Observations and inanities by a second-shift assistant supervisor in the Puppy-Grinding division of the Evil Atheist Conspiracy® (our motto: "Sure it's cruel, but think of the jobs!"), your host, Brent Rasmussen.
I'm Not Gay, I Just Really Love Rainbows!
Feeling a little haggard? (Sorry. That was just inappropriate. *snicker*)
[link] In January 2007, Ted Haggard voluntarily agreed to enter a process of spiritual restoration. He has selected Phoenix First Assembly and Pastor Tommy Barnett as his local church fellowship and is maintaining an accountability relationship there. He has recently requested to end his official relationship with the New Life Church Restoration Team and this has been accepted by them.
New Life Church recognizes the process of restoring Ted Haggard is incomplete and maintains its original stance that he should not return to vocational ministry. However, we wish him and his family only success in the future.
I honestly had no idea he was in Phoenix.
The whole "curing teh gay" thing is complete and utter bullshit. Haggard is, oddly enough, a victim of the entire Judeo-Christian anti-gay sentiment. As a young man it seems to have caused him to reject who and what he was, a gay man. He appears to have to shamefully hidden it from even himself for years, and engaged in dangerous sexual liaisons on the sly - probably rationalizing them in his own screwed-up brain every time as "reaching out to a sinner" or some such.
Sad really.
It hurts his family, which like it or not he is responsible for. I'll also bet the guy is losing his mind at this point after a year of anti-gay "cures", witch doctor's spells, and shamanic chanting. (Or whatever they do. Kill a chicken and read the guts? What?) I actually feel a little bit of pity for the poor guy. I hope he can resolve his personal situation in a healthy fashion, for his wife and kid's sake if for nothing else.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
The "cures"
"I'll also bet the guy is losing his mind at this point after a year of anti-gay "cures", witch doctor's spells, and shamanic chanting. (Or whatever they do. Kill a chicken and read the guts? What?)"
Read "Anything But Straight" by Wayne Besen, he's been studying them for 10 years and it will tell you all you need to know. There's also a lot of quick information on his website: www.anythingbutstraight.com.
A common "cure" though is to make men play sports and women, uh, do girly things like cook and sew, I guess. The idea is that homosexuality is caused by "gender confusion" (whatever the hell that is).
So they think by playing sports it will turn men straight. Tell that to the millions of gay guys who already play sports, including at least one pro basketball player, a pro baseball player, and two ex-Green Bay Packers that came out after they retired (i.e. after it was safe and financially sound to do so).
My husband plays rugby, hockey, volleyball, tennis and bowling. If that made people straight, he would have left me for a woman a long time ago.
What does homosexuality have to do with atheism?
I have not seen any relationship between the two.
Having read "What Could He be Thinking" by Michael Gurian, it seems there are far more things involved in the hormonal development of the male and female brains than the simple "born that way" or "immoral choices" views. There is a "normal" that is effected by environmental factors in utero and after birth that is complex - some by choices made, some by events beyond the control of either the individual or the parents. And I believe that everyone here recognizes that people are not mindless animals doomed to yield to every feeling and attraction.
And I can recommend "Self Made Man" by Norah Vicent. Here is a dyke going undercover as a man doing "man things" like joining a bowling league and a Robert Bly group.
The line between being Hard-Wired" as homosexual or making "bad choices" is not a clear one.
"I believe in preaching to the converted; for I have generally found that the converted do not understand their own religion." -G.K. Chesterton
I've seen others fall, too
It's not just Ted Haggard - I have seen others fall into the very same behaviors they are denouncing in others. And not just preachers. I suspect it is partly because they get set up on pedestals by their fans. Once they accept the pedestal, there is no way to graciously get off and be human, so many of them fall off in disgrace. I am more bothered that he left his restoration program early. I've seen that, too. And the results are usually worse than the original problem.
And I am under no delusions that I am immune from hypocrisy myself - I just try to be aware of it and not try to get away with doing anything that I oppose in others.
But I think there is too much misplaced anger - Does he deserve to have everything else he was doing thrown out because he had this particular wrong finally brought into the open?
"I believe in preaching to the converted; for I have generally found that the converted do not understand their own religion." -G.K. Chesterton
Misplaced Anger?
The anger is not misplaced.
Working at my newpaper, I have for years protested the policy of printing the addresses of people arrested. Because in my mind, they’re innocent until proven guilty, and deserve the protection of the presumption of innocence, which includes the same privacy everybody else gets. Ordinarily, I’d feel the same about Haggard and whatever little private peccadilloes he has. However ... this is more than picking your nose when you think nobody’s watching.
I feel the same way about this as I do about denouncements of Bush as compared to Saddam Hussein. The winger refrain is “Saddam is a million times worse than anything Bush ever did. If you criticize Bush, you must hate America and love Saddam.”
But the real issue is expectations. I EXPECTED Saddam Hussein to be a murderous shitbag. The president of the United States, though, I hold to a standard leagues higher. Both men might spit on the sidewalk in public. But whereas I wouldn’t bat an eye to see a pic of Saddam doing it, if Bush does it (I’ve seen the video), it’s disgustingly crass behavior. Ditto for legitimizing torture. Saddam, eh. Bush, damn. For the victim, the act is horrendous in either case. But for the future of America, for our own respect, it’s vital that our leaders strive to live up to higher ideals.
It’s one thing to commit a questionable act. It’s quite another to do it while dressed in the sanctimonious garb of the priesthood – a class of people to which we give all special privileges, powers and advantages.
To become angry at such a person is not the least bit out of line. The betrayal of public trust is clearly an issue worth getting very angry about.
Big difference
No, there is a *huge* difference for the victims. One group was subjected to horrendous physical disfigurement and agonizing death, for the other a *very* frightening, but not damaging experience. The two do not equate.
"I believe in preaching to the converted; for I have generally found that the converted do not understand their own religion." -G.K. Chesterton
New And Improved
Our torture has on an average of 15% less excruciating pain and suffering than our leading competitor's torture. 8 out of 10 torture victims prefer our torture over the leading brand.
God DAMN that makes me want to puke just writing those words. I don't think the victim cares if his torture is performed with the most lofty of American nationalist ideals, and slightly less pain and suffering. I think they still end up screaming, crying, and shitting themselves in abject panic and horrific fear - regardless of whether or not their torturer is a middle eastern man, or a fresh-faced Marine from Ohio.
Damn...Brent's onto me
I got out of the Marines last year and I'm originally from Ohio.
Now if only I could find that damned taser...
Principles, morals, or ethics . . .
. . . which are discarded when they are inconvenient are not principles, morals, or ethics. They are only a facade to give the illusion of civilized behaviour.
There is no moral equivalency between mass murder and a single execution. There is no equivalency between the tortures perpetrated upon hundreds of thousands by Saddam (or Pol Pot, or Stalin) and those committed by the CIA against a handful of Al Qaeda leaders on the orders of President Bush/Cheney. But that does not make what we did 'right', nor in keeping with the ideals of this nation, or indeed with the ideals of any civilized nation. That it was done in violation of the law and treaty obligations does not let us off the hook, unless we hold those who did it to account under the law.
Jim Downey
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like Science Fiction? Read my novel, Communion of Dreams, for free.
Ahem.
I agree. THEIR torture is horrible, OUR torture is just scary.
Perplexed
I cannot see why you would defend this monster, and the monster I am referring to is George Bush. Even if there were a hell, there would not be one deep enough for him. He is directly responsible for the unprovoked murder of tens of thousands if not hundred of thousands of human beings. The Iraqi people did not attack the US or its allies. The Iraqi people did not threaten the US or its allies and yet he ordered them butchered. They can pretify it all they like with words like 'collateral damage' and 'shock and awe' but what we are speaking of here is tearing human flesh and bone apart with high velocity white hot metal. Daisy cutters don't make exceptions for non-combatants. What happened (and is still happening) in Iraq is genocide. George Bush is one of the greatest mass murderers in all of history i.e. a monster. It's just too bad there aren't any of the traditional Greek heroes around these days.
And here I thought you thought for yourself...
Pull the string and get a pre-recorded retelling of ThinkProgress.Org talking points.
It sounds to me that you have not talked with anyone who's actually been there. I have - 4 family members and 1 native Iraqi-American civil engineer involved with the rebuilding of the infrastructure. Try it some time.
All GWB is doing is what the Klintons and the DNC told us needed to be done (in '98). They just didn't have the balls to do it.
And just what in the hell were we doing in Kosovo?
"I believe in preaching to the converted; for I have generally found that the converted do not understand their own religion." -G.K. Chesterton
Well...
If it's worth anything, I spent a year over there and I don't think us going there was a good idea. Everyone I was there with and worked close to was of the same opinion.
It sounds to me that you have not talked with anyone who's actually been there...who doesn't approve of it. I have.
(Just have to make it clear to everyone here that not everyone who has been there supports it.)
The Iraqi Engineer...
Well, the Iraqi civil engineer (who commutes between Oregon and Bagdad) still has family in Iraq. According to him most of the locals prefer the damage the US inflicted to the ongoing terror that is being brought in by the Saudis & Iranians, or was common under the despotism of Saddam. The water and power are more reliable than any time since long before the US invasion, and they are less afraid of being 'disappeared' by the Baathists. He would not describe things as "good" by American standards but "much less bad".
"I believe in preaching to the converted; for I have generally found that the converted do not understand their own religion." -G.K. Chesterton
Deny it then
Was it Rush, Sean, O'reilly, Kristol, Savage (Weiner) or Ann who told you to say that?
I do and did think for myself and what I thought was "Why is the United States attacking a beaten country they have been flying over for a decade? This doesn't make any sense." The country could have done better with a lot more of that thinking, but Jorj had to have his Wargasm while you and the rest of your ilk cheered him on.
Gee I wonder why they need to have their infrastructure rebuilt. Could it be maybe because the US military blew it up? For your information I did talk with someone who had been there. He said that corruption is rampant. That was heartening.
What the hell does talking with people who have been there have to do with anything anyway? Do you mean to imply that the carnage and the tens of thousands of Iraqis and the thousands of Americans who have been dismembered and disemboweled are some sort of liberal media fabrication?
Screw you, you sanctimonious son of a bitch. If you find Jorj Jizz so very tasty then sign up to go play in his war.
Go ahead. I want to hear you deny it. I want to hear you deny that the United States attacked a country unprovoked. I want to know exactly when and where Saddam Hussein attacked the United States or its allies. Alternatively I would want to know exactly when and where Saddam Hussein issued a credible threat against the United States or its allies. I'll be right here waiting.
Here I thought that you were a religious person or at least pretending to be one. Clearly if the murder of tens of thousands of people does not move you in the least then I guess we know just what kind of 'morality' you ascribe to. Do you have hot and cold running blood coming out of the faucets at your house? On second thought you are indeed a person of god.
And that god is Ares.
Heh.
Rich, you're really starting to come out and be honest now.
I joke every once in a while that 50 years from now, right wingers will still be screaming that everything is Bill Clinton's fault. Seven years later, after Bush and friends have started a needless war, wrecked the economy, destroyed our standing in the world, pissed on public trust, created a climate of fear, made a mockery of the idea of privacy, and so much more ...
Here you are delivering the punchline.
Partial agreement
I'll grant that "misplaced anger" was a wrong use of the term on my part. But I am bothered by the glee some are writing with, seeing someone fail so publicly.
"I believe in preaching to the converted; for I have generally found that the converted do not understand their own religion." -G.K. Chesterton
You can't want justice and then not be pleased when it happens
And make no mistake, Haggard's fall is justice. I had a gay roomate for a couple semesters in college. It was a private Christian college and he suffered the tortures of the damned - as he literally understood it - trying not to be gay. His attraction to men tore him up inside for no good reason and like many closeted gays he was often on the brink of suicide because of the self-righteous posturing of guys like Haggard.
At close range I watched a human being conditioned by the society he grew up in torture himself. The suicide rate of gay teens is something like four times that of heterosexual teens. For every one who actually commits suicide many walk through their lives in a dark desert of pain and isolation and conditioned self-hatred. And it's unnecessary.
Your guy Jesus never once mentioned homosexuality - not once! - and he had a strategy that would have gone a long way toward mitigating the current pain of that sorry little SOB you're defending. He said "Judge not, lest you be judged." And lest you think I'm being too harsh, go re-read Matthew 23.
If Haggard wouldn't listen to a modern understanding of human sexuality, the very least he could do is listen to Jesus.
He read the bible and knew it had like 13 verses condemning homosexuality, most in the Old Testament and none from Jesus. Some from Paul, who never met Jesus except in hallucinations. But over 200 verses defending the poor against the rich, the powerless against the powerful, the outcast against the inner circle. He. Knew. Better.
Don't forget...
There are also verses warning against slanting justice in favor of the poor against the rich. Money (or the lack of it) should never color justice - although in the real world, I admit it does. The wealthy can afford better lawyers, but juries are often biased toward the little guy, and in the legislature, wealthy people are often creating government programs for the poor at the expense of the middle-to-upper income.
Whether justice is slanted toward the rich or toward the poor, it is still injustice.
"I believe in preaching to the converted; for I have generally found that the converted do not understand their own religion." -G.K. Chesterton
Yeah, you've got a point there
...because the rich are always being victimized by poor people and all their fancy lawyers. ;-)
Money doesn't just color justice in this country, it perverts it. And it's always been that way; read Jeremiah, "Why do the wicked prosper, why do the faithless live in comfort..." Seriously I don't think we need to worry much about the interests of the rich against the poor. The rich take very good care of themselves, by honest means or as often, not.
"Where hearts are sour as boiled beer ..."
I feel sorry for people who are victimized by others, or a system that rejects them.
But the people who ARE the victimizers, or who perpetuate the system, and then fall into their own trap, them I don't feel sorry for. I'd feel the same way about a bully who beat his dogs, and ended up getting eaten by them. Screw him -- I'd feel more compassion for the dogs.
Ted Haggard has HURT people. And he's made a lucrative career off it.
He's no different from a upper-level drug dealer, driving a BMW and vacationing in Belize while spreading misery and death all around him back home. If the guy gets caught and sent to prison, this is not a tragedy.
Save the tears for someone who deserves them. There must be a million gay people out there who haven't climbed the bodies of their fellows in spiked boots in order to achieve personal fame and profit.
Haggard has to try to FIX things first, before I waste my time caring about him.
Good Point
Good point Hank.
I hear my tiny violin playing
In a way, I feel sorry for him too. It must be a living hell to deny your true self. On the other hand, this guy used his influence and power to fleece his flock out of millions and lived a pretty comfortable lifestyle all while dabbling in the "sins" he so publicly railed against. One word: hypocrite. Gay people can be complete assholes too you know.
So while I hope he finally finds happiness being who he really is, I wish him no more good will than I would any other jerk who deserves their lot in life. If he wants our respect, he's going to have to earn it, and that definitely will not happen overnight. Once he's the president of GLAAD then maybe I'll reconsider.
Yeah, I'm having a hard time being sympathetic too
When you think of the amount of misery that man spread making gays out to be the villains from his bully pulpit. Sure, he was messed up inside and probably lost a lot of sleep over his "thorn in the flesh" (which I think is probably the same one Apostle Paul referred to in 2 Corinthians 12:7-10). It's possible to be a mixed-up person, a victim of societal prejudice, and a hypocrite all wrapped up in one package.
Culture of Intolerance
I actually do feel sorry for Haggard. Yes, I know he's done incredible harm to thousands of young people, but did he really know better?
The reason I ask is because it seems to me that he was a product of his environment. He probably grew up with religious zealots as parents, went to school with fundies, then off to a funie college, then married a fundie. I doubt he ever had the opportunities I had. I doubt he ever had the chance to be exposed to different cultures or ideas the way I did when growing up.
I've always heard that children of abusers grow up to be abusers. Wouldn't that be the same for religious extremists? I am sure some of them are able to break the cycle, but probably not most.
Yes Haggard is a jackass, but think about the price he paid. He lost his job, his friends and his reputation all because of bigotry that he had been taught and brainwashed into. I don't mean to make excuses for the guy, but it is a bit unfair that Haggard is the scapegoat for an entire culture of intolerance.
We're all products of our
We're all products of our environment. Does that mean we are incapable of stepping outside of that box and using our intellect and common sense to assess our own beliefs? Haggard DID make a lucrative career out of - among other things - spewing ignorance, hate and intolerance against gays. How many gay men and women in his audience, already struggling with what they've been indoctrinated into thinking of as their "sinful" natures, were inspired to hate themselves even more, to conceal their authentic selves even more....in short, to live their lives exactly like Haggard lived his?
He doesn't get exonerated because he was a "product of his environment." He's still responsible.
Breaking the cycle
If you mean me, then the answer is no. I am capable of stepping outside of that box and using my intellect and common sense to assess my own beliefs. If you are talking about most people in the United States, then I would say "yes," they are incapable. Or at least, they appear to be incapable most of the time.
Haggard is the perfect example of someone who is incapable of assessing his own beliefs. He still has not come out and said "I'm gay, get over it." He still believes that somehow he can 'overcome' his sexual preferences. I am absolutely amazed that people think homosexuality is a choice.
Yep. And now he is the target of that very same hatred and intolerance. Poetic justice? Yes. But let's stand up for EVERY victim of intolerance rather than every victim except Ted Haggard. We should stand up for anyone who is being discriminated against.
I think you misunderstood my post. If you think this is news to me you are wrong. Did you happen to follow the link in my previous post? The link was to an article about teen suicide. Maybe as many as 30% of suicides by 15-24 year olds are by homosexuals.
In no way, did I 'exonerate' Haggard. I did however, suggest that he is a victim himself and I think it's silly to scapegoat one man for the evils of fundamentalist Christianity. It's also a distraction.
Yeah, it's easy to beat up on Haggard, but he's out. He's done. Who cares about Haggard now? The real people I want to go after philosophically are the new leaders of The New Life Church. I want Brady Boyd's name in the paper. Haggard was the old face of bigotry. I want to publicize his successors. I'd like to publicize the whole hate filled culture of Christianity. I'm more concerned with breaking the cycle than punishing one guy.
I like the idea of highlighting his successors
Even though I'm not personally inclined to let Haggard off the hook even a little, I do like the idea of keeping the spotlight on the current crop of bigots. Plenty to go around. For too long bigotry has gotten a free pass if it could pass itself off as a virtue.
Post new comment