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.

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.

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.

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.

Roll over, JAQ.

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.

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.

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.

What Haggard did is wrong.

What McGreevey did is wrong AND criminal.

Does that answer your question?

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.