Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Josh DuBois evidently was the one who suggest both McClurkin and Warren

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-09 06:13 PM
Original message
Josh DuBois evidently was the one who suggest both McClurkin and Warren
and now he is in charge of faith based initiatives.

http://www.queerty.com/tag/josh-dubois /

What it seems like to me is this: Obamas religous outreach is not witchhunting or targeting gays in any way. But it also is not looking at us as important religious partners. Newsweek columnist Sally Quinn says that DuBois was the person who first floated Rick Warrens name as a possible inaugural speaker; DuBois, who was in charge of faith-based outreach for the Obama campaign, also put together the program that featured Donnie McClurkin, an ex-gay gospel singer who has said that homosexuality is a curse.

I have a big problem with the existance of the office in the first place but this makes it worse. I would be appalled if a Republican appointed him and am not happy Obama did. Here is a link to his faith's beliefs.

http://www.upcag.net/beliefs.html

Of Marriage and Family
We believe in the sanctity of marriage and the sanctity of life. We believe that marriage is a sacrament only to be entered into between a man and a woman. We believe human life to be precious, beginning at conception. (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:4-6; Jeremiah 1:5).

Are we allowed to get mad yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-09 06:19 PM
Response to Original message
1. Not good.
:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LostinVA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-09 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
2. That was posted in my GLBT thread yesterday -- charming, isn't it?
Now, now DSC -- why so thin-skinned and upset? It's nice and warm under the bus by the exhaust.

IT'S ONLY A FOUR TO EIGHT YEAR APPOINTMENT!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-09 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. hadn't seen the thread
glad it has been posted there too. Faith based is personal for me in that I am sober today only due to a rehab center. Would a faith based one had accepted me as I was?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LostinVA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-09 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. That would have accepted you into the program, but only if you would "change"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-09 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. and I might well have promised to I was that desperate
luckily I was insured and went to a decent rehab.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LostinVA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-09 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. This issue is very, very personal to me (Ex Gay)
Haruka's parents sent her to an Ex Gay psychiatrist when she was a teenager. If not for the support of a teacher and a friend's mother, she almost absolutely would have killed herself, the experience was so horrible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-09 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. wow
I investigated going when I was in college but my parent's insurance wouldn't pay, so I couldn't go. I am glad for Haruka's sake she had adults willing to fight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-09 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
8. This is NOT a good thing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-09 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
9. My assesment is Obama wants status quo
He'll do things to advance the rights of Gay Americans and won't set them back like a Republican but he's not looking to move things quickly.

The good news for the Gay Community either was JFK or LBJ on civil rights in the 60s when they took office.

I stand with you, the fight won't be easy but we are going to have to fight with a mediocre ally on this issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
starroute Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-09 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
10. Are those three Bible verses *all* they're hinging this stuff on?
I just checked, and Jeremiah 1:4-5 is "The word of the Lord came to me: 'Before I formed you in the womb I knew you for my own; before you were born I consecrated you, I appointed you a prophet to the nations."

That's it? The mythological notion that an unborn child might already have a preordained destiny is the basis on which they rant against abortion? Because their God might be so deluded and hapless as to appoint some little ball of cells a prophet-in-the-making without taking into account that the mother of said ball might abort it, or spontaneously miscarry, or catch German measles and give birth to a deaf and blind child without the capacity for serving as a prophet? That's some pretty weird theology right there.

The other two verses are equally bizarre. The one from Genesis immediately follows the verse about Eve being created from Adam's rib and states, "That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife and the two become one flesh." Is this *really* why they're against gay marriage? Because they literally believe in this just-so story which some Paleolithic tale-spinner invented to explain why (in certain cultures but by no means all) men leave their parents' home when they marry? Please, tell me they're not that crazy.

And add to that the third verse, from Matthew, in which that same "one flesh" line is used by Jesus to argue against the possibility of divorce -- and then to suggest that this situation is so intolerable that any men who are capable of it are far better off renouncing marriage altogether "for the sake of the kingdom of Heaven."

Well, I can understand the Catholic church using that as a reason to oppose divorce and maybe even to insist on clerical celibacy -- but to oppose gay marriage? I mean, if anything it seems to be saying that marriage is an inferior arrangement for those who can't handle chastity. So how can you also use it to argue that marriage is such a pure and sacred institution that it would be defiled by letting gays take part in it?

This stuff makes my head hurt. Is this really and truly *all* they're going on? Or is there some crucial missing piece I'm simply not getting?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-09 08:44 PM
Response to Original message
11. Where is the proof that he suggested them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 06:10 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. he is on the record as having suggested Warren
as to McClurkin I will try to find it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 08:47 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. delete. I promised myself I wouldn't bother
Edited on Sun Feb-01-09 08:51 AM by KittyWampus
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. I don't know what your post was
but he is in fact on record as to suggesting Warren. He gave an interview to that affect so I sure hope it wasn't an accusation that I was lying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-31-09 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
12. The Founding Fathers would Oppose Religious Outreach

Thomas Jefferson

"I have examined all the known superstitions of the world and I do not find
in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They
are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men,
women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been
burnt, tortured, fined, and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this
coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to
support roguery and error all over the earth."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 12:16 AM
Response to Original message
13. Since faith-based initiatives are flatly unconstitutional everyone involved can go fuck themselves
Zero tolerance of warrant-less searches, torture and theocratic gibberish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chulanowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 01:15 AM
Response to Original message
14. Well, here's something I hope for....
Let's hope that "faith based initiatives" has to pray for its funding, 'cause I don't want MY dollars going towards that shit. if I wanted to donate to a church, I would do so (and I HAVE done so) and it would be a church who's congregation I was comfortable with and who's theology didn't make me want to take a tack hammer to someone's teeth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 08:12 AM
Response to Original message
16. DuBois is not just a tounge speaking bigot
he is also a 26 year old young man being given sway over billions of taxpayer dollars. He's got to be kept under close scrutiny, for his spending and his tendency to hate minorities according to his delusional readings of ancient books. He is not just a man who holds his prejudices close to his heart, he is also a scandal waiting to happen. Let us all remember that DuBois has painted himself as superior to others, and has taken the role of judge, tossing the stones that the Christ himself refused to throw. Any slight error from such a man can not be tolerated, and a hubristic man like DuBois will committ crimes and errors and never even notice, for he thinks he is above all law, above even the role of the son of man.
A contemptable anti-science, anti-woman, anti-gay cultist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. delete. I promised myself I wouldn't bother
Edited on Sun Feb-01-09 08:51 AM by KittyWampus
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tbyg52 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #16
21. Ya get religion into government, yer gonna get some people like this.
End of story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. Yep. Because I leave the Pentacostals alone
if they stay out of politics with their blather and hate. I left those churches years and years ago, I know them well, and will debate the merits of their theology or politics anytime, with anyone. Bring me DuBois.
I consider Dubois a blasphmeous apostate, by the way. My objections to him in this venue are political, but if we were meeting as men, I'd have other issues to discuss with him, with his own scripture as the basis of the conversation.
I was raised to know the difference between men who use the divine as a tool for their own agendas and people who allow themselves to be used by the divine for the good of others. Any contempt you hear from me about religionists is righteous, not generalized, and based not on my standards, but on the standards they pretend they have. I will not be calling wolves by the name of angels, not for anyone, and certainly not to please the wolves.
I stand where I stand with great thought and contemplation. Hope all who defend hate in the name of a God who IS love will consider doing the same.
Peace to you too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 10:45 AM
Response to Original message
20. Whoa, anti-equality and anti-abortion?
Like Maven said up in #1, not good. I want "faith-based" out of my government. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
22. HE'S JUST GOING TO SING ONE SONG!1!!!!11
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
23. Faith-based programs aren't new for Democrats; both Clintons used and advocated for them.
Edited on Sun Feb-01-09 12:36 PM by AtomicKitten
Bill Clinton institutionalized faith-based programs:
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/historyprofiles/tp/cli...

Sen. Clinton Urges Use of Faith-Based Initiatives:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles... /

In an effort to try to understand the continued brouhaha over Warren and McClurkin, I am beginning to wonder if heads exploded commensurately over DOMA and DATV. You know, actual policy that actually affected lives as opposed to people getting their knickers in a twist over hurt feelings over Obama's policy of inclusion. Or has a convenient and thorough rationalization dealt with that unpleasant comparative analysis satisfactorily in some minds?

I used to think the LGBT community at DU was a foreign entity compared to my LGBT community here in SF, but it has become apparent there is a particular subset of Clintonites that use this as a cudgel as a means to an end around this place.

edited for spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. believe it or not we can concentrate on more than one thing at one time
but until you have either tried suicide yourself or had to pick up the pieces when someone else did then you can shut the fuck up about McClurkin not being important. Today there is some teen boy or some teen girl being told that they can change and are worthless until they do and that teen boy or teen girl will attempt suicide. The likes of McClurkin cause that directly. Somewhere else some teen boy or teen girl is being kidnapped or forced into a love in action style camp to change their orientation. The likes of McClurkin is directly responsible. Oh and one other thing. My first candidate was Richardson, my second was Edwards. Note that neither one is Clinton. Clinton was where I wound up due to not trusting Obama, a non trust which turned out to be sadly precient. Oh, and I complained about Clinton's faith based non sense too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
26. Nothing on earth will prevent you (personally) from getting mad
As you've demonstrated on these boards for the past 8 months or so. What you're actually mad about, of course, is another matter altogether.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. Your total lack of interest in, or care for, gay issues is notable and noted
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. Yeesh
Edited on Sun Feb-01-09 03:32 PM by alcibiades_mystery
If you only knew...

Your objections, as is clear to everybody, have very little to do with LGBT issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-01-09 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. sure
I am sick to death of Obama supporters here who wouldn't piss on a gay person if they were on fire blaming everyone but Obama for his misteps with the gay community. McClurkin was DuBois' fault then but now apparently it must be someoneelse's. Warren is somehow Clinton's fault. When Robinson's prayer was broadcast it was HBO's fault until Obama's team finally owned up to it. The simple fact is that from just about day one of Obama's campaign he has been totally tone deaf toward gays and gay issues. DuBois is just another in a long line of supposed misteps etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Sep 21st 2014, 05:28 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC