While I appreciate that Ted Haggard, the immediate past president of the National Association of Evangelicals, has acknowledged his errors, calling himself “a deceiver and a liar” in a letter of apology he wrote to his New Life congregation, I take no comfort in his apparent reference to his homosexual feelings as a part of his life that is “repulsive and dark.”
It is one thing to admit error, quite another to see one’s own feelings as dark forces. To be sure, we all have feelings which are indeed dark and repulsive. And sometimes we act on them, hurting others and ourselves. One’s sexual/emotional feelings, even when directed to one’s own gender, are not, in and of themselves, either dark or repulsive.
It is how we act on them that defines who we are. And how we act when recognize that we have made mistakes and strayed from our path.
Haggard has done the right thing in admitting his error. In seeking some kind of contact* with a prostitute, he cheated on his wife.
Tammy thinks Haggard has a better “chance of becoming a better person” than former President Bill Clinton and former New Jersey Governor James McGreevey because he has at least admitted his wrong. While I highly recommend Tammy’s post, I wish Haggard had not dismissed his own sexual feelings as dark forces deserving contempt.
But, Tammy is right to distinguish Haggard from Clinton and McGreevey. It’s unfortunate that all too many gay people are so eager to forgive the former New Jersey Governor his faults because he has come out as a “gay American.” That Democrat behaved as badly as did Mr. Haggard.
The primary differences are that Haggard admitted his wrong and did not choose to come out as gay — that is, while he seems to have acknowledged his attraction to men, he will try to repress those feelings in the future. It’s unfortunate that he could not both admit his wrong and acknowledge the possibility of living a moral life as a gay man.
That said, as social conservatives go, Haggard has shown some sympathy for gay concerns, even before last week’s revelations. As Eva Young noted in an e-mail to me, he has “criticized one of the more extreme anti-gay candidates in a GOP primary in Colorado.” Another reader e-mailed me a link to an article noting that he supported Lawrence v. Texas, “2003 Supreme Court decision striking down Texas’ anti-sodomy law on privacy grounds.”
Mr. Haggard has the freedom to live his own life as he chooses. So, I will not pass judgment on him if he decides to stay with his wife and raise his children together with her. If he does not return to his past practices and is faithful to her, that choice may very well be a very good thing for those children. But, it would be nice at least, if he could say that while he has chosen this life, he understands that other men with feelings for men make different choices, acting on attractions which are neither dark nor repulsive, but merely natural feelings on which one can act in a moral manner.
-B. Daniel Blatt (AKA GayPatriotWest)
*I use the term “some kind of contact” to acknowledge the difference between Haggard’s account and that of Mike Jones, the gay man whom Haggard claims he paid for massage.
‘I take no comfort in his apparent reference to his homosexual feelings as a part of his life that is “repulsive and dark.”’
Huh? That’s one of the major motivations for conservatives to bring up gays in the first place–to consolidate power by misdirecting people from the real crimes committed by those at the top (as well as by those at the bottom: the much more ‘normal’ sexual abuse of children in ‘unbroken’ nuclear families), scapegoat an ‘outsider’ instead–and thus it is only to be expected that being gay is seen by Haggard as repulsive and dark. The GayPatriots seem to exist in some odd netherworld where conservative Christians normally espouse the beautiful wonders of male-male hand-holding and kissing (let alone anal sex)! Please wake up. Thank you!
As a New Jersey resident (and yes, also a liberal), I’d be interested to know why this site is so obsessed with trashing Jim McGreevey. Has no one who posts here actually watched any of McGreevey’s interviews? He’s the first person who is standing up and saying “I was wrong and what I did is inexcusable.” And he’s trying to explain to people not to repeat his mistakes of staying in the closet, showing what living your life that way does.
Now I will be the first to grant anyone that his decisions can’t all be blamed on the pathology of the closet. And I’m not saying he didn’t behave badly. But as badly as Haggard? Does anyone here really think a standard corrupt politician (as we know NJ politics are) is as bad as such core hypocrisy from Haggard?
I’m tired of hearing the religious right talking about forgiveness of sinners when they are the first to accuse everyone of sin. That’s the problem with Haggard that makes him worse than McGreevey in my mind.
I started reading this site a few months ago because even as a liberal, I liked getting some balance in my blog reading. But I can see that (especially recently), this blog is no better than the smear campaign my own side of the spectrum uses in it’s blogs. This obsession with Clinton (and McGreevey) is tired.
Now I will be the first to grant anyone that his decisions can’t all be blamed on the pathology of the closet. And I’m not saying he didn’t behave badly. But as badly as Haggard? Does anyone here really think a standard corrupt politician (as we know NJ politics are) is as bad as such core hypocrisy from Haggard?
What Haggard did is wrong.
What McGreevey did is wrong AND criminal.
Does that answer your question?
Criminality is the distinction? And using meth and hiring a prostitute — these aren’t crimes?
NDT, I’m not arguing McGreevey wasn’t criminal. And I agree with inLA – the meth and prostitution was illegal, too. Maybe he doesn’t get charged. McGreevey hasn’t been.
My point is the hypocrisy that I’m really exhausted with from the religious right, and enablers that want to scream “Clinton! McGreevey! Frank!” as their only defense to allowing bigots take charge. And I am referring to the religious right, not true conservatives, and I think there is a difference. True conservatives I can have a reasoned difference of opinion with and still respect. Hypocritical religious bigots and those who support them I can not.
#3. Buying and using meth isn’t criminal? What a joke: “…AND criminal”!! Shouldn’t this guy beign going to John School sometime soon?
And when you say that what Haggard did is wrong, is it for the same reasons that Haggard and his friends think it is wrong? “Repulsive and dark”…that’s what your mates under the GOP tent think of gay people.
“But, it would be nice at least, if he could say that while he has chosen this life, he understands that other men with feelings for men make different choices, acting on attractions which are neither dark nor repulsive, but merely natural feelings on which one can act in a moral manner.”
This has got to be the funniest post on here ever. Good luck convincing the MadConRepSunMoonBatEagleRepXtnistSockPuppetBibleQuoteFetish folks on this point! And notice how easy and gentle you are when you speak about this guy–sex worker, check; tina, check; adultery, check; hypocrisy, check; liar and deceiver, pretending to be a “Christian,’ check; actively supporting anti-gay measures, check; calling homosexuality “dark and and repulsive,” check–and then how you attack the large majority of gay folks who happen to be liberal the rest of the time. It is almost as fascinating as the Foley and Haggard stories themselves.
Absolutely. When are you going to charge Mike Jones, who has admitted to both buying and selling meth and to prostitution?
Furthermore, when are you going to demand that McGreevey repay the money the state of New Jersey lost to his corruption and to his hiring of a completely-unqualified individual because he wanted to coerce them into sex?
My point is the hypocrisy that I’m really exhausted with from the religious right, and enablers that want to scream “Clinton! McGreevey! Frank!” as their only defense to allowing bigots take charge.
The hypocrisy being what?
Haggard was canned. Investigated, found wanting, and thrown out on his can, immediately, by said individuals.
Compare that to McGreevey, Frank, and Clinton, all who were found wanting and the majority of whom were perpetuated in office after the fact.
If there’s hypocrisy here, it’s in the leftists who claim to be appalled by behavior, yet perpetuate and make excuses for it.
Pharisees?
JAQ has learned a new word… fancy that. Who said you couldn’t teach a dog…
Roll over, JAQ.
Let me make myself clear – I’m not making excuses for anyone in my own party that does wrong. Period. But why is is so easy for those of you on the right (especially those of you who are gay and conservative) to excuse these religious fanatics who want to criminalize your very existence? So his church dumped him? Big F-ing deal.
The hyposcrisy I’m referring to is that which is institutional in the Republican party (not among conservatives mind you – I’m still making a distinction) the last few years. It goes something like this: “We demand policies which marginalize those who don’t support our religious beliefs. Oh, we’re perverts too, but when we do it, we’re just sinners. But they are still worse than us!”
The problem is that the Foley scandal, and the Haggard issue aren’t going to change things. Power is still being held and used (or trying to be used) by those who think their interpretation of the Bible should govern every life in this country. And the Republican party (in my view at least) has embraced this for no other reason than to take power and hold on to it.
But why is is so easy for those of you on the right (especially those of you who are gay and conservative) to excuse these religious fanatics who want to criminalize your very existence?
Because, Mike, as I’ve outlined here, we would much rather deal with the alleged hatred that you claim evangelicals and Christians have for gays than the proven and demonstrated hatred for gay conservatives and Republicans that gay leftists have.
Oh, and GPW, I have to disagree with you on this:
But, it would be nice at least, if he could say that while he has chosen this life, he understands that other men with feelings for men make different choices, acting on attractions which are neither dark nor repulsive, but merely natural feelings on which one can act in a moral manner.
I, for one, don’t need or want that kind of validation. He is free to feel and say what he thinks, and I will do the same.
#11. Right. Those gay liberals and leftists are pushing a constitutional amendment against marriage for gay conservatives.
Oh, and GPW, I have to disagree with you on this:
But, it would be nice at least, if he could say that while he has chosen this life, he understands that other men with feelings for men make different choices, acting on attractions which are neither dark nor repulsive, but merely natural feelings on which one can act in a moral manner.
I agree with GPW on this. Haggard already has hurt his family. By continuing to deny that he is gay* and continue in this marriage, he will continue to hurt his family by living a lie. His being gay and entering a sham marriage is what started the trouble in the first place. But it’s up to his wife to make that decision. But maybe in time, Haggard can come to the conclusion that he can act on his natural feelings in a moral manner.
*I am fairly convinced that Haggard is gay. But if I’m wrong, then perhaps it would be the right thing to stay in the marriage. But again, that’s his wife’s call.
Haggard didn’t say the “g” word but we all know what he meant. He was raised & preached that being gay is so “dark & repulsive”, so why should we be suprised when he says as such? He needs therapy (preferable to the alternative – suicide) & hopefully this will be the incident that causes evangelicals to rachet down the anti-gay retoric just a wee bit.
Sometimes, I do feel that American Psychology Association has NOT done enough. It was clearly stated by them that homosexuality is NOT an illness and it should NOT be cured. In that cade, why can’t a straight person accept gays who are different from them? Why can’t America legalize gay marriage like Canada and other Scandinavian countries? How are we different from them? Does anyone has an answer? Haggard does NOT need therapy. He just needs to be himself. Too bad Mike Jones does NOT have more evidence. Otherwise, Haggard would have no choice but to come out like Jim McGreevey where that he is his resolution.