Totally Gay
 

"And as far as just a massage, hey, if that's what he wants to call it, you know, that's up to him."

There are hundreds of gay men and women who, like Mr. Haggard, are so deep in the closet that they'll never come out. And I wonder, as did Mike Jones (he's the gay/escort/massage dude who squealed), if honesty will ever replace their denial:

"When I heard his wife say she was going to stand by her man, it just made me think, would she stand by her gay man?"

Mr. Jones asked a good question there, because you just know that Haggard will just spin his homosexuality as some kind of "sickness" that he has to "get over." Evangelicals HAVE to do that because if they admit that people are born that way, it removes an important underpinning of their entire philosophy.

Anyhow, I like the fact that Jones flat out said "Of course it was politically motivated" when asked why he revealed Haggard's hypocrisy. Colorado has another one of those anti-gay marriage initiatives on Tuesday's ballot. It's unfortunate that the whole Haggard debacle will probably motivate the anti-gay crowd. A caller to a talk show on which Jones was a guest called him "a whore," which to some extent is true, but that is just another way to blame the prostitute for the proclivaties of the John, or in this case, those of the Ted.

Here are the Haggard's "sorry" letters:

November 5, 2006
My Dear New Life Church Family, I am so sorry. I am sorry for the disappointment, the betrayal, and the hurt. I am sorry for the horrible example I have set for you.

I have an overwhelming, all-consuming sadness in my heart for the pain that you and I and my family have experienced over the past few days. I am so sorry for the circumstances that have caused shame and embarrassment to all of you. I asked that this note be read to you this morning so I could clarify my heart's condition to you.

The last four days have been so difficult for me, my family and all of you, and I
have further confused the situation with some of the things I've said during interviews with reporters who would catch me coming or going from my home. But I alone am responsible for the confusion caused by my inconsistent statements.

The fact is, I am guilty of sexual immorality, and I take responsibility for the entire problem. I am a deceiver and a liar. There is a part of my life that is so repulsive and dark that I?ve been warring against it all of my adult life. For extended periods of time, I would enjoy victory and rejoice in freedom. Then, from time to time, the dirt that I thought was gone would resurface, and I would find myself thinking thoughts and experiencing desires that were contrary to everything I believe and teach.

Through the years, I?ve sought assistance in a variety of ways, with none of them proving to be effective in me. Then, because of pride, I began deceiving those I love the most because I didn?t want to hurt or disappoint them.

The public person I was wasn?t a lie; it was just incomplete. When I stopped
communicating about my problems, the darkness increased and finally dominated me. As a result, I did things that were contrary to everything I believe.

The accusations that have been leveled against me are not all true, but enough of them are true that I have been appropriately and lovingly removed from ministry. Our church's overseers have required me to submit to the oversight of Dr. James Dobson, Pastor Jack Hayford, and Pastor Tommy Barnett. Those men will perform a thorough analysis of my mental, spiritual, emotional, and physical life. They will guide me through a program with the goal of healing and restoration for my life, my marriage, and my family.

I created this entire situation. The things that I did opened the door for additional allegations. But I am responsible; I alone need to be disciplined and corrected. An example must be set.

It is important that you know how much I love and appreciate my wife, Gayle. What I didshould never reflect in a negative way on her relationship with me. She has been and continues to be incredible. The problem was not with her, my children, or any of you. It was created 100% by me.

I have been permanently removed from the office of Senior Pastor of New Life Church. Until a new senior pastor is chosen, our Associate Senior Pastor, Ross Parsley, will assume all of the responsibilities of the office. On the day he accepted this new role, he and his wife, Aimee, had a new baby boy. A new life in the midst of this circumstance?I consider that confluence of events to be prophetic. Please commit to join with Pastor Ross and the others in church leadership to make their service to you easy and without burden. They are fine leaders. You are blessed.

I appreciate your loving and forgiving nature, and I humbly ask you to do a few things:

1. Please stay faithful to God through service and giving.

2. Please forgive me. I am so embarrassed and ashamed. I caused this and I have no
excuse. I am a sinner. I have fallen. I desperately need to be forgiven and healed.

3. Please forgive my accuser. He is revealing the deception and sensuality that was in my life. Those sins, and others, need to be dealt with harshly. So, forgive him and, actually, thank God for him. I am trusting that his actions will make me, my wife and family, and ultimately all of you, stronger. He didn?t violate you; I did.

4. Please stay faithful to each other. Perform your functions well. Encourage each other and rejoice in God?s faithfulness. Our church body is a beautiful body, and like every family, our strength is tested and proven in the midst of adversity. Because of the negative publicity I?ve created with my foolishness, we can now demonstrate to the world how our sick and wounded can be healed, and how even disappointed and betrayed church bodies can prosper and rejoice.

Gayle and I need to be gone for a while. We will never return to a leadership role at New Life Church. In our hearts, we will always be members of this body. We love you as our family. I know this situation will put you to the test. I?m sorry I?ve created the test, but please rise to this challenge and demonstrate the incredible grace that is available to all of us.

Ted Haggard


November 5, 2006
Dear Women of New Life Church,
I am so sorry for the circumstances that have led me to write this letter to you today. I know your hearts are broken; mine is as well. Yet my hope rests steadfastly in the Lord who is forever faithful.

What I want you to know is that I love my husband, Ted Haggard, with all my heart. I am committed to him until death ?do us part.? We started this journey together and with the grace of God, we will finish together.

If I were standing before you today, I would not change one iota of what I have been teaching the women of our church. For those of you who have been concerned that my marriage was so perfect I could not possibly relate to the women who are facing great difficulties, know that this will never again be the case. My test has begun; watch me. I will try to prove myself faithful.

I love you all so much, especially you young women?you were my delight.
To all the church family of new Life Church?Ted and I are so proud of you. You are all we hoped you would be. In our minds, there is no greater church.

As you try to make sense of these past few days, know that Ted believes with all his heart and soul everything he has ever taught you, those things you are putting into practice. He is now the visible and public evidence that every man (woman and child) needs a Savior.

We are grateful for your prayers for our family. I hold you forever in my heart,

Gayle Haggard

NOT THAT THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT...[/seinfeld]

What's so GAY about it?

Do you suppose he's been able to scrap together enough to live on, until he can get a job at walmart of McD's? :rolleyes:

I'm glad he's not blaming anyone/thing for the situation but himself and is asking his congregation to do the same. That alone earns my respect. Normally its all excuses and "such and such made me do this," in his statement he is admitting that it is fully his own sin.

It's really his place to say whether he's ashamed of it or not as well, if he lives his life by a set of principles that forbid it then it's his choice. If he's willing to stand by those principles even when faced by something so personal it is a testament to his character. He's not blaming others, he believes this is his personal battle which he must fight and will be rewarded for fighting, I'm not going to disrespect him for that.

Pastor Dismissed for ‘Sexually Immoral Conduct’
By NEELA BANERJEE and LAURIE GOODSTEIN
Published: November 5, 2006
WASHINGTON, Nov. 4 — In the wake of accusations by a former male escort that the Rev. Ted Haggard had a three-year sexual relationship with him, an independent oversight board at Mr. Haggard’s New Life Church on Saturday found that he had “committed sexually immoral conduct” and dismissed him as senior pastor.

Over the last few days, Mr. Haggard’s career as the founder of the 14,000-member New Life megachurch in Colorado Springs and as leader of the National Association of Evangelicals has crumbled under the weight of the accusations and his explanations. He initially denied knowing the former escort, Michael Jones, 49, of Denver. By Friday, Mr. Haggard revised his account and said he had gotten a massage from Mr. Jones and bought methamphetamine from him. Mr. Jones has denied selling drugs. Mr. Haggard said he never used the drugs. He has publicly denied any sexual relationship.

Nonetheless, he resigned on Thursday as president of the evangelical association and stepped down temporarily as the senior pastor of New Life until its Overseer Board, an independent panel made up of four pastors from other churches, completed an investigation.

In a one-page statement issued Saturday afternoon, the board said, “Our investigation and Pastor Haggard’s public statements have proven without a doubt that he has committed sexually immoral conduct.”

The statement, which was made available by the church’s lawyer, L. Martin Nussbaum, did not elaborate on the nature of the immoral conduct, and it did not cite specific statements Mr. Haggard made. The statement also suggested that the board did not speak to Mr. Jones, but Mr. Nussbaum could not be reached for further clarification.

“In consultation with leading evangelicals and experts familiar with the type of behavior Pastor Haggard has demonstrated, we have decided that the most positive and productive direction for our church is his dismissal,” the statement said. “Pastor Haggard and his wife have been informed of this decision. They have agreed as well that he should be dismissed.”

The statement said that “a letter of explanation and apology” from Mr. Haggard would be read at New Life’s 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. Sunday services.

Mr. Jones has said that his decision to disclose his relationship with Mr. Haggard was politically motivated. He has said that he found it hypocritical that Mr. Haggard would publicly support a ballot initiative in Colorado that would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, while having gay liaisons.

Patton Dodd, a friend of Mr. Haggard’s who has edited seven of his books, said Mr. Haggard called him on Saturday and apologized. Mr. Dodd said that Mr. Haggard did not go into detail, but admitted that it did involve sexual transgressions.

“He’s coming clean with his family and friends,” Mr. Dodd said. Of the decision, he added, “I think it’s a good idea because this is the way for Ted and his family to get healing and restoration. He won’t have to worry about pastoring his church and can focus on being pastored himself.”

You're gay or you're not. It's not a disease, you can't cure it, it's in the genes. So Pastor Ted (and his wife) needs to live with it.

Still he's Christian, so that's all right, because All Non-Christians are Doomed!

With a loss of income, we can assume Pastor Haggard will acknowledge a new life style.

While I agree it is his place as to how he feels about this, I cannot have any respect for someone who has spent his life condemning gays, saying it's a choice, when he, above anyone else, should now know it has nothing to do with choice. Unless you count his "choice" to deny his true self.

I think that, when he writes the book confessing and repenting, and inspiring his flock about the glories of divine forgiveness, he'll probably do alright financially.

Ha! I hadn't realized there wasn't already evidence pointing to the meth... "You out me and ruin my life, I'll make sure you get brought up on drug charges, bitch."

Nah. With his charisma, he'll open up across the street from his old church, under the name "The Christian Gay Brotherhood".:right:

lol, oops.

Disease, no, but don't be fooled into confusing a persons genetics with the persons behavior. Genetics is far more complicated, those who say "it's a genetic factor, so it's just who they are" are really distorting what a genetic factor is. We've already done bahavioral analysis based on genetic markers in my cellular engineering course, and we're definately holding this to a different standard. At best your genetics are a structure upon which behaviors are built according to environmental influences, it is absolutly not a rigid frame that determines what you are from conception onwards. If it wasn't such a political issue I'm sure that we'd be doing research on what genes are involved in homosexuality, the results could be interesting in a number of other areas as well. We're actually very good at manipulating the expression of genes in living organisms, turning off or turning on different factors is simple. Wouldn't it be interesting to really know the answer to all this? Would people accept that answer no matter what it turned out to be?

I just want to live in a world where people can be gay if they want to, and no one really cares, as long as they aren't being forced to get it on with them.

On the other hand, when someone builds their entire life and image on morality that doesn't include being gay, then turns out to have those proclivities, they deserve to get reamed just for being stupid, judgemental and big stinking lying hypocrites.

Just like if you ever find yourself going against your moral code you should have the same done to you for having such a stupid sense of morals?:eyebrow:

Yup. Unlike the disgraced preacher, my path requires me to take personal resposibility for my actions. I have no saviour to take away my stupidity. If I screw up, I get reamed. I pay the price, both in this world and the next. Pretty simple philosophy, and I think it makes me a good deal more careful.

It also helps that I don't go around professing to others how they should live their lives. It would be one thing if this guy had quietly been against homosexuality and drugs, then fell on his face. It is quite another to pound on a pulpit, all Righteous and imbued with Truth, then fall on his face.

He is taking personal responsibility for his actions, he has stepped down and hasn't changed from what he was saying before.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you insinuate that the fault lies with them having a bad set of morals, not with struggling with something that they don't believe they should do. He believes that homosexual sex is a choice he made and that it was a sin, there's a separation of the person and the act in there. He's acting the same way as he would if he started doing meth or something else forbidden, then was forced to atone for his actions.
Even churchs that condem homosexuality almost always separate the sex itself from the person. It's not the urges that they find evil, it's going out and having a gay partner. I'm sure that if he had never given in to it and announced to his congregation that he himself is subject to these urges but was strong in the face of temptation he would have recieved an ovation.
You are projecting your belief that if a person has homosexual urges they must satisfy those urges, these people don't think that way.

That's a mischaracterization of Christianity. Consequences don't disappear, if anything they are more pronounced. The preacher is getting doubly slammed because he is doubly hypocritical. Beyond any personal price he pays for his lies, he has to answer for the fact that he has turned more people against God because they take his example as representative of the faith. God will judge him not just for what he did, but for the fact that he damaged the faith of others.

Matt. 18:7 -- Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to sin! Such things must come, but woe to the man through whom they come!

Preacher is in deep trouble, and aside from the status of his salvation, he will pay in a big way, if Jesus was telling the truth.

No...I think that the guy deserves what happened to him because he went around telling other people that gay sex and drugs were bad, but he was doing it anyway. If he hadn't made a (probably lucrative) career out of peddling morality, then got caught with his pants down and a dollar billed rolled up and up his nose, then he'd just be another sad sack loser.

I'm happy he's taking personal responsibility. Its the least he can do after at first obfuscating the truth. This is the first step on the road to becoming a decent, upright human being.

My problem is ultimately this: Don't tell me that you hold Truth, then violate it. I'll be unsympathetic every time. Tell me you *believe* something, walk your talk, and I'll admire you...as long as you don't tell me it *is* The Truth, and that you alone have It. Don't claim The Truth, and then act as though it is your divine duty to make sure everyone else adheres to it, most especially while you, yourself, are out doing the very things against which you rail.

Of course, I am not referencing *you* specifically when I say "you"...

But still...he will be forgiven, as long as he accepts Jesus as his personal savior, so this life may suck, but Eternity will be cool.

If he claimed he never violated the rules that would mean something different altogether:rolleyes:

He claimed, from a pulpit, that it was wrong to violate the rules, then did it. He told others how to live, but was unable to live that way.

That's the problem in dealing with absolutes. No wiggle room. No room for doubt...or real enlightenment...or real learning. Just failure and retribution.

No thanks.

That is the problem with "leaders" in faith...

We have the same problems with our secular laws as well, even cops break the law from time to time. Doesn't mean we should scrap the system though

Faith and legal system are two, completely, different things.

Rob Quote, weakness of the Church

I think the biggest weakness/strength of the church is that it prays on the lazy... then creates/encourages lazy people.
Faith takes work, VERY HARD, constant, diligent work... "but it you just listen to me I can cut through all of that and give you the inside line, just help us pay for all this stuff, most of it (less than 10% on average in reality) is going to help others!" is religion's line & it is total BS. (Instead of line I wanted to say schpeal but I don't know how to spell it)

If it were, "we are a group of like-minded/faith(ed) people who want to help each other on our path" that would be fine... "we will only take/use as much as it takes to maintain our infrastructure and no more, there will be no associates that work for the institute, as it will be for all our benefit, we will all volunteer...." you get the idea. (The Mormon Church tries to say that they do this, it is a lie, they are, I think, the fourth richest company in the US, if churches were listed in those rankings. With associates intentionally placed in high ranking political positions, both locally and nationally. As opposite from that ideal as you can get).
Also... if that were true, there would be no dogma, especially stuff like some guy in Europe decides to make-up the rapture and everyone buys it. All the descendants of Calvinism with their Dooms Day shit (Though Watchtower is a blast to read) that never comes to pass and takes the focus off of the word.
It is all smoke and mirrors to INTENTIONALLY take the focus off of your personal relationship with your Savior and God so you are dependent/addicted to the fear/salvation cycle that they get you hooked-on.
The pay off is as much as you will shell out to keep from going to hell. I have never met a preacher in a poor neighborhood that did not live twice as well as his flock, & I have known a lot of them and am related to two.

These snake-oil salesmen prey on the fact that it IS scary that your fate is in your hands alone, that you don't have any talismans or magic yellow brick roads laid-out in front of you..."Don't go astray or you will go to hellllllll!"
It is very easy to fall for that comfort, "perhaps they do know what God wants from me and all I have to do is accept their interpretation of the Bible (even though they do not have a thorough understanding of the historical time period in which it is referring to and they always interpret what it says in today's social framework), that way I don't have to feel like I alone in this."
But, they are not if they truly have faith, God is always with them and their heart really, TRULY, knows what is right, what path to take... that is what meditation and prayer are for. If you believe you know that you have a part of God in you... that will show you the way if you learn how to listen to it, really listen with the Word of Jesus as a guide.
Having a supportive community, there to help you as fellow faithful and one that preys on the insecurity of that relationship in a position of authority and dogma, teaching "Us-&-Them", the farthest thing from anything Christ ever stated, are two different things.... I have yet to find the first.
You just can’t put an individual in a position of power like that, especially one that makes people so vulnerable.
Pride is our one great weakness, that pathway to sin that is greased with our most basic animal urges. All of the Seven Deadlies (though not Biblical) are all sins of Pride, in one form or another.
To place an individual where their ego is between the faithful and God is just so much temptation that one cannot expect that most will succumb to some form of pride…
The solution, there is no one individual that is the interpreter, the authority, the final word on the Word but what you know in your heart to be true and right based on the teachings of Christ (not the OT). If a group forms, it is just that…. A GROUP, all equal in discussion and discourse for the purpose of spiritual kinship and learning, never authority, profit, regulation; or, especially, dogma.

1 Peter 2:1-3
1But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. 3In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.

Unfortunately, Government does the same thing. Yet another reason why Religion and Government should be kept out of the same bed, no matter how much they try to crawl in with each other.

Because to God, any sin at all causes separation from his perfect will. He makes no distinction between lying to someone and cutting off their head, insofar as "sin" is concerned. To recognize your sin and accept forgiveness is all that's required. That's the whole point of Jesus dying. He became sin, and took the punishment in our place. That's not carte blanche to act any way you want, and you are right to doubt anything the preacher says. But man is not the example to follow, Christ is.

Jeffery Dahmer could have truly repented and been saved before his death, and spend eternity in a much better state than many lifelong "Christians" who weren't what they said they were.

I've always assumed there was a special place in their Hell for hypocritical Christians, especially dishonest ministers who use their platforms to fleece the seekers of divine grace.

Oops
 

"From This Day Forward"? Wow...they got that album out in a hurry... :D

My favorite comment on this so far has come from Jon Stewart who said something to the effect: it takes some doing to cede the moral highground to a drug dealing prostitute!

Ted publically denied all, he was happily married after all with 5 kids! until the evidence was shown to be solid and substantial,... then he slid and weasled- It was just a massage and I threw it away,.. then he finally caved and admitted he was naughty. He got caught. He had no intention of seeking forgiveness for his sins until he was forced to.

I dont care if he had gay sex or meth. Sounds like that might have been just what a powerful christian leader needed at the end of a long tent meeting. I am ammused that he is yet another example of Evangelical hypocricy that would damn gays and lesbians that live loving, peaceful, truthful live as sinning deviants all the while banging away in his closet.

Of course I've had it in the ear before
 

I can imagine that whatever kind of "massage" he got, it was made all the more exciting for the very fact it was a trip to the dark side (in his mind). He was being "bad." That probably was a rush at the time.

At least he had some class in telling his flock not to blame the escort dude.

But don't you guys find the way they each had their own letter a bit weird; like the wife had to apologize for her husband, as if SHE had responsibility to the flock. WTF indeed.

Well, if she'd been willing to wear jockey shorts and Old Spice to bed she might have kept him from temptation.;)

Hey...what's wrong with old spice and jockey shorts?

I think she wrote her own letter in order to encourage the women of her church to stay strong in their own marriages. Not to take things for granted. I realize that he tried to step around the public humiliation and it took backing him into a corner to get his confession. BUT he has taken the blame on himself rather than try to project it onto the escort...he even tells his former congregation not to blame the escort (common reaction for ppl who don't want to accept the truth). He believes that homosexuality is a choice just like any other action a person might take. He's entitled to his belief, just like everyone else. He is ashamed that he broke his own moral code, just because he didn't volunteerly announce his deviation doesn't mean he isn't. Gah sorry its hard for me to say what I mean so I'll sum it up: He's a jerk for what he has done (not practicing what he preached) but he has somewhat retributed himself by his most current actions.

It indicated in her letter that she taught classes for women in the church. Not all church leaders are ordained. The pastor's wife is always a visible figure in the church even if she doesn't actively lead, and she does have a responsibility to the flock, insofar as her own behavior--and it would be a big question on everyone's mind whether she intended to leave her husband over this.

Agreed, she was as active and responsible as he was, in creating and building that particular Church into the cash cow/political force, it was. :thumbsup:

Hey, do you think he wants his wife to do the disciplining and correction? A young man from the congragation perhaps? tee-hee

Who better than Dan Savage...
 

...to deconstruct the Haggard debacle.


Here's a piece from today's NYT by Dan Savage (Savage Love, etc.) on the whole Haggard thing. He pretty much nails the situation in every respect:

I once had a friend who did sex work, which is a nice way of saying that he was a prostitute.

He was based in Los Angeles and one of his clients was a movie star. Not just any movie star, but a top male movie star. A sex symbol. This guy used to fly my friend first class to far-flung locales, usually to unwind after a big location shoot.

Sorry, but I can?t tell you who this movie star is. It?s not that I?m afraid of being sued or that I disapprove of outing. Nope, the reason I can?t tell you the name of this movie star is, well, I don?t know it. No matter how many times I asked, no matter how much I pried, my friend simply wouldn?t tell me the guy?s name. My friend wouldn?t even tell me where he was meeting his famous client, lest the places where his films were being shot offered a telling clue.

My friend took the callboy?s code of silence seriously.

Besides the sheer scale of the hypocrisy, the Ted Haggard scandal doesn?t tell us much we don?t already know about closeted gay or bisexual men; closet cases will take enormous risks to get their needs met and will often do great harm to themselves and to those they profess to love. What?s new in the Haggard scandal ? perhaps we should call it a flameout ? is the refusal of Mike Jones, a former male prostitute, to honor the callboy?s code of silence, the omertà of gay hookerdom.

On the Web site where Mr. Haggard is said to have found Mr. Jones, the callboys describe themselves as discreet. That?s their solemn promise not to blab to the wife, if you?re married; to the tabloids (or prying friends), if you?re a movie star; to your congregation, if you?re one of the most powerful evangelical ministers in the country. The fear that callboys can no longer be trusted will make the lives of men like Ted Haggard that much more lonely and difficult.

Back in the bad old days ? the mythical 1950s, the era social conservatives pine for ? most gay men were closeted, which made it relatively easy for them to arrange discreet trysts. You could rely on the discretion of your sex partners because they were relying on yours. It was the era of mutually assured destruction, both in terms of nuclear warfare and gay sex. Your partner couldn?t reveal your secret without revealing his own.

Needless to say, a sex life infused with cold-war-style tensions didn?t lead to many healthy or lasting relationships.

Today gay and bisexual men live openly, making the modern closet a much less crowded place. While once all the best gay men were closeted, now the only adults you find in the closet are the fearful, the pathetic and the hypocritical. The men you meet in today?s closet are the ones with a great deal to lose if their secrets are exposed. They?re gay men with lucrative careers that would collapse if they came out; gay men whose obscenely wealthy families would disown them if they lived openly; or gay men leading large congregations that would dismiss them if they knew the truth about their pastor.

A less crowded closet doesn?t just mean slimmer pickings for men like Ted Haggard, but unreliable ones as well. While once you could be certain that the closeted gay man you were sleeping with would still be closeted 10 or 20 years in the future, now you never know. The closeted gay man you entrust with your secret today may be out next year. As he has nothing left to hide, your secret is no longer safe. Better hope you parted on good terms.

Which is why so many powerful closet cases turn to callboys. It?s not just the callboy?s promise of discretion, but the sense that the old dynamics ? mutually assured destruction ? remain in force. A callboy can?t expose your secret without exposing his own. There?s still a stigma attached to selling sex.

So why did Mike Jones speak out?

Because today it is arguably more shameful and damaging to be a hypocritical closet case than it is to be a sex worker. Even those delighted by Mr. Haggard?s disgrace ? disclosure: I count myself among their number ? ache for his five children, all suffering now for the sins of their father. And let me be clear: their father?s sin is not his sexual orientation, but his deceit and hypocrisy. His sin is the closet.

When Representative Mark Foley flamed out, Pat Robertson said: ?Well, this man?s gay. He does what gay people do.? That lie might have worked when most gay Americans were closeted, but it doesn?t work anymore. Seventy percent of Americans today know a gay person; for straight Americans, hitting on teenagers, hiring prostitutes and snorting meth are not things their gay relatives, friends and co-workers typically do. (Or not at appreciably higher rates than their straight friends.) An openly gay man is accountable to himself, his family, his partner and his community. He is free to form healthy relationships, which is why he is far less likely to be I.M.?ing teenagers or hiring hookers than some desperate closet case.

Ultimately it was Ted Haggard?s hypocrisy ? railing against homosexuals and campaigning against gay marriage while apparently indulging in sex romps with a gay escort ? that prompted Mr. Jones to shove him out of the closet. The homophobia promoted by Mr. Haggard and other agents of intolerance, if I may use John McCain?s phrase (he?s not using it anymore), undermined the callboy code of silence that Mr. Haggard himself relied on. Most callboys are gay, after all, and most are out of the closet these days.

And while most callboys will continue to respect a code of silence where the average closet case is concerned, the Ted Haggards of the world have been placed on notice: You can?t have your callboy and disparage him too.

Dan Savage is the editor of The Stranger, a Seattle newsweekly, and the author of ?The Commitment: Love, Sex, Marriage and My Family.?

Another One
 

Well, after reading about "closet" psychology, this is anything but weird. It seems that closetting yourself leads to extreme manifestations of, as Savage said, what you "need."

In the end, I hope all this discussion will normalize homosexuality to a point where such "extremes" are not required to BE who you are.

Lets not get too carried away with the idea that anyone has immutable traits. Who you ARE is a concept under constant flux, and has very little or nothing to do with genetics as long as we leave physical structure out of the picture. If someone loves to play the piano, can't for whatever reason we don't say that they can't be who they ARE.
Why can't we say that people ARE other things that they may or may not want to be in other cases, but we have to accept that sexual orientation inseperable from who a person is? If it's true, then wouldn't it also be true that we have other traits that others must accept at face value no matter what? Who gets to decide what these are?

(the thread was turning into the 1,000 list of gay figures/rant about how people need to stop questioning gay-ness, it needed some sprucing up)

In this particular case, what the guy *is* is a bisexual pastor of a religion that doesn't allow him to be that way. I would be very interested in how *he* rationalized his homosexual behavior with his deity, and how he was able to condemn the acts while performing them.

I'd be even more interested to see how his mental health evolves as he tries to rid himself of this "affliction" under the loving supervision of his wife and whoever agrees to mentor his "recovery".

I think he should just love Jesus *and* Jose.

I think that's all homosexual people have wanted from the begining. Straight people aren't defined by their sexuality, so why should gay people be? Unfortunately, while society at large still regards being gay as something worth at least thinking about before declaring, there will always be a stigma attached to being gay.

It was definately amplified in their defense though. It was some of the loudest supporters of gay marriage that encouraged gays to center themselves around their homosexuality and "be proud of who you are". Intentions aside, I think that the labeling came into play largely in the effort to stamp out the concept of homosexuality being a behavior, since you can rationalize that people have control over their actions.

So my father and I somehow got into a convo about gay marriage. For some reason he thinks that lagal gay marriage will lead to legal polygomy marriages which will somehow lead to legalized pedophillia.

01) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.

02) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

03) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

04) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.

05) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britany Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.

06) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.

07) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

08) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.

09) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.

10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.

and just for good measure...

Questions for Heterosexuals

When did you first realize you were straight?

What made you decide to become straight?

Do you think your parents did something to you to make you become straight?

Did you have bad relationships with people of the same sex when you were young?

Did you turn straight as a result of being molested by someone of the same sex?

How do you think being a heterosexual has affected your work?



As a heterosexual, do you discriminate in who you will sleep with, or will you sleep with anyone else who is straight?

Are you straight because you can't get anyone of the same sex to go out with you?

What would you do if your kids also decided they were straight? Are you afraid that might happen?

Do you really even think you should be around kids as an out heterosexual?

very funny Ibram. I have to try not to laugh out loud cause I'm at work. (boo hoo to those of you that think I shouldn't be browsing at work)

You'll rarely see me here when I'm not at work.

Ibram -- I actually convinced my own mother that "teh ghey" was okay using argument #1. Many, many years ago. ;)

My mother was against gay couples raising children. Her argument was that they need both male and female influences on their lives. I pointed out that while I was living with her without either of us having a husband, it was similar to my boys being brought up with lesbian parents i.e. that there were two women and no men in the house.

She got pretty pissed off with me when I suggested that.

Crikey!
 

Way to go, Ali! You did the right thing.

Ibram: Thankyou I'm showing those to my dad...I love the man but he has no logic. Atleast maybe this will shut him up for a bit.

Panglo, my mum was very conservative. Strict Catholic all her life. Hardly ever even said 'shit' or any other mild expletive. We just had different perspectives on things...lots of things. lol She was a great woman though.

It already was legal. Just ask the Catholic Church (who also fears gays).

There was a time when people believed that about women in the workplace, reading, higher education & (heaven forbid) voting.

Everything is a process.