Ted Haggard is one of those people I genuinely despise. He's a major leader of a conservative evangelical organization, and as you can see in the clip below, he's a genuinely creepy, hypocritical, arrogant little man.
He's changed now, though. Here's another clip of Haggard, being evasive and humble and making excuses for himself…and now we learn that he has stepped down from his ministry over accusations that he had a gay affair. I suspect, from his demeanor and responses, that he did have that affair, and that he's now political deadweight, destined to be discarded for at least a good long while. (Latest news: Haggard has admitted to some of the indiscretions)
One smarmy preacher down. I ought to be pleased. I'm not.
He's going down for the wrong reasons.
The bottom line in this business is that Haggard did nothing illegal. He may have cheated on his wife, which is deplorable, but it's an entirely personal issue, not one that we should be concerned about, and not one that should cause him to lose his job. Having sex with someone isn't a crime, and shouldn't be the cause of all of this outrage. Being a moralistic hypocrite is also not an actionable business.
I'm also not too thrilled with Democrats pointing fingers and using this and the Mark Foley case to accuse the Republican party of being a hotbed of corruption and iniquity. These are people (creepy, unpleasant people, perhaps) who had consensual sex with other adults. Stop acting as if this is a sin or an evil—that kind of narrow moral certitude is the other party's schtick! By playing that game, you've been coopted to serve the right-wing's social agenda, reinforcing that homosexuality is a damnable offense.
Why don't we instead see Haggard's sanctimonious lies, his authoritarian appropriation of the church for the Republican party, or his ignorance, which he foists off on his congregation as wisdom, as the real crimes here? I really don't care what he does with his penis in his private life, but that seems to be the major concern of everyone right now.
- Log in to post comments
Not to split hairs, but if the drug allegations are true - he definitely did something illegal.
It's the hypocrisy factor that makes it piquant. I mean, who would care if a Unitarian minister was outed?
That depends on his job. The fundamentalists who employ him surely consider his sexual behavior to be relevant to the position.
Teaching garbage and indoctrinating people with nonsense isn't illegal, either.
Can't we have just a little bit of schadenfreude, even if the cause for his fall is for the wrong reasons?
I'm also not too thrilled with Democrats pointing fingers and using this and the Mark Foley case to accuse the Republican party of being a hotbed of corruption and iniquity. These are people (creepy, unpleasant people, perhaps) who had consensual sex with other adults.
Umm - what? Mark Foley didn't have consensual sex with adults, he was molesting children. For all we know, over the decade that he did it, he even had sex with some of them. That's most definitely illegal.
Dr. Z, in some ways I agree. But hypocrites must be brought low; false prophets must be cast down; mendacious heroes must be crushed in public to show their dupes how they have been manipulated.
If only his followers stop for a minute and think: 'enough of this crap! I'm tired of being jerked around.' then it might be worth it.
Of course, I'm not holding my breath.
Because those things aren't crimes either?
Are you trying to make yourself look like a fool, PZ? Smashing good job if you are.
Caledonian: Something can be a crime and not be illegal. Check your dictionary, Trollio.
It's not the homosexuality or even the adultery that's driving my glee from this. It's the exposure of the hypocrite and fraud that he is.
When men who hold themselves above others and demonize them constantly while hold great sway and power are exposed to be the very people they are trying to demonize it shines a pretty serious light on the validity of their accusations.
When they're exposed as liars and frauds it causes greater scrutiny on their positions.
There is always the backfire of how the most religious will use this as an example of the "evil" of homosexuality. But honestly, no one being exposed like this is going to change their minds. George Bush could come out as a homosexual and they'd poo-poo and stay the course.
I agree with Caledonian. When your job is to persecute homosexuals and preach moral values, which deal with fidelity and the sanctity of marriage; cheating on your wife and having gay sex are both in violation of your job description. So he should lose his job.
Now if you want to debate whether being a "moral" figurehead and preaching hate and prudish values is a valid job that's another story.
It's not as though we're talking the ordinary social hypocrisy that might be mistaken for discretion. Running an organization that condemns man-on-man action in the strongest possible terms while also getting sweaty with the man-love, is about as strong an hypocritical act as you are going to find, and deserves to be condemned itself. From all quarters.
I miss Frank Zappa.
Sit on it, Electric Razor. If you're going to pretend that the metaphoric use of crime can be used interchangeably with its literal use, then Haggard's violation of what he claims to believe is a sacred bond and hypocrisy in endulging in an act he proclaims is profoundly sinful and an affront against God is a crime, and Haggard's followers are perfectly justified in being outraged about them.
If we take the responsible position, then nothing Haggard has been accused of doing (except possibly illegal drugs) are crimes.
PZ wants to have it both ways. Eating and having cake are mutually incompatible, donchaknow.
Illegal stuff done by Haggard:
Drug use
Prostitution
Reasons enough to resign even if it wasn't homosexual sex.
The fact of the matter is that Haggard is a closet gay gay-basher who deserves to be outted. Hypocrites deserve no consideration whatever. As to the question of Haggards' private life being private, he forfeited the right to privacy when he engaged in gay-bashing publicly while engaging in homosexual activity privately.
Yep - it's not the "crimes" per se, but the hypocrisy that makes this such juicy news.
Enjoy the schadenfreude!
"I miss Frank Zappa."
Me too, the more it changes the more it is exactly the same. He had songs that fit this perfectly, just change the names. How come people cannot wise-up to the hypocritical right wing (apparently often open) arseholes, who want to carry us into a homophobic twilight zone.
Caledonian:
PZ said:
"Why don't we instead see Haggard's sanctimonious lies, his authoritarian appropriation of the church for the Republican party, or his ignorance, which he foists off on his congregation as wisdom, as the real crimes here?"
You said:
"Because those things aren't crimes either?
Are you trying to make yourself look like a fool, PZ? Smashing good job if you are."
The conclusion I drew from that was that you approve of people telling sanctimonious lies, appropriating religious beliefs for their political parties and foisting their ignorance as wisdom.
Am I right?
Because obviously criticizing a person's critique of a thing means that I support that thing.
Whoo boy! I'd recommend that you be given your own blog named "The Idiot Room", but that name has already been taking by some very entertaining young gentlemen. You'd fit right in with their personas, but I don't think they'd deign to work with you.
Illegal stuff done by Haggard:
Drug use
Prostitution
Reasons enough to resign even if it wasn't homosexual sex.
Only if you think drug use and prostitution should be illegal (I don't, even though I have no interest in either of them).
I'm torn on this story... on the one hand, I think his personal life is his personal life. On the other, I think when you're a moralizing blowhard of a bigot, it's nice to see it bite you in the ass (or anything else you might have had done back there).
No need for me to repeat what has already been stated on this thread. It's the hypocrisy, stupid.
It's one thing to be gay and work for, say, Playboy magazine. Odd, but nothing strange if you're not out persecuting horny straight men for being horny and straight. If you are, then what you do for a living definitely becomes important.
[/tortured metaphor]
I'm a little with you, here, PZ, but not entirely. Yes, he should be perfectly free to have all the gay sex he wants. Hell, he should be perfectly free to have all the methamphetamine he wants. What he did in the strictest sense isn't the cause of my glee over his fall; his blatant hypocrisy is what does it for me. His constant bigoted hatred of homosexuality and opposition of any forward motion of the gay rights movement, while all the while he was paying for an extra-marital gay affair. A man like that being exposed as such a blatant fraud and hypocrite most definitely brings a smile to my face.
From a local TV station (http://www.kktv.com/news/headlines/4557411.html):
Don't worry folks, drug use and gay sex are mere indiscretions, nothing to see here.
Why don't we instead see Haggard's sanctimonious lies, his authoritarian appropriation of the church for the Republican party, or his ignorance, which he foists off on his congregation as wisdom, as the real crimes here?
We do. But those aren't illegal.
So we use what we can to bring him down. And down is a very good place for him to be.
Just like they got Capone and Hovind on their tax returns and not their other crimes.
And another thing. Picture the smile on Dawkins' face today!
PZ sez: "I really don't care what he does with his penis in his private life, but that seems to be the major concern of everyone right now."
Seems a lot of folks are more pissed off at the hypocrisy. It's the old, and still useful, Micaelangelo Signorile standard: you don't "out" folks EXCEPT when they are repeat-offender public homophobes, such as preachers and politicians who ride the anti-queer train to the top of their particular heaps.
PZ sez: "Why don't we instead see Haggard's sanctimonious lies, his authoritarian appropriation of the church for the Republican party, or his ignorance, which he foists off on his congregation as wisdom, as the real crimes here?"
I did not get the impression that Haggard is being charged, formally, with any crimes. He is being dissed and maybe dismissed by his own churchy group and his own churchy standards.
I agree that the folks who focus exclusively on SEX are missing the larger points, but it is rightwing religiods as much as the center right Democrats who will play that soundbite game. And all of them can play the "he's not a Real Christian (TM)" game.
The party that snowed so many for so long by framing and flogging the "morals" and "family values" horses are reaping their own whirlwind. Arrogance and contempt for their own flock are common to the Bush Gang, the megachurch movement, the leadership of the NRA...
When an edifice built on deception and misdirection has its foundational blocks removed, it is hard to keep the whole thing from collapse; the US evangelical house of cards was employed to support too many rickety policies.
Sadly, when the dust clears, the sub-basement of theism will still be there.
Skeptyk
I had wondered about the tension in that confrontation scene from "Root of All Evil". Was it just boiling antipathy? Or perhaps we can now conclude that it was repressed sexual tension?
Sorry, I couldn't help it.
Why don't we instead see Haggard's sanctimonious lies, his authoritarian appropriation of the church for the Republican party, or his ignorance, which he foists off on his congregation as wisdom, as the real crimes here?
Nothing will further that end more than events like this.
"Umm - what? Mark Foley didn't have consensual sex with adults, he was molesting children. For all we know, over the decade that he did it, he even had sex with some of them. That's most definitely illegal."
Given that the age of consent in DC in 16 it is not "most definitely illegal". It could probably be considered harrassment and abusing his position of power.
Nes channel in Denver hired a nationally recognized voice expert to analyze the voice mails.
Art = Haggard
linky-poo
grrrr
NEWS channel
There is nothing wrong with homosexual sex and I think drug use should be legal. However, Haggard should step down because he is a hypocritcal liar. That in itself is the crux of it. What is really sad, if this is indeed true as I suspect it is, is that he has been living a lie and repressing his true identity for his entire life. I can only guess why and I don't care to speculate here. But that is a real tragedy for him as a person.
I hve no problem with what he allegedly did. None.
Should people be outed? I don't know. I wouldn't want my private life publicized, and I especially would not want my private life publicized if I were a national figure.
The religious people are all about what people should do in their private lives, so I guess I'm more okay with this if it exposes the hypocrisy of the sanctimonious religious blowhards. Also, this guy is in regular direct contact with the White House. He no doubt makes sure Bush feels right with God so Bush can feel good about his Freedom (and Death) Agenda.
From the online Los Angeles Times, quoting the Rev. Richard Cizik, vice president for governmental affairs for the National Association of Evangelicals:
"Let's not crucify the man until we've gotten the facts."
Wow, I'd like to think I could be so cool and courteous to Haggard in the face of his smiling insults. Did he get beaten up a lot as a kid?
Someone said..."Now if you want to debate whether being a "moral" figurehead and preaching hate and prudish values is a valid job that's another story."
Unless you are the so-called "prophet" Mahmoud, who did just that, and is reputed to have sex with a 9(?) year old (Ayesha).
So it obviously is a valid job.
Oh dear.
Last time I checked, paying for sex, and doing (unprescribed) methamphetamines were both illegal, not that he's been formally charged with such crimes.
What makes this some of the purest, most unadulterated, untainted schadenfreude I've ever come across is the degree to which this guy is being hoisted by his own petard.
Sure, it may be wrong for a guy to get demolished by a mob simply for being gay, etc, but is it so wrong to laugh if the guy being so demolished has made his living building up and inciting his very own personal mob of thousands to do that very thing?
I mean... BWAHAHAHA! What a comeuppance!
When people build their lives around religious fantasies, these conflict with reality in mundane matters: the inability to pretend about their own nature, the deceit practiced by their fellow believers, the hollowness of relationships based on shared pretense. Jesus isn't going to come down to the fundamentalists and say, "you folks are all crazy," for the simple reason that Jesus is their fantasy. This kind of hypocrisy is where they bump into reality.
I think the gist of the issue is that he's a gay man and he rails against gay marriage.
The reason for his downfall is his own doing. People like him create the fear and intolerance. He's a victim of his own sermons. His possible self loathing was created by his religion and this society.
A persons sexual orientation should not be an issues. But it's people like him and his flock that do.
Maybe it will cause some greater introspection in the evangelical community. But I doubt it. They'll just chalk one up for satan rather than look inward for the greater truths.
This is not a question of simple hypocrisy. This is a man who uses his position of immense power and influence (he's the president of the National Association of Evangelicals, which represents millions of people) to work positvely for the oppression of an entire class of people. Although I'm still confused by Barney Franks' recent ascent to "Elder Statesmanhood", I have to agree with him on this issue: When you are part of an organization and/or you yourself are actively working to oppress the people who are like you, your self-hatred are public issues and reason for scorn and derision. I am absolutely in favor of public outing in these cases, as I was in the Foley case, for the same reason.
Where I agree with Dr. Myers, however, is that these are not the rationales given by either the NAE or the DNC. The evangelicals, when/if they accept that Haggard is a self-hating closeted gay, will simply see this as evidence that they are right, that gayness is indeed a moral disease, that gay people are deceitful and untrustworthy, and that they are justified in their campaign of bigotry. Similarly, the Democrats and liberals are using the Foley case to say that the Republicans are corrupt because they have closeted gay men in their ranks. This is a bit more subtle, but in its subtlety, may even be worse than the rather straight-forward homophobia of the NAE. The Democrats in their approach to using the Foley scandal are perpetuating the same association of homosexuality with deceitfulness and untrustworthiness. Mr. Franks has been the only congressman I've heard speak about this who, for obvious reasons, gets it.
There is also a problem with the liberal critique of the outing itself, which is that Haggard's (or Foley's) sexuality is a "private" matter. This is, albeit probably unintentionally, a sublte reinforcing of the Closet, something we've been trying to destroy for years. One's homosexuality is as much a part of oneself as another's heterosexuality. And when one is in a position of public power, one's sexuality may very well be of issue in one's actions in the public sphere.
So I say, let Haggard fall, and start talking about the *real* reasons why it's a good thing that he burn.
I'm sorry PZ, but I have to disagree on this one. Yes, he didn't do anything that I'd consider illegal, (well, drugs, if it's true - I don't have a problem with keeping meth illegal, but I wouldn't be upset at all if it were pot.)
It's the hypocrisy that brought Ted down. And Mark Foley. I would love to see hypocrisy be the end of every single right wing fundamentalist - even if none of it legally led to a single day in jail.
This would set the precedent - when a right wing fundamentalist loony advocates gay-hostile laws, I want their fan base to think, "What is he hiding? Why is he so strident?"
Next to "Alcohol Rehab" this is a useful meme for nonbelievers and progressives to point out when they are being battered with the 'morality cudgel of Christianity'.
Todd O.
Agreed - and so much better put that my little blurb.
Perhaps it would be useful to point out that homosexuality appears to be innate, not a "choice" - but really a part of a person physically.
Haggard was trying to deny his core sexuality, and it led him to hypocrisy. We should point out that the world is a place where reality can't be denied or wished away, and shouldn't we all start acting accordingly?
I'm glad he fell, I'm glad that true believers are now looking at their leaders with suspicion, and I'm glad to have the opportunity to say, "Well, I don't think the homosexuality was wrong, but the hypocrisy, most certainly was!"
PZ, intellectually I agree with you. I wish the creepy little toad was busted for being an evil moron instead of being merely a hypocrite.
Emotionally, however, can I be excused if I feel overwhelmed with delicious glee?
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone, and another one gone
Another one bites the dust....
Yes, in a perfect enlightened world we would bring these snake charmers down by rational arguments, but in the meantime..
let him join the "The Jimmy "I-have-sinned" Swaggart Home for Wayward Preachers"....
After all, all's fair in love and war...
schadenfreude: the word of the day.
With all apologies to Malcolm X, "By any means necessary"... I don't care if it was tax evasion or smoking meth & having sex with other dudes, these people need to be exposed as the raging hypocites whenever humanly possible.
"Pastor" Ted built his life around telling other people what was wrong and right and now EVERYONE can see what a lying, power-hungry bastard he really is. Sad thing? It's always been this way... because folks want to be told what to do and where they fit in the scheme of things (primates. go figure)
Er, and just whom in the National Ass'n of Evangelicals do you expect to be the first to cast those stones?
I have to admit that I've done more personal thinking about atheism than I ever did reading other people's opinions on it. Only recently have I bothered to take much notice of people like Dawkins, so I was somewhat surprised to see that he acted like a total jerk. I'd expect a bit of edginess from Haggard, in my experience, evangelicals are often genuinely disturbed to closely deal with people outside their comfort zone. But Dawkins? He's supposed to be a well-educated man. And does anyone see him blinking up a storm? He seems less well-spoken, and more repressed than Haggard at that moment in time.
As for PZ's entry, I can see where he's going with it. I'd be much less concerned if people were focusing on the fact that Haggard has shown he is unqualified to be in such as powerful position of trust. Personally, I would hope that the outcome of these revelations is not as much to lambast Haggard (which many commentators in this section seem to delight in doing) but to help show Haggard's flock the value of thinking for one's own self.
Before all of us good guys on the left get too jubilant about the apparent fall from grace Ted Haggard we might want to remember good old Karl Rove. Mike Jones, Haggard's accuser, just failed a polygraph test. Pay some wannabe (with buckets of unmarked cash?) to make false accusations against a popular and charasmatic leader of an evangelical religious movement with 30,000,000 members nationwide...can you say "mobilize the base?" /dps
Dawkins was blinking because he found it difficult to believe that such a combination of utter stupidity and overweening arrogance as Haggard could actually exist.
But apparently you think such a combination merits the adjective "well-spoken". Whatever.
As far as Mark Foley goes, even if the age of consent in D.C. is 16, and even if he actually waited to harass any of his pages until they were of that age, he still traded explicitly sexual e-mails on government time, and did so with people directly under his authority (and this is just going off what we know he did). I'd think that's enough to warrant at the least a sexual harassment suit, and at most, rape or attempted rape charges (using a position of power as leverage to obtain sex). Some of that depends on whether or not e-mails were the only thing involved.
With people like Haggard, I think it's absolutely necessary to expose them as terrible hypocrites, so long as we make clear that it's the hypocrisy, and not the homosexuality, we're condemning. Every time one of these ministers is outed as a closet, self-loathing homosexual or an adulterer or something along those lines, it helps to invalidate their message of hate and intolerance and "traditional family values." It adds credence to the "protest too much" motivation for bigotry--that the loudest, most offensive bigots are the ones who are self-loathing. People see this same bombastic hatred in others, and they start to think "why is he really saying this?"
Hypocrisy discredits these "values" positions, and we ought to leap on every opportunity to expose it. But we do need to be careful that we don't do it in a way that plays against our own interests.
Too late, Dann, because Haggard has already admitted- according to his own assistant pastor- to "indiscretions". Evidently there really is some fire behind that smoke. (And whether or not all of Jones's accusations are true, the polygraph is a worthless pile of crap anyway.)
Anyone else notice how Haggard had a maniacal gleam in his eye during the interview with Dawkins? He's got that Children-of-the-Corn-thing going on.
I also liked the part where Dawkins calls him on his gross ignorance of evolution. Haggard tries to dodge by saying that Dawkins must not be talking to the same people he is. Show of hands - how many of us believe that Haggard has ever talked to a real evolutionary biologist in his life (before Dawkins)?
Yeah, I said well-spoken. He may be completely wrong, and hopelessly in need of a decent science education, but Haggard at least presented himself decently.
Aside from this sort of nit-picking, I'm intrigued by the deeper implications of where the "self-loathing" mentioned by Tom Foss comes from. Wouldn't it be amazing to be able to take a guy like Haggard and see if he could turn this all into something good? Instead of letting the evangelicals get him on a "I have sinned, but I found rebirth in Jesus" lecture circuit, why not harness his communication skills to turn some of that anti-gay sentiment around?
Dawkins was not at all a jerk. He was taken aback by Haggards arrogance... telling Dawkins about biology. Haggard just didn't like being told he was wrong.
I've long argued that most forms of extremism harkens back to one's own psychological issues. I'm reminded of the psychological theory that suggests that the psyche is similar to a tube of toothpaste. The gist of the argument is that a tube of toothpaste works well when the cap is removed and pressure is applied in order to push the paste from the container. However, if the cap is placed on the tube and the same pressure is applied, toothpaste will eventually ooze out from numerous newly created and unintended openings. The psyche functions similarly in that if we allow our identity to flow naturally and resist the societal pressure to "cap it" we function normally...but if we attempt to hide our identity...meaning to "cap it" in order to keep it hidden (whether that be from shame, fear, or some other factor)...it will escape and manifest itself in numerous dysfunctional behaviors.
If Jesus was to be our example, then I don't understand this thing we now call Christian values. Pastor Haggard may believe that he speaks for God but his actions suggest that he merely fears his own humanity. Further, if the values he espouses exist to demonstrate his faith in the God he knows, then the God he knows must have already seen this element of his humanity that he cannot personally accept...which would mean that any true God has already accepted that which we humans won't and would also prove that the God Haggard purports to represent is not a real God but a God of his own creation designed to serve his flawed view of the human condition.
Read more here:
www.thoughttheater.com
PZ - I usually agree with you but this time I totally disagree. As many others have said, it's NOT the sex or drugs, it's the hypocrisy - the sex just gives the hypocrisy a healthy radioactive glow.
You could almost forgive the stupidity of a character like this - if they really believe the crap they spew, they're more to be pitied than hated, perhaps. But the hypocrisy puts him well beyond redemption or pity. How many gay teenagers has this guy helped to send to the morgue or emergency room, victims of suicide or gay-bashing? And for what? A false "value" he doesn't even believe himself!
Because of this, I'll be glutting on rich, creamy Hypocrisy-brand Schadenfreude - sorry if you don't want some, too, because it's delicious.
As a gay man who was previously a fundamentalist Christian I am following this with special interest. As a former Christian I went through years of "ministry" at the hands of people like Haggard. It was painful, humiliating, psychologically damaging, and completely ineffective. The American Psychological Association has already commented on this too and noted that there is no evidence that this ministry works, and indeed that it is extremely harmful. When the likes of Haggard and his cohorts then declare that homosexuality is "sin" this only compounds the misery and prejudice against gay people. Perhaps one positive outcome from this (and I'm being hopelessly naive here) is that there will be a focus on the total ineffectiveness of churches to 'fix' homosexuality and that such ministries are dangerous (if not criminal). But I'm afraid I know too well how the fundie mind works - I'm sure all the sheep will be bleating something along the lines that even the elite and the chosen can slip and much more diligent they all need to avoid temptation. Nevertheless, I am stil finding the whole affair just completely delicious and as much as I don't wish suffering on others, Haggard has fully brought this on himself.
Part of the job description of being a pastor and leader of a religious organization is living up to the moral codes that your church professes and that you publicly demand that others live up to. I don't completely agree with the particular moral codes being touted in this case, but he agreed, implicitly and maybe explicitly (I wouldn't be surprised if there were a "morals code" in his contract), to live up to them. Failing to do so is certainly grounds for losing that particular kind of job. Best, Marc
Steve...I listened to the video of the assistant pastor "confirming" some "indiscretions" (did you?). Pretty vague and tepid as an admission of guilt. My main point wasn't about Haggard's alleged behaviors in any case. Rather, I am concerned that by this time tomorrow the other foot will fall and Haggard will be portrayed as a victim of the anti-Christian, pro-gay left. Less than a week before the election, with the evangelical base not feeling particularly motivated to vote...what are you going to do? Construct an attack on one of evangelical Christianity's most telegenic and charismatic leaders? Hmmmm. Still stinks of Karl Rove to me. Unfortunately, the more we on the left revel in this the more energized Haggard's co-believers will become. It is admittedly a risky tactic but rabid Karl is backed into a corner.
By playing that game, you've been coopted to serve the right-wing's social agenda, reinforcing that homosexuality is a damnable offense.
Which tells you something about the contemptible hypocrisy surrounding the Democratic Party you've hitched your draft cephalopod to.
Kudos to you for at least being honest about it.
To me it's more that the guy has no credibility. It's like Ann Coulter et al saying anything for money or publicity-simple media whoredom. Why trust anything he would ever say in public again? I don't care about the gay aspect of it, I'm actually a bit of an activist when it comes to gay issues because I support equal rights for all Americans and don't want a second class citizenry to spring up. There is more money in trying to get that to happen and this guy is just using it as his golden egg.
Dann, do you see Rove in your sleep? Part of the Democratic party's self-inflicted gormlessness has been its obsession with that fat creep's supposed "genius".He's just a garden-variety slimeball, whose only real "talent" is his utter absence of a conscience even by Rethuglican standards.
Meanwhile, you can rest assured that the sublimely arrogant Pastor Ted would not have resigned and admitted to "indiscretions" if there weren't something pretty juicy there. And the rats are already leaving the sinking ship- just saw a quote from Falwell pooh-poohing Haggard's importance to the evangelical movement.
PZ,
So you basically don't think rank hypocrites should be called out when they publicly oppose what they privately practice?
Hmmm. Interesting how most folks want to call this dude gay because he did it with a gay prostitute. So much "this or that" thinking in the world today. Right~wrong. Liberal~Conservative. Gay~Straight. Evil~Good. Blah blah blah.
Sexuality is a continuum. People vary from gay to bi to straight with all kinds of points between these definitions.
Those who can't or don't want to devote brain power to sorting out life's complexity seek to simplify it. Haggard's torturous self-created reality is based on this kind of thinking. Because he believes the world is full of black & white choices yet has desires incompatible with his beliefs, he acts out a secret, deliciously naughty, compulsive lie thickened with substance abuse. Inevitably, such charades are unmasked--especially in the case of high profile people. All the pain and sorrow this will inflict on his family and followers...in the name of maintaining the illusion that there is one simple truth we must all follow.
To quote one of my favorite Minnesota authors, Bill Holm, "Beware the one truth. Hidden inside it, anywhere on earth, is a loaded gun pointed straight at your head."
In the best of all possible worlds, Haggard would have gone down years ago for being the mouthpiece of evil. But this works, too. The best thing about it is that the media's got something to talk about besides John Kerry's botched joke.
its kinda hard to talk to someone who has that air of arrogant ignorance ...nothing you say gets thru that barrier of ignorance/aka faith ...im not surprised dawkins was blinking in incredulity (how could anyone be THAT ignorant) ......its like talking to a small child in the midst of one of their fantasy explanations .....we are sorta socialized not to point out their fantasies as nonsence.....so dawkins comes off as being a little spluttery ....and he's british ....that air of unimpressed british reserve doesnt help ....i feel that it looks like arrogance to most americans
having said that im quite sure that dawkins mouth dropped open when he had is back turned to the camera ....because mine did and i see these ignorant creationists all the time
I miss Frank Zappa.
Word. Frank Zappa would never write a post as corny as this one that PZ just wrote.
Which tells you something about the contemptible hypocrisy surrounding the Democratic Party you've hitched your draft cephalopod to.
Let me guess, Hoody. Your mom's a liberal Democrat, and you just can't stand her and having to live in her basement, so you turned into a Republican in order to 'rebel'. Does that about cover it?
Sorry you're not happy, PZ. But that's OK--us homo-lovin', hell-destined, incessantly-harassed libruls out here in Colorado are happy enough for everybody.
Now if only James "Ass-Paddlin'" Dobson would get caught somewhere on East Colfax with his pants around his ankles and a crack pipe pressed to his fleshy lips...
Dann, do you see Karl Rove in your sleep? Part of the Democratic party's self-inflicted gormlessness has been its obsession with that fat creep's supposed "genius".He's just a garden-variety slimeball, whose only real "talent" is his utter absence of a conscience even by Rethuglican standards.
No -- and I concur with your assessment of his talents...BUT: this story is only a few hours old -- let's see what happens between now and Tuesday (BTW Steve, I hope you are right and that there is not more to this than the untimely fall of a sanctimonious huckster)
Re Mark Foley: I think he deserves some pretty severe repercussions, but that the outrage is focused on all the wrong points. That his paramour is a subordinate is a serious problem. That he's extremely young is damn skeevy but not actually illegal in DC. That he's male should, by all rights, not be an issue. I'm irked by the double standard in Washington (and elsewhere) and I can only hope the high profile of the Foley case maybe makes it click for some folks: we basically assume that our male governmental representatives are sleeping with their young female subordinates and don't much care (yes, Clinton got in terrific trouble for it, but that was more about political leverage than anyone actually being surprised or shocked). But when it's a male subordinate, whoa, that's just not right.
We really shouldn't treat the situations differently -- and both should be taken seriously.
Any Republican or conservative evangelical leader who ever had a same-sex relationship must be seriously spooked now. That's probably a good thing.
Um, everyone seems to be missing a point here: Colorado has an anti-gay-marriage initiative on its ballot next week that was heavily supported by ... guess who?
Dann- Haggard now admits he contacted Jones to buy meth and "for a massage". Heh. Feel better now? ;)
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/03/haggard.allegations/index.html
(Sorry, HTML for shortening links never works properly around here.)
Well Professor, he's admitted to buying meth, which is a crime. Does that trump your compulsive contrariety?
You may also enjoy this advertisement for Mike Jones' "massage services":
http://pageoneq.com/news/2006/page110207.html
You may also enjoy this advertisement for Mike Jones' "massage services":
I'll bet this Jones guy is just pissed Haggard didn't get him that White House press pass he was promised.
You know, I don't care if he's gay. What's bad for him is he is engaging in prostitution (gay prostitution - which makes it worse in his crowd), and buying and using meth (I imagine many here would not look so askance if it was marijuana, though in his crowd...). So take homosexuality, drugs, prostitution, alone bad, together with one of the highest leaders of trends, voice in the president's ear, and proponent of values voting...the sheer hypocrisy.
With Foley, none of us care he's gay, it was the youth of the people he was pursuing, his intolerance to homosexuality (when speaking in public), and the choice of political leaders to look the other way and do as little as possible to actually insure no ill fell...that's such hypocrisy.
It is about cruel laws proposed, vile garbage spewed, and an abuse of rational discourse. It is also the annoyance, for me, that for so long we have been seeing this and other hypocrisy shrugged off for "the greater good". Even now, among the religious their are a solid core who will go out Tuesday and do their "duty". Are their leaders possibly living a life they feel is perverted? Will they act and condone things they cannot accept (in their little minds)? Will their reps use and misuse them, take their money and votes, and turn it into grander capital? Oh, sure, you betcha.
M.J. Fox shook a lot of presumption on Stem Cells, Bush has done us the favor of shaking many about the fight with Terrorism and Iraq. Delay, Bush, Foley, Cheney, Abrahamov, Hastert, Schiavo, Rumsfeld, Haggard, and Rove will those names stick in people's heads on Tuesday, or will fear and faith drive them?
I can only hope a large enough group is truly, finally, coming out of the fog.
Between the Bush administration and evangelicals, I'm learning a lot about the gay subculture...
Talking Points for Dems Re: this scandal:
Haggard only admits to contacting Jones for Meth because the tapes Jones are so crystal-clear that it is impossible for Haggard to deny them.
Haggard will continue to deny the sex part, not because there was no sex, but only because there are no tapes that document it.
It's just a great big coincidence that Haggard's meth dealer was also a gay prostitute. And there is also a thriving underground gay/meth scene. (google it).
Now, the next question: Where o where did you look to find your meth supplier, Mr. Haggard? It wouldn't have been on the gay sex-for-sale classifieds, would it? Why would you look there?
damn, hypocrite.
Circus time
What is the point of telling such ridiculous, unbelievable lies?
Now the perverse part of me has to, in regards to Richard Dawkins, look back and appreciate the humor.
A year ago he was smuggly looking down on Dawkins, from his vast "church" with countless adoring worshippers, and telling Dawkins he would be shown to be a fool and that Dawkins knew nothing.
Now Dawkins has a best seller and a new foundation, and Haggard is disgraced and shown up as a hypocrit.
How a year changes things.
As I'm relatively new to this blog, and as a gay man, I am thrilled to discover PZ got this issue exactly right. It's not the sex that should cause our outrage, but the hypocrisy.
Kudos, PZ!
What is the point of telling such ridiculous, unbelievable lies?
The point is that he's hoping that people will believe it. He's used to having people believe total baloney, you know.
Many of them will believe this one. Unfortunately for him, his fellow Christianist bigwigs are not nearly as naive as their flocks. He's toast in the movement for sure.
I just watched the clip with my mouth open. Dawkins looks far more angry than incredulous, and I don't blame him - the utter cheek of this vacuous clodpoll, standing there delivering a patronising you'll-learn-when-you're-older lecture to a real expert and then accusing him of arrogance!
Yes, Haggard should've be sacked for being a lying bastard rather than for having drugged-up sex with a male prostitute. But it really does serve him bloody well right to have his hypocrisy shown up like this, so I for one am happy to point and laugh.
I think the saddest thing about this and the Foley scandal is that now for a lot of people, gay people are not that nice couple next door, or your considerate coworker, but rather these sneaky, warped, dissembling men--a rotten, rotten stereotype.
Shame on fundamentalist Xtians for making people believe that their biological urges are shameful.
I don't know about that. Maybe, just maybe, it will help the average Joe to understand that stereotypes are garbage and anybody he meets could be gay, including people he knows and respects. Perhaps a few Joes might actually start down the road to understanding that gay people are just human beings like anybody else.
Ok, so I'm an optimist. ;)
I just watched the clip with my mouth open. Dawkins looks far more angry than incredulous, and I don't blame him - the utter cheek of this vacuous clodpoll, standing there delivering a patronising you'll-learn-when-you're-older lecture to a real expert and then accusing him of arrogance!
Projection is the first, primary, and last mode of defense that commonly characterizes this type of evangelical.
they use it so often, someone should invent a new word for it, like Colbert did with "truthiness".
any ideas?
I think it's sad that anyone has to hide who they are... but it's even worse when those same people promote views that reinforce that.
We can now officially and categorically point to Haggard's first documented lie. In an interview he denies even knowing Jones (see: http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/03/haggard.allegations/index.html and scroll down to the link entitled "Watch Haggard's response to whether he knows gay men in Denver"
But of course the latest news today is that admits he knows him and has spoken to Jones on the phone.
Of course he could just come out and confess everything and have done with it, but that would be a shame because his current strategy of hole-digging is far more entertaining.
And gosh what an unfortunate coincidence for Haggard that the man he chose to have a massage from just happened to be a gay male escort? What bad luck. Interesting though to find a gay escort who happens to have side business of massage (these two enterprises are usually combined...)
Haggard says he never used the meth and instead threw it away.
...
What is the point of telling such ridiculous, unbelievable lies?
"I never inhaled"
or, what did GW say about his cocaine usage?
He's obviously just parroting a commonly used defense.
It will make for a memorable quote:
"Yeah, I bought it, but I never tried it"
Here's Haggard's next defense:
"I was having this massage with a professional masseur and I was feeling so relaxed that I started to think all of these erotic thoughts about my wife. Before I knew it I was unexpectedly aroused and I guess because of all the oils the masseur was using I accidentally slipped inside the masseur..."
"I went there for a massage."
"I called him to buy some meth. But I threw it away."
I was watching the interview as I typed this. Unbelievable. This is the worst attempt at a coverup I've ever heard.
...and after that, Haggard will claim he was raped.
Regardless of the sex. Regardless of the drug use. He had a contract with the people who are part of his ministry. His contract began when he accepted money from them by portraying himself as something he isn't. They gave him money under false pretenses. Sue him.
He drove voters to the Bushes who in turn drove faith-based monies back to him. Maybe he used that money for the prostitute. Sue him.
Sue him until he bleeds. Then maybe we will have a few of these worthless swindlers pause long enough to think. And I do consider each and every Minister, Priest, Imam, etc to be a swindler. They do not have real jobs or a real occupation so why should they receive real money? We have no need to respect them when this is such a prevalent situation amongst the religious.
Send him one of those 'Gay? Fine by me.' T-shirts Skatje & friends wore. And maybe add, 'Hypocrite? Not so fine.'
In his defence- he was very good in that "American Pie" movie.
Plus his mom's a MILF.
Interesting things in the latest AP coverage:
Haggard case fuels debate over hypocrisy
That's right, it's about hypocrisy, not gay sex.
Well it's about time.
Interesting.
I guess weekly conference calls don't mean what they used to.
Spin, spin, spin.
That's great news!
So the calls involve "Bush aides" and not Bush himself, and Haggard only rarely participates? This could use some fact-checking.
There could be some great opportunity here for reinterpretation of the Gospels. For example, John 11:5
A four way!!!! or John 13:23-25:
Bosoms and breasts, oh my!
[23] Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.
wasn't that depicted in the latest SP episode with Dawkin's and Mrs. Garrison?
...sorry, just had to.
You know, if I were an evangelical, I'd be awfully flattered by the sheer amount of time and effort you guys spend keeping track of us.
You know, if I were an evangelical, I'd be awfully flattered by the sheer amount of time and effort you guys spend keeping track of us.
As a gay man, should I be flattered by the amount of time and effort the evangelicals spend keeping track of me?
I really don't care what he does with his penis in his private life, but that seems to be the major concern of everyone right now.
Perhaps it's because I don't get my news from TV, but that hasn't been my impression. I thought the fact that the Republicans put Foley in charge of protecting children even when they knew of his improprieties was what had people so stirred up. And in Haggard's case, surely it's the hypocrisy that's the issue -- no one is calling for the withdrawal of Barney Frank, or the AIDS director that Condi Rice recently swore in while referring to his male partner's mother as his "mother-in-law".
I finally have some time to post on this subject.
Ahhh... The poetic justice is poignantly sweet. Wife and I have been crowing about this one to no end over the last 24 hours or so... Nice to see the mainstream news sources are picking it up. I can't imagine this happening to a more deserving mofo. How predictable to see Bush and co. cutting poor Pastor Ted loose a la "Kenny Boy." I'm sure that Dobson et al are kicking themselves furiously for jumping to his defense so quickly.
I haven't felt so smug and self-satisfied in quite a long while.
Sometimes life is just too perfect.
The words of John Lennon are apropos:
Instant Karma's gonna get you,
Gonna look you right in the face,
Better get yourself together darlin',
Join the human race,
How in the world you gonna see,
Laughin' at fools like me,
Who on earth d'you think you are,
A super star,
Well, right you are.
Enjoy, me compadres!
Well, they won't be able to blame this one on Larry Flynt..
A Reverend who was fingered
by the prostitute he buggered
soon found that his tush
was abandoned by Bush,
and that was the end of Ted Haggard.
We have to remember how messed up the churches making up the NAE are.
In most of them a pastor will be fired for getting a divorce -- much less having gay sex with a prostitute.
Consensual straight adultery is a fireable offense -- so I don't find much hypocrisy in this. I do find it in Haggart who has made a career over judging others.
On the Foley thing, as I understand it, he violated a Federal law that he wrote regarding soliciting sex from a minor via the Internet. Note: the law in question sets the age of consent at 18, and where Federal law conflicts with local law, Federal law wins. At any rate, like Haggard, he's getting nailed for hypocrisy.
great link to a creepy youtube video. your points are well-taken. the argument that the interviewer's grandchildren will be laughing at him for his belief in evolution is the scariest of all.
I'm torn on this story... on the one hand, I think his personal life is his personal life. On the other, I think when you're a moralizing blowhard of a bigot, it's nice to see it bite you in the ass (or anything else you might have had done back there).
Posted by: andy | November 3, 2006 09:25 AM
***********************************************
Why are you torn?
It makes no sense to me that private is private, when someone with influence over thirty million people and a line to the President of the United States has unequivocally stated in the past that the things he has been caught doing are a travesty in God's eyes, because of their effects on others and specifically framed, society at large.
Homosexuality is a threat to the family, if you listen to his kind speak of this issue. Children are harmed by homosexual images and homosexual ideas. Children are harmed by meth and all drug use is what is preached here.
Read Soldiers of Christ in Harpers magazine. These people have set themselves apart from society at large, in their special suburbia, in order to bar the door against homosexuality, drugs and the like. I have not read the article for a long time, but I distinctly remember one church member being AFRAID of the city---- it frightened this person to go there, and in it they saw evidence of a spiritual warfare involving the demons of sexual licentiousness and drug abuse and chaos. (please correct me if I am misremembering). The whole idea of this Colorado experience was to protect themselves from what their pastor and their God told them was an abomination. He presented the personal as political, and now he is getting it back in spades.
In one segment of Richard Dawkins video, there is a clip where Haggard is on stage bellowing "Listen to me, I am your Pastor!" I almost brought up my lunch. There are millions of people who will listen to him or another mini-me of him, and will abdicate personal thought because it is easier to be told what to do and how to think than it is to work out one's own world view on this. Who will they listen to now as their esteemed leader takes a break from the morality he legislated, however loosely, to them.
I remember that a relative here in Canada was at an anti gay marriage rally last year, and another relative phoned me to tell me he was on TV protesting. I phoned them up and proceeded to have a conversation about their involvement in this movement. I was horrified. They ended up trying to wriggle out of an argument that gay people should be stoned, like muslims do in countries under Sharia law, even thought they agreed with it in principle. Of course, when pointed out that divorce was against the Bible and had a greater effect on children than someone else's homosexuality, there was a lot of hemming and hawing and excuse making as to why that was different.
I live in a religious enclave of sorts. There are at least twenty five churches that advertise their services in our paper. THat is certainly not all of them. Our population is not even 100,000. Not even close in my particular community. ( Our county count is 75, 000 and there are two small cities and a few towns/villages in there.) We are a set conservative vote at election time. We are one of the richest areas in Canada- our per capita income is insane. Many homes are in the half million dollar range and up. It is ninety five percent white. We have an incredible shortage of school space, but the private religious school out here has just announced that it will be doubling its space. (they are partially funded by the government as well). The attitude towards this man and his sins so far has been one of "head in the sand" and all of that because no-one wants to deal with this. Bring it up in conversation and one is met with excuses and a "wait and see- the other guy must be lying" OR "that doesn't affect us up here". Of course not- no--- of course not.
Guess what. That is how it will be dealt with in the churches where you live too. Dobson, Falwell, and the like willdo what the Republicans did wqith Foley- duck and cover and then make up excuses as to why Haggard wasn"t "real". Assholes. But, like the republicans, there will be little falling away from the CHURCH by real live little ordinary folk, because the alternative is way too frightening, and requires too much thought. Some other freak will pop up like a Hydra, to weave their brand of magic over an easily swayed populace.... and no harm no foul. Haggard will be but a bad dream, a distant nightmare.
A question that needs to be addressed here is why people choose not to think. What is the biological advantage of the herd instinct? What are students like these days--- are they less thoughtful? What are the implications for a society that regards "objective testing" of facts as the be all and end all of student achievement, without an emphasis on thought processes that hone the ability to weed the good from the bad. What does the de-emphasis of science mean to Americans? Why are people so afraid to think critically of anything????
Back to the torn bit- don't be torn. He made the claim that these things were horrific unto God. He never specified he was above the law. He just figured he would never get caught. He is a bad person and an idiot. He deserves to be held accountable in some fashion, even if it is by public shaming by his religious peers, for the lie he lived. People who are not of the faith are allowed to feel sanctimonious as well, because they are held hostage in their country by those who say one thing in public but do another on the sly---- and these people hold the keys to power. This is just a big , public example of the debacles that go on daily.
I think this is the perfect scenario.
There's a sweet irony in that most of his opponents don't see anything wrong with what he did (other than the cheating on his wife). It's his own people who will now condemn him for being "a drug-addicted homosexual".
His hypocrisy has been revealed and now he is going to go through the same kind of pain he's put others through.
Or, as Dan Savage puts it, "How'd that happen?".
What it comes down to for me is this...
His secret gay life, etc. is a personal matter between him and his family. Actually I feel for his wife having lived with this "man" for so many years. However, his job was that of preacher for an evangelical right-wing church that actively opposes homosexuality in all of its forms. Therefore, he didn't "practice what he preached" and came up a major hypocrite. I don't see any reason for the justice system to get involved, but his days as a public advocate for "moral family values" are definately over. His public life is over, his marriage is shattered, his kids now know him for the self-hating bastard he is. In all reality, I feel for him. No self-esteem and major self-hatred just because society drilled into him that "gay" equates to "wrong", therefore he's wrong. No matter how much "right" he tries to do in this world, he's always "wrong" and "evil" because being gay isn't just a small piece of one's life, it intertwines with all of your life, just as anyone's sexuality does.
I'm glad he's down from his bully pulpit and is now known for who and what he is, but I feel for him for the hard days to come.
Hypocrisy is the keyword here, not sexual freedom. PZ, your straight male blind spot keeps surfacing.
Haggard spent his whole life trying to keep me from loving who I want. So this is the moment to hold him to his own internal logic.
As a sexual libertarian, you have plenty of other chances to proactively champion the principle of freedom on behalf of gay men and women. But, as with your "What causes homosexuality" post, you seem to prefer opportunities that let you pose as a devil's advocate. Very frustrating to someone like me who generally loves your perspective.
It's not just the hypocrisy that is wrong here. What is dangerous about the Haggards and Swaggarts and Bakers and Robinsons and Fallwells (ad nauseum) is their justifying any behavior - risking giving his wife aids, bombing innocent bystanders - because they are tight with god.
I'm afraid I can't bring myself to watch this footage of Haggard. I remember too clearly the sensation of my skin crawling when I saw him in action on Richard Dawkins' "The Root of All Evil?".
I do wonder what's in store for him now though. Maybe he will have a serious discussion with his wife, and he will have a worthwhile revelation that is nothing to do with God: that being turned on by the same sex does not make one less of a human being. He and his wife can arrange an amicable split, and he can finally stop living a lie and be a nicer, calmer person. OTOH, I can't imagine any gay man would touch him with a bargepole...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6119226.stm
Woot!
Give him credit for speaking some truth.
With that said...
GOOD RIDDANCE.