Economist: Is Outing Of Closeted Political Figures A Useful Tactic?

KIRBY DICK’S documentary “Outrage“, which opened nationally last week, has turned gay activists’ controversial tactic of exposing closeted public figures—in this case, closeted Republicans perceived as advancing anti-gay policies in their public lives—into a feature-length film. The movie targets an array of elected officials and prominent GOP operators, but of particular interest is its focus on Charlie Crist (pictured with wife), the governor of Florida, who has thrown his hat into the 2010 race for the US Senate, with the support of much of the party establishment.

As if to confirm the film’s thesis that the press go out of their way to help preserve this sort of charade, National Public Radio opted to edit their reviewer’s piece on the movie to remove the names of politicos identified as closeted. At this point, as several others note, this seems rather quaint—and indeed, like an endorsement of the notion that there’s something especially awful about being accused of being gay. Nor do the network’s protestations that they simply avoid traffic in gossip and rumour hold up: They are only too happy to pass along unconfirmed reports about the sex lives of entertainers.

Which is odd, when you think about it, since while the public is clearly interested in the romances of musicians and movie stars, it’s hard to claim there’s a genuine public interest served by poking into their private lives. When it comes to public servants, however, we generally accept that it’s perfectly legitimate to scrutinise their private conduct to the extent it’s relevant to assessing the sincerity of their professed beliefs or the veracity of their public personas. Usually the controversy over “outing” has to do not with elected officials, but with high-level staffers, who have not volunteered themselves for scrutiny in the same way as political candidates. In practice legislative directors and analysts too yield significant public power—legislators are important people, and can’t be bothered with writing and reading bills themselves—but “Outrage” limits itself to indisputable public figures. If the claims about them are so poorly sourced as to constitute plain slander, the film shouldn’t be rewarded with any kind of attention; if they’re at least credible, one may as well save the listeners a Google search and say what they are.

See Economist: Is Outing Of Closeted Political Figures A Useful Tactic?

Published by

Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/05/economist-is-…

Joe The Plumber: I Would Never Let “Queers” Near My Children

Joe the Plumber, aka Samuel Wurzelbacher, sat down for an lengthy interview with Christianity Today to discuss his views on the future of the Republican party. Wurzelbacher took the opportunity to speak out against gay marriage, which he says is wrong. The unlikely conservative spokesman went so far as to say he doesn’t allow openly gay people “anywhere near” his children.

The word “queer,” Wurzelbacher noted, “means strange and unusual.”

Christianity Today: In the last month, same-sex marriage has become legal in Iowa and Vermont. What do you think about same-sex marriage at a state level?
Wurzelbacher: At a state level, it’s up to them. I don’t want it to be a federal thing. I personally still think it’s wrong. People don’t understand the dictionary–it’s called queer. Queer means strange and unusual. It’s not like a slur, like you would call a white person a honky or something like that. You know, God is pretty explicit in what we’re supposed to do–what man and woman are for. Now, at the same time, we’re supposed to love everybody and accept people, and preach against the sins. I’ve had some friends that are actually homosexual. And, I mean, they know where I stand, and they know that I wouldn’t have them anywhere near my children. But at the same time, they’re people, and they’re going to do their thing.

In the vein of George W. Bush and Michael Steele, Joe the Plumber also indicated that he wouldn’t run for public office until the Lord had given him a cue. “God hasn’t said, ‘Joe, I want you to run.’ I feel more important to just encourage people to get involved, one way or another. If I can inspire some leaders, that would be great.” Joe added: “I don’t know if I want to be a leader.”

Read more excerpts from the interview at the Colorado Independent.

See Joe The Plumber: I Would Never Let “Queers” Near My Children

Published by

Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/05/joe-plumber-i…

Sympathy for the Devil: Why We Should Show Some Compassion for Ted Haggard

By Michael Shermer

I just watched the HBO documentary film, “The Trials of Ted Haggard,” produced by Alexandra Pelosi (which the media seem curiously intent on identifying not as a filmmaker but as the daughter of Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House). The film is a follow-up to her 2007 film “Friends of God,” in which Haggard was prominently featured just before his downfall from revelations that he had homosexual relations with a male prostitute, with whom he also did methamphetamine. And all this happened right in the middle of the political debate about gay marriage, in which Haggard condemned homosexuality as an abomination and gay marriage as a sin that should never be legalized.

Now, I enjoy roasting a hypocrite as much as the next person, and I sat down to watch Pelosi’s film sharpening my typing fingers in preparation for slicing this evangelical hypocrite to pieces, especially after just watching him on Larry King Live, in which he failed to apologize to gays for condemning the very “lifestyle choice” he also presumably made. (In his Christian worldview homosexuality is a choice–a bad choice, a sinful choice, but a choice nonetheless). But I came away feeling some compassion for Ted Haggard, sympathy for the devil as it were. I don’t know if Pelosi intended her film to have this effect–I suspect not from her off-camera comments in the film as she follows the fallen preacher around Phoenix selling insurance door-to-door and bumming rooms off friends at which his family can live. But given what we know about the power of belief, and the fact that this man devoted his entire life and essence to being an Evangelical Christian and all that stands for–which is a lot when you are the titular head of the 30 million-strong National Association of Evangelicals–what a striking conflict his life has been (and by all accounts still is).

By now, most of us know that homosexuality is not a “choice,” any more than heterosexuality is a choice. Asking a gay person “When did you choose to become gay?” makes about as much sense as asking a straight person “When did you choose to become straight?” The answer is the same: “Uh? I didn’t choose. I’ve always felt this way.” Right, and all the evidence from biology, psychology, and behavior genetics (twin studies) points to the fact that most people are born straight, some people are born gay, and some are even born bisexual, and that’s just the way it is. In a large population (and six billion members of a large mammalian species certainly counts) with considerable variation in most characteristics, it is inevitable that even something as seemingly straightforward (if you’ll pardon the pun) as sexuality will likely show variations on that central theme.

See sympathy for the Devil, Compassion for Ted Haggard
Huffington Post, NY -