The senator and the "incident" in a public restroom

[aldona]

Read the story here

This is becoming predictable...

Those who spend the most time and energy publicly denouncing a particular sin and upholding "family values" usually get discovered doing things that go against what they preach.

It has got to the point that if a preacher comes to our church and starts breathing fire about homosexual behavior, I start wondering what they are up to when nobody is looking.

aldona

[John317]

Read the story here

This is becoming predictable...

Those who spend the most time and energy publicly denouncing a particular sin and upholding "family values" usually get discovered doing things that go against what they preach.

It has got to the point that if a preacher comes to our church and starts breathing fire about homosexual behavior, I start wondering what they are up to when nobody is looking.

aldona

Just because a preacher writes a book about it or preaches a sermon on it, that alone shouldn't be taken to mean we should have questions about the person's own sexuality. But when a preacher or politician seems to focus on that issue, or to be obsessed with it, then, yes, I think it may well be a sign that something is not healthy.

Gay people have felt this for a long time. For instance, if someone is obviously homophobic, gays will often remark that the person probably has fears or uncertainties about themselves that they are subconciously or possibly even consciously suppressing.

[olger]

Sad story. The honorable thing to do would be to resign. Liberal or Conservative, makes no difference.

I can dream, can't I? (Re: the resigning)

Is anyone else weary of people disgracing themselves morally in public and then having a press conference to tell us how much they "love" their wife and family? If you loved her, your desires would be centered around her.

olger

[Amelia]

I feel badly for the plain clothes officer who HAD to spend all that time in the loo. And way too TMI on the clues one uses to get what they want. Will I ever pass TP under the partition to another lady in the future? Would that get me in trouble? YIKES!

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Liberal or Conservative, makes no difference.

Thank you. It does get a little tiring every time there is a sex scandal to hear if it is a conservative that he is a hypercrit and if it is a liberal that we need to remember no one is perfect. Somehow conservatives need to be judged and exposed for their sexual perversions and liberals need compassion and to be understood.

Gays have places they get together. From what I understand, this airport's restroom was one of them. He was not preying on little kids. If we want to condemn him for being gay than lets condemn all gays. If we want to be compassionate with gays, then let's be a little compassion with this guy. But for goodness sake, let's not by hypocrites ourselves with a double standard.

[Bravus]

But conservatives denounce gays and liberals don't. So then if conservatives are gay, they are hypocritical, and if liberals are, they aren't. I agree about no double standard, but this isn't one.

[Bravus]

...aaannnddd the criminal offense here was not gay sex, but soliciting sex in a public place.

[olger]

HI Bravus. Biblical people denounce homosexual sin, and they are right to do so.

It doesn't matter who is doing homosexual acts, it will always be sin.

I agree about the problem with hypocrisy, and from what I observe, it flourishes on both sides of the aisle in our political climate. Shall we justify any of it? No. God has already judged hypocrisy and homosexuality with equal clarity in His Word.

Have a blessed day,

olger

[Dr. Shane]

Gays solicit sex in public places. It can almost be said that is part of being gay. Laws that forbid it can be called anti-gay laws.

Can a man who smokes tobacco favor increasing tobacco prices in order to encourage people to quit smoking without being a hypocrite? I know when I smoked cigarettes I wished the government would have ban tobacco altogether. Was I a hypocrite?

What about the alcoholic that favors government restrictions on alcohol? Must a person be a tea-totaler in order to favor restrictive laws on alcohol?

So what if a person is gay? Can a gay man not oppose laws that give the gay community special rights or oppose gay marriage without being a hypocrite? If he is indeed gay it only lends him more credibility in his position against gay rights and gay marriage.

Fact is that a person can be involved in an addictive or compulsive/obsessive lifestyle they know is wrong and favor public policy to restrict or ban that lifestyle. In the incidences that we learn that a person is actually a victim of the addictive/compulsive behavior that he publicly opposes, I do not see why we still shouldn't have compassion on him.

I favor him resigning. However let's remember Barney Frank, a gay congressman from New York, was found to be running a gay prostitution ring out of his house and he is still in Congress.

[John317]

Gays solicit sex in public places. It can almost be said that is part of being gay...

It is very common, of course, but there are also many gays who are opposed to that kind of behavior and who don't participate in it. They think that it is a sign of bad taste, or low-class, and that it helps give gays a bad reputation, and they are right.

[Dr. Shane]

Well straights solicit sex in public places too. But society doesn't take issue with that as long as it is consensual and no one is paying for it.

[Amelia]

Shane, I don't think men are going into ladies restrooms looking for sex and vise versa.

[John317]

There's also danger associated with men soliciting sex from other men. It's been a good while since I heard of a woman beating a guy to a pulp for making an unwanted "pass" at her. However, it happens more often than people might think that a gay man is beat up by another man for such a reason. (Gay men will often not report it, however, out of embarrassment.) You might remember a case not long ago in Milwaukee where a gay man was murdered by a young person after the gay man made two "passes" at him on the street.

[Dr. Shane]

Gays have their little signals, as do straights. When I was in college we would go out dancing. Often times when on the dance floor, one would either grind or grab the other in a suggestive way. If it was returned they would hook up for the evening. A less subtle heterosexual signal is the wink and nod.

There are a lot of straights out there doing the same thing as gays only with the opposite sex. The difference is that what is the exception for the straight community is the norm for the gay community.

[Bravus]

Hypocrisy is a pretty simple concept: saying one thing and doing another. I didn't say I agree with liberals who accept homosexual acts, or any of that stuff. I simply, logically, said that it is not a double standard to accuse gay conservatives (in particular those who have made loud public pronouncements on the subject) hypocrites if they do what they have proclaimed is wrong, while not calling gay liberals, who do what they say is fine, hypocrites.

Plenty of other issues, and you guys have explored them all, but my simple, logical point remains true.

[Dr. Shane]

Anyone that holds any moral standards is a hypocrite because no one that holds moral standards is able to live up to them. Not one is perfect. No not one. So calling someone a hypocrite is much like throwing stones in a glass house or the pot calling the kettle black.

I heard the audio tape today of the senator during his interrogation with the police and I must say he sounds pretty good. It sounded like he handled it very well and he by no means admitted to being gay. He actually claimed (during the interrogation) that it was the police officer that made an advance on him. The senator was calm and spoke quite articulately and the police officer was getting bent out of shape.

I certainly don't want to say the senator is innocent but I don't think we should assume the worse. If the guy says he isn't gay, and given the circumstances of what happened, it certainly wasn't conclusive, I say he should be given the benefit of the doubt.

[Amelia]

I really dont think this is about the possiblity of him being a closet gay. Although much of the press is leading in that direction. These activities can be done without being gay.

[John317]

In those situations, it is common for the vice squad to make the first advances and then to make an arrest if the other person responds in a way that shows they are open to the temptation. The police in these instances really do play the devil's advocate. They have been known to expose themselves and then make an arrest if the "gay" person shows interest. I'm not at all defending what the Senator did, but on the other hand, I think it is unfair for the police to use some of the tactics they use. They ordinarily are the first to give evidence that they are interested in some form of sexual contact, and then when the other person responds to them, they make an arrest.

[John317]

Believe it or not, these activities very often involve people who consider themselves completely heterosexual and whose closest friends and intimates would be absolutely stunned to find out what happened.

[Dr. Shane]

There are also heterosexual men that respond to a gay man's advances just to see where it goes because they feel flattered - not because they have any intention of engaging in gay sex.

[John317]

Very true.

Many, however, actually engage in sexual contact but afterwards are able to walk away with their manhood fully intact (in their own thinking) as long as they haven't "reciprocated," or shown any affection. They compartmentalize certain behaviors as "gay", and as long as they stay away from those, they go on thinking of themselves as completely heterosexual. (This may be what the Senator does, so that when he says he is not gay, he really means it and could pass a lie detector test with flying colors.)

I think we tend to do the same with spiritual matters. For instance, as long as I stay within certain boundaries, I may sin but it's acceptable sin and doesn't mean I'm unfaithful to Christ. We excuse our favoirte sins just as many excuse various sexual misbehaviors. We can become self-deceived in order to feel good about ourselves and have our sins, too.

[Amelia]

What about those who live on the "down low"?

[John317]

Much of this occurs because there is a very heavy penalty to pay among a certain group for being known as a "fag," whereas if one pretends to do things only as an "experiment," it is more acceptable. One can do this for quite a while and still keep one's sense of not really being "that way." These can ridicule others for being "that way," at the same time that they do many of the same things, and yet feel morally superior to them. More self-delusion.

[Dr. Shane]

I have read studies that have shown quite a number of men and women have had sexual experiences with their same sex only a limited number of times and the authors of the studies wrote that up to same-sex experimentation. So I think that is a very real phenomenon. Whether or not that makes a person gay I guess is dependent upon the definition one attaches to the word gay.

Interesting, the gay rights groups claim that gays that have left the lifestyle, like John317, were never really gay but should be classified with the same kind that experiment in the lifestyle. That is, of course, because they cannot admit that a real gay person was actually able to leave the lifestyle.

I am inclined to believe the senator is either gay or experimenting with the lifestyle. However from the interrogation I heard, I would be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I don't see it as a betrayal of the voters that elected him even if it is true. The way it looks now, he is expected to resign. If he plays his cards right, he could come out with a book in a few months and make a bunch of money.

[John317]

I have read studies that have shown quite a number of men and women have had sexual experiences with their same sex only a limited number of times and the authors of the studies wrote that up to same-sex experimentation. So I think that is a very real phenomenon. Whether or not that makes a person gay I guess is dependent upon the definition one attaches to the word gay.

You're right. Just because a person does those things a few times doesn't mean they are "gay". But some do those things on a regular basis for years yet think of themselves as 100% heterosexual. That's true of those who practice what is called "down low." As long as they keep away from certain kinds of acts and don't get emotionally involved, they don't consider it as "gay."

Quote:

Interesting, the gay rights groups claim that gays that have left the lifestyle, like John317, were never really gay but should be classified with the same kind that experiment in the lifestyle. That is, of course, because they cannot admit that a real gay person was actually able to leave the lifestyle.

Right. All they've done is define "gay" in such as way that it is impossible for anyone who is truly gay to cease to be gay. Leaving the lifestyle means that you stop being in a sexual/romantic relationship with a man/men and you stop doing all the other things that ordinarily accompanies being homosexual. As a Christian, you don't "cruise," pick up "tricks," go to bars, "obsess" about men, "dress up," use makeup, watch porn, go out with gay friends, etc. So you stop a lot of behavior that you know God doesn't want you doing. As you develop a relationship with Christ and as the Holy Spirit continues to live in you, you get to the place where you don't have any desire to do those things. That doesn't mean you don't miss the close friendship/companionship of a man, but The Holy Spirit changes the way you think. He changes your thought patterns and your desires and motives. He helps you find new and acceptable ways in the Lord of satisfying those emotional needs. But the gay rights groups don't accept this view. They can't. And I understand that.

Quote:

I am inclined to believe the senator is either gay or experimenting with the lifestyle. However from the interrogation I heard, I would be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I don't see it as a betrayal of the voters that elected him even if it is true. The way it looks now, he is expected to resign. If he plays his cards right, he could come out with a book in a few months and make a bunch of money.

It's very likely the Senator is fully convinced in his own mind that he's not gay. And he actually may be right. Many otherwise "straight" men participate in some forms of sexual contact with other males. Romans 1 talks plainly about this. My personal experience is that given the right circumstances, most men would, if not under the direction of the Holy Spirit.

Personally I think the Senator should resign. I think he would be better off and the public would be better off if the Senator came open and honest and told the truth about what happened. So far I'm not convinced that he has.