The New York Times and Washington Post report that U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama will tour South Carolina with gospel singers including ex-gay advocate Donnie McClurkin.
The name of Obama’s tour? “Embrace the Change.”
Author and activist Keith Boykin profiles McClurkin here. Previous XGW coverage of McClurkin is here.
Hat tip: AmericaBlog
Obama should have talked with Harry Jackson. Maybe Jackson’s “Change or Die” slogan isn’t so bad after all.
I am disappointed at Sen. Obama. This feeds into both the right-wing position on the glbt community AND the ex-gay groups, both of whom have been proven to be wrong-minded. I would’ve hoped that Sen. Obama would have supported the gay community and chosen to not be involved with these groups.
On the one hand, I don’t believe that political candidates should have to submit every single supporter or performer to a detailed political litmus test.
On the other hand, some of McClurkin’s comments about same-sex-attracted persons have been incredibly bigoted: angry, mean-spirited, ignorant, hypocritical, and easily disproven.
Maybe there shouldn’t be a litmus test, but on the other hand, would it be OK for a candidate to hire performers affiliated with the KKK? Where does one draw the line and say, “Enough’s enough?”
I have no problem with Obama hiring this guy. One, McClurkin could have changed his views. Two, Obama should encourage more people on his side. Obama has been pretty supportive of gay rights, so I doubt this is significant. Remember, Values Voters was about exclusion; Obama is inclusion.
A previous strong supporter of George W. Bush and now signing on to the Obama campaign just a few years later. I am not sure where Obama and W are close on any issues. So, I guess I am a little confused about what has attracted McClurkin to the Obama campaign. On the other hand, maybe I am making the error by expecting any of this to make sense.
If Donnie McClurkin is supporting Obama, I would have to believe that he is having a significant change of heart when it comes to gay rights. It would be a little strange for a strong ex-gay advocate to be supporting a presidential candidate who is strongly in favor of gay rights.
Good points — McClurkin may well have had a change of heart.
It would be a little strange for a strong ex-gay advocate to be supporting a presidential candidate who is strongly in favor of gay rights.
Obama strongly in favor of gay rights??? I’d say he’s rather tepid on the issue. ENDA and federal hate crimes are just cookie crumbs left on the floor for us. None of the major candidates have taken a strong stand on protecting gay families and letting gays and lesbians openly serve in the armed forces. They simply parrot the usual partisan line concerning these issues.
McClurkin may well have had a change of heart.
Is there any strong evidence indicating that McClurkin had a change of heart? I do think McClurkin and Obama should be confronted about this in public.
Anyway, Obama automatically loses points for this, regardless if McClurkin had a change of heart or not.
Or it could be that Mr. McClurkin realised that the issue of homosexuality is more intrinsic and getting on the 700 Club and talking about being an “ex-gay” only complicates the issue.
It kinda reminds me of when the Winans sisters wrote that song “It’s Not Natural.”
First they were doing the talk show circuit about being against homosexuality, then they were testifying in front of State Congressional Committees against pro-gay ordinances.
And finally, they disavowed the entire process, claiming that they were used unfairly by anti-gay forces.
Source: National Black Justice Coalition
I doubt that people who aren’t invested in this debate even know about McClurkin being ex-gay, and he was hired as entertainment, not as a speaker about gayness and ex-gayness. He does have a nice voice. I’ll give Obama and his campaign the benefit of the doubt here…but also write a note and give him the opportunity to disavow certain statements of McClurkin’s.
I just deleted a comment by “adam” since he hadn’t read the preceding content on this page, denied McClurkin’s history as an ex-gay, and ranted about off-topic issues such as pedophilia. (IOW, he was a troll.)
I see Exodus has a press release up on the matter:
How exactly does the condemnation of the accusation of trying to kill children become a condemnation of self determination?
First of all, I guess “strongly urging” to have Donnie dropped didn’t work. I think it was a bias request because it says gays want to be accepted for their belief (OK to be gay), but don’t want others to be accepted despite their beliefs (Not OK to be gay).
I also think challenging African-American religious leaders is misleading. Gays ONLY challenge the Christian religion, because Muslims and Jews don’t accept them PERIOD. You would think that gays would appreciate Christianity for embracing them when the others don’t. Not going to happen though. You give a person an inch, you know the rest.
People will have to be legally blind to believe that a person’s skin color can be compared to two people of the same gender having sex. Do you see how stupid that sounds? Oh, and FYI, what is even more stupid, it’s always compared to black skin, no other color. The trick is this—It’s like being black, why we would want the controversy? Good question.
When it comes to God, he doesn’t approve of sex out of wedlock. Is there a such thing as a gay virgin? I’ll wait for the answer. Time’s up. I didn’t think so either. Homosexuality is about sex and that’s it. You can love people of the same gender, but CAN’T YOU KEEP YOUR LEGS CLOTHES? I hope no one does to your children what was done to Donnie as child.
This is my conclusion, if all people want to bring their sexual issues to church, you have to accept the following 3 rules and warning.
1. All adulterers, fornicators, masturbators, child molesters and homosexuals will have equal say, without being shut out.
2. All of the issues must be brought up in the Mosques, Temples and Churches everywhere.
3. You must also accept bestiality, because some people say they were born that way. It’s happening in Europe –> https://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2005/may/25/broadcasting.radio
Warning – Do not tell God that the religious people said “you can be gay.” Remember religious people don’t have a Heaven or Hell for you.
Donnie Mcclurkin is correct, read Romans chapter 1. People let God be true and every man a liar!!
Wrong.
Majic said:
Bestiality >noun 1) savagely cruel and wicked behavior.
So Majic, based on your comments above, do you feel that you were born bestial, or that it was a learned behavior?
Island girl said:
If every [hu]man is a liar, wouldn’t that make you a liar when you say that “Donnie McClurkin is correct?”
And every man a liar means that those who claim to know God’s word best can never be trusted. Including Donnie McClurkin.
Leg clothing is awfully hard to keep a handle on. Seems I loose a good pair of pants every month or so.
Majic, so much to work with here.
Some of us have no problem with Donnie being a part of Obama’s campaign, so don’t assume all gays think the same on the issue.
Second, Jewish people can be pretty liberal about gay issues.
Third, yes, there are gay virgins and have always been gay virgins.
Last, I don’t know much about bestiality, but I did watch a documentary on it recently, Zoo, and people did not say they were always zooaphiles. In fact, many reported that it was because they became tired of dealing with human relationships. Many were attracted to a certain animal, and it was later in life. Are they born that way? I don’t know. Are gays? I have no idea. Are they comparable? Not at all.
Pants, of course! I knew I knew that phrase sounded familiar. Gosh I haven’t called my pants ‘legs clothes’ since I was in grade school.
“Mom, I ripped my legs clothes again!”
“Mom, I can’t go to school today, I’ve got a hole in my legs clothes!”
“Mom, I need new legs clothes!”
Memories.
I don’t object to McClurkin participating in Obama’s campaign. I do object to him being given 30 minutes on a soapbox to shout out strawman arguments, to verbally abuse fellow members of Obama’s “big tent,” and to vent his unresolved anger and bitterness. A candidate that allows that can’t be very competent.
Wait a minute… I can love people of the same gender platonically?! I don’t have to hump every gal I meet?!
WHY DIDN’T ANYONE EVER TELL MEEEEEEE??!!!
At least now the masturbators won’t have equal say, and can be shut out.
I am a gay virgin.
My love for other girls has been profound and deep – even at times overpowering; paralyzing – but I am still a virgin.
The commenter using the name “majic” has been banned for being generally disgusting. Several recent comments in this thread were also deleted.
Heh.. heaven. How do you argue from being banned from going nowhere? ANyways… What about zeus, mohammed, buddha, the Sun God, etc, dont they get a say in this heaven?… im sure those and many more have their own version of heaven, or not…
Its okay, i don’t mind you believing in whatever you want to. I believed in Santa once.. now i don’t. But i sure as hell have nothing against ppl who believe in santa unless, of course, they start telling me how I MUST believe that santa rides on flying reindeers, and that I MUST write out the presents before christmas day… and that I MUST clean the chimney so he doesn’t get too angry if he gets too dirty. And to top it off, I get no presents if I dont do all of that :-(.
Heteros rape woman, does that mean every hetero male should be treated the same way?
But you didn’t give me anyone anytime to answer…so bigotedly tipical. Are you afraid of what the ‘lies’ you might find?
As has been restated so many times but seems like you can’t get it through to make sense *shrug. Donnie’s ‘ex-gay’ belief is not what I and most, if not all, gay ppl here are against like you try and portray, it is his stance on gay ppl’s ‘belief’ that’s being opposed.