Thursday, November 12, 2009

President Obama's gay-bashing Christian problem

I am reminded by the abrupt re-appearance of Pastor Donnie McClurkin, the rabidly anti-gay minister and early Barack Obama supporter, in a series of You-Tube videos chronicling his opinon that gay people are vampires that there is a specific reason why the President does not take any serious action on the issue of civil rights for gay Americans. [We've covered the Obama-McClurkin links here before.]

It's against his religion.

Aside from McClurkin (whose views then-Senator Obama distanced himself from, but whose support he has continued to court and enjoy in a back-channel wa) and anti-gay zealot Rick Warren (to whom the President gave a national platform at his inauguration), there is also the Circle of Five. NYT:

President Obama has been without a pastor or a home church ever since he cut his ties to the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. in the heat of the presidential campaign. But he has quietly cultivated a handful of evangelical pastors for private prayer sessions on the telephone and for discussions on the role of religion in politics.

All are men, two of them white and three black — including the Rev. Otis Moss Jr., a graying lion of the civil rights movement. Two, the entrepreneurial dynamos Bishop T. D. Jakes and the Rev. Kirbyjon H. Caldwell, also served as occasional spiritual advisers to President George W. Bush. Another, the Rev. Jim Wallis, leans left on some issues, like military intervention and poverty programs, but opposes abortion.

None of these pastors are affiliated with the religious right, though several are quite conservative theologically. One of them, the Rev. Joel C. Hunter, the pastor of a conservative megachurch in Florida, was branded a turncoat by some leaders of the Christian right when he began to speak out on the need to stop global warming.

But as a group they can hardly be characterized as part of the religious left either. Most, like Mr. Wallis, do not take traditionally liberal positions on abortion or homosexuality. What most say they share with the president is the conviction that faith is the foundation in the fight against economic inequality and social injustice.


That is, I suppose, one way of thinking about social injustice, although here's another one:

Rev. Jakes refers to homosexuality as “brokenness” and has claimed that he wouldn’t hire a sexually active gay person. But it seems T.D. can’t even keep his own son off the D.L. (down low). His “sexually broken” heir was arrested earlier this year for cruising a Dallas Park in search of gay men.

Wallis, the chief executive of Sojourners, a Christian magazine, holds “traditional” views on homosexuality and abortion, according to the Times article. Although Wallis has taken some affirmative steps on GLBT equality, he prides himself on not being a part of “the religious left.”

Rev. Caldwell has endorsed Metanoia, an ex-gay ministry designed to “help homosexuals understand with God’s help that ‘change [is] possible.” When the GLBT community worked to elect Obama, this is not what we thought he meant when he promised “change.”


Back to the NYT to find the President on the phone, praying with the man who considers homosexuals to be broken and admits he wouldn't hire one:

Bishop Jakes said he had been tapped for several prayer phone calls — the most recent being when Mr. Obama’s grandmother died in November, two days before the election. “You take turns praying,” said Bishop Jakes, who like the other ministers did not want to divulge details of the calls. “It’s really more about contacting God than each other.”


Truth of the matter: President Obama depends heavily on 95%+ of the African-American vote, as do most Democrats with national aspirations. And that African-American voting block, as a demographic, is significantly more homophobic than other groups.

8 comments:

Tyler Nixon said...

Paging Pandora. Barack O. needs some of that same ire you have for David A. on the whole 'non-heteros are 2nd class citizens' thing.

Steve, you racist. How dare you point out the truth that the African-American population is decidedly more homophobic, as a demographic statement, than other race identity groups.

Tyler Nixon said...

(also, at least David A. is honest about it, whereas Barack is a gladhanding disingenuous fraud who holds pretty much the same views, for all practical intents and purposes.)

Anonymous said...

Steve, you can't say black people are homophobes, that's not PC.

Delaware Watch said...

Quite frankly, I find it mystifying why many people associate themselves w/ churches and denominations that have theological/spiritual "values" that are less enlightened than the people's personal values. Why, for instance, do people who detest homophobia continue to associate w/ the Catholic church and many Protestant churches which are homophobic?

Obama's hypocrisy in this regard is a culture-wide practice that applies to many citizens and not just the current occupant at the White House.

Anonymous said...

Uh Oh, Delaware Watch. You're in big trouble now.

Only Steve and Tyler are allowed to question the motives behind who other people pray with.

anonone

Tyler Nixon said...

Umm, "other people" aren't the fricking President of the United States, steaksauce.

And besides, where did I ever "question the motives behind who other people pray with".

But go ahead and just keep making stuff up. We're used to it from you.

Anonymous said...

Of course, it would not occur to Steve or Tyler that Obama just might be trying to persuade those people who disagree with him to a different view of GLBT rights. You know, the whole Lincoln "destroy your enemies by making them your friend" idea.

In a strategic approach, it would make sense to pull as many people over to his side (or at least keep them from becoming outspoken critics) as he moves forward with an equal rights for GLBT agenda.

Is it going to be fast enough for me? No.

Is it going to be full equal rights, including marriage? No.

Is it going to be enough? Sadly, no.

Is it going to be better than anything the repubs or libertarians or repubertarians have done or will do? You bet.

He is the first President ever to address the HRC. You should read the speech. He didn't promise any timetables, but he stated his commitments.

Of course, in the weird world of repubertarians, this all would have already been a done deal under McInsane-Palin.

anonone

Bowly said...

Of course, it would not occur to Steve or Tyler that Obama just might be trying to persuade those people who disagree with him to a different view of GLBT rights.

Show me ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE of this. I'll be waiting.

Is it going to be better than anything the repubs or libertarians or repubertarians have done or will do?

Elect a Libertarian president and get back to me on that.

He is the first President ever to address the HRC. You should read the speech. He didn't promise any timetables, but he stated his commitments.

You damned fool, this is EXACTLY the point that Steve and Tyler are making about the Democrats: they placate the LGBT community with words, but do nothing to help them. Did I mention that it was Democrats that outlawed gay marriage to start with? The current vice president voted to outlaw it (along with 31 other Democratic senators; only 14 D's voted nay) and it was signed into law by a Democratic president.

The D party platform advocates the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell (also enacted by a Democrat) and DOMA. The D's have a majority in the House, and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and the White House. How many more Democrats do they need before they actually repeal it?

Since Libertarians are all racist based on one line from the platform, it's odd that you ignore this part of the platform: "Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the rights of individuals by government, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships."

Democrats have done more to harm gays than Libertarians ever have or ever will.