A few weeks ago I was in Ripon, Wisconsin, for a same-sex marriage debate with Glenn Stanton of Focus on the Family, when the Ted Haggard story broke. Haggard, then president of the National Association of Evangelicals and pastor of the massive New Life Church in Colorado Springs, was being accused by former Denver prostitute Ted Jones of having regular drug-fueled gay trysts with Jones over a period of several years.
"So, do you think there's anything to this?" I asked Stanton, who told me that Haggard was not only his pastor but also a friend.
"No way," he replied. (At the time no tapes had yet been released, and Haggard was denying the story.) "It's just incongruous. John, it would be like finding out that you secretly have a wife and family in the suburbs. No."
(Betty, if you're reading this, be sure to get Timmy a haircut before his little-league game this weekend, and give Mary Jane a kiss from Daddy.)
Kidding aside, my reaction to the story's unfolding was marked more by sadness than schadenfreude. I could see the shock on my friend and opponent Glenn Stanton's face the next day, as further revelations made it increasingly clear that Haggard was pretty much guilty as charged. I was sad for Haggard, sad for his family, and sad for all the people he had mislead.
But he deserved his downfall, didn't he? Certainly. Here was a leader in a movement that actively fights gay rights. Haggard openly proclaimed that the Bible tells us everything we need to know about homosexuality -- namely, that it's just plain wrong. And as president of the National Association of Evangelicals, he helped to spread this view far and wide--apparently carrying on an affair with a male prostitute all the while.
So I wasn't surprised that many relished his fall from grace. A few days after returning from my trip I ran into a friend who, upon my mentioning Haggard's name, gleefully started dancing and singing "Another one bites the dust…" Schadenfreude--taking pleasure at the misfortune of others--is a natural human tendency, especially when those others are royal hypocrites. And it's not just schadenfreude, it's relief: one less person will be out there spreading lies about gays (though others will doubtless take his place).
Haggard is Exhibit N in a recent line of examples of the dangers of the closet. Some of them are Republicans, some Democrats; some are religious leaders, some not. While their stories differ in detail, they all highlight a major pitfall of trying to fight one's gayness, rather than embracing it openly.
I am of course not saying that when heterosexually married people act on homosexual desires, it automatically proves that they ought to have been doing so all along. Whether they ought to have been doing so depends, crucially, their own predominant sexual orientation, as well as on the moral status of homosexual conduct.
Nor am I saying, "If you don't let us be gay, then we will become lying, cheating, predatory assholes." I am saying that a world that doesn't provide healthy avenues for gay people to pursue intimacy should not be terribly surprised when some turn to unhealthy ones. Barney Frank put it well in a Newsweek interview regarding the Mark Foley scandal: "Being in the closet doesn't make you do dumb things, doesn't justify you doing dumb things, it just makes them likelier."
Of course, there are non-closeted people who (like Haggard and former New Jersey Governor Jim McGreevey) commit adultery or (like Foley) chase after sixteen-year-old employees. But it doesn't follow that the closet is not a contributing factor, any more than non-smokers with cancer disprove that smoking increases cancer risk. It's common sense, really: double lives are a recipe for danger. There are other recipes, to be sure, but this one's pretty reliable.
Partly this is because the closet demands, not just a lie, but an entire pattern of lies, which in turn make deception easier in other areas of life. Partly it's because this pattern is emotionally and spiritually draining. And partly it's because deception poisons relationships, cutting one off from the friends who could otherwise monitor one's behavior, offering support, guidance, and an occasional good smack upside the head when needed.
Haggard's much-needed smack did not come from his friends: it came from a public scandal. In response, he plans to begin a lengthy process of "spiritual restoration," which begins with owning up to one's sins. And that saddens me too--not because I'm against his (or anyone's) acknowledging fault, but because there's good reason to believe that Haggard and his advisers will miss the key ones. Homosexuality is not a sin. Making the world needlessly more difficult for gay and lesbian people surely is.
55 Comments for “Sadness, Not Smirks, for Haggard”
posted by Mark Reneau on
I, too, am very sad for Ted Haggard, especially in view of his decision to submit to a three-year program of “restoration.” My suspicion is that he will emerge from this process a far more adroit and accomplished liar than he proved to be in the days after his “sins” were made known; he most certainly will not come out of it a straight man. I hope he finds the backbone to look his Inquisitors in the eye and tell them to go to hell — in a spirit of love, of course.
posted by John Kauderer MD on
Rev. Haggard is just the latest closeted gay man to be publically virulently homophobic. Famous preecesors are J.Edgar Hoover & his partner Clyde Tolson, Roy Cohn, Cardinal Spellman. There have also been closeted gay men who have not used their positions of power against the LGBT community and in this group those who gay positive public positions. So there is something more than the closet that factors into their public stances on issues affecting the LGBT community. It would be nice if it was definable as good guy and bad guy.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
Why are we supposed to be “sad” for Haggart?
He built a huge base of power, a significant income, and a massive following on lying.
Nobody forced him to marry a woman, have kids, engage in copious gay-bashing, or embrace other stupidity. It was solely his choice — the consequences of closeted living are well-known and no mystery.
posted by James on
What, exactly, did the gay community have to offer Ted Haggard? Let’s say that he genuninely wanted to live his life in relationship with God. Where would he find support for that in the Rainbow World? Yes, there are a small minority of genuinely religious/spiritual gays, but most would be saying, “Lighten up, Ted–throw away that Bible, grab a box of condoms, and let’s go!” Rainbow World offers very little support for men who want to live lives of integrity, morality, and responsibility. His decision to accept Jesus as Savior immediately got him ousted from most of the gay community. If we don’t offer a place where men can be openly moral, openly religious, openly responsible, why should we be surprised that men attempt a fake marriage and destroy lives? We’re just as fundamentalist as the Fundamentalists in our rejection of any set of values or moral code. When was the last time you saw a “Monogamous Marriage” booth at a Pride rally?
posted by bob on
i’d like to try something new….somebody help me….i have 50 years and i dont have no one to understand me…i,m a good chef at a restaurant in florida at the great southern cafe..if you heard about it…somebody call me and help me with my problem…my tel number is 850-231-7327 florida,seaside.
posted by dr on
“His decision to accept Jesus as Savior immediately got him ousted from most of the gay community. If we don’t offer a place where men can be openly moral, openly religious, openly responsible, why should we be surprised that men attempt a fake marriage and destroy lives?”
No, his decision to embrace a virulently homophobic brand of faith did that. Why is it our responsibility to act as a support group for a person who’s version of moral condemns people for something they have no control over, and actively works against us?
There are plenty of gay people who live moral, responsible lives. If someone is too blinded to see that by fundementalism, or the kind of seething hatred of the gay community you see from some posters here, that’s their problem, not ours.
posted by Mark on
“What, exactly, did the gay community have to offer Ted Haggard?” This man seemed self confident enough to build his “massive New Life Church in Colorado Springs.” Maybe he should have brought his GOOD intetion to the gay community. Christians often forget that we all have our shortcomings, gay or not. Maybe he could have bettered a small corner of the world instead of bash on it. The reason so many in the gay community do not even consider participating in the Christian world is because we no longer hate ourselves as much as Mr Haggard seems to hate himself. If those of us gay men with faith set a good example, maybe the gay community wouldnt be so Christian-phobic
posted by james on
Let’s imagine a pre-homophobic Ted Haggard, maybe a 20-year old who is beginning to realize that his feelings about men aren’t a phase. Let’s say that religion/spirituality is important to this man–he’s made a commitment to Christ, say. He wants to live his life in obedience to God’s will. At the moment, he has no idea how his homosexuality fits into that.
OK, now let’s see what happens when he approaches Rainbow World for support. Are they going to help him in his desire to build a relationship with God which includes a commitment to the search for a lifelong, sexually exclusive partner? Or, are the members of Rainbow World going to ask him to turn on the deepest part of himself, the part which connects him with his Creator, and tell him, “Oh, that’s just silly. Put down that Bible, grab your Scissor Sisters CD, and let’s party!”
Seeing the deepest part of himself rejected and ridiculed by those he thought would support him, does he turn instead to the Church? He discovers that the Church understands his relationship with God, and also believes that they can transform his troublesome feelings about men into “normal”, heterosexual feelings. He can, with their help, become the man God wants him to be.
Maybe later he will discover that there was a way for him to integrate his homosexual feelings and his faith, but that will probably be long after he has entered the closet with his wife and kids. But the reason he opened that closet door is because Rainbow World turned him away because of his faith. Rainbow World is just as responsible for his terrible situation as the Fundamentalists. Why can’t Rainbow World be accountable for the damage it does to those of us who aren’t moral relativists, who don’t support promiscuity, and who want to build our relationship with God?
I recognize that not every gay person is a member of what I call Rainbow World. We all know gays in monogamous relationships who are model citizens, blah, blah, blah. But we all need to admit that Rainbow World’s First Response Team is usually made up of the fabulous, flamboyant, and exotic squad which chases away anyone with traditional values.
Ted Haggard might not have had to endure so many problems if the gay community welcomed believers.
posted by dr on
Who the hell is Rainbow World? Are you just making these people up to act as a straw man? Honestly, I have never heard of any organization offering someone who’s questioning their sexuality that advice. They might not help him build his relationship with God, but why wouldn’t he go straight to a religious organization for that?
Quit making excuses. What more than likely happened was he mentioned his sexuality to a person in his parish, then got brow beat with hellfire and brimstone and humilitated until he “repented.” That strikes me as a hell of a lot more likely than him being “traumatized” by the gay community.
posted by Bobby on
“Ted Haggard might not have had to endure so many problems if the gay community welcomed believers.”
—James, I don’t feel welcomed by the gay community, that doesn’t mean I’m gonna marry a woman and have children with her, yuck! You are who you are, and even if people can’t stand you, you have to be true to yourself.
As much as I love rightwingers, I’m not sacrificing my sexual orientation to please them. Haggard is gonna have to make compromises.
posted by Marc on
So because the gay community did not welcome haggard into its Rainbow World, we are somehow responsible for him using his mariage/church/life to live a well-orchestrated scam, one that simply fell apart because he could no longer live his lie? God does work in mysterious ways.
posted by James on
“Rainbow World” is my term for the visible gay community–not every gay person everywhere, but that part of the community which makes itself visible through Pride parades, etc., thus distorting (IMHO) what being gay is about.
I think Rainbow World needs to be accountable for those it has disowned or ridiculed or otherwise not made a place for because they wouldn’t support its underlying moral relativism. I think people like Ted Haggard frequently end up in the kind of situation he finds himself in because Rainbow World is so unfriendly to men of faith. If your experience has been that Rainbow World is supportive and tolerant of Christians, I’d sure like to hear your story.
And if the visible gay community, Rainbow World, does such a great job of welcoming everyone, why is there an IGF? Am I wrong to assume that this site offers some kind of ongoing critique of Rainbow World?
posted by Sam on
James, what kind of line of crap is that about “rainbow world?” If a few straight people are not nice to me does that mean that “straightworld” has rejected me?
The one guy who actually had “integrity, morality, and responsibility” was the hustler who was tired of seeing homosexual men in power enjoy the advantages of the double life, AND at the same time throw shit at people like him by inciting hatred and pushing for constitutional amendments to marginalize him even further. It’s like the plantation owner going out to the woodshack to do it with the fetching black slave, and burning a cross on someone’s yard the next day. Take your pick, you can’t do both.
That lying son of a bitch Haggard needs to be shot, not hugged.
And James, I don’t know what neighborhoods you’ve been hanging around (probably the ones that excited you the most), but there are suburbs with gay people, ranches with gay people, farms with gay people, and MCC churchs and volunteer groups FILLED with jesus-loving folk like yourself. Gay people are not just in clubs and colorful pride parades. You’re either not gay, given your lack of knowledge, or you’re an ashamed gay person. Please, we need no more of them.
posted by Sam on
In Regards to Haggard and religion, one of two things happened:
1. He is using religion and all it’s trappings (with cult-like devotion) as a distraction and mechanism to avoid his homosexuality and true nature.
2. He joined the church earlier for legitimate reason of faith, and found that his homosexuality was rejected by the church.
Either way, the end result is self hatred and denial. When the church says it’s ok to lie to yourself, your family, and live a life on dishonesty, there’s nothing but disaster waiting down the road. And like John says, (only he is talking about the generalized closet here), the deception gets easier and easier.
There’s no doubt to me that option number one speaks volumes in this case. Haggard was in some respects trying to purge that homo demon out of him. In his vain attempts to destroy the healthy relationships of gay men and women in his state, he was trying to destroy that part of himself he rejected.
The great thing (and sad thing for some) about being gay is the way you are faced immediately with self-examination and honesty. And if you do it right, that self honesty helps you not only in relationships but in life. On the flip side, if you reject the honesty part, but want to keep the horny sex, this is the result.
posted by Bobby on
You want to shoot Haggard, Sam? That’s kind of crazy. What his crime? Hiring a hooker and smoking meth? Sounds pretty libertarian to me.
“I think Rainbow World needs to be accountable for those it has disowned or ridiculed or otherwise not made a place for because they wouldn’t support its underlying moral relativism.”
—-No, we just need more diversity in our gay newspapers and the mainstream media, not just voices from the gay left.
“Am I wrong to assume that this site offers some kind of ongoing critique of Rainbow World?”
—You’re not wrong about that. Where you are wrong is in not holding Haggard responsible for what he did. The gay community doesn’t turn him into a wife cheater, that’s a choice he made himself. The gay community offers options, everything from sex in public parks to prayer at gay churches. It’s up to the individual to choose where he goes and what he does.
posted by cesquaq on
james: ted haggard never had a desire to embrace his own rainbow roots. he was raised fundie, and has been trying to overcome his rainbow demon since his teens. he rejected the rainbow world ever since his parents taught him to. i know lots of queer christians and their PFLAG chapters at their churches (not just the rainbow oriented MCC) have booths at pride festivals. are you just remembering a chapter in your own life? where did you get this 20 yo haggard story? he said in his own letters that part of his denunciation and self “healing” of his immoral side, his dark side was to preach against it. i don’t know any homos that would have turned him away unless he preached incessantly on the immorality of gayness and the rainbow world. who wants to hear that? if you are looking for support there are plenty of non flamboyant queenie bitches out therethat are just regular folks that have same sex relationships. and by the way gentlemen they’re not all men.
posted by Harke the Apostle on
I am not so kind as some of the others who posted here. Mister Haggard is a textbook hypocrite, a term that by the way also comes from the Bible that he supposedly was so fond of. If the meaning of your life is wielding power by opressing others for doing openly what you do in secret, you do not deserve any pity.
posted by James on
It’s interesting to me that if you say you don’t like the gay community, then someone always comes back with, “Then you don’t like being gay.” I’m OK with being gay. I just have a different set of values than Rainbow World (which is, as I have siad, not all gay men, but that visible part of the gay community which we all know exists and which we try to pretend is really diverse and tolerant).
The reason I am sympathetic to Haggard is because I probably share the same beliefs about God and Jesus that he does–and I find absolutely no support for that amongst 99% of all the gays (and there have been many, I’m into theater, for heaven’s sake) I have met. Yes, he is responsible for his own choices, but men would find those choices easier to make if their faith was welcomed by Rainbow World.
You mention MCC and UCC as possible places to go–those are really liberal churches. I’m not a liberal. I’m a pretty conservative Christian. Being gay doesn’t mean you have liberal religious beliefs. You can be gay and believe that God has absolute standards for gay relationships–sexual exclusivity and permanence, say. However, if you have conservative beliefs and conservative values, you are not embraced by the gay community, or MCC, or United Church of Christ. Where can you go as a gay man and not be required to give up your fundamental beliefs and morals?
Because the gay community doesn’t provide a place for men of faith like Haggard, he is forced into a life of hypocrisy. The gay community may not be the sole problem, but why can’t we admit our part in creating problems for men who have traditional beliefs and values?
What would happen if Ted Haggard decided to seek out the gay community at this point? Would he find help and support, or derision and rejection? Would he have to modify his faith to fit into the Rainbow? I fear that the gay community would offer a three-year “restoration” program to change him from a man of faith into Lance Bass.
posted by dalea on
James, who seems to be one Jimmie Gatt of Tobacco Road, Dogpatch, sez: Ted Haggard might not have had to endure so many problems if the gay community welcomed believers.
On what evidence do you say the gay world rejects believers? The UCC, most of the Episcopalians and the MCC are more than ready to accept him. There are many gay groups in almost all religions in which he could quite comfortably fit. This idea is absurd.
Regarding conservative christianity, my own experience is there is only one book one needs to read: Elmer Gantry. Anything else is solely commentary. Here one confronts and discovers everything that is known and could be known about conservative christianity. Forget all this pointless bible stuff.
Haggard saw his chance to fleece the sheep and took it. Whatever comes after is his own decision.
posted by the other John on
James, there is a reason all the gay friendly churches and religious organizations fall under the ‘liberal christian’ umbrella. It is because one of the most basic tenets oif fundamentalist christianity is that gay people do not exist, period/. They are just herterosexuals who refuse to conform to God’s will and are deciding to go and sin in that manner. Being a gay fundamentalist is like being a pacifist soldier – mutually exclusive states. I don’t see where this ‘rainbow world’ you speak of exists. There is pretty much a niche for any taste in the gay ‘community’ , be it religious, secular, hedonistic or puritanical.
posted by dr on
“Where can you go as a gay man and not be required to give up your fundamental beliefs and morals?”
Here’s a good solution- quit expecting the gay community to cater to your niche belief, and start your own gay conservative church. If your faith produced such a strong reaction because there was no such organization, then it ought to be strong enough for you to create one.
“You want to shoot Haggard, Sam? That’s kind of crazy. What his crime?”
General asshattery. Being a moralizing hypocrit. Spreading lies he knew to be patently untrue, and general hostility to a demographic that he himself was a part of.
Of course, Sam, like everyone else on the internet, was probably exagerating. The hostility towards what he did, as contemptable as cheating on his spouse was, and as icky as having sex with a drug-dealing hooker may be, seems to be non-existant compared to the fact that he did those things while maintaining a holier-than-thou public persona.
posted by james on
So, back to the question–what would the gay community offer Ted Haggard if he decided to come to us for help? Wouldn’t the first thing we say be something like this–“Get rid of Jesus, you silly thing! There’s your trouble right there. Stop trying to be moral and responsible. Just do whatever feels good!” I suspect this message would come loud and clear from both Pride rallies and MCC churches. If he wanted to integrate his homosexuality with his conservative religious beliefs and traditional moral values, I doubt if he would find any help. And because we have no place for men of faith to go for help, the gay community is just as much part of the problem as anyone else in these kinds of situations. Why can’t we admit it and try to change? You say that everyone has a niche in the gay community, but where is the niche for men of faith and values?
posted by Bill Libbey on
Niche for gay men of faith and values:
Just a sampling…. its really not that small a niche…..
http://www.whosoever.org/index.shtml
http://www.gaychristianonline.org/
http://www.mabenterprises.com/gaychristians/index1.html
posted by Bobby on
“what would the gay community offer Ted Haggard if he decided to come to us for help?”
—Well, he could start by finding a gay coming out group, those are very welcoming of different people. Maybe join up with gay republicans, or gay evangelicals, or a mainstream church that welcomes gay people even if they don’t change. Or maybe accept himself as he is even if others don’t agree with him.
“And because we have no place for men of faith to go for help, the gay community is just as much part of the problem as anyone else in these kinds of situations”
—Online there are places for gay evangelicals. Websites for ex-ex-gays. Really James, you sound like those liberals that complain about there not being enough homeless shelters, as if it was our responsability to take care of everyone.
In the real world, you’re all alone. Consider yourself lucky if you have a friend or two.
I will not feel sorry for Haggard or criticize the gay community for not welcoming him with open arms. This isn’t a case of gays censoring others, or attacking christians, or preaching political correctness.
Haggard brought this on himself. And rather than apologizing to his evangelical congregation for his sins, he should apologize to the gay community for speaking against homosexuality.
Although I champion politically incorrect people, I despise liars and hypocrites, and that’s what Haggard is. He needs to repent and join another church.
posted by Randy R. on
Can’t feel one bit sorry for Haggard. In this day and age, there is plenty of real help for people like him. If he really was in pain and couldn’t find an outlet, then he should have consulted a real therapist to deal with his problems. There is plenty of help if you want it.
The ones I really feel sorry for, though, are the people who are hurt by his anti-gay rhetoric. How many followers took his advice and disowned their gay kids? How many gay kids heard his speeches and thought of suicide or attempted it? How many people hate gays because of him? It’s the effects of his actions that spread far and wide that I condemn him for.
As for whether he would have gotten a welcome from Rainbow World. Sorry, but as this website proves amply clear, there is no gay consensus on anything. When you have a group millions strong, you cannot generalize about much. If Haggard had come out, he could have found ample support. Soulforce would have welcomed him, just as a start, and there are plenty of other groups.
And if Haggard is really that good to build a church thousands strong, he certainly could build another gay church thousands strong. But it’s wrong to blame your failings to others — what ever happened to individual accountability?
posted by cesquaq on
james: you should get out more! you seem stuck to this one version of gay men that is limp wristed, talks with a lisp and only wears feather chaps and thongs at pridefest. when is the last time you went to a pride fest or parade? it really sounds like you only get the snippets on the news. they never show gays against abortion, or log cabin republicans or political campaigns marching in the parade (normal people are not news worthy) and you havent seen all the people that volunteer at lgbt youth centers (typically mainstream folks). to reiterate, conservative gays are all over! just not on the news. they are in the parades, they do have booths at the festivals. they volunteer at health organizations, shelters, hospices, on political campaigns. they are everywhere!! and 90% of the gays i know don’t go to bars or wear rainbows or tell people they should put down jesus silly and just do what feels good. we have morals, ethics, values, monogamous long term relationships. all you have to do is look for them.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
There’s a simple reply to James — why does the “gay community” need to “offer” Haggard anything?
Honesty is a basic human characteristic — especially for someone who claims to be a man of God. He chose to lie, and attempting to fob off that decision on the other gays out there who you seem to hate so much doesn’t change that fact one iota.
posted by Randy R. on
NE: You are correct. The ‘gay community’ doesn’t need to offer anything to anybody. That is does is great, but there is no requirement.
But in any case, James’s argument is strangely like that of the ex-gays. We’ve all heard them bellow that they were once gay, but that the gay community is all about sex and drugs, and they tired of that or where unhappy, so now they want out. So they think that by becoming ‘ex-gay’ that will solve all their problems.
Memo to these idiots: Being gay isn’t the problem. If you are gay and unhappy for any reason, you need to seek therapy (real therapy, not some Christian posing as one). The only person who needs to ‘accept’ you is yourself.
James seems to think that because the gay community somehow doesn’t immediately and easily accept people of faith (which I find not true at all), then the only other option for Haggard is to remain the hypocrite that he is.
Not true. Haggard can be true to himself, stop the lies, be openly gay, and be as religious as he wants to be. There simply is no stopping him if he so chooses, and a man who is as rich and well connected as him should have no problems at all.
posted by james on
Sometimes, when offering a critique of the gay community, I feel like a child with an abusive father: “This is great family! We’re wonderful people! Stop saying we’re not perfect or I’ll smack you again!” I have been around, I’ve met a lot of gays, I’ve been to a lot of rallies, and, you know, I just don’t think that the gay community is all that diverse and tolerant. I think there are clearly behaviors which get you accepted within the community (moral relativism, sexual adventuring, pretending to like Melissa Etheridge, etc.). There are behaviors which the community doesn’t tolerate–having traditional values, believing that Jesus is God, etc. If you are one of the people the gay community accepts, then its intolerance is probably not so apparent. If you are one of the people the gay community rejects, then its intolerance is pretty darn clear. The fact that the gay community is intolerant of men of faith like Ted Haggard means that he has to make self-destructive choices involving those who do accept his basic values. I admire a man whose relationship with Jesus is more important than his sexual orientation–but it would be nice if he had a place he could go where he could learn how to integrate his traditional faith with his orientation. MCC isn’t it.
If you want to believe in Rainbow World, go ahead–but there are those of us who see its intolerance, vindictiveness, and amorality and are willing to say it, in the face of certain rejection and ridicule. Fortunately, the truly attractive men don’t like Rainbow World, either.
posted by Sam on
James, stop lying and misrepresenting reality. The MCC Church doesn’t believe in Christ? You’ve got to be kidding. It’s the other way around, conservative churches don’t live by Jesus’s teachings anymore, they teach the old testament. Most gay people don’t have morals and values, only conservative gays do? If you’re going around saying this stuff then no wonder you didn’t make a lot of friends at MCC. Maybe Gary Bauer and Ralph Reed are your type of friends, in which case, imo, you’re not gay in the sense of an awakened and honest gay man, part of a community of people who have been-there-done-that and learned from their mistakes,..you’re just a man enjoys sex with other men.
Haggard hurt a lot of people. And he is a chief organizer against gay marriage. His megachurch is a circus, wrapped in the flag, filled inside with semi-erotic paintings. If that is your hero, then I’m sorry for you. I don’t know why you wouldn’t prefer an intimate and neighborly MCC church instead of that megachurch, but that’s your business.
Here is an important quote from another website about Haggard:
“This is where religion is truly harmful ? when it forces people to completely distance themselves from psychological understanding, and divorces them from humanity ? their own and everybody else?s. It?s a brand of Christianity that goes right back to the Puritans. The body is unholy. The body is the enemy, not created in the image of God, but the image of the Devil. Against it the Puritan places the soul, which is so removed from the physical that it seems a judgment against it. The religion of so many of these evangelicals is a harmful, life-rejecting theology, where the goal of life is for the body to die away, and the soul to live on in [another] world.”
I personally reject religious fundamentalism. I avoid most people who claim they have values I don’t have. I am for good, middle class values. I’ve had enough of a dose of conservatism in political and economic terms to last me a lifetime.
posted by Mark on
This discussion reminds me of a profound statement in the movie, “The Boys in the Band,” for those who are old enough or savvy enough to have seen it. Near the end, Harold and Michael exchange jabs…but Harold’s stinging response seems appropriate to quote here:
Harold: “You’re a sad and pathetic man. You’re a homosexual and you don’t want to be, but there’s nothing you can do to change it. Not all the prayers to you god, not all the analysis you can buy in all the years you’ve go left to live. You may one day be able to know a heterosexual life if you want it desperately enough. If you pursue it with the fervor with which you annihilate. But you’ll always be homosexual as well. Always Michael. Always. Until the day you die.”
Sad, perhaps, but true.
posted by Randy R. on
James: The fact that the gay community is intolerant of men of faith like Ted Haggard means that he has to make self-destructive choices involving those who do accept his basic values.
Absolutely untrue. First, there is no evidence that Haggard ever WAS involved in the gay community beyond visiting a male hooker. Second, nobody forced him to do anything at all. Third, the gay community is intolerant of Haggard (not ‘men like him’, as discussed above) because he hates the hell out of us. Sorta hard to be nice to someone who seeks our destruction.
Haggard’s problem — and men like him — is that their faith requires them to believe gays are sinners. What James is suggesting is that gay people should be able to be believe in their faith that being gay is a sin. Fine — go ahead, believe what you want. But there isn’t any likely anyone in Rainbow World who believes that being gay is a sin. As long as you hold onto THAT faith, then James is correct — you won’t find any open arms in the gay community.
Why you would want to is another discussion…
BUT if Haggard — and men like him — seek a faith that gays are fine in the eyes of God, then there are indeed plenty of places that he can go to within the gay community. If none are particularly to his liking, he can start his own community. I’ve started or participated in many of my own — gay literature, gay cinema, gay music — all venues where gay people can share our enthusiam for our passions.
But please, James. Don’t blame Haggard’s lies on the gay community. No one here forced him to do anything at all. And since you are so quick to blame the gay community for failing to provide a space for him, where have you been the last few years? if you think it’s needed, they why haven’t you created a community where people of your faith can be open and gay as well?
posted by james on
“This is where the gay community is truly harmful ? when it forces people to completely distance themselves from psychological understanding, and divorces them from humanity ? their own and everybody else?s. It?s a brand of homosexuality that goes right back to Stonewall. The spirit is unholy. The spirit is the enemy, not created in the image of God, but the image of the Devil. Against it the gay community places the body, which is so removed from the spiritual that it seems a judgment against it. The value system of so many of these Rainbow World gays is a harmful, life-rejecting system, where the goal of life is for the spirit to go away, and the body to live on in a series of sexual encounters.”
And–
“You’re a sad and pathetic man. You’re an eternal Child of God and you don’t want to be, but there’s nothing you can do to change it. Not all the sexual encounters, not all the analysis you can buy in all the years you’ve go left to live. You may one day be able to know a godless life if you want it desperately enough. If you pursue it with the fervor with which you annihilate. But you’ll always be an eternal Child of God as well. Always Michael. Always. Until the day you die. And after.”
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
Sometimes, when offering a critique of the gay community, I feel like a child with an abusive father
Oh, spare us the victimhood play, please. Yes, come down off your cross, we need the wood.
posted by raj on
It appears that “james” here is nothing more than “jimmy gatt” from the Where are the Gay Adults? thread–maybe a little more toned down, but the complaints are the same. At some point, his (their?) diatribe against gay people becomes boring, and it makes one wonder whether or not james/jimmy gatt is a gay adult. Adults are expected to take responsibility for their own actions, not bitch&moan about others. That’s why adults are given some degree of autonomy, and non-adults aren’t.
On the point of the post, I don’t feel sorry for Haggard in the least. In point of fact, I would feel contemptuous of him, except for the obvious fact that he made US$millions hood-winking the rubes with his diatribes. He’s nothing more than a Jimmy Swaggart. An entertainer, who separated the gullible from their money. It’s the gullible for whom I am contemptuous.
Regarding Haggard’s wife and children, maybe I would feel sorry for them. But, as the saying goes, when you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.
I’ve read some of Corvino’s pieces, and, quite frankly, I’ve come to the conclusion that he is more than a bit naive. From the post: A few weeks ago I was in Ripon, Wisconsin, for a same-sex marriage debate with Glenn Stanton of Focus on the Family…. It’s sweet that he was participating in a “debate” with someone with someone from Focus, but, quite frankly, debates are useless exercises. They don’t change anyone’s mind.
As an analogy, I’ve seen it too often in connection with debates over evolution vs. creationism/”intelligent design.” The only people who attend any such debates are people who have already made up their minds, and want the debaters on their side to re-inforce their pre-conceived beliefs. After a while, pro-evolution side caught onto the facts that (i) the debates were wastes of time, because they didn’t change anyone’s mind, and, more importantly, (ii) by even debating with the creation/intelligent design side, they were giving that side a degree of credibility that creation/intelligent design didn’t deserve. Regarding (i), I would suggest that Corvino shouldn’t waste his time debating with Stanton–although it admittedly is his time to waste. Regarding (ii), I would suggest that Corvino’s debating Stanton may actually be doing more harm than good.
posted by James on
If I said I was damaged by my experience with Fundamentalism, you would say, “Oh, you poor thing!” When I say I’ve been damaged by my experiences with the gay community, you say, “That’s your own fault, you whiny jackass. Stop being such a victim.” How come you believe that people are damaged by fundamentalism but not the gay community? I think they are both equally intolerant, toxic, and destructive. Why is Rainbow World less damaging than Jesusland?
posted by Sam on
James, it’s pretty creepy that you took my quote and mirrored it to fit your own gay-hating phrases. I’m sorry that you feel you are damaged. But what I honestly think is that if you’re damaged, you most likely got that way the same way we all did, from our judgemental, neglectful, shameful or sometimes abusive upbringing. I know it’s easier to blame the gay community, James, because they’re right in front of you. But it would be healthier to confront the source of the problem, and find compassion for yourself and others around you.
Growing up gay was tough for us, but no matter what hand we got dealt, as adults we have an obligation to pave the way and make it more hospitable for younger people. That means fighting for civil rights, setting a good example, working on local projects like the gay/straight alliance for teens in school, and creating some positive exposure in all forms of media/film, like Brokeback Mountain, to name just one.
There is also a difference in the human condition with the closet and being out. When you come out, and when you pursue healthy gay relationships, interact with family and friends, and go about living a normal life, your spirituality automatically grows. So I don’t feel what you said about the spirit is correct at all. There is no way NOT to feel more connected to God when you take an honest path.
Also, for me, there are many life lessons that I would not have otherwise been forced to learn. For example, as a caucasian, I never experienced descrimination. But being Gay was God’s way of letting me understand that, and allowing me to become more connected to the world.
People like Haggard have cut off their humanity and spirituality just the same as if they put a tournaquette around their own arm. But that arm is part of you and will soon become swollen and painful, forcing you to either release the binding or lose a part of yourself forever. That hustler has given Haggard a rare opportunity, whether he knows it or not. He can re-take a path to accept God’s plan for himself, or he can fight God. And it matters little at this point if he has burned bridges with the gay community or not. Because if he gets right with himself, that is the most important thing. Everything else flows from that.
posted by Sam on
Good post, btw Raj.
posted by James on
Sam, I could go through your post and change “out of the closet” to “becoming a Christian.” It is exactly the same rhetoric of fundamentalism, and just as toxic.
I’m not “gay-hating.” I don’t hate being gay. I like the little tingly feelings I get when I look at a shirtless picture of Dominic Purcell. I hate Rainbow World, if hate is the right word. I hate Jesusland. I hate any toxic system which forces people into conformity with a predetermined set of values in order to gain acceptance.
It is difficult to tell your post from the sorts of things my fundamentalist friends have written to me. You all want me to submit and conform to a set of pre-established values in order that I might find “true freedom.” But I don’t want to be a part of Rainbow World or Jesusland. I want both Ted Haggard and I to find a place where we can be ourselves, and where we can integrate our faith and homosexuality.
Please stop telling people like us that our experience is not our experience. Accept the fact that there are men who do not find Rainbow World a happy, welcoming place. Accept that there are men who, for all its faults, like Jesusland better. Both are toxic and uncomfortable, and it would be nice if there were a clear alternative.
You want me to be “out of the closet” because you assume I’m not. I want you to become a Christian because I assume you’re not. (I assume you’re an amoral nonbeliever for the same reasons you assume I’m a self-loathing, closeted gay.) You want me to be free–I want you to be free. Who wins?
posted by Lola on
I sort of get your point, James. I have been at Pride Parades where everyone cheers wildly for the leather boys and dykes on bikes when they go by, but fall strangely silent when open and affirming churches march by.
That, I get the impression you need a lot of validation for your beliefs. I say be brave and be gay and Christian. So what if you don’t feel largely accepted? Where’s your courage, man?
posted by Lola on
Oops, that was supposed to read, “That said…” in the second paragraph.
posted by crankyd on
James,
I’m having trouble understanding why you seem to heaping all the responsibility upon “Rainbow World’s” non-acceptance of conservative Christian values.
You seem to be saying that Haggard was told that he MUST abide promiscuity, drugs and effeminate pantomiming or he would be completely shut out of Rainbow World.
Deciding that he could not live in world where his Christian beliefs were not appreciated, he sought refuge elsewhere.
So, the only logical reaction would be to embrace the polar opposite of Rainbow World? Nothing in-between exists in this great country of ours? Not sure what world you’re living in.
His newfound Christian home told him he must abide monogamy, all biblical teachings and strict obedience to the beliefs of his peers in order to be one of the tribe. He gladly accepts.
After joining up, he deciding that he could not live in a world where his homosexual urges were not appreciated, so he sought refuge on the sly…like in the arms of a drug-dealing hooker.
What’s the difference?
He just chose a different world in which to violate the accepted customs. Seems to me he sounds like a textbook example of one of those tawdry Rainbow World citizens.
Oh yeah, “Rainbow World”, while far from perfect, is just trying to get some level of acceptance and peace. For all of the failings of the individuals in this community; the damage they’re doing is largely to themselves.
Jesusland seems intent on passage of federal laws to keep homosexuals inequal and inferior; Christian Beliefs as Federal Law and creating a general society of active hostility for anyone opposing them.
And you want to talk about Rainbow World’s rejection of others that don’t think just the way they do?
Please.
My advice to Haggard is the same as what I would have said to Jimmy Gatt’s rejection of the gay community:
If you don’t like the community you see, create your own. Be your own example. Others of like mind will eventually join you.
And if others refuse to accept your example…to Hell with them.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
If I said I was damaged by my experience with Fundamentalism, you would say, “Oh, you poor thing!” When I say I’ve been damaged by my experiences with the gay community, you say, “That’s your own fault, you whiny jackass. Stop being such a victim.” How come you believe that people are damaged by fundamentalism but not the gay community?
Actually, I would say “stop whining” in both cases.
Of course, your underlying assumption that the “gay community” has anywhere near the cultural or political power of fundamentalism is rather blinkered too.
But why even argue the point? It’s obvious you’ve got a view you won’t change.
So on the behalf of all my fellow homosexual men, let me extend the Deepest Apologies of the Gay Agenda for its hurtful treatment of you. Really.
posted by Bobby on
“You assume I’m a self-loathing, closeted gay.”
—I don’t assume that. I assume the gay community doesn’t meet your standards. I know what that’s like, believe me. But James, you’ll just have to deal with it. It sucks being a minority within a minority, but you’re not the first person in that situation. Think about black republicans, or gay blacks, or gay muslims. Where do you live? I think you might be luckier finding gays like you in the bible belt.
posted by raj on
James | November 22, 2006, 1:42pm |
You want me to be free–I want you to be free.
Aside from the fact that your rant doesn’t make any sense, maybe you should consider stopping bitching and moaning about what other people do, and take care of your own “knitting,” as they say.
If you did that, at least we’d be free of your bitching and moaning about what other people do. It isn’t as though your bitching and moaning about what other people do will change what they do. Some of us have learned to live with it–maybe you should, too.
posted by james on
I’m not sure why it is so difficult to understand that the gay community is toxic and dysfunctional and frequently damages people. I really think that we have to find better, more mature, more responsible ways to express what it means to be gay. I think a more public role needs to be given to gay men with traditional faith and traditional values. I would much rather have Ted Haggard come to terms with his homosexuality and his faith and become a leader in the gay community and replace Lance Bass and Rosie ‘O Donnell who do nothing but affirm people’s prejudices. I would like the word “gay” to become a synonym for loyalty, monogamy, responsibility, and maturity–instead of the flamboyance, immaturity, and amorality which is currently synonymous with gay in most people’s minds.
We need to accept and affirm peoples’ faith in God as well as their sexual orientation so all can find true support in the community. And no, groups like MCC don’t help, since they water down the Gospel. There needs to be a place for traditional faith and traditional values. Ted Haggard may have failed miserably, but at least he was seeking after the right set of goals. He’s wrong to try to “cure” himself of his homosexuality, but if he came to gay community for help, they’d try to “cure” him of his faith. What’s he supposed to do?
I appreciate this discussion. I may have run out of things to say at this point. Oh, stop cheering, Rosie!
posted by Joysword on
More saddening than the suffering caused by delusional folk like Ted Haggard is the swift decay of adult discourse when posters like “James” enter a discussion. Let the dogs bark and the caravan move on!
I, too, experienced a lovely gush of glee when I heard about Mike Jones?s statements. As the details of the story ripened, the schadenfreude was dancing in my mind. I remember thinking that just maybe, somewhere out there, are the pictures of Ralph Reed porking a 12-old girl while being royally screwed by a 6?5?, 260 lb black man! O what a fabulous 1-2 punch that would be to the hypocrisy of the Christian Right!!! The notion still makes me smile.
But counterweighting the giggle is the reality of another gay man who has made a shambles of his life through his choices. Now there was *never* a time in my life when I ever contemplated trying to pass as Haggard did. But I remember very well (as I think most gay men remember) how terrifying it could be when the people and institutions in my life were saying, latently or blatantly, that I was bad, wrong, evil, whatever, because I was different. I think that that terror is responsible for most of the bad choices young gay men and woman make in their lives. Haggard appears to have hit most of the real big ones.
It saddens me when gay men ruin their lives through drugs, alcoholic and dangerous behaviors; it?s such a waste. That, to me, is the tragedy of Haggard?s life. I do not wish to defend his hurtful, hateful behavior, but to me it seems the man has a genuine desire to help people and he brought energy and spirit to his attempts. I can?t help but wonder what that energy, spirit and desire might have accomplished if they had been contained in a heart that was not warring with itself so violently. Such a heart might have done wonders. Instead, look what?s left. Such a waste?.
posted by Randy R. on
James: “There needs to be a place for traditional faith and traditional values.”
A place for traditional values that accepts gay people? That doesn’t exist either in Rainbow World, OR in straight world, my boy.
No matter what you or I think, the ‘traditional values’ crowd will never accept gays, and they have made that abudantly clear. If you know of any place, in either world, please let us know.
posted by Bobby on
James:
The number one thing you need to understand is that most gays lose all moral demands after they come out. When you’re straight, your parents care what race you date, what religion, what politics the bf or gf is. You may break up with a partner because you don’t want to hurt your grandmother’s feelings. People pressure you into marriage, they ask you, “when are you gonna have kids,” your life is not your own but it belongs to the entire community around you.
When your gay, usually parents don’t care if you’re having orgies or a monogamous relationship. So you have to make your own moral choices independently of other people, because you’re completely alone and no one cares what you do.
posted by Sam on
I think we\\’ve all tried to explain things to James sufficiently. My impression is that there might be some sincerity there, but there\\’s also a lot of carefully-chosen words, contradictory statements, and suspiciously vague references to \\”values\\” and \\”tradition.\\”
You know, if you asked southern racist what he thinks is traditional, he\\’d say bring back Jim Crow. If you asked a muslim fundamentalist what he thinks is traditional he\\’d say stop educating women. And so on. And right now, what is traditional to James? And do we want that tradition. Well from what little he\\’s revealing, I\\’d say no.
For example, I\\’m concerned about the phrase \\”watered-down gospel.\\” That suggests to me that James, and perhaps his hero Haggard, was not rejected by MCC or UCC churches. What more likely occured is that THEY rejected the church.
It\\’s the Rick Santorum way. For Rick, it wasn\\’t enough to be ultra-conservative, he wanted everyone to live like that. To keep women in line, to have 50\\’s era rules for marriage, to keep the daughters virgins and send them to purity balls. To stop AIDS prevention and cervical cancer prevention, (because if you\\’re having sex outside of wedlock you deserve to be punished). Stuff like that. But what happened to Rick? He went down in flames. And so did Foley, and now Haggard. Often times we find that the very people preaching a certain way of life do not even live that life themselves. James\\’ answer to that of course, is that at least they\\’re \\”trying.\\” I\\’m waiting next for him to tell me that christians aren\\’t perfect, they\\’re just \\”forgiven.\\”
On a positive note, I like what Bobby has to say. Yes, I think gays naturally lose some structure when we begin same-sex dating. Because there are simply no rules set up for that. That\\’s why I think it\\’s important to incorporate gay americans into american culture, and help fill that gap. Less birth parents would be rejecting their gay children, and early talk would be of a gay marriage or perhaps grandchildren from their gay children, just as their straight children. The goal is not to completely mirror the straight life, but to at least treat them the same and have similar expectations of success. However, there is a limit to the \\”structure\\” we as gays would fully accept, because as Bobby said, we don\\’t regret being free of the biased and bigoted restrictions of race, age, and religion of the person we\\’re dating. Similarly, we\\’re probably not interested in entering into the type of marriage we saw growing up, where the man was master, sat at the head of the table, kept the checkbook and bank accounts, made the important decisions. (Remember \\”obey\\” was in the original vows.) So just by definition, marriage has to be updated for us as same-sex couples, regardless of our degree of conservatism or liberalism.
We\\’re moving forward, and we\\’re taking marriage and the nation with us.
posted by Bobby on
Hey Sam, you raise interesting issues.
I wouldn’t mind some structure if it benefited gays. For example, let’s say you come from a prominent family respected by the community. In the straight world, mothers would talk to your mother, asking her if their son would be interested in going out with their daughters. Imagine that! Getting a date based on who your parents are!
posted by John on
I think the trouble with James and the frustration of trying to reason with him comes down to the fact that our society and to a degree we ourselves define gay people by their sexuality. Unlike heterosexuals, we are not viewed, ultimately, as individuals who happen to have a common characteristic. I sometimes go to a working class ( and very homophobic ) straight bar in my neighborhood for some beers. Many of the people are crude, vulgar, have very messy and fractured family lives, alcohol and drug problems, etc. Would anyone think it rational if I concluded from this that heterosexuality was to blame? Add to this the fact that gay people often suffer from the additional stresses of rejection and blind hatred and it seems to me, James, Rainbow World isn’t doing so bad.
posted by Sam on
I think you make some good points, John. This is something black americans have to deal with too. They have to be “better” in some respects than the whites they are competing with because they are viewed a specific way and there are certain expectations.
But as far as sexuality, there is a strange difference between the two minority groups (gays and blacks) in regards to sexual expectations. Blacks are more accepted as a group, more mainstreamed, but their sexuality has been cut off. On the other hand, the public EXPECTS us to be sexual, because we’re pigionholed that way, and so here it is early on in our civil rights struggle and you’ve got QAF on televions and Brokeback Mountain on the big screen, complete with passionate kiss.
For example, I just saw a movie called DejaVu with Denzel Washington. With all his clout and star power, (and amazing good looks) they can’t have him front-on kiss the co-star? Or beyond that? Are we still not at the point where we acknowledge the sexual lives of minorities? It’s like, sure they let them into the club, but keep your penis in your pants. Outside of hip-hop culture which they couldn’t control, tv and movies were devoid of passionate black couples.
On South Beach down here, there is no problem with gays all over the street, even if they are derided, but when black organizers brought black spring break down here, with their feared sex and violence, the whole police force was called out.
I think that’s interesting.
posted by John on
Sam – It’s simple. Gay men are always laughable, in the end, because we don’t pound pussy. Black men are feared because whites suspect they do it better. It’s a crude society we live in, when it isn’t the best ever, of course.
posted by John on
I really should have read all of James’ postings before I wrote anything myself. It seems clear to me now that he’s just some joker taking advantage of our earnestness and not the screwed-up pious fool he purports to be.