A call for full equality

[Barack_America]

A call for full equality

by Sen. Barack Obama
Published Thursday, 08-Nov-2007 in issue 1037

Over the last several weeks, the question of GLBT equality was placed on center stage by the appearance of Donnie McClurkin at one of my campaign events. McClurkin is a talented performer and a beloved figure among many African Americans and Christians around the country. At the same time, he espouses beliefs about homosexuality that I completely reject.

The events of the last several weeks are not the occasion that I would have chosen to discuss America’s divisions on gay rights and my own deep commitment to GLBT equality. Now that the issue is before us, however, I do not intend to run away from it. These events have provided an important opportunity for us to confront a difficult fact: There are good, decent, moral people in this country who do not yet embrace their gay brothers and sisters as full members of our shared community.

We will not secure full equality for all GLBT Americans until we learn how to address that deep disagreement and move beyond it. To achieve that goal, we must state our beliefs boldly, bring the message of equality to audiences that have not yet accepted it, and listen to what those audiences have to say in return.

For my entire career in public life, I have brought the message of GLBT equality to skeptical audiences as well as friendly ones. No other leading candidate in the race for the Presidency has demonstrated the same commitment to the principle of full equality. I support the full and unqualified repeal of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. While some say we should repeal only part of the law, I believe we should get rid of that statute altogether. Federal law should not discriminate in any way against gay and lesbian couples. I will also fight to repeal the U.S. military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy, a law that should never have been passed, and my Defense Department will work with top military leaders to implement that repeal.

More

It has come to my attention that many DU posters may not be aware of Obama's positions regarding gay and lesbian equality and McClurkin's beliefs. Therefore, I present this to help inform those who may not be aware of his plans.

Thank you for taking the time to read this.

Edited: to separate paragraphs.

[peoli]

1. Lets see how many ways people will this. Should be interesting.

[angie_love]

2. So I guess ppl were lying when they said hes anti-gay

More lies from hillary supporters, hmm...sounds about right.

[yardwork]

13. People are pointing out that he has homophobes in his campaign. That's not a lie.

I've never said that Obama is a homophobe. Nor am I a Hillary supporter - although she looks better every day in contrast to Obama.

[Meldread]

20. Hillary also has a homophobe in her campaign - her Husband Bill Clinton.

In 2004 Bill Clinton was pleading with John Kerry to campaign in every small town across America supporting all the State Constitutional Amendments against Gay Marriage. He stabbed the gay community in the back. Who is worse? A former President and Campaign Manager who supports Constitutional Amendments against Gay Marriage or some obviously mentally fucked up hack who likes to sing songs?

[Barack_America]

50. Why did I not know about this? This is terrible. Excellent point though.

That is what scares me so much about the Clintons (honestly), they seem willing to scrape off whomever stands between themselves and the object of their ambitions.

[IndianaJones]

3. there is a special place carved out for the union of a man and a woman in our great country. nt.

[Yuugal]

5. divorce court? nt

[IndianaJones]

6. no, the unit of child rearing most common to every culture.nt.

[More Than A Feeling]

11. Wait, you're defending DOMA?

Are you insane? Are you aware that those who have studied this say that the gender of the parents has nothing to do with the welfare of the child? How about slavery? That was "common in every culture" once upon a time, and in fact still is, though nowhere near as prominent. Should we have laws celebrating that fact?

Isn't the point that the child have a parent or parents? Why should heterosexual relationships be privileged? It's discriminatory. Nothing more.

[yardwork]

14. I think he's quoting Obama.

[More Than A Feeling]

15. If he is, he should make that clear.

[Meldread]

8. Yes, there is - and Hillary will make sure of it. Thank GOD for Hillary. -nt-

:kick:

[IndianaJones]

9. but it is a special relationship. nt.

[okasha]

4. Homophobes

are "good, decent, moral people."

[Barack_America]

7. Please don't twist his words. You have to give allowance that many people...

...are torn between what their hearts tell them and what their churches tell them. And yes, that makes the McClurkin's of this world even worse.

So yes, the end result is that "good, decent, moral people" are torn regarding this issue.

[yardwork]

16. It's not twisting his words. Obama said that homophobes are "good decent people."

That's not ok. That's not progressive.

That's like saying that white supremacists are good decent people.

[Barack_America]

22. That is unfair and no, it is not the same as saying...

that White Supremacists are decent people. White Supremacists are not told by their churches that their beliefs are correct or desirable.

However, Christians are currently getting conficting messages from society and their churches. And, even though I'm not Christian and I fully support gay and lesbian rights, I do think I have to remember that before I condemn them for their "beliefs".

[NMMNG]

56. White supremacists, historically and even today,

have used the Bible to justify their hatred of non-whites, Jewish people and other groups. It was and is wrong.


Likewise homophobes use the Bible and their religion to justify hating and treating GLBT people badly, and denying them equal rights. That is wrong. Justifying hatred and mistreatment of others in any form under the guise of "deeply held religious beliefs" or "my momma taught me" or whatever is plain wrong. Period. End of story.


It is time that bigots of all stripes be relegated to the lunatic fringe where they belong.

[yardwork]

68. Yes, white supremacists ARE told by their churches that their beliefs are correct and desireable.

Go read on the Southern Poverty Law Center's website and educate yourself. The church has always been used as a vehicle to justify human rights violations. Always. It's the main vehicle, in fact.

People are always getting conflicting messages from society and their churches. That doesn't absolve them of the responsibility for making the right choice.

[LordJFT]

18. do you seriously not have any homophobic friends or relatives

that you choose to associate with nonetheless?

[yardwork]

69. I have zero homophobic friends - I drop anyone who reveals themselves as such.

As for my homophobic relatives, I avoid them as much as possible.

Also, I'm not running for president. If I were, I'd sure as hell stay clear of homophobes.

[More Than A Feeling]

10. Are the members of the ex-gay movement "good, decent, moral people?"

Or slime using social hatred to prey on fragile teenagers, leading to many suicides? All of his other pretty words don't answer that question. It goes way beyond "McClurkin has beliefs I reject." That response is wholly inadequate, especially in light of the Rev. Caldwell thing that just came up. Obama hasn't learned anything.

[Barack_America]

17. I would imagine that he's referring to your average church-goer...

Who may feel in their hearts that gays and lesbians deserve equal rights, but hear otherwise from their so-called "spiritual advisors".

Personally, I am a forgiving person and, yes, I do feel badly for people who are so obviously conflicted and ashamed of their own identities that they would take this frustration and anger out on others.

Please don't assume that I don't have personal experience with this, because I do. It is an issue that has affected my family deeply. There are people I love dearly on both sides of this debate.

[More Than A Feeling]

23. So he's using religion to give them a pass?

That won't fly either. That's something religion has to answer for, and it isn't an excuse. It's certainly no reason to get into bed, metaphorically speaking, with the ex-gay movement.

[Barack_America]

36. Not a pass. Understanding.

A pass signifies, "no big deal". Understanding signifies some real personal and spiritual conflict that may take some time to resolve.

Personally, I think that Obama is himself conflicted, which is not surprising to me given his Christian faith and how he has obviously been instructed to view lesbians and gays. Everything I have read regarding his feelings on this subject suggest that he is in a period of personal and spiritual conflict. But what encourages me is that he is determined to push for equality while he resolves these issues. It seems that this is something he thinks about, deeply.

[hulklogan]

12. I have yet to meet a good, decent, moral person who refuses to support full equality

for all people. I've met nice people, kind people, tender people all who think GLBT Americans should be second-class citizens, but not good, decent, moral people.

[Barack_America]

19. Then you don't believe that people who devoutly adhere to the Christian faith...

...As being "good, decent, moral" people.

I think that's unfair. Please realize that many Christians are being pulled from both sides on this issue.

(Please note that I am not Christian and I do support full rights for gays and lesbians--it's not even a question)

[More Than A Feeling]

21. So by supporting those full rights, are you not devoutly adhering to your faith?

If you can do that and still remain a christian in good standing, why should other christians get a pass?

[Barack_America]

26. I don't exactly understand your argument, but I'll try.

I think we all know that there is a BIG difference between what Christianity is really about and how it is preached in churches around this country.

If Christianity were preached as it should be, Christians would be voting overwhelmingly Democratic for the parties positions regarding the poor, education, etc.

But that is obviously not how Christianity is presented in churches. If we're talking about the "Christian spirit" then, yes, one would like it would be in the "Christian spirit" to be accepting of all. Christians right now are being manipulated, and part of that manipulation is this whole awful anti-gay, anti-choice obsession. Christianity as our nation now knows it, is not about full rights for anybody.

Do I feel sorry for people who are being manipulated and obviously don't know it? Yes, I do.

[More Than A Feeling]

29. This isn't just about "anti-gay" this is about "ex-gay"

nowhere has Obama addressed that virulent poison beyond one rinkydink sentence that as I said, is wholly inadequate especially in light of the Caldwell thing.

[Barack_America]

55. Caldwell sounds like the devil himself, but as for McClurkin...

...does he just denounce gays and lesbians or is he in any way involved in the attempt to "cure"?

[More Than A Feeling]

57. He's a "graduate" of the movement, and he actively promotes it

He had an open mike all to himself to do so at an Obama rally.

[Barack_America]

62. Okay thanks. Yes, that is undeniably inexcusable.

If he wants to sing, that's one thing, but if he's there to spread a message of hate....no way.

And by "one thing" I mean not as bad, but still certainly not okay with me.

[More Than A Feeling]

63. Yeah, he got a whole half an hour (which is a lot, you understand)

in addition to being the mc of the whole event (after obama's campaign said he would only be there to sing).

[hulklogan]

28. The Christian faith does not determine what is good, decent, and moral

If a faith is bad, indecent, and immoral and people devoutly adhere to it, it doesn't make them good, decent and moral. I'm not saying that Christianity is bad, indecent, and immoral, but it doesn't have the best reputation when it comes to full equality.

There are many Christians who are good, decent, moral people and understand the value of full equality. We, as Americans, need to make decisions for ourselves about what is right and what is wrong and not abdicate that responsibility in favor of following religious dogma, Christian or otherwise. If a person's religion tells them that discrimination is God's law and they believe it, they are not good, decent, and moral no matter how devout a follower they are.

/edited to correct spelling and clarify one remark

[More Than A Feeling]

31. Well said!

:applause:

[Barack_America]

34. All I'm asking for is to give them a little understanding and time.

If we're going to reclaim this country from the fundamentalist asshats who are currently controlling the social and political views of more moderate Christians...it's going to take patience and forgiveness. That's all I'm saying.

Although I still don't know exactly why I'm defending Christians considering most of them scare the shit out of me. I guess it's because they're Americans too. And I can imagine how hard it must be when your heart is in conflict with your "faith" and you're being told that there's something wrong with you because of that.

[hulklogan]

37. This conflict between heart and faith has been lived by GLBT Americans for years

They'll have an easier time with it, though. Religious faith can be changed while sexual orientation cannot.

[Barack_America]

45. Tell that to my Catholic family, lol.

Seriously though, yeah of course it can be changed, but you have to accept that for many it will take time. I think of my gay and lesbian friends and family and the length of time it took them to sort their sexuality out (some more successfully than others, unfortunately). And I think of other friends and family who were sorting their own issues out right along with them. And really, isn't that what we're doing right now as a country?

[JackBeck]

24. A call for full equality.

Over the last several weeks, the question of racial equality was placed on center stage by the appearance of David Duke at one of my campaign events. Duke is a talented performer and a beloved figure among many caucasion and Christians around the country. At the same time, he espouses beliefs about race that I completely reject.

The events of the last several weeks are not the occasion that I would have chosen to discuss America’s divisions on race rights and my own deep commitment to race equality. Now that the issue is before us, however, I do not intend to run away from it. These events have provided an important opportunity for us to confront a difficult fact: There are good, decent, moral people in this country who do not yet embrace their black and brown brothers and sisters as full members of our shared community.

We will not secure full equality for all Americans of color until we learn how to address that deep disagreement and move beyond it. To achieve that goal, we must state our beliefs boldly, bring the message of equality to audiences that have not yet accepted it, and listen to what those audiences have to say in return.

For my entire career in public life, I have brought the message of racial equality to skeptical audiences as well as friendly ones. No other leading candidate in the race for the Presidency has demonstrated the same commitment to the principle of full equality. I support the full and unqualified repeal of the federal mysigony laws. While some say we should repeal only part of the law, I believe we should get rid of that statute altogether. Federal law should not discriminate in any way against multiple race couples.
------------

[IndianaJones]

25. there is a special place in Amerca for all white couples. nt.

[JackBeck]

33. you left out heterosexual.

[IndianaJones]

35. no, I said that above. nt.

[Barack_America]

27. Are Christian churches promoting racism?---No.

Are Christian churches demanding that their parishoners denounce gays and lesbians? Yes.

Are Christians being unfairly manipulated to promote the social agendas of fundamentalist psychopaths? Yes.

Do I pity these Christians who are being manipulated? Yes.

[JackBeck]

32. Fucked up, isn't it?

I pray that these Christians eventually see the light.

[Barack_America]

39. self-delete.

n/t

[Solon]

30. How about equal respect? n/t

[Sapphocrat]

38. Wow! Golly gee!

It's not like I never read EVERY FUCKING WORD Obama ever spat out regarding LGBTs or anything. :sarcasm:

End result: His revolting actions speak louder than his empty words.

Thanks for playing anyway!

[Barack_America]

41. Thanks for having an open mind...

And being willing to discuss the issues.

:hi:

[Sapphocrat]

43. Like YOU want to discuss the issues?

Honey, your position is clear. If I truly believed you would actually listen, I would be happy to discuss anything about your man you wanted.

But I've read your posts, ad infinitum. Obama's your guy, you defend him against every criticism, homos like me are just a goddamned thorn in your side, and you wish we'd shut the fuck up and go away.

Am I wrong? Show me I'm wrong. You love him. You're voting for him. You think the sun rises and sets on him. What's there to discuss?

[Barack_America]

47. Not true.

I admit that I get involved with the petty back and forth stuff. I like to debate, even if it's childish.

But really, I'm thirsting to discuss issues. And, if you look through this thread, that's exactly what I've been doing. I just haven't had much luck finding people who want to talk about issues lately.

And everyone here seems so prone to attack lately. It's all attack-defend-attack-defend, which really kills the dialogue.

I'm rambling...

[Barack_America]

40. I have to ask this. If Hillary is 100% pro-gay and lesbian rights, why is she against...

a full DOMA repeal? Are the Dem majorities in the House and Senate not enough to prevent some sort of backlash bill? Or, honestly, is this due to some sort of selfish political triangulation? And why did she only agree to repeal any part of DOMA so recently?

[IndianaJones]

42. she's not 100%. nt.

[Sapphocrat]

44. See what I mean?

When you're backed into a corner, all you can do is attack Hillary. Deflect, deflect, deflect. You make it IMPOSSIBLE to "discuss" anything about Obama when you CANNOT keep the topic ON Obama.

Do you understand yet?

[Barack_America]

46. I'm trying to discuss this, but you're attacking me.

I really want to know what I'm missing here as her policies and beliefs seem to conflict.

[Sapphocrat]

48. No, YOU are deflecting the convo AWAY from Obama.

Christ Almighty, can you really, truly not see that? YOU start a thread on Obama, yet YOU follow it up with an attack on Hillary to turn attention away from Obama. Can you keep the topic ON Obama, or can you not? Is there no other way to defend him other than resorting to the old "Hillary/Kucinich/Whoever does it too?" tack?

Seriously, this has been done so many times, it's ridiculous -- it defeats any potentially legitimate defense of Obama.

Do you see it yet? If not, then I beg someone, anyone else to explain it, because I'm obviously doing a terrible job. It's just so obvious!

[Barack_America]

51. If you can answer my question, please answer it...

Why is Hillary's stance on DOMA what it is?

If you can't answer it, please let me be and stop telling me what I'm trying to do.

[Sapphocrat]

52. Again, with Hillary.

Your thread was presumably about Obama. You cannot defend Obama without attacking Hillary. You just proved, again, every point I've made -- and proved there is no "discussing" OBAMA with you.

I don't know if you really don't see what you're doing, or if you think I -- and every other DUer -- is that stupid.

[Barack_America]

53. This is a subthread in which I asked about Hillary. Yes.

As you know, subthreads can (and do) go off-topic. I'm assuming you don't know the answer to my question then?

[Sapphocrat]

59. So, since it's your OP...

...then it's OK for you to take your own thread OT, when your thread isn't going your way? :eyes:

No, dear, you're not going to suck me into your familiar, tiresome trap of discussing Hillary just to deflect attention away from your beloved Obama, and his sickening fuck-over of LGBTs. If you want to discuss Hillary and her record on LGBT equality, start a new thread on that, and I will be more than happy to give you my views on her (which -- surprise! -- are not so adoring as you probably think).

[Barack_America]

61. Maybe I decided to start a sub-thread so that I didn't get absolutely annihilated...

like I would if I made it it's own thread.

That's the truth.

But, it looks like I'll get attacked regardless, so nevermind.

[Sapphocrat]

65. If you were so secure in your statement...

...then why make it a subthread? If you believe in what you say, then have the courage to give it its own thread.

And quit with the "I'm getting attacked!" stuff. You are not getting "attacked" -- your stance and tactics are being challenged, firmly.

And if you really believe you are being attacked, then you need to grow a much, much thicker skin.

[Barack_America]

66. Will do, thanks...

Hillary's position on DOMA was mentioned in another thread so I posed the question over there.

The problem is asking any question about a different candidate these days is met pretty hostily. And the hostility usually results in the question never being answered. Combine that with my having a reputation for being a staunch Obama supporter and...well, you get the picture.

When oh when will these fucking primaries be over?

[Sapphocrat]

67. Good.

If I don't show up straightaway for it (it's close to my bedtime), PM me when you've got it posted so I can find it. I will discuss Hillary and her position on LGBT equality with you, sans Obama and his.

[FrenchieCat]

49. Thanks.

I hadn't seen that, although I saw the interview where he basically said the same thing.

[AGirl]

54. He mentioned T

OMG!

[NMMNG]

58. Praytell, what does this have to do with global warming?

:shrug:

[IndianaJones]

60. there are carbon credits involved somehow. nt.

[Egnever]

64. Nice find and not in the least suprising.