and if it's based in religion, then they have a right to even preach that. I hate it, but that's the way it is in a democracy with free speech.

anything particularly offensive to the audience members, out of respect for the audience. I don't think that would've stopped this guy, though. He would not have regarded his stating his beliefs as being offensive.

Besides, my understanding is that Obama attended and gave a speech at someone else's event. That it wasn't Obama's event, arranged by Obama's people. That was what I gathered, when I read about it, anyway.

dealing with discrimination my entire lifetime, from being patted on the head by the mailroom guys, being called "honey" by the janitor, getting less pay than a guy who replaced me in the same job, getting put down by older men who thought I used too authoritative a tone of voice when speaking with them, told by men to my face that of course women should get less pay since they are less able than men to do many things and men have families to support, etc., etc.

I know discrimination. I know the hurt from having someone state their supposed beliefs about things which denigrate me. AND those beliefs are accepted by everyone around me as truisms. It is hurtful.

But you have to pick the battles. You can't get in everyone's face every time something happens. You have to take it a step at a time and deal with the real biggies as they happen.

It is my understanding that the guy is just going to do his gospel music thing. Is that not correct? He is just known for talking about the homosexuality thing. But if it's a gospel show, and he is one of the big gospel acts, you can't really leave him out, I don't think. But he is not being included for the purpose of preaching...just the music.

It's sort of like going to a Mel Gibson movie, knowing that he hates Jews and thinks they're responsible for all the wars in the world. I don't watch Mel Gibson movies, anymore. But lots of people do, choosing to enjoy his acting skills and disregarding his bigoted statements.

Our pleas were met with silence by the campaign, who afterwards said "we got what we needed to get out of it."

That is why many of us are not "hopeful" that a President Obama would have anything to offer gay Americans.

they are in favor of civil unions, but do not favor the federal govt. getting involved in "gay marriage" per se. Obama's views are the same as Clinton's and Edwards' views, from a legal standpoint. We can't see inside their brains to know what they really think about homosexuality. If Obama doesn't like the idea of being gay, then he probably thinks his wife should be submissive to him, too. Most religious people think that way. But it doesn't matter, as long as he does what's right, legally.

is a choice and sinful, etc., etc.? I mean, we're not talking about a preaching event here. He's going to do his gospel music.

It's unpleasant, it's hurtful, it's denigrating. But in the scheme of things..compared with getting fired, not getting ins. coverage because you're gay, not getting ins. coverage for domestic partners, getting paid less than someone else because you're gay, not being allowed to visit your partner in the ICU....compared with these rights, which still aren't installed everywhere...how is this gospel singer a big deal, esp. if he doesn't talk about his religious beliefs onstage?

Note: Probably a lot of the gospel music performers will have the same belief. Is what you're really saying that Obama shouldn't have a gospel music event?

Because you've written about three or four totally untrue statements.

A little background.
http://news.lavenderliberal.com/category/democrats/barack-obama/page/3/">More.

When Don Imus used racial slurs in his radio program Barack Obama called for him to be fired.


When Voting Section Chief John Tanner made remarks Obama considered "erroneous, offensive, and dangerous" Obama called for Tanner to be fired.


When Donnie McClurkin, during a fundraiser concert for the Obama campaign, said that homosexuality is something bad from which God can deliver people Obama said nothing.


The message? People who engage in racism must be silenced, but people who engage in homophobia can be given a microphone on behalf of presidential candidates. Nice double standard.


Don't ever tell us to "give it a rest". It is a big deal. It's our lives.

you from being an asshole."

This message was approved by Zorra.

I would just not have invited the sick bastard to begin with, but you're response is golden, Zorra, golden!

:applause:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3954660

ZulchZulu details the incident, Obama's response, and Obama's record when it comes to GLBT issues and concerns.

"It was only one song sung in a small town by one singer" is his entire philosophy on this.

No thanks. It was vomit-inducing enough the first time.

but won't help pay my rent and utility bills no matter how hard I pray?

Is he still sore about all that nasty shit I said about him after the 2004 election theft?

ROFL

thats funny!

we're going to win. Sorry about the gaffe.

This is what Obama welcomed into his campaign with open arms - an "ex-gay" clown who proclaimed, under Obama's banner, that "God delivered (him) from homosexuality"

I would think you'd be happy that Obama supports civil unions, a position not even John Kerry took four years ago.

Of course not. Extremists are never happy unless their candidate is perfect.

I simply ask that my candidate not hire a bigot to clown it up at a campaign event for a crowd of like-minded bigots to score some sweet, sweet primary votes.

For simple tactical gain, he'll exploit race and religion and smilingly go along with feeding the flames of homophobia. Where will he draw the line? Will he throw the non-religious overboard or endorse those who hate them if it suits his fancy or brings momentary success? Considering how hot and heavy he is on capitalizing on religion, it doesn't seem that out of keeping.

What about women? The Southern Baptists have been quite adamant in the last few years about affirming the male's primacy; if a tasty bloc of voters present themselves with this nasty proclivity, will he take advantage of that, too?

This is a character issue of immense proportions. He KNEW about this guy. He was beseeched by many people to get rid of this guy, but he knew that the whole point of his 40 days of Faith was to remind the gospel crowd that he was one of them. He deliberately downplayed the guy's prominence in the event. He tried to be on both sides of the issue by bringing in a gay preacher, but deliberately turned down at least two prominent gay black preachers that we know of to put on a white one instead, a deeply cynical move when dealing with homophobes in a racial consciousness setting. Make no mistake about it: this was a racial solidarity event designed to pull support away from Hillary Clinton and coalesce it around one of the group. The situation is truly disgusting when taken in its totality, especially when the timeline is taken point by point.

Who's next? Who else is "dispensable"? If it's just expediency, how are we to believe that further expediencies won't be presented? There is no doubt that he knew specifically about the implications and the courting of cultural ugliness, and he gambled that he could get away with it. The only people who should admire something like that are weaklings who like getting away with things and bigots who secretly agree. There has been some remorse shown, but precious little, and that's a sad testimony.

Like, really, really gay and really, really in the closet.