Fourteen years ago, the Democratic Party faced a test of leadership, and our party failed that test. We had an opportunity to be leaders on the World stage in eliminating discrimination against gay and lesbian service members, to recognize the patriotism and heroism of the hundreds of thousands of gay and lesbian citizens who have served our country. Instead, we bowed to fear and prejudice.
We were told that American soldiers weren’t ready to serve next to gay and lesbian comrades. We were told that our airmen, sailors and Marines would lose their “unit cohesion” if we implemented a policy of equality. And so, rather than embracing leadership and principle, we embraced Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell — a policy that is antithetical to the values of honor and integrity that our military holds most dear. Patriotic gay and lesbian Americans are now told that they may serve their country only if they hide their true identities. They are forced to live a lie as the price of risking their lives for their country.
As president, I will work with Congress and place the weight of my administration behind enactment of the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, which will make nondiscrimination the official policy of the U.S. military. I will task the Defense Department and the senior command structure in every branch of the armed forces with developing an action plan for the implementation of a full repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.
(christopher writes From the Left, a great blog that I only recently discovered. (Moved section of diary to extended entry) - promoted by psericks)
The field of Democrats running for president is impressive and far superior to any of the Republican candidates, but Barack Obama is unique.
As a proud, gay man, it’s important that I feel confident the candidate I support will stand up for the entire LGBT community, and unlike some of the Democratic candidates who had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the table, Barack Obama has proven record of support for LGBT equality since the start of his political career in Illinois.
If Obama hasn't compromised his views, what's the uproar about? Why shouldn't he use this guy to bring in voters who might not normally be inclined to vote for him? If McClurkin can help spread Obama's message of inclusiveness does it matter what his personal views are? Isn't McClurkin, and not Obama, who's compromising his position and helping to propel a pro-gay politician towards the White House?
Now to the South Carolina event. The tour itself is a great idea, and I don't agree with those who suggest the candidate should cancel the entire event[...]
However, I think the Obama campaign made a big mistake in inviting Donnie McClurkin to the gospel tour. I don't think the campaign staff had any clue to the controversy that would be created by inviting McClurkin, and I think if they had known they would have invited someone else. I also doubt that Obama himself knew anything about the controversy around McClurkin. Having worked on 6 campaigns over the years, I know that many of these scheduling decisions are made without the direct involvement of the candidate.
4. Over at the Huffington Post, Paul Jenkins had this much to say:
His association with a fool like McClurkin notwithstanding, Obama easily remains the most convincing on the issue of gay rights. He is by far the most comfortably eloquent on the subject, and he is right when he says that he is the only candidate who has brought the fight to some of its toughest frontiers. Clinton, Ms. DOMA, is fine in front of a Human Rights Campaign audience, but, as with everything else, overly cautious elsewhere. As for Edwards, his stated "struggle" on the issue of gay marriage is not exactly inspiring, especially coming from Mr. Slick on every other topic.
In the flurry of arguments about McClurkin, I wanted to try to offer some perspective:
On World AIDS Day, December 1st, 2006, Barack Obama traveled deep into Orange County, California, to visit a conference at Saddleback Church being led by Rick Warren.
Rick Warren, although outspoken on issues of abortion, happens to think that AIDS has been devastating both here at home and around the world and that we have a moral obligation to act.
There are religious leaders who show no tolerance on gay marriage, but who happen to feel that the Earth is God's creation and are more open to conservation measures than some of their leaders might suggest. There are those who, when it comes to homosexuality, believe that one should 'Love the sinner, hate the sin' --- but are as interested as anyone in providing health care to children, preventing genocide in Darfur, and stopping the exploitation of the Third World through sexual trafficking. And contrary to their Republican leaders, a lot can perhaps be moved by the argument that we are our brother's keeper and we have allowed poverty to persist at home for far too long.
