Ted Haggard Debate Reveals Sexuality Misconceptions (homosexuality, experience, bible, marriage)

[DeepShadow]

Originally Posted by Beliefnet

According to our cultural logic on sexuality, an affair with a male prostitute is the singular clue to Haggard's orientation; everything else is a coverup. Why? Because of the assumption that when a straight man has gay sex, he must be gay. His orientation, once hidden, is now disclosed. And it is absolute. Call it Hidden Absolute Gayness.

This logic is a problem for both sides of the debate over people like Haggard, because it refuses to acknowledge the paradoxical nature of human experience. As the psychologist quoted in the Times and his colleagues know, humans can act in myriad and inconsistent ways. We can go astray from ourselves. We can experiment with things that we wouldn’t ordinarily consider a part of who we are. A husband who sleeps with another woman is not revealing his inner polygamist. A straight man who experiences gay sex is not necessarily revealing his inner homosexual.

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/212/story_21235_1.html

[MaddLlama]

And, it didn't occur to the guy who wrote the article that Haggard could just be lying to protect his image and his career?

I have a problem with this:

Ted Haggard had an affair with a man. He also has a wife. He has five children. Those are all equal, neutral facts, but in our public conversation about Haggard, they are being weighed differently. Since early November, the facts of Haggard's marriage and family life are overwhelmed by the fact of his extra-marital sex life.

They certainly are not being weighed differently. What is being weighed is the fact that Haggard made a career out of being anti-homosexual, and then he's found doing meth with a male prostitute. His kids and his wife aren't really the issue at all. The issue is that he is saying one thing, and essentially doing the exact opposite. Are we not supposed to consider that when talking about his problems?

I don't care if he's not really gay and just "experimenting", or had a temporary lapse in judgement. When you are the president of the evangellical association and you say that the Bible is the absolute authority and it says that homosexuality is wrong for everybody, then for the love of all that is holy, don't get caught taking it from behind.

[DeepShadow]

Originally Posted by MaddLlama

And, it didn't occur to the guy who wrote the article that Haggard could just be lying to protect his image and his career?

Ummmm...I don't see where the author is denying this possibility. It just isn't the focus of the article. The focus of the article is the possibility of an either/or fallacy within popular conceptions of sexuality--on both sides.

They certainly are not being weighed differently. What is being weighed is the fact that Haggard made a career out of being anti-homosexual, and then he's found doing meth with a male prostitute. His kids and his wife aren't really the issue at all.

They ought to weigh in to a claim that he's completely gay, just as his affair ought to weigh in to any claim that he's completely straight. Could it be that Ted Haggard--like most of us--isn't completely anything?

The issue is that he is saying one thing, and essentially doing the exact opposite. Are we not supposed to consider that when talking about his problems?

Of course. As one of the commenters said, he may not be 100% gay or straight, but he's 100% hypocrite. And I totally agree. I don't see anywhere in the article where the author says he's not a hypocrite. That just wasn't the point of the article.

I don't care if he's not really gay and just "experimenting", or had a temporary lapse in judgement. When you are the president of the evangellical association and you say that the Bible is the absolute authority and it says that homosexuality is wrong for everybody, then for the love of all that is holy, don't get caught taking it from behind.

No argument here, and I don't see any in the article. I'm sorry you felt so strongly about Ted Haggard that you couldn't help being crude, but the fact is you are arguing with the wrong article.

Back on topic, do you believe that people are either 100% gay or straight?

[FatMan]

Once you engage in homosexual behavior, the distinction of who you are sexually has to include some percentage of bisexuality.

Haggard having a team of doctors declare him 100% heterosexual is a farce. Plain and simple. He is certainly less pure than Dove.

[michel]

Originally Posted by FatMan

Once you engage in homosexual behavior, the distinction of who you are sexually has to include some percentage of bisexuality.

Haggard having a team of doctors declare him 100% heterosexual is a farce. Plain and simple. He is certainly less pure than Dove.

I agree. And this is no isolated incident; this is something that one hears about reasonably frequently. In fact, it almost makes one wonder how many of us self styled heterosexuals are latent bi-sexuals.............

[MaddLlama]

Having homosexual sex means you are not 100% heterosexual.

To say that we are "sexual" implies that all, or a high percentage of people have the potential to be bi-sexual. Physically, yes, but I don't believe that's true mentally. Some people simply don't have the capacity or desire to be anything but heterosexual or homosexual. I don't see anything wrong with that.

[Fluffy]

I absolutely agree with the author of the article but I feel that he (and perhaps many gay rights activists) have missed the point.

Haggard, and people like him, have persistently tried to characterise gay relationships, especially male gay relationships, as being purely lustful in nature frequently featuring effective prostitution and drug use. They do this because they don't believe that homosexuality is a "natural" thing and so wish to discount the possibility of a loving committed gay couple.

Whether or not Haggard is actually gay, he has been caught in his own strawman since he has committed the very behaviour that he has falsely attributed to the gay community. His hipocrisy is obviously very relevant to those who put their trust in him such as his family and congregation but this pales (for the gay community at least) in comparison to the damage he has done to his image of the typical homosexual.

I view sexuality as line with heterosexual and homosexual at each end. A very small number of people occupy either end and everyone else is somewhere inbetween. I feel that given Haggard's views on homosexuality and the outcry of being discovered should he ever engage in a homosexual relationship should tell us that he had a lot of pressure not to have sex with a male prostitute. That he did anyway should indicate that he is at least leaning towards homosexuality.

[Nanda]

Personally, I don't think anyone's 100% anything.