Fifty years ago, Martin Luther King stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and gave his “I Have A Dream” speech and spoke of the day when people would be judged by the content of their character. I am not sure that the recent controversy over singer Donnie McClurkin is what MLK had in mind. McClurkin is a deeply religious man who says that God delivered him from being gay. That reportedly led to his being told that he was no longer welcomed at the anniversary performance of the speech.
McClurkin was scheduled to perform at the concert Saturday evening but gay rights activities objected to his participation ahead of the event.
Yet, Doxie McCoy, a spokeswoman for Mayor Vincent Gray, insisted that it was McClurkin who removed himself from the lineup to avoid controversy over his participation. She issued a statement that “[t]he Arts and Humanities Commission and Donnie McClurkin’s management decided that it would be best for him to withdraw because the purpose of the event is to bring people together.”
McClurkin however contradicted that account and said that he did not agree to be excluded. He states that he was “asked not to attend” the concert. That is quite a difference in accounts. Where the Mayor’s office is claiming that he removed himself, he is saying that he was barred because of his religious beliefs.
I can understand the feelings of gay rights advocates, particularly given the clear analogies of their own current struggle with the fight of Martin Luther King. However, the greater symbol of division can be found in barring people who share their admiration for MLK but subscribe to opposing religious views. I am equally concerned over what McClurkin is clearly suggesting is a false account from the office of Mayor Gray on the matter. The burden is now on Gray’s office to produce proof that the singer did opt not to attend to avoid controversy.
What do you think?
Source: Washington Post
Please forgive my phonetic spelling.
Gene,
I’ve kind’ve always liked moderate Republicans like Rudolph Giuliani, Olympia Snowe, and Lincoln Chafee (although he’s no longer a Republican). Boy, they’re just great. Like ice skating at the town pond with your family on a bright optimistic winter day in the 1970s. That great.
My mom gave me a huge thick biography of Dwight Eisenhower at some point. But I never read it. We did visit their place in Gettysburg.
I hope this isn’t a conversation atmosphere killer, but maybe what I like most are pure-hearted people, although I’m definitely not one myself. I don’t care if you’re the most extreme kind of hippie or extreme kind of conservative Christian. If you’re motivated by kindness, I’m just gonna think you’re cool.
Vestal Virgin
As Ghandi “sort of” said.
“I like your Christ, but I don’t like your Coulters”
OS,
I was being more than a little snarky about Ann’s intelligence as well. However, the word “cunning” I think does apply.
Otteray,
Coultergeist isn’t as smart as she and some of her admirers think she is–and she isn’t terribly well informed–as those two videos that I posted of her show.
Elaine M wrote: “Coultergeist isn’t as smart as she and some of her admirers think she is–and she isn’t terribly well informed–as those two videos that I posted of her show.”
You put too much confidence in videos for which comments are turned off. In the first video, Coulter actually had some truth in what she said. Canada did get involved in enforcing the 1973 Paris Peace Accords. Prior to this, more than 30,000 Canadian troops fought there since 1954. Their casualties numbered about 110 and 7 MIA. There are at least two monuments in Canada for the fallen Canadian soldiers who fought in Vietnam. The government of Canada awarded medals to 1,550 of these troops for their service between August 7, 1954 and January 28, 1973. A second medal was also awarded to the 240 Canadian troops who participated in Operation Gallant in Vietnam from January 28, 1973 to July 31, 1973.
Diplomatically, Canada did take the official position of non-belligerence, so the interviewer is not completely wrong, but Ann Coulter was not wrong either. She had a rational basis in facts for thinking Canada sent troops to Vietnam. Contrary to your assertion, apparently Ann Coulter is well informed for an off-the-cuff comment in an interview.
VV,
True that, but there is a huge difference between what I call an “Eisenhower conservative” and the neoconservatives exemplified by talking heads like Coulter and Limbaugh and the neocon influenced “defectors” who often seek solace in the Libertarian Party. Just so, there is a difference between a classical liberal such as myself and the neoliberals as exemplified by Obama. Ironically, there isn’t much difference between the neocons and neolibs as both are extremist partisans and fascists to boot with the main distinction being how each chooses to use “the stick” in foreign policy. Both of them though really like the stick because both are funded by corporations and wealthy individuals who make lots of money off of war. In the partisan politics game most people are left out in the cold with no party truly representing their interests but instead representing the usually purely financial interests of their monied backers. It was an inevitable outcome of Buckley v. Valeo.
I like Eisenhower conservatives. My grandfather was one and there used to be a regular poster here that was one whom I liked and respected enormously. They are the honorable opposition. Even though I don’t always agree with them, I find much more common ground with them than the extremists. They are, however, becoming a rarity in the increasingly radicalized right.
Conservatives are a necessary part of any closed system. Sometimes they malfunction, however.
There goes the second posting swallowed by something or other.
“Where two faiths flourish side by side, renegades are looked upon with contempt, even by the party whose beliefs they have adopted.” — Charles Sanders Peirce
“Help. I’m a lesbian trapped in a man’s body!” — my dear departed friend Steve Crane
In my pagan opinion, organizers of the Martin Luther King, Jr. memorial event should practice the fairness doctrine and have Mr. McClurkin perform a rap duet with a homosexual atheist who will testify that homosexuality delivered him from bigoted Christianity. That should make everybody happy, right? I’ll even supply the lyrics for:
Gene,
I agree that Coulter is smart and cunning. Because she is, I seriously doubt she even believes the stuff she says. She is like a carney barker. She knows it is show biz and it’s a schtick for the audience.
The scary part is that people like David are awed by her presence and ‘brilliance,’ so to speak.
“I think [women] should be armed but should not vote…women have no capacity to understand how money is earned.” And yet she persists in meddling in politics and making money selling her hateful sputum to the Kool-Aid Brigade. I’m real impressed with Ann’s intelligence and subtle use of sarcasm, but her hypocrisy is what really makes her a hot lil’ snuggle bunny. She’s almost as witty and insightful as Rush Limbaugh.
@David:
It is particularly wry and ironic, when you remember all this “non-authoritarian” and “non-dogmatic” stuff is on a thread about an ex-gay person getting the heave-ho because:
“McClurkin was scheduled to perform at the concert Saturday evening but gay rights activities objected to his participation ahead of the event. ”
Tee Hee! Tee Hee!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Yeah. Because to be free of bigotry and unrestrained by authoritarianism, open to new ideas for progress and broad minded are all such clearly insane things. Michael Savage is about as good a resource as Ann Coulter. 🙄
Actually, there is a pretty good case to be made for conservatism being the result of a brain deformity in that conservatives have a larger and more active amygdala (the part of the brain that controls fear and threat perception) compared to liberals who tend to have a larger and more active anterior cingulate cortex (the part of the brain that allows for the processing of conflicting information). Hmmm. Paranoia and an over active threat response versus more flexible rational thought in any given situation sounds a lot like conservatives are at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to rational thought.
Since you mentioned it.
By the way, I’m still waiting for that specific harm and Elaine is still waiting for a number.
I had a pastor once tell me that I should study the Bible to make female gender identity and attraction to men go away. ^_^
Gene,
Maybe it was one of those “pray away the gay” therapists like Marcus Bachmann.
ABC News Confirms Bachmann Clinic Used “Pray Away The Gay’ Therapy
Grace Wyler
Jul. 11, 2011
http://www.businessinsider.com/abc-news-confirms-bachmann-clinic-used-pray-away-the-gay-therapy-2011-7
Excerpt;
An ABC News story tonight confirmed rumors that the Christian counseling clinic owned by Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann and her husband Marcus Bachmann offered therapy to help “convert” homosexuals to heterosexuals.
The “World News” report featured an interview with a former patient at the Bachmann & Associates clinic, Andrew Ramirez, who first visited the counseling center as a 17-year-old in 2004.
“[One counselor’s] path for my therapy would be to read the Bible, pray to God that I would no longer be gay,” Ramirez told ABC News. “And God would forgive me if I were straight.”
Ramirez story, first reported by The Nation, is backed up by an undercover video at the clinic, which shows a counselor telling a gay man that he can be “totally free” of his homosexual feelings through prayer and hard work.
Ann Coulter has figured out a way to sell books, get on TV, and get paid for making speeches to the converted. Be outrageous and they will come. She knows her audience. She looks as if she may have an eating disorder. Unless she has some kind of endocrine problem, no one is that skinny naturally. A stick figure would be very appropriate as an avatar for Coulter.
Ann Coulter???? She has never let the facts get in her way.
GeneH:
Actually, I did, and I recommend the experience. My stupid boyfriend had been trying to get me to couples therapy for a while, and after I dumped all his crap on the curb, then I had time, and the peace, to reflect on whether I was truly a “distant, f*cking b*tch” as he so often informed me, or somebody who was just pretty good at seeing through crap. It also occurred to me, that I would probably have a conflict of interest in the outcome, and perhaps it was better to seek out an uninterested opinion.
Sooo, I found out I was both an INTP, and an HSP, and had certain tendencies. Like seeing personal stuff as if I was at a distance appraising it. Plus, it explained why I was good at stuff like debate, and poetry and art stuff. And word plays. That alone was worth the money. You might find this interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INTP
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
I’m not sure you got your money’s worth.
No, actually it was a therapist I went to several years ago. It was really helpful to me! Because I thought I was psychic or something, and my parents had maybe stolen me from gypsies, instead of gypsies stealing me from somebody.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter