I don't see what's wrong with that memo from the Obama campaign. It clarifies what McClurkin believes (which had been widely misreported) and then contrasts it with what Obama himself believes.

Aravosis is just being opportunistic, trying to get on CNN.

That's a naive thing to say, Kevin. To acknowledge that God delivered him from homosexuality implies that it is this God's plan to have homosexuals change. Furthermore, these are the aides' words, which don't carry the same value. Even if this "ex-gay" indeed asserted this, it means nothing in the eyes of the black community. Just like individuals guilty can be happy with their sinful lifestyle, the same can be applied to gays as a loophole in this community's eyes. They are deviating from God's plan, therefore they will go to Hell, which enables them to look down at us.

I also don't understand why you try so hard to excuse their moral ambivalence with homosexuality. To call homosexuality a sin is an act of condescension, since they don't see heterosexuality as the same. Subtle condescension is still responsible for fomenting opposition to LGBT acceptance. Unless they face the reality that they can't hold a target group's legal equality hostage just because it doesn't fit with their irrational worldview, they will continue to work against us.

I also remember you mentioning how they vote Democrat either way, so it shouldn't be an issue. It SHOULD be an issue because as soon as Republicans smarten up, they will court the black vote; and coupled with their anti-gay stances, the Republicans will have no trouble doing so.

Lucrece, i'm not claiming that the views expressed in the memo are benign, but that mcclurkin's views had been widely misrepresented, and that needed clearing up.

Lucrece~

I don't think that black people will en masse switch to Republicans with a few anti-gay stances. The GOP has been anti-gay for all these years, and that hasn't happened.

It might also be hard to present policies that black people find appealing and maintain the bulk of the Republican votership - the Rush Limbaugh constituency. Republicans always say things like that - if only black/gays/jews/women voted for us more instead of Democrats... as if those people will switch parties without policy changes.

Kev~

You're right, his words were misrepresented from before, but Obama's staff is making a distinction between trying to change the gays and trying to change only the unhappy gays. They're implying that the latter position is more benign than the former. It shows not just a lack of understanding of spirit violence against LGBT people as well as the fact that no one gay was consulted for that memo, but it's also pretty much the Exodus International position on the matter (we're only trying to help those gays that are unhappy with their sexuality).

He said he disagreed, but he's definitely implying that there's a distinction there worth noticing because one position is manifestly better than the other, which it's not.

Not saying he's homophobic (well, any more than we all are), just that he doesn't get it and doesn't really seem to be trying. Like Andrew Sullivan on race issues, since that was an analogy you used earlier. (I'd also throw in Andrew Sullivan on sexuality issues, but that'd just be mean.)

McClurkin does not belong on the campaign stage of a progressive Democratic presidential candidate unless he is willing to say that full equality is justice, & he concedes the necessity of this justice. McClurkin's message is that homsexuality is a sinful condition & that he has been delivered from its sinfulness. The form of personal deliverance is something of a mystery - one suspects is it self-imposed celibacy. This is not justice. There can be no transcendent or utopian reconciliation on human rights via this belief. If Donnie is political, his politics are suited to Republicans.

Kevin Erickson states: "Watch the video, and tell me what you think. Watch the video, and tell me if you would honestly describe that as "gay bashing". [sic]

I’ve seen the video, and I will/can honestly describe part of it as gay bashing. Kevin, gay "bashing" can be subtle. Even if the person doing does not realize he's doing it, or had absolutely no intention of doing it, it's still bashing. I understand that "bash" is a hard word. But let's think about what he said at the very end of the video and be even a little more honest.

He states that when someone accepts Christ as his Savior all bad things, past things negative, one is delivered from, they go away. He had just mentioned his deliverance from homosexuality (I find that hilarious, too, because the whole performance betrays he's still a little light in his Jesus sandals), so he is continuing his thought process when he goes on to say that it was THEN THAT HE BECAME A CHRISTIAN, was brought into his Savior's grace, or whatever. He is just shy of literally stating that one can't be gay (as he was BEFORE NOW) and be a Christian.

Accept God, he'll take away your faggotry, forgive you, and let you into the Christian Club (I'm gay and a member but don’t' tell Donnie that). McClurkin may not really believe that; I'm willing to concede that -- but that is what he implied heavily in those last remarks.

Donnie did not say that this idea only applied to his personal way to God. He was preaching. Preaching means he's telling people how it is for everyone, et cetera.

If confronted with this fact, that he did commit an act of bashing (he may have been already; don't know), I'm sure he'll use some slick, circumlocutorily scriptural way of explaining how he didn't say that. First he'll deny it, and then grab that big book and start a quotin’ to explain what he did mean (never mind that he didn't do that while he was on the stage). The Bible's good like that -- it's got anything one needs in it to help one lie effectively, coming out smelling like Febreeze wafting through a baptistery.

To say to people in general and to gays in particular that one can't be gay and Christian is a form of spiritual violence --- and yes, that is bashing. For one, it gives literal bashers a whole lot more justification for that last fatal punch (or can of lighter fluid) when they're beating up "just a fag" (hey, even God rejects the way he is; he's not only a pervert; he's a heathen, too).

So, with all due respect, Kevin, you're dead wrong on this one. I've been an Obama supporter up until now, but the way he's handled the aftermath of the "Donnie Debacle" has been so intellectually and politically disingenuous(i.e., Obama lies) that I cannot now conceive of voting for the man.

The third paragraph in my previous post should have read a bit differently; I posted before I edited (not a good procedure, lol):

"He states that when someone accepts Christ as his Savior all bad things, past things negative, one is delivered from, they go away. He had just mentioned his deliverance from homosexuality (I find that hilarious, too, because the whole performance betrays he's still a little light in his Jesus sandals), so he is just shy of literally stating that one can't be gay and be a Christian."