MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell Slams Anti-Gay Pastor Disinvited To Inauguration

laurence o'donnellThis [inauguration], as it was last time for the first time in history, the book will be held by a First Lady who is a descendent of slaves. But the holy book she will be holding does not contain one word of God condemning slavery. Not one word.

But that same book, which spends hundreds and hundreds of pages condemning all sorts of things—and couldn’t find one sentence to condemn slavery—does manage to find the space to repeatedly condemn gay people, as the now-banished Louie Giglio says it does. And as the First Lady is holding that book for the President, sitting somewhere near them will be a pastor who the Inauguration Committee will make sure is much more adept at hiding what that book actually says than Louie Giglio was.”

MSNBC’s Laurence O’Donnell, making an excellent point, on The Last Word.

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #politics #gayagenda #random stories and more


  • sfbeast

    not sure if the headline matches the quote. it sounds like he is actually supporting giglio and criticizing the committee for dropping him

  • Bjk

    He IS saying, we should have slavery and not have homosexuals. And queerty says, “making a good point”?

  • Stache1

    or lets try this….
    He says the Giglio was only quoting something that’s in the bible. Maybe the president shouldn’t be using a book so full of BS for his inauguration. It supports slavery in every way possible and condemns people to death for everything from kids lying to their parents to working on the sabboth. Yet no one even thinks of following that.


    Lawrence, you are real dude man. I am watching your show every night. Go for it my man.

  • smileyeagle1021

    Hmm, the Bible does not condemn slavery… really, it doesn’t? If that is the case, and I were a Christian pastor, I’d be keeping that my little secret. Seriously, who in their right mind is going to base their moral code off of a book that says slavery is OK?

  • mike777


    that’s a leap of logic to say that the bible says slavery is okay because it doesn’t spell it out.

    Also, if someone is a Christian, they wouldn’t get their moral code from the old testament, they’d defer to the New.

    Aaaaand…. It’s not a book of rules to follow or not follow and be judged by them. In fact, the whole point of Jesus is to negate that thinking.

  • Saint_Nunya

    @mike777: You’ve never read much of the old testament have you? Cuz it shows pretty clearly that Abraham’s god has got no problem with slavery… In fact, in multiple instances he tells the Israelites to take over neighboring territories and enslave the population…

  • Saint_Nunya

    Oh and Jesus didn’t do much for slavery, not like he ever told anyone to free their slaves. In fact he told slaves to be obedient to their masters because it was pleasing to his father.

  • 2eo




  • marc sfe

    @smileyeagle1021: The bible says you can own slaves from neighbouring countries. So, should it be mexican slaves or canadian slaves. And with that in mind, that means Canadians could only own american slaves though mexico would have the option of guatemala or belize to choose from as well.

  • Michael

    @sfbeast and @bjk…please leave the thinking to people who are capable of doing so. If you can’t read between the lines and understand context, you should probably keep your traps shut.

  • Tommy25

    I don’t understand his point. You can’t use the Bible to talk about things that happened long after it was written and to which weren’t considered at the time of its writing. Yes, they had slaves from neighboring countries at that time, but that is totally different from the wholesale taking of Africans across the ocean to the New World. Same with the part about homosexuality. It’s open to interpretation. When it was written, they were talking about prostitutes. They weren’t considering open loving relationships of people of the same gender that are just like a heterosexual marriage. So how could the Bible condemn something that wasn’t really existing at that time.
    And where does he get the Bible is repeatedly condemning gay people? There are only a few passages that could even be interpreted that way. Actually, the Bible spends more time on dietary restrictions than gay people. President Obama doesn’t keep kosher either.
    A lot of people respect the Bible as a historical document and a spiritual work, doesn’t mean they take everything in there literally or follow everything it says. That is how President Obama is using it at his swearing in which is perfectly fine.

  • gaym50ish

    It’s all moot now, anyway. That homophobic pastor has withdrawn from participating in the inauguration. Maybe he learned a lesson from all this, or maybe not, but he got a good dose of vilification from the media. He will probably go back to his congregation and preach about how Christians are “persecuted” by gays and that “the homosexual lobby” is causing them to lose their religious freedom.

  • Stache1

    The bible clearly supports slavery. It makes no difference where the slaves come from. The second point was that all Giglio was doing was saying something thats already in the bible. You know. Man shall not lay with man or else be killed and all. Of coarse like most of them they cherry pick that one out while completely ignoring the many other inconvenient commands. His last point is that Obama is using a book he himself doesn’t fully believe as most don’t. Why swear an oath to that?

  • AJMA

    I thought the Bible was up for interpretation… Because last time I checked the Bible doesn’t condemn homosexuality, unless the reader, believes the intent of the original author…?


  • Bjk

    @Michael: if you can’t read between the lines and understand context, you should probably keep your trap shut and avoid personal [email protected]Michael:

Comments are closed.