When did Democrats change their platform on gay marriage? and Abortion?

by Patricia L. Dickson10/13/15

It appears that Hillary Clinton may not have the black vote in the bag. Breitbart is reporting that The Church of God in Christ, a historically black Christian denomination with over 12,000 churches in the United States, has turned down multiple speaking requests from Mrs. Clinton.  Church leaders have discussed whether to allow Mrs. Clinton to speak on three separate occasions.  According to a source within the church, Clinton representatives have even requested to have her speak at the church’s annual women’s conference.  When asked by Breitbart News for comment, a Clinton spokesman said that it was simply not true.  However, Boston pastor Eugene F. Rivers III confirmed in an interview with Breitbart that the conversation did take place, but that COGIC leadership ultimately decided against allowing her to speak.

One reason for the church’s decision cited by Pastor Rivers is that the black church has grown weary of Democrats and sense that they are being taken for granted.  Other reasons stem from Mrs. Clinton’s stance on same-sex marriage and abortion – particularly her recent comments that religious organizations should change their beliefs about abortion.  The question that I have for these church leaders is, when did the Democratic Party not support same-sex marriage and abortion?  Democrats have never concealed their support for these issues that the black churches are now claiming goes in opposition to their beliefs.  In addition, I was struck by Pastor Rivers calling out Mrs. Clinton on these issues, while he did not include President Obama for having the exact same stances.

He made it clear that the church is not interested in supporting a Republican in 2016 either:

“Republicans have no interest in social justice for the poor and Democrats don’t believe that the unborn have rights and refuse to respect our beliefs on our understanding on marriage,” Rivers explained.

Again, I ask: has the Democratic Party not always believed in the killing of unborn babies?  Has the Democratic Party not always disrespected the church’s views on marriage?  It is hypocritical for this pastor to cite these reasons for not supporting Democrats when he and those like him have been supporting Democrats for years under the same platform.  What is one to believe as the real reason the black church has decided not to support Mrs. Clinton?  Is it because she is not black enough?

PatriciaDicksonPatricia Dickson blogs at Patricia’s Corner.
About Author Author Archive Email

Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (509 views)

This entry was posted in Blog Post. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to When did Democrats change their platform on gay marriage? and Abortion?

  1. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    “Republicans have no interest in social justice for the poor and Democrats don’t believe that the unborn have rights and refuse to respect our beliefs on our understanding on marriage,” Rivers explained.

    Another fool who does not appear to understand what is fundamental and what is secondary. But one cannot help but suspect that it comes down to which candidate is most willing to butter “Pastor” Rivers’ bread.

  2. Timothy Lane says:

    The use of “social justice for the poor” is a dead giveaway that the pastor is another socialist and as ignorant of economics as the Peron Pope. At least he does retain a moral code, unlike most liberals today.

  3. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    I can certainly understand this pastor’s disdain for Republicans. I don’t like them either. Most are frauds. Many will give lip service to being “pro life” but it is just for show. Few would be pro-abolition of abortion. Few have the Giulianis to stand up the howls of protests from that great fascistic/demagougic bloc: “women’s health.”

    Women have become such pampered political princesses in this regard. As Rush noted the other day, the reason the NFL has wussified itself by wearing pink is to attack women viewers, for there are many other cancers that are more widespread and virulent than those which are specific to women.

    So, in defense of the good pastor, it’s difficult to look to the Republican Party for substance when so many of them have proven to be liars. But, of course, it’s not this inside-baseball aspect of the GOP that likely has formed the pastor’s views. He’s likely highly partisan (bigoted may not be too strong of a word) when it comes to the GOP and believes all the stereotypes he has learned. This is odd behavior from a black man who ought to know the danger of caving to rude stereotypes.

    But this is a big problem in the black community who have been used and abused (and abused themselves, for sure) by sublimating moral issues to allegiance to a particular political party. You get what you pay for. You dance with the devil, you can expect to get burned, no matter what prejudicial things many black people have been taught about the GOP.

    So I think I understand the racial, cultural, religious, and moral quagmire the good pastor finds himself in. There are liars to the Left of him and liars (or at least cowards) to the right. Most of his congregants believe twisted and inflated things about both major political parties and are as likely as uninformed as your typically white person who can’t be bothered with reality either.

    Given that he is a pastor, perhaps he should not spend so much time on a “women’s conference” and spend more time on a “Christ conference,” for if you’re going to ignore your religion and spend so much time on the political (why not a men’s conference or some other conference?) do you then really expect to escape the world you have made that parses everything via political interest groups?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *