Klingenschmitt: Can’t Quote the Bible in Church Anymore »« Solomon: Atheist Chaplain Would Tell Soldiers to Kill Themselves

LaBarbera: MLK Would Roll Over in Grave Over Gay Rights

To the long list of white bigots who have invoked the name of Martin Luther King to justify their desire to continue discriminating against gay people, add Peter LaBarbera. He says MLK would be rolling over in his grave over the idea of equality for gay people.

Now let’s see what Coretta Scott King, who actually, ya know, knew MLK and was married to him, had to say about her husband’s views on the subject:

For too long, our nation has tolerated the insidious form of discrimination against this group of Americans, who have worked as hard as any other group, paid their taxes like everyone else, and yet have been denied equal protection under the law…I believe that freedom and justice cannot be parceled out in pieces to suit political convenience. My husband, Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” On another occasion he said, “I have worked too long and hard against segregated public accommodations to end up segregating my moral concern. Justice is indivisible.” Like Martin, I don’t believe you can stand for freedom for one group of people and deny it to others…

Gays and lesbians stood up for civil rights in Montgomery, Selma, in Albany, Ga. and St. Augustine, Fla., and many other campaigns of the Civil Rights Movement. Many of these courageous men and women were fighting for my freedom at a time when they could find few voices for their own, and I salute their contributions.

Gee, which one is more believable?

Comments

  1. schism says

    Gee, which one is more believable?

    The one saying what the most people want to hear (so, probably not King).

  2. matty1 says

    I’m more concerned that the bulk of the clip is an attack on children for identifying as transgender. Do they really believe people do so just so they can get into opposite gender bathrooms and sneak a peek?

  3. says

    Oh come on, Ed! That isn’t the real Coretta Scott King. The real Coretta Scott King disappeared under mysterious circumstances. That’s Betty Shabazz, who faked her own death to assume the identity of Mrs. King.

  4. Childermass says

    Given that Mrs. King failed to actually cite her husband actually supporting gay rights I would not put too much stock in her answer either.

    If MLK was still alive today, it is very probable that he would be a supporter of gay rights. It fits nicely with the principles he stood for. But that it fits with his principles does not mean he actually supported it when he was alive.

    But I really have seen no evidence whatsoever that he was such a supporter when he was still alive. Indeed if he had even remotely said anything supporting rights for homosexuals, the bigots would have gladly and repeatedly reminded us of this fact. We would hear this about MLK every time he got mentioned. And of course, if a clear statement from MLK would turn up now, our side would find it very useful in the debate. Given this, if King ever went on the record on this issue, it is shocking that we don’t know about it.

  5. Pierce R. Butler says

    Chlldermass @ # 5: I really have seen no evidence whatsoever that he was such a supporter when he was still alive.

    Please look up “Bayard Rustin”.

    Thank you.

  6. Amphiox says

    Even if LaBarbera was right about MLK, what would it matter? What relevance do the views of a person from a different historical period have on this issue, at all?

  7. dan4 says

    @3: “Do they really believe do so just so they can get into opposite gender bathrooms and sneak a peek?”

    Yes. Yes, they do.

  8. Childermass says

    Pierce R. Butler @ 6:

    Chlldermass @ # 5: I really have seen no evidence whatsoever that he was such a supporter when he was still alive.

    Please look up “Bayard Rustin”.

    Associating with a known homosexual is not exactly very good evidence for being in support of gay rights as some opponents of gay rights do associate with people they know to be gay.

    Of course as several have pointed out, even if King was against gay rights (which there is no evidence for that either), it would not change the rightness of the cause of freedom one little bit.

  9. Gvlgeologist, FCD says

    Even were it true that MLK was homophobic, that means nothing with respect to his struggle for the human and civil rights of African Americans. We already know he was a flawed human being due to reports that he had extramarital affairs. IT DOES NOT MATTER. A person can be right, even heroically right, about some things and completely wrong about others.

    We see the same thing from (especially) religious conservatives in criticism of Darwin with respect to racism and in the comments about Obama that use terms like “Dear Leader” and “Messiah”. These people don’t understand that we can broadly support someone while recognizing that they may be wrong in others.

    I think what we are seeing is the effects of tribalism – the Repubs, TPers, and religious conservatives feel that they must completely support someone and that they can do no wrong. If someone they support finally says something they disagree with, they’re now the enemy (see “RINO”). I think this is one of the reasons that non-religious science like global climate change is denied by conservatives and even churches – because it is supported by liberals, and thus must be wrong, because liberals are wrong about EVERYTHING.

  10. Who Knows? says

    Associating with a known homosexual…

    Don’t you mean, associating with a practicing homosexual?

  11. marcus says

    “We already know he was a flawed human being due to reports that he had extramarital affairs.</strike.

Leave a Reply