Only you would know?
I would know that it's six inches and small. Not because he told me but because I saw it.

Was he circumcised?
Yes.

I can't believe the good Rev with the voice of an angel was bashing the gays the ENTIRE time he was being fucked by some guy. Perfect. Just perfect.

Kidding.

However, Donnie McClurkin is not the homophobic equivalent of David Duke. What's your next nod to Godwin's Law, a comparison of McClurkin to Hitler?

Not that any of the pro-Clinton/Guilani MSM cares what we think.

Are you saying that a few gays won't show up to the polls over this non-issue? That's hardly going to hand the election to the GOP. Everyone else in the base knows what's at stake. They're not going to stay away because one presidential candidate asked a homophobic gospel singer, who supports the candidate despite said candidate's support of GLBT issues, to sing (not speak) at an event, where the candidate will not be appearing. Most of the Democratic base is not made up of idiots.

I can get behind this statement.

We believe that Barack Obama is constructing a tent big enough for LGBT Americans who know that their sexual orientation is an innate and treasured part of their being, and for African American ministers and citizens who believe that their religion prevents them from fully embracing their gay brothers and sisters. And if we are to confront our shared challenges we have to join together, build on common ground, and engage in a civil dialogue even when we disagree.

We also ask Senator Obama’s critics to consider the alternatives. Would we prefer a candidate who ignores the realities in the African American community and cuts off millions of Blacks who believe things offensive to many Americans? Or a panderer who tells African Americans what they want to hear, at the expense of our gay brothers and sisters? Or would we rather stand with Barack Obama, who speaks truth in love to both sides, pulling no punches but foreclosing no opportunities to engage?"

It's a fair question. Which would you prefer, Dan?

If you really want respect for the LBGT community then you might try thinking before you react. You are speaking out against the one candidate who is actually capable of moving this fight forward.

It's absolutely within the right of a political critic like Dan to examine what a candidate does, and with whom a candidate spends his or her time. I know I certainly won't waste my vote on a candidate who thinks there's such a thing as an "ex"-gay.

Since you obviously didn't read my entry: I never said that Dan doesn't have the "right" to examine what a candidate does--I merely disagreed with the conclusions he has drawn. And as his reader I have every right to say that...or don't I? Sounds to me like you're the one lacking tolerance.

When and where has Obama said that he endorses ex-gays?

Obama seems like a great guy, no worse or better than the other candidates, but I have to say something about Donnie McClurkin.

Whenever I hear him say that being abused caused him to become gay, or indulge in the "gay lifestyle" or whatever term he uses, I go a little out of my mind.

You see, I'm the adult victim of child sexual abuse. My abuser was my stepfather. I've been seeing a therapist for several years about the abuse, and I'm doing pretty well.

But it didn't make any more or less likely to become gay- because, of course, that's decided in your genes, long before any abuse occurs. As it happens, I'm straight. My experience didn't have any effect on how I deal with LGBTs, because that's a function of who you are and what you believe about judgment and compassion. Which, hopefully, is also decided long before the abuse happens.

I'm really sorry that Mr. McClurkin was abused as a kid. But for him to use that abuse to impugn gays is reprehensible and just represents a continuation of the pain and damage caused by his original violation. I hope in time that with spiritual and emotional guidance he will realize how wrong his statements really are.

One more thing, if anyone is still reading. I can't speak for other victims of abuse, but every one of those "Every Child Needs..." posts is very painful for me to read. On the advice of my psychologist, I avoid news stories about child torture or murder. I never follow the jump, but sometimes the details in the "front" page are horrific. Not to sound whiny, but sometimes it's been so bad that I've had to question my commitment to being active on the Slog.

If you good folks at the Slog could be a little more careful about leaving the details until after the jump, I suspect I'm not the only person who would be deeply grateful.

Until this changes, you have no moral standing on this issue.

It's not that I think Senator Obama is anti-gay. He doesn't seem to be. This whole episode has just seemed like misstep after misstep. And that's too bad.

More than half of Marylanders would prefer that convicted murderers get life in prison rather than the death penalty, and nearly six in 10 support allowing gay and lesbian couples to form civil unions, according to a new Washington Post poll.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/25/AR2007102502530.html?hpid=topnews

um, FACTS please.