2008 Obama’s Ex-Gay Problem
posted by on October 24 at 9:50 AM
In an interview with the Chicago Tribune Donnie McClurkin, Barack Obama’s singin’ ex-gay bigot, denies that he’s an anti-gay bigot.
“I don’t believe that even from a religious point of view that Jesus ever discriminated toward anyone, nor do I,” McClurkin said in an exclusive interview with the Tribune. “Most of the things that were said were totally out of context and then other things weren’t true.”
Well, you could argue that Jesus is pretty clear about His intent to discriminate against non-Christians come judgment day—paradise for His believers, lakes of fire for everyone else. But let’s set that aside. When McClurkin says his comments were taken out of context, he’s talking about comments like these (all via Americablog):
“[There] are many other things to be done to break the curse of homosexuality…”
“There are certain things like, you know, anybody who has a lying problem; they get to the point where they hate being so, having such a lack of character that they make a change.”
“[There] are countless people who are discontent in this lifestyle and want to be freed from it. They were thrust into homosexuality by neglect, abuse and molestation.”
And my personal favorite:
“The gloves are off and if there’s going to be a war, there’s going to be a war. But it will be a war with a purpose? I’m not in the mood to play with those who are trying to kill our children.”
So McClurkin isn’t anti-gay or anything. He simply believes homosexuality is a curse, gays and lesbians lack character, and we got this way because we were abused and molested—oh, and we’re trying to kill your children. But I’m sure when you these statements are placed in their proper context there’s nothing offensive about them at all.
Sorry, no. Unless McClurkin qualified each of these statements with, “I’m an idiot, I don’t know what I’m talking about, please don’t listen to me, someone turn off this mic, dammit!”, then McClurkin’s a bigot and his buddy Barack Obama is a tool. Says John Aravosis:
What’s even more offensive than McClurkin trying to mislead the Chicago Trib about his past (and present) is the fact that Obama’s campaign clearly put him up to this interview with the Trib. Trust me, there is NO WAY this guy opened his mouth to the Chicago Trib about this matter without the Obama people setting the entire interview up, or at least approving of the entire thing. Obama is now trying to feed you misinformation about his top surrogates and their anti-gay campaigns. Nice, Senator. It was bad enough that you embraced an anti-gay bigot and put him on stage as your representative, but now you’re trying to polish his image in the media and lie about who he really is.
Yeah, it is time to move the hell out of America. Why are Black leaders so damn homophobic for the most part? Seriously I would love an explaination. (And I know that not all are but way to many are)
Why should I a gay/white boy march on Martin Luther King day anymore? I hoped that Obama would be the light that would shine new leadership but I can see that hope was misplaced. I belive in equality but not if showing that equality is going to feed hatred towards me.
Am I the only gay guy torn on this?
So Fnarf, what's more important to Obama's campaign? Having a shitty, bigoted singer who could easily be replaced, or having some credibility for his LGBT supporters who have addressed that this is not okay?
See ya Obama.
@1
We're stealing their thunder. They want to continue to be the most oppressed minority in America. That way they can continue to pull the race card whenever they see fit.
I don't know. I don't know. McClurkin didn't say all of us gays were gay b/c of molestation. He said some folks were. It sounds to me like he's speaking from his own experience and then saying that's how it is for all of us. And he would be woefully, horribly wrong about that.
The other comments are nutso.
This entire thing has jumped into the realm of comedy, hasn't it?
I'm still confused - everybody's acting like this McClurkin fool holds some high position of influence in the Obama campaign, but isn't he just performing at a campaign stop in SC? There is a valid reason for indignation up to a point, but this whole story is starting to get over-sensationalized.
Dan,
Care to provide a source for this quote:
“The gloves are off and if there’s going to be a war, there’s going to be a war. But it will be a war with a purpose? I’m not in the mood to play with those who are trying to kill our children.”
The only references I can find are on liberal blogs that do not state the context. Is it absolutely certain that McClurkin is talking about gay people? Call me a little suspicious that neither Americablog nor the blog you linked to provide anything more than that quote.
@6 It would never have been a problem if Obama hadn't invited this guy along, or if , when it was pointed out that he's an asshole, he had canceled the performance. At this point, to me anyway, he's just being stupidly stubborn. He's courting a voter base he's not likely to get much from anyway, and costing himself the support of the LGBT community. I know which I prefer.
given that such a large percentage of americans are "christian", don't we want the support of those who think homosexuality is wrong for them, but should be completey okay legally (complete equal rights, marriage, etc...) for anyone else?
are we surprised? I'm sorry to say that gay rights LOST us TWO national elections. yes black leaders are notorious homophobes, but embrassing gay rights is political SUICIDE in this culture. Do I think it's right, no ... will I personally vote against such yes.
because dan is right it's not JUST homosexual rights that are at stake, ALL sexual moral values that the fundamentalists don't agree with are at fault, they use the gay thing because it's what an uneducutaded vocal majority feel uncomfortable with.
I guess, sure you can theoretically have control over your desires and quell them, doesn't make you any happier? But that's not where I'm going to judge. I personally think its sick to use metaphysical arguments to shape our politcal landscape. God's judgement is intercosmic law and has no place on our current plane of existence.
And it's not that people I know who are republicans don't agree. MOST of them are prochoice, propremarital sex, probirth control, and some agnostics, yet they keep voting for these hyprocrits otherwise the opposition will "raise our taxes" or "take away our guns" when in reality most of these democratic candidates couldn't give a damn or feel strongly about either of these issues, which is obvious that they are against them in this polarizing climate.
The solution, I think America is polarized and bitter, I think the "red" is going to have learn their faults the VERY HARD WAY. In the meantime, those that are aware, are going to have to take care of their own, protect their interests on a state level, invest wisely and do what we can. Let the welfare plight of the "red" states sink themselves.
What I will NEVER understand is why the people that pay the MOST in taxes seem to bitch about them the least.
So good luck America! Maybe back alley abortions, picking up men in restrooms, and miserable disenfranchized violent youth/crime will become all the rage again just as it was in the 50's and 80's.
To this I close with fuck you Karl Rove.
@8 does obama have to justify everyone who supports him? and now that he's in a pickle (that he probably did not anticipate), he cannot get out of it without alienating a large group of people either way.
http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/
http://www.nbjcoalition.org/news/nbjc-responds-to-obamadonnie.html
Looking at the other comments here illustrates just how easy it is to pursue a divide-and-conquer strategy against various interest groups on the left. Forcing candidates to constantly choose between constituencies like this insures that ultimately none of those constituencies will be represented. The way to achieve representation is to make support for a candidate conditional on their pursuit of specific political initiatives, and holding them to what they promise.
Insisting that a candidate never shake hands with someone who has ever said something you disagree with is an excellent means of squandering political capital.
Policy is what matters. The rest is showbiz.
flamingbanjo:
There is a difference between shaking hands with a bigotted supporter and employing that person to tour as a headliner in a musical fund raiser.
@12,
I already checked out those sites, Dan. None of them have source information stating everything that McClurkin says. I'm not taking the word of people who have already demonstrated that they don't give a shit about the facts in this matter.
Try again.
Are Black leaders generally homophobic or are Black, Pentecostal leaders homophobic?
It's a sincere question.
It makes more sense to me that a Black, evangelical or pentecostal leader would be homophobic than all Black Leaders in general.
Its good to see the black justice coalition calling him out.
On behalf of the National Black Justice Coalition, I am writing to request a face-to-face meeting to discuss an urgent matter regarding your recent decision to continue to promote the Embrace The Courage Tour which headlines three of gospel music's most openly homophobic artists; the most volatile of which is the Rev. Donnie McClurkin. While we appreciate your recent statement reassuring the public that "... gays and lesbians are our brothers and sisters and should be provided the respect, dignity, and rights of all other citizens," we must also remind you that actions speak much louder than words
http://www.pamspaulding.com/graphics/SenObamaMeetRequest.pdf
And Dan it would be good to post the black ministers who are critical of the homophobes, so that the only voices that get air time are black homophobic voices..
http://s2.photobucket.com/albums/y49/pspauld/?action=view¤t=Dyson3.flv
and mj this post should answer your question.
sorry, the above should read, " so that the only voices that get air time are NOT THE black homophobic voices.."
Dan, that still doesn't establish the context. Was he talking about all gay people? About pedophiles? About ninja turtles? It doesn't tell us ANYTHING.
I've studied the christian music industry for a couple years now, and I knew who this guy was before you'd ever heard of him. He's ignorant, but not a hatemonger. He opposes homosexuality but also opposes discrimination. Not perfect, but a step in the right direction. If we can get those kinds of people to get behind solidly pro-gay candidates it's a huge step forward.
He's not really a part of the ex-gay movement. To my knowledge, he hasn't even used the term "ex-gay" to describe himself.
Get your head out of Aravosis's ass and look at the facts.
"Embraced"?
While I would rather have Obama get rid of this guy, how exactly has McClurkin been "embraced" by the Obama camp?
Pretty loaded language. Which says more to me about the general frustration level of the average "activist" liberal than it does about Obama's stance on GLBT issues.
WoW! Hey noboby's perfect. Did you know that Martin Luther King, cheat on and allegedly beat his wife???????? Check it out...
mcclurkin is probably gay. but he, much like many in the african amican community, has been taught all his life that being gay is wrong. he was raped a child -- a terrible event no matter who you are or what your orientation is. he now blames his homosexual desires on the perpetrator of that crime.
is that odd?
he might be wrong, and i've yet to see old links credibly assert he made the "kill" statement, but i've seen many a rape victim go overboard when talking about what they'd like to do to the type of person who raped them. certainly mcclurkin doesn't think you are a rapist if you are gay -- because he was/is gay -- and he doesn't think gay people should be killed.
Seriously Dan, I enjoy a good hissy-fit once in a while, but only if it's well-targeted. Mars Hill? That's a good target. Garrison Keillor? Calm the fuck down.
Garrison Keillor can suck a big ol' bag o' dicks! The sound of his voice makes my skin crawl...
# 1
'Why should I a gay/white boy march on Martin Luther King day anymore? '
i very sincerly hope that this isn't really your response to homophobia you perceive among some african americans. if this is true then it menas that you may have never understood who dr king was or what he died trying to accomplish. do you really think that the ascendance to prominence of barack obama in the last five minutes of the centuries old american political landscape was a signal for us to stop marching ? why is it a such surprise that to you or any one else that black folks can be as stupid, hateful, and misguided as anyone else on the planet? queer politics in he african american community have been ignored and underdocumented for decades and homophobia had been left to fester for longer. were the white gays 'acting up'in black communities 15 20 years ago? did anybody heed the memo about the sorry response of the african american clergy during the peak of the aids crisis? or its shunning and vilification of closeted gays after they were outed by sickness and death ? or the fact that the current riffs in the african american community towrds the darker sides of hip hop often don't address the approved homophobia there ? do you march against the still barely checked sexism and racism that that plaques the queer community ?
wondering..
.. that should be 'reverend dr dj riz '
Religion plays a bigger part than simply someone being a "black leader." From what I heard from Jim McDermott, long before any mainstream politicians supported gay rights, the Black Congressional Caucus was the most supportive of the rights of gays and lesbians.
the racism i have seen on this and other blogs about the homophobia in the black community needs to be addressed in the blogosphere more than barack does. to be honest its white homophobia that is responsible for most hate crimes and legislation. come on dan...showing native women in subservient positions is fine, allowing racist comments to go unchallenged is fine?
Hey! But adultery, and physical abuse are alright???????
Sounds like excuse making to me...
this just got even more interesting, as slog noted yesterday--the human righs campaign, who have so often given obama very high marks, have jumped into the issue demanding action. adios obama. way to slaughter your honest, candid campaign platform by being dishonest and manipulating an issue that could easily have gone away or amounted to a nonissue if you'd have been candid and honest.
this is a dead horse. actually, it was never even a real horse. it's like one of those miniature horses that lead around blind people. can we please move on to a REAL FUCKING ISSUE more important than some gospel singer?
this type of ideological purity is why liberals always lose.
i watch jeopardy which was developed by Merv Griffin (the horror). does that make me a bad gay, Dan?
Um, hate to break it to ya, but the Slog pretty much attacks anyone who shows a homophobic streak... the only reason race ever comes into play is to illustrate the complete hypocrisy of one oppressed minority (blacks) turning on another (gays).
This could also work with Christians (because let's not forget that in Roman times, they were in fact an oppressed minority) but ancient history has long since faded from living memory. But to forget what it was like 50 years ago? Not so much.
how was obama *not* candid and honest?
mirror @ 14:
Is that gospel singer setting policy? Is he onstage with Obama singing about how much God hates the gays? Then no, there's really not a big difference.
At some point any Democratic candidate who hopes to win will employ or appear in public with somebody who believes something you don't. Elevating this kind of campaign window-dressing to the level of policy (and then proceeding to ignore any substantive discussion of policy) is why Rovian politics works as well as it does.
Is Obama pandering to a segment of the evangelical vote? Probably. Is any Democrat who hopes to win going to do the same thing? Definitely. Will Republicans keep hammering away at this wedge issue when offered further evidence of the left breaking ranks at its mere mention? What do you think?
Remember Dan's whole criticism of Nader supporters whose insistence on ideological purity (being right) superseded all practical concerns about winning? Remind you of anything?
Apparently the "kill" quote stems from an appearance he made on Pat Robertson's CBN 700 Club, after which his profile on CBN's webpage included that quote for awhile. It's long gone now - it was 2004; anybody a google cache master? Go!
Hey! What's wrong with ideological purity????????????
The most frustrating thing about this is John Aravosis's complete intellectual dishonesty. He's claiming that Donnie is one of Obama's top surrogates. Not even close.
This is getting idiotic. All these one-sided, panic-stricken excerpts and quotations and here we are ready to abandon Obama without any apparent research or thought. I'm gay, and I want Obama to be my president. I also want him to be McClurkin's president. McClurkin is kind of an idiot, but he's not a hate-monger. If he's going to sing at a rally that is sponsored by Obama, that's fine with me. If he gets a job on the Obama campaign and has any kind of effect on it, that'll be a problem. But his performance at some event is NOT an indication in any way that Obama is embracing him, legitimizing his views, or throwing LGBT under the bus, as so many of you overdramatic fools keep insisting. To insist that anyone who ever has anything to do with a politician has to agree with you on every issue in order for you to support said politician is idiotic. Take a deep breath people, and think for a minute.
i agree with Ganza, and K, and many others above who do not think this is a big issue regardless of who this exgay guy is.
about that, here is the original story (and quotations):
http://web.archive.org/web/20030925082218/http://www.cbn.com/700club/profiles/donnie_mcclurkin2.asp
Thank you, Kevin. You've been a source of sanity in this mind-numbing discussion. It's always helpful to be reminded that a Shillary is the raving madman behind all this sound and fury (signifying nothing). Oh, and the Human Rights Campaign, another Shillary.
The great irony is that the people who are so concerned about Obama's intellectual honesty in this whole kefuffle wouldn't know intellectual honesty if it [redacted].
This whole ugly affair has convinced me to swing my financial support from Obama to Mitt Romney -- he would never hire a gospel singer of any sexual orientation.
I hope we this doesn't derail Obama's gay support.
The issues at stake in this election are important-- things like reestablishing the rule of law, ending the war in Iraq and restoring fiscal sanity. Obama is the most electable opponent of the disastrous Republican rule. On the issues he's 95% there.
Let's elect him.
I don't see why Neumo's doesn't just cancel the show so it can move to Studio Seven, where the gay-rights crowd will promptly stop caring about it, not bother to turn up in protest, and thus diffuse the issue entirely.
If it worked for a singer who provably advocates violence against homosexuals, surely it can work for this McClurkin fellow, too.
Ryno and flamingbanjo:
While I am not convinced this hasn't been blown of proportion, I do not believe it is an abstract matter of ideology to say gays can be "cured" (McExgay) or are created by molestation (McExgay), or are comparable as sinners to "murderers" (Erica Campbell, the lead singer of group Mary Mary in Obamas traveling fund raiser revival meeting). clearly documented quotes, leaving aside the 700 Club quote, being used as a distraction.
Unrepudiated, I can see how these comments would seem to fall smack dab in the middle of a political rhetoric that wants to take away gay people's children and refuse gay people anti-discrimination protection in healthcare, housing, and employment.
Are these singers just confused losers who don't know any better? maybe....? But Obama isn't supposed to be a confused loser who doesn't know any better, so it's confusing why he has them fronting a fund-raising tour for him. I suspect his organizers just fucked up and that he's stuck in a hard place between the politically active gay community and the significant number of homophobic religious African-Americans who have been reluctant to support him or even allow him the status of American.
I listened to Tavis Smiley year ago on a radio show steadfastly unwilling to view gay rights as a Civil Rights (big C) issue, instead of some sort of lifestyle issue, like skateboarder rights, or snowboarder rights. Until a larger number of the Tavis Smiley's of the world, a *larger number* of the people who frame the public debate about civil rights in the African-American community, explicitly agree that gay rights are a (big C) Civil Rights issue, a major tension will exist that will inflame events like this here with Obama and McExgay, and racists and homophobes on both sides will feel very comfortable spewing and dripping their poison into the publicly open sore.
It's a political mine field for Obama.
I hate to see Obama go down on this. (but I can understand those that feel like they are looking straight into the headlights of the bus)
He's getting pretty good on some things others are wishy washy about.
for example, retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies who illegally release information to the feds:
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/10/24/nice-work-senator-obama/
I stand by my opinion that inane hairsplitting like this is how we end up with only the most insipid, focus-grouped, what-two-party-system candidates. That said Obama is handling this crazy badly. Is there some ulterior motive for him trying to give this guy a PR makeover?
@46,
Aravosis is going crazy claiming that Obama is the one responsible for white washing McClurkin. I've yet to see any evidence of it. Considering Aravosis' other mischaracterizations, if not outright lies, I'm not inclined to buy it.
"Why should I a gay/white boy march on Martin Luther King day anymore?"
You should march bc MLK was for rights of ALL people--did you know he was killed when fighting for the poor, both Black and white. Further, Ms. CS King, his wife, clearly and loudly supported gay rights and said that her late husband would have done so. Lastly, you should march bc there are queer people of color. Is it freedom if only WHITE gay people have rights, but BLACK, ASIAN, and LATINO gay people are still being beat up and killed?
@22 "like many in the african amican community, has been taught all his life that being gay is wrong. "
Yeah, cuz white families teach their children that being gay is great? I grew up Black in America and I'm queer. My family taught me that being gay was alright there were no homophobic jokes told at our house and when I came out my mom she gave me a hug. I realize that I am an exception (at least I was 15 years ago when I came out). However, I was/am an exception for AMERICANS, not just African Americans but WHITE Americans as well. Fifteen years ago white American families weren't telling kids that being gay was awesome any more than Black American families.
Further, I work with youth in an all Black and Latino neighborhood and I can tell you that families are grappling with queer issues in the home. And for the most part, they are accepting and loving their children JUST LIKE white families.
Yeah, actually it does. Robotslave, do you believe that ex-gays should not have rights? So, now we'll lynch ex-gays for winking at women (or men), pay them lower wages and not let them use the same hospitals or schools as current-gays or straights.
@48. why are you arguing with me? do you disagree that: "like many in the african american community, [he] has been taught all his life that being gay is wrong." i don't see what your point is as it relates to this issue? are you saying that obama shouldn't let this guy sing because black/white religious/atheist conservative/liberal we all face the same outside pressures regarding homosexuality?
@48...thanks...this obama debate has been bothering me as a person of color. so many comments on this and other blogs have been racist...which have not been addressed by the people who run these blogs. the queer community really needs to address alot of the racism that is present fore they go shouting out about homophobia.
Infrequent @ 22/51:
I agree with your basic point--yeah we are on the same "side." However, I take issue with the assumption that Blacks are more homophobic than whites. If you had said like "many in America he was taught that homosexuality was wrong" I would have totally agreed with you.
Throughout these posts on Obama/McClurkin people are assuming that the Black community has more homophobia than the white community. It seemed to me that you were doing that as well, that is what I objected to.
Infrequent, if you weren't doing that I'm sorry I misunderstood. Either way, I'm glad that we are part of the group of people that is speaking out agaisnt the foolishness of this whole bruhaha.
Jiberish: Word.
Jibberish and Papayas, you weren't and aren't the only ones to have noticed the racism being demonstrated by the (mainstream)(white) gay community over this issue. I console myself by telling myself that those who did it, were always the way they were -- this was just the excuse to let what was bottled up come bubbling out.
The insistence that the black community is more homophobic than the white community, more hostile than the white community, is also unnerving. As I stated elsewhere, if things were really so comparatively rosy for whites, gays in the military and gay marriage wouldn't be such hot button issues, they'd be boring done deals.
I don't know what the solution is. I don't think the solution is self-immolation by any group. We ALL need to work together.
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).