The Media, Ted Haggard, Hypocrisy & Human Emotion
Given that I’m a gay conservative blogger, everyone seems to expect me to write something about Ted Haggard, who, earlier this week, resigned his position as president of the National Association of Evangelicals when an escort accused him of paying for sex and buying drugs. I would really rather not write about yet another man with apparent homosexual tendencies engaged in behavior that is clearly wrong.* Why does it always seem that those with the most unusual gay proclivities are those who get the most media attention?
It would be nice if the media paid more attention to the gay men involved in monogamous relationships — or those choosing to forego sexual relations for a time while they pursue such relationships. Oh, but those stories aren’t particularly interesting to the scandal-mongering media.
My first thought when I read the story about Haggard — after he had confirmed that he paid a prostitute for massage and drugs — was how terribly lonely this man must be. Married to a woman, with a family and having reached the top of his profession, he still sought out sex and drugs, trying to fill some hole in his life.
I might have more compassion for this man were he not married. In marrying his wife, he vowed to be faithful to her. And by seeking a sexual relationship outside that relationship, he cheated on her, likely causing her much pain.
The media has focused on Haggard’s hypocrisy as it that were his only sin. To the MSM — and others on the left — it seems that whenever they learn of the sexual shenanigans of a social conservative, particularly one as outspoken as Haggard, they focus on the hypocrisy angle, as if this one individual’s hypocrisy proves that all such conservatives were hypocrites and their values empty moralizing. Yet, with the media’s narrow focus leaves out so much about the values of evangelicals and the emotions of the alleged hypocrite.
Most evangelicals are very sincere in their beliefs — and their values. Just because one man violated his own marital vows — and acted contrary to his words does not condemn the entire evangelical enterprise.
Yet, Mr. Haggard’s actions show that when one has a strong sexual/emotional attraction to members of his own gender, that attraction is not easily overcome, even by those of strong faith. It’s too bad Mr. Haggard didn’t realize that when he married his wife — or take his own experiences into account when he spoke out against homosexuality.
Mr. Haggard’s problems weren’t limited to his loneliness, though I would daresay that was at the root of them. He exaggerated his own importance, claiming he had participated in regular weekly conference calls with the White House (a claim left-wing blogs have made much of — even as the White House denied it).
Mr. Haggard is obviously a very unhappy man. Despite rising to the top of his profession, he looked outside his marriage for a physical connection to fill some kind of void in his life. He is not the first man to do so. And I would not fault him for doing so had he not pledged fidelity to his wife (and had he not spoken out against homosexuality).
There is more to the story that the MSM tells. They choose to focus on only one aspect, more interested are they in besmirching a whole movement than in telling the true story of a man who remained very lonely despite his great professional success. Ted Haggard’s story should remind us that there is more to life than rising to the top of your profession. Such success is meaningless if we lack a fulfilling emotional life — as he obviously did.
When we don’t find that emotional fulfillment, we often seek it out in sexual substitutes. For the physical closeness of the sexual act provides a simulacrum of the intimacy we all, in the deepest parts of our being, truly long for.
Yes, Mr. Haggard is a hypocrite. But, his hypocrisy is not all there is to his story. He is also a very lonely man. And his failure to understand his loneliness has brought shame to him — and much pain to his family.
It’s unfortunate that those in the media so focus on the hypocrisy that they lose sight of the human aspects of this story. And the real meaning of our sexuality. Most individuals with sexual/emotion feelings for others of their own gender cannot overcome them by trying to wish them out of existence or by labeling them a sin. For these feelings are one thing which draws us to our fellows. And an indication of the emotional bonds we need to leave a fulfilling life.
It’s too bad Mr. Haggard dismissed such longings as sinful. For had he not, he would certainly not have risen to the top of the evangelical profession, but he might have otherwise found a more fulfilling life, certainly with less public prominence, but likely with more private fulfillment — and more peace of mind.
-B. Daniel Blatt (AKA GayPatriotWest)
*While I believe prostitution raises serious moral questions, I don’t think it’s wrong per se. What is wrong here is his infidelity, paying a prostitute for sex (if that was indeed what he was doing it) while married to a woman, violating his vows to her.
111 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
So yet another preacher cheats on his wife and hides a deep seeded taste for homoeroticism…so what.Different john,different hook,same old story.
Comment by Bobby Alpy — November 4, 2006 @ 1:21 pm - November 4, 2006
obviously he was good at what he did, even if he is a hypocrite. but that does kind of call the whole thing into question. like when the people who run those un-gay your kid camps end up running off with each other, even opponents of gay rights have to wonder if the whole thing is just ridiculous. I mean, why does he feel a need to be against gay marriage in particular? or abortion? why is it sex sex sex with these evangelicals?
Comment by lester — November 4, 2006 @ 1:45 pm - November 4, 2006
Great post Dan. I would just add that I think this sorry episode one again demonstrates how destructive the closet can be, not just to the individual but to friends and family as well.
Comment by Ian — November 4, 2006 @ 2:02 pm - November 4, 2006
I’m gay and a strong Christian. In fact, I have been to Ted Haggert’s church and prayer center in Colorado Springs. They put on an incredible Sunday service.
I feel sorry for what Ted Haggert’s family and his congregation is going through right now, they must be really hurting. It’s important for everyone including Republican leaders and Evangelical Christians to remember nobody is perfect and everyone makes mistakes. When you make a mistake it’s better to admit to it, tell how you are going to correct it and move on. Denials and cover-ups or blaming someone else, always become worse than the actual mistake. In some way, it always comes back to you if you cover it up. People don’t want to admit a mistake because of fear or because they don’t want to appear weak. But when you admit your faults and show honesty and humility, that’s a sign of strength. It’s the first step to recovery and to move forward in victory. I am wary of trusting people especially in leadership positions who never will admit a mistake or a weakness, never apologize, acting holier than thou and setting the standards so high for everyone else. It’s about pride vs humility. The Ted Haggart case and the recent behavior of others in leadership will show that everyone makes mistakes but it’s how you recover from it that counts.
Comment by Ralph — November 4, 2006 @ 2:05 pm - November 4, 2006
sex scandals of the prominent will always be news, even though similar circumstances occur daily in this country. until such time as gay people are granted economic equality and freedom, and the religious rite of marriage is separated from the civil rite of “marriage” this kind of crap will be sensationalized. we only have one more generation to wait, but it’s a pity it will take that long.
Comment by markie — November 4, 2006 @ 2:23 pm - November 4, 2006
The Evangelicals should learn from the Catholics…. they don’t have to “buy” their sex, they can get “massages” from their little captives….. and they are much better at covering it up!
Comment by Jim — November 4, 2006 @ 3:14 pm - November 4, 2006
he definately lost the game of chicken with the reporters. he must have figured no way would they ask him about that stuff with his wife and kids there.
he “put on a great sunday service” lol. was there a flying trapeze?
Comment by lester — November 4, 2006 @ 3:16 pm - November 4, 2006
Yeah, he was ‘filling some holes alright.’ And this is what continued support for the Republican Party will get you, more denunciations of the evil, family destroying homos, more ‘closeted’ republican homos, (shout-out to Bruce and Dan) and hence more ‘outing’ scandals because of more denunciations of homos, driving more into the closet.
“It would be nice if the media paid more attention to the gay men involved in monogamous relationships — or those choosing to forego sexual relations for a time while they pursue such relationships. Oh, but those stories aren’t particularly interesting to the scandal-mongering media.”
You can pin the blame squarely on the Republican Leadership and their Coalition of Christian allies for that one; those who have continuously portrayed us as fist-fucking, dog-boning perverts. My ‘homo-monogamy’ gets very little attention either.
Pity.
Comment by tonto_cal — November 4, 2006 @ 3:41 pm - November 4, 2006
Well there was no flying trapeze at the church but a huge choir and a great worship band. Lot’s of volunteers participating to make it positive experience. Again, it’s sad this happened and affecting so many people.
But right now I’m ready to move on and looking frward to next Tuesday’s election. Whoever gets elected I hope they have honesty, integrity and the right motivations.
Comment by Ralph — November 4, 2006 @ 4:03 pm - November 4, 2006
It’s hard to have any sympathy for the man, especially when he continues to lie. He says a hotel refered him to a male prostitute advertised on rentboy.com? Puh-leeze. Where was he staying, The Holigay Inn? He also says he bought drugs but never used them. Riiiight. And he only admitted to that after learning that Mike Jones had voice mails that implicated him, having initially denied the entire affair.
Really, you don’t have to be Agatha Christie to figure out that Haggard is a liar. He can’t ask for forgiveness when he won’t even come clean.
Comment by Chase — November 4, 2006 @ 4:05 pm - November 4, 2006
#11. LOL!! That’s some funny stuff there, tough guy. Daddy Lincoln/Bush? Riotous.
As for this whole thing, I love seeing homosexuals standing up for evangelicals…evagelicals that want to save the homosexuals souls and erase homosexuality from society. It truly is a queer thing.
Comment by jimmy — November 4, 2006 @ 4:38 pm - November 4, 2006
GayPatriotWest, that was somewhat inspiring to read. I fully appreciated your compassion and your emphasis on who was really hurt most by Haggard — his wife and family. But his insistence on doing that TV interview in his car, with his wife and children present (presumably to give him safety to speed off if necessary) was the act of a very sad man.
Your post, with its very real attempt at understanding and compassion, also gives me some pause about some of the things I’m reading on your site, among them: lots of compassion for a raging hypocrite but not an ounce of compassion for a war hero who made a mistake in delivering a silly speech. Lots of compassion for another preacher gone “bad”, but not an iota for your Democratic countrymen here when they say something you disagree with. I’ve only been commenting here a few days now and I’ve already been called “leftist” (as if that’s somehow worse than “rightist”), “coward” (by that raging fellow above), and who knows what else — I have some threads to read yet.
By the way, cheers to markie for a comment in #5 that I agree with completely — one more generation. But you know markie, we’ve come a long way in a short time (circa 1985 til now), and it was NOT because of the Party of Lincoln. That party faded into history in 1980, replaced by the Party of Robertson-Falwell-cum Dobson (npi).
Comment by Eddie Graziano — November 4, 2006 @ 4:49 pm - November 4, 2006
It is so easy to simply dismiss Ted Haggard as a misguided man. I agree, once he married his wife he should have stayed loyal to her, or else explained his issues and divorced her.
He has probably been struggling with this issue for years, probably even felt that if he served God as a minister, God would help him overcome his homosexual urges.
It didn’t work out that way, and by then he was too tied up in the ministry and probably still loves his wife and children very much. So he did what many others have done before him, gave in to temptation. And now he, his family and his church will pay the price.
It is just that he be called on the carpet, but to paint all Evangelicals as hypocritical is unfair. And to use this as a political issue is typical of the “openminded” left.
Comment by Leah — November 4, 2006 @ 5:34 pm - November 4, 2006
A word of shameless appreciation for Dan. I am biased, I admit, since I am a non-Republican who nevertheless agrees with most of Dan’s positions and I have had the pleasure of meeting him, so he is not just a cyberobject for me but a real actual man.
You take on all sorts of complicated subjects on a regular basis and give them thoughtful and articulate and differentiated attention and then wade through the waves of comments that follow. Just your energy and perseverance is impressive. I don’t comment much, but I do read regularly and I value what you have to say and how careful you are in how you try to say it. I think Athena is proud of you!
Comment by EssEm — November 4, 2006 @ 5:51 pm - November 4, 2006
Question, if Ted Haggard is a hypocrite, what does that make Harold “I talk about Jesus and Family Values in my commercials but party with Playboy models and college girls half my age” Ford?
Comment by V the K — November 4, 2006 @ 6:09 pm - November 4, 2006
AOSHQ had an excellent quote on this:
Comment by V the K — November 4, 2006 @ 6:29 pm - November 4, 2006
I guess it makes Harold Ford a heterosexual.
Comment by inLA — November 4, 2006 @ 6:54 pm - November 4, 2006
Eddie, it’s pretty obvious you haven’t made much effort to understand my posts though you claim to have read them. I don’t have lots of compassion for Mr. Haggard. And why should I have any compassion for John Kerry when he insults our soldiers and refuses to apologize for it?
Haggard’s story is a sad one. And he’s a lonely man. But, that doesn’t excuse his behavior. And I never said it did.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — November 4, 2006 @ 7:10 pm - November 4, 2006
Funny how the White House didn’t deny Haggard’s claims at the time he made them… they only bothered to do that once he was mired in scandal. As long as he was popular, they seemed more than happy to allow everyone to believe that his claims were true.
Comment by Ann C — November 4, 2006 @ 7:22 pm - November 4, 2006
Dan, I share your sympathy for Haggard, but maybe not for the same reasons. He is the result (I’ll resist the temptation of saying “victim”) of a system that says that loving someone of the same gender as your own makes you abnormal and a sinner. Even if they let you into their big tent, it’s almost impossible to avoid internalizing that stigma. You do your best to suppress your true nature and what happens? You start sneaking around, turn into a hypocrite, and hurt people you love. We can all point fingers at Haggard and say he was wrong for what he did, but maybe we should also point fingers at the institutions and attitudes that force people like him to lead double lives.
Comment by lce — November 4, 2006 @ 7:33 pm - November 4, 2006
where has it been reported that he is a republican?
Comment by sloop — November 4, 2006 @ 8:30 pm - November 4, 2006
Well, in politics there is enough hypocrisy to go around. A perfect example is Democratic Catholic Politicians like Kerry, Kennedy or Pelosi who make sure to mention their faith on the campaign trail or be photographed taking communion at mass on Sunday only to turn around on Monday and vote against partial birth abortion or parental notification legislation. This is done in the name of a cynical notion that Catholic Politicians are expected to abandon the faith of their Church out of an obligation to their office. Of course these “righteous” individuals never fail to make the claim that they are personally opposed to abortion but are incapable of supporting anti abortion legislation for fear of imposing their strongly held beliefs onto others. This is truly ludicrous since these same individuals have no problems imposing higher taxes and increasing the power of the state solely based on their beliefs that is for the Common Good.
This situation with Haggard is very unfortunate because it involves so many innocent people from his wife and children as well as his congregation who he was entrusted to minister. Regardless of the outcome of this sorry situation, I hope he finds some peace as he works to regain the trust of those he betrayed.
Comment by republichick — November 4, 2006 @ 9:17 pm - November 4, 2006
#23. You aren’t serious, are you?
#20. Completely disingenous to still be claiming that Kerry insulted the troops–completely for an intellectually honest person. What’s that projection of yours–seeing people the way you want to instead of the way they are? The LCF lapdog filter that some information is being filtered through these days is really thinning out the posts from the more serious poster on here.
#18. I remember another gay hooker that was very much defended on this blog.
#15. The bravado stuff is great. Brings me back to the Man Show. Gotta love it.
Comment by sean — November 4, 2006 @ 10:56 pm - November 4, 2006
#20: “I don’t have lots of compassion for Mr. Haggard.”
It’s interesting that usually when a married man forsakes his marital vows to cheat on his wife with another man, the gay community “applauds his courage.” Wasn’t that what Brokeback Mountain was all about? The gay community adored that movie.
Comment by V the K — November 4, 2006 @ 11:33 pm - November 4, 2006
I enjoy reading your posts, gaypatriots. But does anyone knew if he’s hot or what?
Comment by ryan — November 4, 2006 @ 11:36 pm - November 4, 2006
I have but one regret. “Tis a shame James Dobson and Tony Perkins et al didn’t get caught with Pastor Haggard.
Comment by Ashley Hunter — November 5, 2006 @ 12:28 am - November 5, 2006
Dan (GayPatriotWest),
Even though I think Kerry was extremely stupid (enough that he has forever blown his chance for the presidency (can’t say I’m not glad the Dems have jetisoned that baggage)…..I honestly can’t believe someone as intelligent and seemingly level headed as you could look everyone in the eye and say you truly believe he was talking about the troops with his lame joke.
Do you really need a “one up” on Kerry that badly that you would misrepresent yourself and your credibility so?
monty
Comment by monty — November 5, 2006 @ 12:47 am - November 5, 2006
“Eddie, it’s pretty obvious you haven’t made much effort to understand my posts though you claim to have read them. I don’t have lots of compassion for Mr. Haggard. And why should I have any compassion for John Kerry when he insults our soldiers and refuses to apologize for it?
Haggard’s story is a sad one. And he’s a lonely man. But, that doesn’t excuse his behavior. And I never said it did.”
Eddie, you should know that if you ever reflect Dan’s words back to him in a critical way, especially if you cite his frequent self-contradiction, he will accuse you of being fundamentally illiterate — even though, in this case, several others here cite his compassion for Haggard but don’t get spanked (because they don’t cite his inconsistency).
Actually, Dan, you’ve made your own error: Eddie doesn’t say you excuse his behavior, only that you demonstrate some compassion. Perhaps in your world compassion is reserved only for the guiltless.
But most amazing is your insistence that John Kerry insulted the troops and refused to apologize for it. The severest Republican blabbermouths have agreed that the context clearly demonstrates that Kerry was talking about Bush. But, seeing that he had blown his lines, which were rapidly exploited out of context, he did apologize for that.
Oh well, only a few more days before the the Preznit becomes a very lame duck quite possibly bound for trial for war crimes if his latest insanity — keeping prisoners quiet about their torture — doesn’t fly with the courts.
Comment by JonathanG — November 5, 2006 @ 1:01 am - November 5, 2006
Dan,
An evangelical Christian myself (along with a lesbian) I find myself put somewhat to shame by the grace you showed Rev. Haggard in this post and the way you never forgot to acknowledge his humanity. I’ve kept an eye on Haggard and the NAE for a few years, and he’s always given me a sketchy vibe, and I wasn’t particularly surprised by this story… but that does not justify the judgment I’ve wanted to heap on his head. It isn’t our place to judge him – it’s God’s – and we only hurt ourselves by hating him, whatever his sins. I just hope that God would use this scandal to change the hearts of his people, by causing them to question whether it is the orientation, or the suppression of it, that causes a man to sin. Deception, hypocrisy, adultury – it isn’t being out that causes these things. Here’s hoping some good comes from what is, without doubt, one man’s tragedy. I, at least, will be praying for him, his family, and his church. Thank you for a thoughtful post.
Comment by Casey — November 5, 2006 @ 1:27 am - November 5, 2006
Actually, Jonathan in #30, no, I can’t think of a single Republican — or GOP talking head — who thought Kerry was talking about Bush. The context clearly shows that he was talking about the troops, especially as his thoughts expressed in Pasadena correspond to things he said in 1972 about the prospect of an all-volunteer army. So, yes, Monty & Sean, Kerry was talking about the troops. Why was it that even the Democratic nominee for Governor of Massachusetts thought he should apologize and refused to campaign alongside his own party’s erstwhile presidential nominee?
And Jonathan in #30, you mention my “frequent self-contradiction,” but fail to provide any examples.
Perhaps, I should have ignored Eddie’s request that I show compassion for Kerry as this discussion better belongs on threads to other posts I have written.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — November 5, 2006 @ 1:57 am - November 5, 2006
How can be part of a political party that hates you? You are gay and you enjoy being among people who say you will burn in hell? You should get some serious help my friend.
Comment by ... — November 5, 2006 @ 6:10 am - November 5, 2006
As a participant of the Arlington group, Haggard did participate in some conference calls with the White House. The fact you are skipping, and its important, is that this group does meet weekly with top White House officials to vet and coordinate Administration policy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arlington_group
Comment by Patrick (Gryph) — November 5, 2006 @ 8:55 am - November 5, 2006
Dan, impressive compassion you show to Haggard. What a nice demonstration of your character.
And Kerry? Think he wasn’t talking about the troops? All one need do is examine his long history; he’s held these views for decades! I do not tar all the Democrats with this ugly and incorrect attitude, however. How wise of so many of them to quickly distance themselves from the tone deaf Senator.
It must be difficult for gay folks to remain in the Republican party. Sometimes I wonder how I can check the box for any of ‘em, given the overall attitude toward gays.
But – so many viewpoints of Democrats are antithetical to my own, I keep on hoping that Republicans will make progress – and soon – with gay civil rights. If so, perhaps the Haggards of the world wouldn’t have to hide and cheat … and all of us would be better off.
Comment by Peg — November 5, 2006 @ 10:48 am - November 5, 2006
GPW, excellent post. I agreed with every point you made, and failed to see the contradiction that others have seen. I would also rather see the media concentrate on gay men in monogamous relationships too. We need more of those who are in leadership positions of BOTH parties that are gay, proudly come out, instead of hiding gay relationships, and be as proud and open as their straight counterparts. It’s a start when Condoleezza Rice swears in an official with his partner and refers to the partner’s mother as the official’s mother-in-law. But there is a way to go. Outing doesn’t help. Making the false claim that sexuality doesn’t matter, when you always see them with spouses in children, doesn’t help.
I also sympathesize with those that feel for whatever reason, they have to play straight, even to the point of getting married, when they are gay. It doesn’t excuse cheating on one’s spouse. In fact, if a gay person temptation is strong enough that they need to engage in a gay sexual relationship, it is time to come clean with the spouse, file for divorce, and ask for forgiveness. In general, I don’t sympathesize with someone who cheats on their spouse with someone of the opposite sex. When homosexuality has the same acceptance as heterosexuality, then I will feel the same disdain for gay men who gettied married to women, and then cheat on their wives.
In Brokeback Mountain, I sympathesized with the two lead characters, even though it was wrong for them to cheat on their wives. I felt more sympathetic for them, because in their environment, being found out to be gay could have lead to their deaths. I wonder how any of their straight counterparts would have fared, had they have been gay instead. Sometimes it’s much easier to do the moral thing, when you’re not thrown a bitch of a curve ball.
Comment by Pat — November 5, 2006 @ 11:06 am - November 5, 2006
Patrick, “some conference calls” does not mean weekly conference calls. He was not, as he seemed to sugest, a confidant of the White House.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — November 5, 2006 @ 11:11 am - November 5, 2006
Actually, Jonathan in #30, no, I can’t think of a single Republican — or GOP talking head — who thought Kerry was talking about Bush. The context clearly shows that he was talking about the troops, especially as his thoughts expressed in Pasadena correspond to things he said in 1972 about the prospect of an all-volunteer army. So, yes, Monty & Sean, Kerry was talking about the troops. Why was it that even the Democratic nominee for Governor of Massachusetts thought he should apologize and refused to campaign alongside his own party’s erstwhile presidential nominee?
I suggest you do some reading. You might start with Pat Buchanan. Nobody with a brain who hears the entire thing in context believes Kerry was attempting to insult the troops. Even O’Reilly and his guests declared it a betrayal by the unconscious — recognizing the obvious intention established by the context.
As for your contradictions, one has been cited in this thread: Your expression of compassion and its subsequent denial. As I said, Eddie wasn’t the only one to find your words compassionate.
But of course it’s never you; it’s always our own failure to parse your words just right.
Comment by JonathanG — November 5, 2006 @ 11:36 am - November 5, 2006
Not being in the evangelical circle, I had no idea who Rev. Haggard was. Talk about being hoisted on one’s own petard. Hopefully, he’ll turn his life around & start showing some Christian charity towards gay people for a change.
Comment by Jimbo — November 5, 2006 @ 1:32 pm - November 5, 2006
I just realized why I love this blog so much and look forward to your opinion. You are a “compassionate” conservative.
The environmental activists have lost a good friend in Ted Haggard.
“In a subsequent Independent interview at New Life Church last week, Haggard didn’t mince words.
“I’ve been an environmentalist all my life,” he said, his trademark grin cutting through any discomfort with the issue.
“It’s awkward — I’m a conservative Republican environmentalist, which means I don’t have a home.”
From the Colorado Springs Independent:
http://csindy.com/csindy/2005-04-21/cover.html
Comment by cc — November 5, 2006 @ 3:23 pm - November 5, 2006
the guy is a nobody elevated to be some great leader.
my sister is born again in Fort Collins Co and very involved in her church did not know who the heck this guy was. this smells like the usual Liberal media november surprise that was hatched by the local libs in the Denver media , the DNC , the HRC , and it meant to impact the local colorado races and gay amendment . this story was out on the wire a little too quickly and blown out of proportion so it was a planned event !
Comment by bert — November 5, 2006 @ 3:39 pm - November 5, 2006
Dan, for your consideration (since it’s about Haggard, and since if Bruce is the heart of GayPatriot, you are the soul*).
Mich Being a liberal means having a right to do anything that you want sexually anywhere, anytime, and with anybody. Thus, there is no way for liberals to be hypocritical about sex. Except by being chaste.
* I consider myself ‘the snot’ by the way.
Comment by V the K — November 5, 2006 @ 4:59 pm - November 5, 2006
Sorry, the last posted prematurely. It happens to all men, sometimes. Just give me a minute to recover.
Dan, for your consideration (since it’s about Haggard, and since if Bruce is the heart of GayPatriot, you are the soul* and these questions interest you).
Michael Novak @ NRO: “Being a liberal means having a right to do anything that you want sexually anywhere, anytime, and with anybody. Thus, there is no way for liberals to be hypocritical about sex. Except by being chaste.”
* I consider myself ‘the snot’ by the way.
Comment by V the K — November 5, 2006 @ 5:01 pm - November 5, 2006
Bert – beg to differ as to Haggard’s insignificance. The simple fact is, anybody who recognizes that the social conservative/”religious right” movement has had significant influence lately, anybody who has looked on at the rise of megachurches across the country, anybody who has marveled at the increasing political savvy and youth appeal of evangelicals (as compared to the ignorant and awkward attempts by the Falwells and Robertsons of the world, or the old-fashioned ramblings of Dobson himself) has seen the effects of Haggard’s work. And the fact that you don’t know his name, but that any politically involved evangelical does, speaks to part of this new savviness – the ability to work below the public radar so as not to draw the opposition’s fire, and then get votes out when it counts. The NAE’s endorsement is an important one in many parts of the country. So no, this isn’t some random pastor whose relevance has been exaggerated. It’s simply that you don’t know enough about the culture he’s a part of – a culture that makes up a significant chunk of this country – and that ignorance is a weakness.
Comment by Casey — November 5, 2006 @ 5:10 pm - November 5, 2006
GayPatriotWest, with all due respect to your being the sane one blogging here, I believe you should go back and read your own post before calling my comprehension skills into question. It’s clear from the take-away of Jonathan, Monty, and others above that you left the impression you were generously understanding of the moral errors of Pastor Haggard while elsewhere being completely resistant to understanding the speechifying mistakes of John Kerry.
[No, I was somewhat sympathetic to his solitude, but not understanding of a man who cheats on his wife. And Kerry has yet to apologize, only say he regrets his words were "misrepresented." In this case, there's no need to offer compassion for Kerry --GPW]
That said, I still admire how your post emphasized the ones who are really hurt by the closet masquerade — wives and children. How will the man’s wife and kids EVER get over this mess he created? I can’t imagine. [Here we agree]
Comment by Eddie Graziano — November 5, 2006 @ 6:36 pm - November 5, 2006
Thought-provoking post in 36 above.
A big “amen” to most of your first paragraph — though it reminds me again of a political party full of contradictions. On one hand, you have all those GOP congressional staffers being given opportunities in government, sometimes by outwardly anti-gay politicians (eg, Santorum) and on the other hand, you have a party pushing an anti-gay amendment to the American Constitution. There’s only one reason they’d do that: they want to be understanding and accepting while also mollifying their bigot wing.
But no “amen” to the second paragraph. Instead, a big “WTF?” to that — you say you…”sympathize with those that feel for whatever reason, they have to play straight, even to the point of getting married, when they are gay.” How CAN you sympathize with a man who destroys the life, hopes, dreams of a woman and her children? It’s simply evil of a person to do that.
Comment by Eddie Graziano — November 5, 2006 @ 6:58 pm - November 5, 2006
Patrick, “some conference calls” does not mean weekly conference calls. He was not, as he seemed to sugest, a confidant of the White House.”
Haggard claimed to be a regular participant in the weekly conference calls, and often indicated he had a close personal relationship with Bush. He said “I joke that the only disagreement I have with George Bush is on what type of truck to drive.” If he was misrepresenting himself, nobody challenged him on it before. Now that he’s lost his church position and implicated himself (at least partly) in an unfolding scandal, he’s a liability and it’s clearly in the President’s interest to distance himself, as he did with “Kenny Boy” Lay. So when Tony Snow is suddenly lukewarm and downplays the relationship, why should we take it at 100% face value, as you seem to? Would you be so naive and trusting if a similar situation involved a liberal?
Comment by Jed Weber — November 5, 2006 @ 8:04 pm - November 5, 2006
Why would the White House, Jed in #47, challenge Haggard’s claim given that he had not, until recently, been so prominent in the news?
Lots of people claim they have close personal relationships to the president. Haggard is not the only one to have made such a claim of access to this president. Just as many on the left claimed similar access to the White House in Clinton’s Administration.
It isn’t the White House’s job to distance itself from every public person who claims he is quote to the president. Only now that this has been the lead item in the news has the White House needed to clarify.
It’s so amusing the lengths to which people go to criticize President Bush.
You guys make it seem like the whole job of the White House press corps is to respond those who claim they’re close to the president.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — November 5, 2006 @ 8:48 pm - November 5, 2006
Well, those television Reverends all contend that gay marriage will destroy families and our society. How could that be since this involves the humiliation of a so called traditional family. Got to feel sorry about the kids.
The only political aspect of this is my belief that the evangelicals have made gay marraige a political issue rather than accelpt it as a right included in the constitution.
I am a lifelong Christian and I resent my religion used as a pawn to promote hatred through politics. Out of politics religion, do you hear.
By the way, contrary to many this is not the fault of the media. I laugh until I cry when people scream at the media if they or someone they wish to help is reported when caught. Everyone on the take wants to kill the whistle blower.
Larry
Comment by larry — November 5, 2006 @ 9:11 pm - November 5, 2006
#29. Ditto.
Comment by jimmy — November 5, 2006 @ 9:36 pm - November 5, 2006
I don’t mean to criticize Bush for this at all. I don’t expect anyone is going out of their way to play up their ties to Haggard right now. I don’t think there’s anything to hide. Maybe Snow just wanted to discourage reporters from asking any annoying questions on the issue. I’m not even suggesting there’s any dishonesty – just an interesting change of nuance. But you used Snow’s words to correct someone, as if they were definitive fact, I was just noting there were political considerations involved.
Comment by Jed Weber — November 6, 2006 @ 12:23 am - November 6, 2006
The Ken Lay denials were clearly dishonest, though. The “Kenny Boy” letters are posted on the net Not that it matters anymore.
Comment by Jed Weber — November 6, 2006 @ 12:47 am - November 6, 2006
I’m afraid I don’t have a lot of compassion for this man. I appreciate that he may have been able to bring people comfort, but it’s obvious that he used his pulpit and his power more to affect political ends than spiritual ones – focused on the external. Modern evangelist and conservative Christian/Republicans are just like the Pharisees.
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which on the outside look beautiful, but inside they are full of the bones of the dead and of all kinds of filth. So you also on the outside look righteous to others, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness. (Matthew 23:27-28)
I suggest you all read 12 Steps for the Recovering Pharisee.
I just wanna be a sheep, baa, baa, baa, baa
I just wanna be a sheep, baa, baa, baa, baa
pray the Lord my soul to keep,
I just wanna be a sheep, baa, baa, baa, baa.
I don’t wanna be a Pharisee,
I don’t wanna be a Pharisee,
Cause they’re not Fair you see,
I don’t wanna be a Pharisee.
I don’t wanna be a Hypocrite
I don’t wanna be a Hypocrite
Cause they’re not hip with it…
I don’t wanna be a Hypocrite.
Comment by Just A Question — November 6, 2006 @ 12:51 am - November 6, 2006
I think all the comments about liberals or gays being cruel, “intolerant,” hypocritical, etc. are incredibly unfair.
Haggard was no ordinary local pastor – he’s President of the National Association of Evangelicals, which claims to represent more than 30 million Christians. He was ranked in Time Magazine as one of the 25 most influential evangelicals in the country. Harper’s magazine wrote “No pastor in America holds more sway over the political direction of evangelicalism than does Pastor Ted.”
As one of the public faces behind Colorado’s anti-gay marriage amendment, this man deliberately jumped into the poliical arena,on an issue directly affecting gay people. He made repeated public pronouncements on the evils of homosexuality, and apparently even led vigils outside gay bars inviting customers to church.[which sure take on a new light, but who knew?]. How can anyone fault people for noting the exquisite irony here?
I don’t want to take delight in his misery, and I’m sorry for his wife and family. But isn’t their suffering entirely the fault of his lies and actions? Besides the infidelity he committed criminal actions, including a drug felony. As someone else said above, it’s nice to see conservatives show compassion, but I wish you could save a little for the people who are usually demonized.
Comment by Jed Weber — November 6, 2006 @ 1:30 am - November 6, 2006
I am a first time contibutor.
Dan, I thought your opening comments were very well written. And as one of the bloggers here commented, you do a good job of expressing compassion and thoughtfulness to you writings. I hope I am able to do as well as you.
I am a “born-again” openly Gay Christian! I have since age 11 been a Christian. I realize that I have also, always been Gay, as that is the way God created me, in God’s wonderful wisdom and plan.
I wish that I could see this idea taught everywhere… that God, in God’s infinte wisdom, understanding, compassion and love, creates some of us Gay.
You see, I too believed when I was college aged, that my “sexuality” was a choice. I did NOT WANT TO BE Gay. I wanted to be Straight. I wanted to fit in, be a part of the “Majority Class” and be accepted into the fullness of society and certainly the fullness of the church. (raised United Methodist)
So, I married a “friend” who knew my secret, and agreed to “Love me” so much that I’d not even think of being Gay again. (And for those cynics – I am not just talking about being a great sex partner… but, real, genuine LOVE for me.)
She already had a 1 year old child, and I always wanted children. So we were married. Right away we had our first Son, and I gave him my full name.
NOW, I could hold up this little family before all the world and proclaim “I was Straight”.
And out of that… came a life built upon lies, fears to be hidden, falsehoods and deceptions. Probably the worse deception was self-deception.
To add to the deception and lies, at the prompting of our local church, I joined “Exodus International” and more locally “Reconcilation Ministries”.
What a night mare… but, it was out of that “facing the demon of homosexuality” that I began to realize, there was NO demon of homosexuality in side of me.
It was just truth… I was ONLY attracted sexually to men. Not all men.. but certainly Only men. I was born Gay!
After 16 years, our marriage was a mess. We were NOT “IN LOVE” with each other. We married for all the wrong reasons… “We thought we could change each other”. In those 16 years, we were blessed with 6 wonderful children, I beautiful big home, on property in the country… I was fairly successful in my profession… and like Ted Haggard… I was so lonely.
And one night, in Oct. 1998 I met a fella at a gathering, and it just happend that my wife was not with me.
WOW.. I was so taken by this guy… and I did what I had resisted for 15 1/2 years.. I had an affair…
And it felt so wonderful, so right, so fulfilling… that after our intimacy time together, I would lay in his arms and cry.. usually for hours… I was so lonely, so afraid, so lost and so afraid of lossing ALL that was “My life”.
I had lived my life full of integrity, honesty and truthfulness… and yet ALL of it was ONE BIG LIE!!!
Because, when you build your life as a “straight man” and you are a “Gay Man”, all you have is this person that no one really knows – in honesty. So your life is a big lie.
I tell you ALL of this.. because, I do have compassion for Ted Haggard and every other Gay man and woman out there, who are currently living a “straight life” praying that somehow, the nightmare they’ve created for themselves would end.
And like Ted Haggard, I was BLESSED….. mine marriage ended abruptly, horrifically and very painfully.
So painful for me, that I simply wanted to die.
I did NOT want my “bubble” burst. But, burst it did and it ended.
At the time… I lost all of my material world. Home, Business, Family, Church Family (they turned their backs on me totally) in fact, my ex-wife, in her pain and agony was very cruel.
And not only to me, but to our children… because they were an extension of ME. (Much of this was done by her unconsciously or without premeditated intent)
But, eight years have come and gone, and today that hurricane that blew our lives apart is overwith. We’ve rebuilt our lives – seperately. And I am a very happy, well adjusted, Openly Gay Christain man.
What I pray for Ted Haggard, is that he will NOT fall into the trap of “EXODUS INTERNATIONAL” and their false teachings of become an “EX-GAY”.
What he has done is wrong… there is no good excuse for it. But, what will only add further pain, to an already painful situation, is for Ted to deny his sexuality.
I wish I could put into his hands, the book that gave Liberty to me! (I hope it’s OK to do this)
I read the book “The Children Are Free” by Rev. Jeff Miner of Jesus MCC in Indianapolis, it was a life saver for me.
I pray that some how, Ted will get that book placed into his hands and he will read it and be set free.
I also, worry about his wife. Regardless, of their “bedroom” relationship, she is the wife of this prominent man, perceived to be this “great woman” of Faith and Christian Community.
Only to find out that her whole life, has been built upon a lie.
There is a place I know of, where she would be able to find hope and that is at the “Straight Spouse Network”.
It is a great place for the straight spouses of Gay men and women.
This situation with Ted Haggard makes it so clear to me, WHY we need to have this “national” dialogue about Homosexuality. That it is NOT a Choice, no more so than being born Left Handed.
That Homosexuals, who do “act in offensive or abusive” ways, are often acting out of the deep pain and rejection or abuse that they’ve felt or experienced in their life. Often from many sources, people and institutions. Extreme rejection, simply because they were born “gay”.
My prayer is that this situation, will do one good thing currently, and that is block the marriage proposal in Colorado. And secondly, get the Conservative Christian Community to begin to talk about “INCLUSIVENESS” rather then “EXCLUSIVENESS”.
Jesus was open armed and embracing to all of those whom were considered “Out side the margins of society”, in his day. And we as Christians, should also be “Open Armed and Accepting” of those whom we don’t fully understand, and learn to be understanding and share with sincerity and real caring.
Ted Haggard’s ministry was a wonderful ministry, reaching many people and bringing goodness into the life of many people.
How sad this great work, could not have been credited to “an Openly Gay, Openly Christian – Ted Haggard”
Now that would be a wonderful ministry…
Thank you for putting this website together. I can’t express my appreciation enough. Thanks!
Comment by MichiganGayPatriot — November 6, 2006 @ 3:02 am - November 6, 2006
#44, Eddie, I think you referred to my post, since the quote in your second paragraph was from my post in #34. Maybe the numbers were changed through editing. Anyway, I stand by what I said in the quote. It does not mean that I approve of these actions, and acknowledge that in many cases, their actions are wrong and have hurt other people, like wives and children.
First, some gay men get married thinking that they are straight and with the intention of remaining faithful. But many straight persons get married with that intention, and after a year, 5 years, 10 years, or whenever, decide they no longer love their spouse and file for divorce. When Haggard discovered that he could no longer resist temptation, he should at that point filed for divorce and asked for forgiveness. His actions then would have been no worse than a straight person divorcing without cheating on the spouse. But like many of his straight counterparts, he did cheat and hurt his family. To me, both situations are similar and equally immoral.
I sympathesize with these gay individuals, because society is still not fully accepting of homosexuality. When a gay person marries someone of the opposite sex, who knows what crap they went through their childhood in terms of how evil homosexuality is, and how anyone who is gay is going to burn in hell, etc. The people with these beliefs are partly to blame for the situation that leads gay men to marry women, in my view. But at some point, these gay men need to stop being victims, and take control of their lives, and not continue their hurtful actions.
You may feel that what I’m saying is loaded with contradictions, but I don’t see this situation as black and white.
I am disturbed that Haggard still views his homosexuality as “dark and repulsive.” If he continues this self-loathing, then I will lose all sympathy for him.
Comment by Pat — November 6, 2006 @ 7:30 am - November 6, 2006
Chase at #10 writes: “Really, you don’t have to be Agatha Christie to figure out that Haggard is a liar. He can’t ask for forgiveness when he won’t even come clean. ”
Really?
“I did not have sex with that woman” –Pres Bill Clinton; (director’s note: finger point at camera for full effect, compose a stern look on face, appear angered at the suggestion of impropriety).
Yes, Chase… you were saying?
Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 6, 2006 @ 8:55 am - November 6, 2006
my ex-wife, in her pain and agony was very cruel.
Let me see if I got this straight. You cheated on your wife, you broke your marital vows, you betrayed her, you destroyed her life and the lives of your children… but she’s the bitch?
I don’t see anything noble or admirable about putting one’s own self-gratification above the well-being of one’s wife and children.
Comment by V the K — November 6, 2006 @ 10:04 am - November 6, 2006
Pat writes: “I sympathesize with these gay individuals, because society is still not fully accepting of homosexuality.”
Let’s see, Haggard contends he isn’t gay… his conduct was a breach in his moral fabric and a failure of character due to the influence of illegal drugs… he still sees gays as inherently flawed, abnormal, and probably sick.
You contend he’s gay and express sympathy in general terms for people who are outed as gay because of something bad or evil in the childhood. How about this concept: when you turn into an adult, no more excuses about bad mommies with coat hangers, clergy abuse or the best one “drugs made me do it”. If you got problems entering adulthood –get some frickin’ help and deal with it –stay away from relationships until you do. Simple.
If you don’t we won’t issue a PR “get out of jail card” from the well meaning public or reprobate media. This guy made choices; he knew what he was doing. Suffer the consequences. And quit calling him “gay” like it’s a disease he needs an excuse to “get over”.
How about we skip the labeling of yet another scumbag as “gay” –we’ve had enough to last this century already. Haggard doesn’t deserve a moment’s consideration… his family and flock do. Haggard should go find a trailer park in Vermont and blend into the backdrop of history’s failures.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 6, 2006 @ 11:41 am - November 6, 2006
VdaK writes: “I don’t see anything noble or admirable about putting one’s own self-gratification above the well-being of one’s wife and children.”
So I’m guessing you are against sitting Presidents getting blow jobs in the Oval Office while their family, security guards and fellow workers are 30 ft away?
I love the liberal’s take on all this. First it’s: Can we use it against GOPers? Then it’s: Can we use it against religion? Finally it’s: He’s gay so he deserves our pity and exemption –probably a bad childhood experience. Followed, for the GayLeftBorg, with the dating optional question: “Is he cute?”
Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 6, 2006 @ 11:49 am - November 6, 2006
So I’m guessing you are against sitting Presidents getting blow jobs in the Oval Office while their family, security guards and fellow workers are 30 ft away?
Actually, Haggard admits to buying drugs from the gay hooker, but denies having sex with him. In other words, he claims, “I bought crystal meth, but I did not impale.”
Comment by V the K — November 6, 2006 @ 11:51 am - November 6, 2006
I don’t want to take delight in his misery, and I’m sorry for his wife and family. But isn’t their suffering entirely the fault of his lies and actions?
Depends on how you look at it.
Which do you think would be worse: finding out about his problems privately and dealing with them as such, or through the media circus?
Sure, they’re going to suffer because of his lies and actions. However, thanks to the liberal left who saw a chance to swing an election, they’re also going to be completely and publicly humiliated and pilloried. They’re going to get to see leftist websites and commentators make fun of their father and husband, and they’re going to hear him (and them) mocked in the media and publicly.
That’s why, quite frankly, I think the liberal commentors here expressing sympathy are full of shit.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 6, 2006 @ 12:54 pm - November 6, 2006
Wow! What a sad situation for ALL. Yes I did say ALL, EVERYONE! I am a Christian who has sinned,made mistakes,lied,made hypocrytical comments,stole,watched porn, etc… in my life just like EVERYONE else and am not proud of it, nor would I ever condone those practices. I am not here to judge anyone nor should anyone else judge. God will be the Judge for all of us. Anyway, Ted really messed up, especially being the person who led and taught a large number of people and will be held acountable for his actions and removed from the pulpit as he should be. I don’t believe his views or beliefs about homosexualityor any other aspect of the bible have changed because of this but maybe his level of compassion has. It is very sad when people take a situation like this and laugh, mock, expoit, etc. at a person falling from bad choices when we should be trying to help and encourage. Isn’t that what you would want when faced with your own shortcomings? Yes, his actions and words were dispicable, and I am in no way showing favor towards a man of faith, but I am saying WE are all capable and do many things that are just as bad but just haven’t got caught! The bottom line is if we would all try (yes, try) to live good and respectful lives we would have less of a mess in our society.
Comment by OOPS — November 6, 2006 @ 1:11 pm - November 6, 2006
the least sophisticated psych student knows that those who cry the loudest about some supposedly horrible personal thing are very often the most afflicted by it. isnt it a bit odd that theres such a rush to forgive this guy that it makes it appear that the supposed sin itself cant be such a big deal? whereas just before and all along the sin of homosexuality has been so huge it almost blots out the light in the sky?
Comment by prgall — November 6, 2006 @ 1:51 pm - November 6, 2006
OPPs, no offense intended but I am so tired of the “Do not judge, God will judge us all” crap that comes out of the liberalized left religious community. Quit padding the kneelers, ok?
No. We are allowed to judge. It’s an ancient religious principle that transcends the 1970’s dumbing down of religion to the lowest denominator. He’s not guilty, no one is beyond redemption, we must all forgive. Crap. If you want to wait for divine justice to be determined at a later date, go ahead. As a Christian, I know we have license to identify immoral acts, isolate the perp and protect society. Frankly, not to do so is an immoral act in my book.
You watching porn is a lot different than a religious minister “defrocking” his flock and impeaching God’s message of moral conduct. I’m perfectly content to let God forgive Haggard when he gets him before the Pearly Gates… til then, he’s pond scum.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 6, 2006 @ 2:13 pm - November 6, 2006
the least sophisticated psych student knows that those who cry the loudest about some supposedly horrible personal thing are very often the most afflicted by it.
Yes, the least-sophisticated psych students know that, but the more>-sophisticated ones have learned that this is not scientifically borne out on a regular basis, and is in fact an excuse.
In short, the reason gay leftists claim that “everyone who opposes gays is closeted” is because it allows them to avoid evaluating their own behavior and looking for reasons why that just might be..
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 6, 2006 @ 2:21 pm - November 6, 2006
Be very careful, Matt.
As a Christian, I know we have license to identify immoral acts, isolate the perp and protect society. Frankly, not to do so is an immoral act in my book.
You’re right; we can identify the act, isolate the perpetrator, and protect OUR community (the church).
Howeve, take that to extremes, and you end up like Cotton Mather — or his latter-day counterpart, Mike Rogers.
In my opinion, the church has the right to confront people about their specific sins, ask them to repent, and, if they choose not to do so, expel them from the body. It also is the church’s duty to report if a crime is being committed to the appropriate civil authorities, especially if it is a crime between members, i.e. molestation.
But the ultimate, overriding point is this; if someone confesses their sin and repents, we are duty-bound to forgive them. And then, when/if they screw up again, the cycle repeats.
Yes, it’s incredibly annoying. But it’s also what our Lord did.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 6, 2006 @ 2:33 pm - November 6, 2006
Matt, No, OOPS to you. I have not judged you. But you seem to be real quick to pass judgement on me. You on the left say we “Christians are intollerant”, you need to look in a mirror. You are very intollerant of any Christian or anything to do with Christianity. You didn’t listen to a thing I said. I am talking about being a good, upstanding person. If we all practice that, we wouldn’t have them crimes and disention that we all face today. I could care less whether you are gay, straight, christian,athiest,black, white, green or purple get rid of such hate and have compassion on people. You must be the righteous one!
Comment by oops — November 6, 2006 @ 2:34 pm - November 6, 2006
Pharisees!! Pharisees!!
Comment by JustAQuestion — November 6, 2006 @ 2:41 pm - November 6, 2006
JustAQuestion, you do realize that pointing fingers and namecalling is in and of itself an example of Pharisee-like behavior, don’t you?
Of course not. You are merely using the charge as a perjorative to tear down others, just as you invariably do.
Perhaps you actually ought to consider following the first two steps.
1. We admit that our single most unmitigated pleasure is to judge other people.
2. Have come to believe that our means of obtaining greatness is to make everyone lower than ourselves in our own mind.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 6, 2006 @ 2:51 pm - November 6, 2006
1. I’m essentially calling a spade a spade, or in this case, a Pharisee a Pharisee. I leave judgment of what that means to others… Or perhaps you are in agreement that religion should be externally focused? The right-wing on here certainly have no problem flinging judgment around with glee. I’m simply followimg that example.
2. My personal feeling is that religious leaders and the GOP need a little humble pie, to realize they’re the same as others, not better or worse, certainly (and obviously) not without fault, and most certainly not the party of family values their rhetoric claims them to be.
Comment by JustAQuestion — November 6, 2006 @ 3:07 pm - November 6, 2006
P.S. Haggard cast the first stone.
Neither do I condemn him: go Haggard, and sin no more…and stay away from the preaching business.
Comment by JustAQuestion — November 6, 2006 @ 3:15 pm - November 6, 2006
The right-wing on here certainly have no problem flinging judgment around with glee. I’m simply followimg that example.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 6, 2006 @ 3:24 pm - November 6, 2006
The right-wing on here certainly have no problem flinging judgment around with glee. I’m simply followimg that example.
So you are actually doing yourself that which you oppose, condemn, and mock when others do it.
That says it all, methinks.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 6, 2006 @ 3:29 pm - November 6, 2006
The example we should all follow is that of Christ. We would all be happier and more fulfilled in this life if we would use the guidelines the bible has set for us. When we choose to live our lives according to “ME” we have chaos and discord. So, those filled with hatred words and actions are not living the way we were all created to live. What happened to us is the evil in this world has made sin look very inviting and rewarding, which it is, or we wouln’t sin. Why is it that we do the things which we know we shouldn’t? Hint…(Satan), evil, whatever you want to call it. But we all have a choice, turn and flee those evil things.
Comment by oops — November 6, 2006 @ 3:49 pm - November 6, 2006
I certainly mock it, but to oppose it would be the hypocrisy found within the GOP and evangelist Christians, and to oppose it would be futile. Nearly every thread and comment in this blog is one ranting judgment or another. Why stop now?
Comment by JustAQuestion — November 6, 2006 @ 4:34 pm - November 6, 2006
I certainly mock it, but to oppose it would be the hypocrisy found within the GOP and evangelist Christians, and to condemn oppose it would be futile. Nearly every thread and comment in this blog is one ranting judgment or another. Why stop now?
Comment by JustAQuestion — November 6, 2006 @ 4:39 pm - November 6, 2006
Everyone makes hypocritical statements, believe it or not. You don’t have to agree with the Christian teaching, that is your choice, but don’t mock that which you don’t believe in. Being a Christian is harder to live than being a non-christian. We are actually a persecuted minority these days. A non-Christian life is much easier to live. Because in that life there are no morals (that is a Christian belief), no rules (10 commandments), no forgiveness or grace if you don’t want, etc. So when you dont believe in Christian values, you have one choice… a Godless society and all that goes with it, a very selfish society full of murder, rape, robbery, deception, etc. So I really don’t know why the Christian values are so offensive because they are based on all that is good and what everyone truely wants in their lives. We all want to live in peace and harmony. And that is what the Bible teaches.
Comment by oops — November 6, 2006 @ 5:13 pm - November 6, 2006
I certainly mock it, but to oppose it would be the hypocrisy found within the GOP and evangelist Christians, and to oppose it would be futile. Nearly every thread and comment in this blog is one ranting judgment or another.
Again, you are practicing yourself that which you condemn in others, and using their behavior as an excuse for yours.
Each time you speak, you make it more obvious.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 6, 2006 @ 5:30 pm - November 6, 2006
Oops, just a few comments:
A. Approximately 76% of Americans identify as Christian. You are most certainly not part of a “persecuted minority.” Perhaps your personal version of Christianity is not that of mainstream America but Christianity being under attack is a ridiculous fallacy that you should be ashamed to repeat. Pharisee.
B. I certainly don’t need to be a Christian to be aware of how my actions may harm others and be ashamed by that and personally find it sad that you have so little faith in mankind to assume that the “godless” would simply and automatically fall toward a life of immorality. Like my advice to Haggard, please stay out of the preaching business. Pharisee.
Comment by JustAQuestion — November 6, 2006 @ 5:45 pm - November 6, 2006
ND30,
Your point would be…?
Comment by JustAQuestion — November 6, 2006 @ 5:47 pm - November 6, 2006
I’ve known quite a lot of people who had the attitude, “I don’t need religion to tell me how to treat other people. I’m capable of being decent and moral on my own.” Most of them have turned out to be the most obnoxious, inconsiderate, and selfish people I’ve ever known. But they are so smug in their own minds that they have no idea what major assholes they are.
It’s like the saying goes. If you get a flat tire on a rainy night, you’re a thousand times more likely to be helped out by someone with a Jesus fish on their car than someone with a “Visualize World Peace” bumper sticker.
Comment by V the K — November 6, 2006 @ 6:11 pm - November 6, 2006
I certainly don’t need to be a Christian to be aware of how my actions may harm others and be ashamed by that and personally find it sad that you have so little faith in mankind to assume that the “godless” would simply and automatically fall toward a life of immorality.
Looking at your own posts would make that patently obvious, JAQ.
You yourself said it was wrong to mock, judge, and condemn others……but you’ve made excuse after excuse after excuse of why it’s not wrong for you to do it.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 6, 2006 @ 6:14 pm - November 6, 2006
Here’s the thing about religion. It’s hard. Religion requires you to look beyond yourself, and also requires you to embrace discipline about your behavior and attitude. This is very very hard. And for people who can’t get past their own egos, it’s impossible.
I think one place all the ridicule, and all the hate the secular left has for religion comes from the place where they know other people are getting something that’s just too hard for them to get. It’s like, some people hate athletes, because on some level, they know that the training and dedication an athlete goes through to get himself in top shape is something they could never handle. They hate successful businessmen for a similar reason.
But lefties adore celebrities and politicians, mainly because success in those fields does not really require individual effort, focus, and discipline. Politicians and athletes tend to be chosen by established systems and organizations (parties or studios) and then packaged and promoted by other people’s efforts.
Likewise, if you’re a secularist, there’s no expectation from others that you’ll behave decently, or try to improve yourself. You just have to mouth the words, “It’s wrong to judge people,” and voice support for selected left-wing causes (gay marriage, environmentalism, hatred of Christians), and your left secular buddies will reinforce your sense of superiority.
Comment by V the K — November 6, 2006 @ 6:20 pm - November 6, 2006
JAQ: First of all, I am not ashamed of being a Christian. Second of all, before you go around calling names, you really need to know what they mean. Third, your “mainstream America” is likewise your personal version. Of those 76% claiming to be “Christian”, what are they referring to as “Christian”? Sad to say, “Christian” has become a cliche and a title. In America today its the squeeky wheel that gets greased. Because “mainstream america” or “76% of Christians” if asked, don’t approve of the gay lifestyle displayed on our televisions and airwaves. If youre gay, fine, I don’t need to know about it. I don’t go around telling everyone my sexual orientation. So, why is it that it is pushed down our throats and in our faces? I really don’t care if your gay or not, thats up to you, and yes I can turn the channel if I don’t like what I see. Your right on that, but I don’t bash them, persecute them, or push “Christianity” them. I just don’t believe in that lifesyle. Is that okay that I don’t agree with it? I hope your answer would be YES.
Comment by oops — November 6, 2006 @ 6:41 pm - November 6, 2006
ND30 – It’s obvious you don’t know how to read.
oops – You’ve proven my point for me.
V the K – Pharisee! Wear it proud.
Comment by JustAQuestion — November 6, 2006 @ 6:50 pm - November 6, 2006
Does JAQ remind anyone of a three-year-old who just learned a new word?
Comment by V the K — November 6, 2006 @ 6:54 pm - November 6, 2006
Gay Patriot writes: “Most evangelicals are very sincere in their beliefs — and their values” Really? Prove it.
Comment by Lives in Reality — November 6, 2006 @ 7:03 pm - November 6, 2006
Or is “Pharisee” just another example of how lefties resort to name-calling to disguise the fact that they are incapable of constructing an actual argument.
Comment by V the K — November 6, 2006 @ 7:09 pm - November 6, 2006
JAQ – I have proven my point……just not the one you wanted to hear!
VtheK – well said!
JAQ – This battle between man is not new, nor will it end. You are either a heart or spade, no in between. And in the end, a fence will definitely draw the line. I just hope you choose the right side! But until then, you have alot of searching and studying to do.
Comment by oops — November 6, 2006 @ 7:10 pm - November 6, 2006
Gay Patriot: Try and “Disprove” it! All i can say is if by some small remote chance that my beliefs are true, I have nothing to lose but eternal life to gain. What do you have?
Comment by oops — November 6, 2006 @ 7:15 pm - November 6, 2006
To that person who said Christians are in the minority. Please! You own the country. I’m not Christian and I’m reminded of that every day, as during this election, suddenly everyone is talking about their love of the Lord and Jesus. No one cares about the Jewish vote, I don’t see anyone trying to court us and don’t say it’s because we’re all liberal, a lot of us are Lieberman Jews. And I wonder, NDT and Mr. Patriot, let’s say the Jewish equivalent of Preacher (or Reverend, I admit I’m not sure) Haggard who was married with children, who had the same kind of position with Jewish organizations, was caught in the same compromising position. Would you have the same compassion for him? Judaism is just as “accepting” of homosexuality as Christianity is.
Comment by jaded cyncic — November 6, 2006 @ 7:24 pm - November 6, 2006
#89: As I see it, you either believe that the universe and everything in it was created by an all-powerful supreme being, or you believe it was the result of a series of random trillion-to-one chances that the universe would evolve to support life, and that intelligent life in all its complexity would evolve.
Either way, you have to take a leap of faith the believe in something fantastically unlikely. The difference is, one gives hope and meaning. The other offers nothing but empty existential materialism.
Comment by V the K — November 6, 2006 @ 7:31 pm - November 6, 2006
VdaK… and the latter also rewards you with relativistic morality, deontological utilitarianism and the “right” to do anything that pleases you because the DoI says “pursuit of happiness” is a God Given Right.
Ever notice how many on the Left have so many Rights? They gotta be making up as they go along.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 6, 2006 @ 7:47 pm - November 6, 2006
Ever notice how many on the Left have so many Rights?
And so few responsibilities, especially toward wives and children.
Comment by V the K — November 6, 2006 @ 8:01 pm - November 6, 2006
From #53 to V the K #56:
In my original posting (#53) I said that what was sad is that in my Ex-wife has used her pain in a very destructive way. She took it out on our children. And I won’t go into all of it, as it is personal and that is not the purpose here, to air my family laundry… But, before, during and after my divorce… I DID NOT turn my back on my family. I have had FULL custody of my kids and raised these children on my own WITHOUT her help, without ANY Child Support from her, and have worked very hard to encourage our children to have a “good quality” relationship with their Mother.
She continues to put everything in her life, before or ahead of her children.
And that sole fact contributed heavily, to the affair that I had.
The fact that it was a gay affair, was indicative of the fact that before, during and after my marriage I am GAY!
I am NOT excusing my failure to maintain my vows to her.
My whole point to my writings here, revolve around the fact, that many people make some very bad and wrong choices because they believe the lies that Homosexuality is something that can be changed. Should be changed or worse yet…. that those who are Gay and Lesbian should somehow be scorned, condemned, treated with 2nd class treatment, and somehow “demonized” in society.
And the reprecussions of all of this is very sad in the lives of the people involved.
I hope that Ted Haggard will come to terms with his Homosexuality, see it for what it is… “the way he was created” learn to accept it and see it as good – and then build a life that is fully based in truth, honesty and integrity.
Then maybe he can start a great church that is Welcoming, Affirming and Open to ALL of God’s Children!
AMEN!
Comment by MichiganGayPatriot — November 6, 2006 @ 8:53 pm - November 6, 2006
It is sad that the proferred therapy for Ted Haggard should be a group of evangelical pastors like he tried to be. I would counsel him to view Brokeback Mountain, the movie, and read Gov. McGreevey’s extraordinary memoir. He needs to ask himself who he really is, rather than jamb himself back into the straightjacket of his old life.
Comment by fishface — November 6, 2006 @ 8:58 pm - November 6, 2006
Again, back to Ted. Yes we are all Gods children and He loves each and every one of us. Teds battle is that he knows right from wrong. He knows what the bible teaches and so should the 76% of people professing to be Christians. You either believe the bible and all its teachings or you don’t. If you only believe the parts that you like and discard the rest, then you have to discard the entire bible. Ted will find his way thru all of this, and when he does I hope we can all forgive him just like we are forgiven when we mess up.
Comment by oops — November 6, 2006 @ 9:23 pm - November 6, 2006
I would counsel him to view Brokeback Mountain, the movie, and read Gov. McGreevey’s extraordinary memoir. He needs to ask himself who he really is, rather than jamb himself back into the straightjacket of his old life.
Perhaps he prefers to be a loving husband and father who has confronted his issues…..instead of an abusive former spouse who threatens to beat his wife (Ennis Del Mar) or a philanderer who goes gay, then ditches his second wife and his kids to move in with his rich boyfriend (McGreevey).
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 6, 2006 @ 11:33 pm - November 6, 2006
Oops, my friend – we all, as Christians, think we know what scripture teaches us about God, and try to live in accordance with it’s teachings about right and wrong… however, the wiser among us try to remember that we see Him and understand His scripture about as clearly as we see through a glass darkly – the Bible is anything but easy to understand. History shows, time and again, how Christians of good faith have misunderstood scripture (slavery? the subjugation of women? polygamy? the Inquistion?) and how people suffer when, in an excess of zeal and certainty, we try to act on that “knowledge” in a judgmental manner. Perhaps that’s why Christ warned us to look to the log in our own eyes before saying anything about the speck in somebody else’s. There are many disagreements in today’s church as to what scripture is, what it means, and how to respond to that – and I think the lesson from all of this is that we should be humble in our use of the Bible. After my study of the Word, and much prayer and struggle, I’ve come to believe that the Bible says nothing against gays who would live in godly relationships with each other, marked by fidelity, monogamy, mutual sacrifice and love. Perhaps you disagree – if so, I think you’re wrong, but I’ll still call you brother. There’s been a lot of verses tossed around in this thread today, so I’ll add one more, from Micah 6.
6 With what shall I come before the LORD
and bow down before the exalted God?
Shall I come before him with burnt offerings,
with calves a year old?
7 Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams,
with ten thousand rivers of oil?
Shall I offer my firstborn for my transgression,
the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?
8 He has showed you, O man, what is good.
And what does the LORD require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
and to walk humbly with your God.
Comment by Casey — November 7, 2006 @ 2:52 am - November 7, 2006
Michigan-Matt, my having sympathy for people like Haggard and McGreevey doesn’t excuse their behavior and the hurt they caused their family. In fact, since McGreevey was the governor of my state, I am ticked of the crap he pulled here. He hasn’t apologized to the taxpayers he bilked (for appointing an unqualified boyfriend), or, as far as I now, repaid the state treasury for doing it, while he can clearly afford to do so.
Yes, Haggard should put his family’s feelings ahead of his own. But I don’t believe staying in this type of marriage is the way to go. His wife should have the opportunity to be with someone who loves her the way should be loved. But that’s her choice and her business.
I agree that no matter what childhood problems that Haggard or anyone else had to endure does not entitle them to a “get out of Jail free card.” By the time you hit your 20s, you have to stop playing the victim, get the help you need, and not hurt anyone else in the process. That’s what Haggard should have done. And now he needs to repair the damage he caused. As for the term gay, I usually don’t like to play semantics. I simply meant the term to mean he is attracted to men. Any disease he has is not because of being gay (or homosexual), but the way he dealt with it and is dealing with it.
NDT, it certainly would have been preferable for his family if this did not come out publicly. But it is Haggard’s fault. He became a high profile figure, and didn’t step away from it when he started his egregious behavior. I don’t know how he could expect a drug selling prostitute to keep this information between them. So the whole time he risked public disclosure.
As for this influencing the election, I don’t think it helps Democrats at all, even if they are somehow behind this public disclosure. One of the reasons I am against outing is that it doesn’t advance gay rights.
Michigan-Matt, one more thing. I really do not wish to enter the religion debate, but I am curious about one thing. And I apologize if this sounds snarky. It seems to me that any gay Christian (especially Catholic) has to have some degree of moral relativism, if they are having sex and continues to intend on having sex, when it is against Catholic teaching. Please explain how this does not conflict with your views.
Comment by Pat — November 7, 2006 @ 7:25 am - November 7, 2006
Pat writes: “Michigan-Matt, one more thing. I really do not wish to enter the religion debate”
and later
“It seems to me that any gay Christian (especially Catholic) has to have some degree of moral relativism, if they are having sex and continues to intend on having sex, when it is against Catholic teaching.”
Pat, if someone else here wants to explain that to you, they can. Maybe some research into the question by you would be more beneficial in the long term than any response I could offer.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 7, 2006 @ 10:17 am - November 7, 2006
Michigan-Matt, thanks. I may just follow your suggestion. In the meantime, if anyone else wants to give it a shot, I would it appreciate it.
Comment by Pat — November 7, 2006 @ 10:49 am - November 7, 2006
Casey in #98, thanks for quoting one of my favorite passages from Scripture. Sometimes I think Micah’s words get at the very essence of faith.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — November 7, 2006 @ 12:06 pm - November 7, 2006
Casey, I respect your comments and also agree that there are scriptures in the bible that are very hard to interpret and understand fully. But there are also scriptures that are very clear with little room for misinterpretation. Micah 6 is a great script but I fail to see where it adresses the issue of homosexuality. On the other hand Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 speak of this issue. I really don’t know how you can interpret that any other way. Again, I am not here to judge you, you must seek for yourself as we all do. Sin is Sin and we all do it, but we must also recognize it and turn away. I would speak of murder, hate, and any other sin the same way. I by no means am trying to get the specks out of your eyes because my own planks are big enough for me to worry about. Some planks are harder to get out than others. We all need to take our own inventory of planks and be humble enough and teachable enough to get rid of them.
Comment by oops — November 7, 2006 @ 12:15 pm - November 7, 2006
Oops: Gays are not more out or in your face with their sexuality and sexual oriention. It’s simply that you and everyone else presume the world to be straight and so you are more likely to notice “acts of gayness” (e.g., hand holding or commenting about his boyfriend). And, because of the assumption of heterosexuality, gays must put it out there. Society has put them in that position. If the presumption was that everyone was gay, there would be no need to and you would be the one putting your straightness in our faces.
Comment by Lisa — November 7, 2006 @ 1:19 pm - November 7, 2006
I think it is brilliant that the “moral elite” are revealed to be hypocrits every now and then. The Red States inhabitants believe they are getting people pure as teh driven snow when they vote Republican. They don’t believe they are getting closet homos or else they might just vote for the other Democratic candidate who they presume is either a homo or likes homos. The Republicans won the last election with the argument that they are more moral and should rule because of this. I’m glad some are revealed to be full of shit. It’s a nice reminder for the country that they’re not necessarily more moral and don’t have a monopoly on morality. People should know that because they vote Republican does not mean they won’t get someone who is spending their evenings getting f*cked in the butt, which is a-ok if you’re not married to a woman and lying to her about it.
Comment by Lisa — November 7, 2006 @ 1:27 pm - November 7, 2006
Why is it that the hateful, spiteful, vulgar, and name calling comments only come from readers like Lisa? Maybe it is true conviction coming out of the closet! Huh!!!! We are all adults in a debate, act like one.
Comment by oops — November 7, 2006 @ 1:59 pm - November 7, 2006
I don’t think Haggard qualifies as a hypocrite (a term we throw around much too loosely). Haggard claimed that homosexuals behaved in a certain way, and were a threat to the stability of the family. Now we find that as a homosexual, he behaved in a certain way, and was a threat to the stability of his family. It seems to me that Pastor Haggard’s life has been pretty much consistent with his beliefs. A “liar and a deceiver” he may be, but a hypocrite he is not. In fact, he might have been a better human being if he had been a hypocrite.
VtheK: Gay people loved “Brokeback Mountain” for many reasons (even though no Gays or Lesbians were seriously involved or consulted at any stage of its creative development), but not because the film provided an object lesson on how to live as a well-adjusted Gay man. Jack and Ennis became Gay icons not because of their virtue, but because of their suffering. And since Gay and Lesbian communities are on their most basic level a reaction against the martyrdom of the closet, the narrative of “Brokeback” served to consolidate and reaffirm contemporary Gay identity.
Comment by Tim Hulsey — November 7, 2006 @ 2:23 pm - November 7, 2006
Yeah, yeah, yeah, bullshit. The real issue is “christianity” demonizing homosexuality, therefore causing all damaged souls to seek destructive outlets for their natural, god-given same sex desires, whether gay or bi. It’s not about Haggard making mistakes or not being perfect. It’s about religious hypocrites(powerful or not) preaching against homosexuality and enacting laws that punish homosexuality throughout history
that is just one of the very evil bloody legacies that “christianity” leaves in it’s wake…none of which jesus would approve of or particpate in. So to all pharisees and sadducee of the day, I say “throw ‘em to the lions!”. …in the name of Jesus.
Comment by Nikko — November 7, 2006 @ 2:53 pm - November 7, 2006
Heya Oops – glad you responded (though since I’m abandoning this thread after this post… altogether too much scrolling to get here… you’re welcome to continue this discussion with me at shadowlover14@yahoo.com). You say that the passages of scripture used to condemn homosexuality are clear – I’d say don’t be so certain. Is it worth a little of your time and effort to do the research it takes to certify that when you tell somebody they cannot be happy in a relationship with somebody of the same sex, you are correct in doing so? Telling gays that God has “given them up” causes a lot of suffering, and I know that any compassionate person would not want to do so in ignorance. I’d like to ask that you read a few things, just so you know that there are other, valid interpretations of those passages out there – and then that you pray for conviction as to which interpretation is more in line with Christ’s teaching that all the law and the prophets hang on the twin commandments to love God and neighbor. Start with http://truthsetsfree.net/study.html. I think you might be surprised, particularly if you approach it with the desire to treat gays justly, to show mercy, and to be humble in the face of truth.
Comment by Casey — November 7, 2006 @ 4:20 pm - November 7, 2006
Casey, I have some very dear close gay friends so I am not trying to condemn anyone. I have alot of compassion for anyone in sin, or I wouldn’t be on this space. I am not the one throwing around hatred comments and judgement. I agree that you can have a close, happy relationship with the same sex, just like you can with the opposite. But, it doesn’t mean it has to be a sexual realtionship. That is what the bible clearly says is sexual immorality. God does not hate the person, he hates the sin. I didn’t say it, God did. So, maybe your anger ought to be towards God and take the issue up with Him. Sin is enjoyable, that is why we do it and battle with it. So , you too need to pray for clear revelation from God and not man.
Comment by oops — November 8, 2006 @ 10:17 am - November 8, 2006
Lisa, Oh, by the way, if we were “all gay”, the human race would be extinct. We all know how reproduction works, a homosexual cannot produce offspring! Hmmm. So, tell me how God would have ordained that! Doesn’t quite add up does it!
Comment by oops — November 8, 2006 @ 2:02 pm - November 8, 2006