Family Research Council founder goes a’twinking.

1. Waldo, why do you suppose that the dateline on the linked article is Thursday, May 6? We are reading this on May 4 . . .

2. that’s been a safe assumption for YEARS.

3. Whoa. I think we’re seeing the future. Quick, check the lottery numbers!

4. Or, more likely, can we presume that the most stridently PRO-gay people are closeted homosexuals? Why isn’t that acceptable?

   Because hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue, perhaps?

5. can we presume that the most stridently PRO-gay people are closeted homosexuals?

   I think the theory goes something like: If you’re PRO-gay, AND you’re attracted to other men, then what’s there to be in the closet about?

   (Not to say it doesn’t happen, just playing Queer’s Advocate, here.)

6. Or, more likely, can we presume that the most stridently PRO-gay people are closeted homosexuals? Why isn’t that acceptable?

   I’m not familiar with the multi-year series of prominent, staunchly pro-gay politicians and national political leaders being forced out of the closet. Could you point me to a half-dozen examples from the past eighteen months?

7. I thought a militant breastplate was the tribute vice paid to Virtus?

8. Kudos for the appropriate use of “twink.” Perhaps you found that out while doing that innocently-conceived search for horseback riding?

   And yes, it’s common assumption now among many (most?) openly gay people to assume that the most vitriolic, hateful anti-gay people are self-loathing closet cases. There are just too many cases for it not to have at least a shred of truth. That people would go to such extremes to self-loathe makes me sad.

9. Many of those who are hetero are strident in their anti-promiscuity views, so it follows that many of the homo community are likely to be strongly against openly promiscuous behavior among their own community.

   It is illogical to presume that anyone who criticizes homosexual behavior, such as the bath house games that helped to turn AIDs into an epidemic, are themselves, homosexual.

   It is best for everyone to hear honest criticisms of societal behavior with genuine desire to improve our human condition.

   We cannot allow those who claim that anyone who criticizes homosexuals, pedophiles or rapists, to deflect attention from legitimate criticism, by claiming that anyone who cites the damage done to society of a particular behavior, is really just a frustrated, self loathing practitioner of whatever behavior that is being criticized.

10. We cannot allow those who claim that anyone who criticizes homosexuals, pedophiles or rapists, to deflect attention from legitimate criticism, by claiming that anyone who cites the damage done to society of a particular behavior, is really just a frustrated, self loathing practitioner of whatever behavior that is being criticized.

    Why not? What’ll happen?

11. “We cannot allow those who claim that anyone who criticizes homosexuals, pedophiles or rapists, to deflect attention from legitimate criticism”

    Love the fact that you lump gays with pedophiles and rapists…nice.

12. Nice point, Kevin.

    Additionally, she mistakenly describes my orientation as a “behavior.” It’s not. It’s an orientation. I can change behaviors; I can’t change my orientation. She can believe otherwise if she wants to, but she’s wrong.

    Just like George Rekers was wrong to think that if he tried hard enough, he could wish/pray/work his own orientation away. Doesn’t happen. Clairese’s post is entirely consistent with the root problem in the thought process of folks like George Rekers.

13. It’s funny the way people act like the idea that homophobes are often closet cases is unsubstantiated. If only we had some high-profile cases of this to show these people this happens quite often!

14. Excellent point Brian, about the root cause of both Clairese’s confusion and George Rekers… I should be more sad than mad, but confess my own failing. I focus on the harm they cause in their mistaken mission to “cure” people and adhere to an obsolete and harmful dogma that it itself grossly and widely misunderstood. That makes me mad rather than sad for them.

    Imagine a society or world where this sort of confusion was not actively promulgated by wrong teachings and an institution with something to gain. Wouldn’t it be nice?

15. It is illogical to presume that anyone who criticizes homosexual behavior, such as the bath house games that helped to turn AIDs into an epidemic, are themselves, homosexual.

    @Clairise Now if this isn’t the subtle tweaking of history I don’t know what is. HIV/AIDS isn’t a gay plague, the history of the disease is clear on that. That was a fallacy perpetuated by those hateful people who society allows to label themselves Christians like James Dobson. I’m going to assume that you veiled your true views with politeness because you were aware on what kind of blog you were commenting on. If I’m off the mark here please correct me.

16. And what IF sexual orientation is a choice instead of a predisposition? Who gives a shit?

17. His crime is worse than just being gay.

    It’s important to point out. Rekers was paid 120,000 by the state of Florida as an expert witness in a case where a Gay man wanted to adopt the two children he had fostered for more than 4 years.

    Florida is “the ONLY that specifically prohibits someone from adopting if they are gay.”

    Further this Hypocrit- Rekers (a closeted homosexual) adopted a 16 year old boy in Florida- and if he were gay- In violation of the gay adoption ban in Florida.

    “…if the reports are true and he did adopt in Florida, then he did so under perjury, which is a felony. When you apply for an adoption in Florida you must answer a question related to your sexuality and sexual lifestyle. If he lied on the application (the only way he could have obtained a Florida adoption) then he has broken the law.

    The Link from where I’ve taken my info:

    http://www.care2.com/causes/politics/blog/fl-paid-rekers-for-anti-gay-testimony-rekers-paid-for-gay-escort/

18. I’m very fiscally conservative. I usually vote republican. I do enjoy Mr. Jaquith’s blog on occasion, despite clashing ideologically quite frequently. But on this subject, I’m with you.

    I’ve long considered the overly anti-gay crowd to be closeted. I personally don’t care what two men do in their own time. I spend very little time thinking about gay sex(I’m usually obsessing about the straight variety). That being said, if you spend so much time thinking about men(or women) getting frisky that it becomes your political/moral/religious obsession, it’s probably just deferred sexual obsession.

19. What it reminds me of is the happy marriage research article that I linked to yesterday:

    Other McGill studies confirmed differences in how men and women react to such threats. In one, attractive actors or actresses were brought in to flirt with study participants in a waiting room. Later, the participants were asked questions about their relationships, particularly how they would respond to a partner’s bad behavior, like being late and forgetting to call.

    Men who had just been flirting were less forgiving of the hypothetical bad behavior, suggesting that the attractive actress had momentarily chipped away at their commitment. But women who had been flirting were more likely to be forgiving and to make excuses for the man, suggesting that their earlier flirting had triggered a protective response when discussing their relationship.

    I suspect this is a very similar psychological trait at work here.

Comments are closed.