Well, it appears that Mark Foley wasn’t making things up. “A Roman Catholic priest said he had an inappropriate two-year relationship with” the former Congressman “in the 1960s that included massaging the boy in the nude, but he did not specifically remember having sex.”
While this certainly helps explain Foley’s fascination with teenage boys, it doesn’t excuse his behavior. Indeed, David Roth, his attorney said as much “Mark does not blame the trauma he sustained as a young adolescent for his totally inappropriate [actions]. He continues to offer no excuse whatsoever for his conduct.”
If Foley were a Democrat, you can be sure that many of those now demonizing him would show more compassion for his present woes, given his adolescent trauma. But, for political reasons, they apply a different standard to him because of that (R) after his name. It’s too bad they’re so partisan; they should hold all people to the same standard.
To be sure, Mark Foley was, as an adolescent, the “victim” of an irresponsible adult supervising him. But that past trauma does not excuse his adult behavior. It’s a good sign his lawyer recognizes as much. Now, let’s hope that gay activists and left-wing pundits come to similar conclusions should a Democrat do what Foley has done — or worse.
Wow, what’s next? Could Foley’s claim of alcoholism also be true?
(To the detriment of the Left, as well as the detriment of Foley’s alcoholism claim: they never did find any evidence to support that story about him showing up drunk at the page’s dorm.)
Is the Priest a Democrat or a Republican? The lefties on the blog need to know before they can decide to condemn him, or declare him ‘courageous’ and a ‘role model’ and maybe name a Marine Sanctuary after him.
Dan, I think yours is somewhat of a straw man argument. I don’t think the left is saying much any more about Foley who obviously had issues stemming from his childhood. What I and many others are far more concerned about is the apparent tendency on the part of the GOP leadership to look the other way for years while Foley chased after young pages. It’s not just the left – “55% of those polled who’ve heard about the scandal are dissatisfied with the way GOP leaders handled it” http://tinyurl.com/v7ypx
but, Ian, polls also show that most people believe the Democrats would have handled the situation no differently had Foley beenone of theirs.
The main thing for elected officials, even if they are homos, is to bring in the pork and jobs and grants and advocate killing terrorists on the spot. Those of us on the death squad ultra right wing will keep voting for them because all this homo activity comes from the Catholic church. Damn right it does! If it weren’t for them priests, sonny boy and missy wouldn’t have turned to you-know-what. We still can pray for our elected homos while voting for them. What else can we do? Elect whale and tree huggers and terrorist kissers some of whom may be a little light on their feet too, if you know what I mean.
#4: Well, I would hope we could agree that regardless of whether it was Dems or Repubs in charge, it is absolutely inexcusable for Congressional leaders to look the other way for 5 to 10 years. IIRC, when the page scandal involving Crane and Studds was brought to the attention of the Dem leadership in the early 1980’s, an investigation was begun immediately.
#6 They investigated immediately, as soon as the press got a hold of it, just like with Foley.
The difference is that unlike Foley, Studds continued in office as a valued member of the Democrat Party while most likely continuing in his pedophilia. How many pages were victimized by the predator Studds for years while the Dem leadership cast a blind eye?
The day that the true nature of Jordan Edmund”s role was revealed, my heart broke for Mark Foley, a victim twice over. The advantage taken of him whe he was at his most impressionable age interfered with his development as a man, gay or straight. This is a man who was perceived as ‘too needful’ by young sophisticates, and they proceeded to lure him into an eventual disgracing of himself. The confusing of his actual deeds and the conflating of his orientation with pedophilia has hurt many more people than just Mark Foley, but make no mistake–Mark Foley’s life is ruined, and he is twice, or three times, a victim.
What bothers me about this new information about the priest is that it reinforces a very bad stereotype. That it is through abuse, or missuse of a young impressionable boy that one becomes gay.
Or even worse than that, to blame Foley’s attraction to teenagers on this event.
Many people suffer horrible traumas as teenagers, whether sexual or otherwise, and go on to live healthy life styles without resorting to inflicting that kind of trauma on someone else. We’re not talking about a person who was systematically abused for years and had that behavior ingrained in him.
I see two things happening. First avoid the responsibilty of ones actions by throwing the blame on someone else. Who cares if in the process the gay community is set back to the: “its’ all about abuse”.
Second, any chance to slam the Catholic Church, because clearly 2000 years of exsistence have produced nothing more than predatory priests.
Foley was engaging in cybersex with young male pages who were plainly setting him up for a fall.Nobody who is that stupid should be a representative and for that reason i’m glad he resigned.
That being said,there’s a huge differance between talking sex with a page and actually having sex with a page,which is what studds did.The dems have no problem with studds but they’re all over foley.Apparently only republican pervs deserve their derision.The dems were also very keen on protecting President Clinton who had the audacity to engage in felatio behind Abraham Lincolns desk.When it comes to their own anything goes,but when it’s a republican they morph into the paragons of morality.If your going to be twofaced,the least you can do is not be so obvious about it.
When did conservatives forget that Clinton’s crime wasn’t having sex with an adult intern (that’s more of a “peccadillo, ” as they say), but lying under oath about it? And worse than either of those, from my perspective, was his attempt to disgrace those who told the truth by having his henchmen label them “trailer trash.” (And, probably, having their dogs killed, though I don’t know for sure that that happened. :))
That it is through abuse, or missuse of a young impressionable boy that one becomes gay.
I think this is a problem, and the way the information was released almost seems to encourage the belief in this connection. My thoughts are that there probably are quite a few homosexuals who were sexually abused, and who may struggle with sexual issues because of it, but I would be willing to bet there are far more heterosexuals who were also sexually abused-I would even leap off a bridge and argue that the percentages of gays among all sexually abused is probably pretty close to the percentage of gays in the population (I have no study, but I suspect this is the case).
I think it is sad that Foley experienced sexual abuse, but given the fact that plenty of people who had similar experiences didn’t opt to victimize others means he still did a pretty terrible thing and this doesn’t excuse the behavior-or even mitigate it in my opinion.
Now maybe it’s just me, but what type of kid would get into a sauna with a naked priest, let alone get a massage from said priest?
I mean, yeah, if he looked like Antonio Sabato Jr., that would be one thing. But I could not conceivably see myself naked with a naked priest in a sauna when I was growing up. And how on earth did Foley ever get put in that position anyway? (No pun intended.)
This whole thing sounds like the “plot” from the latest Falcon video…
Regards,
Peter H.
Now maybe it’s just me, but what type of kid would get into a sauna with a naked priest, let alone get a massage from said priest?
People who do this stuff often choose their victims well, and often the victimizer will gradually seduce a child/teen into participation-they don’t generally come right out and proposition the kid, and often they will meet other emotional needs that may not be met by their kid’s family.
Gee, wonder why is the liberal media is still peddling this crap ?
Some pages were either playing a prank or working as DNC
operatives (ie , the so called Repub page that turns out is not a registered repub and has given money to the HRC and GLT political action group) . The guy never had sex or as it turns out never went to the pages dorm. Can someone tell me why we are still hearing about this guy. The guy resigned .Oh right , the Media-crats are trying to discourage Repub from voting . Newflash, leftist media it ain’t working in fact it probably backfired and pissed off the base !