Probably most of you have by now heard of the hypocrisy of Ted Haggard, a social conservative leader based in Denver and pastor of a Denver megachurch. Allegations have surfaced that he retained the services of a male prostitute with whom he had sex and used methamphetamines. He has admitted “some” of the allegations. Apparently he is copping to having gotten a “massage” from the male prostitute and having purchased methamphetamines, but he didn’t keep or use them.
Foley a few weeks ago, and now this. So, is there a correlation between the volume with which one condemns homosexuality and the likelihood that one is secretly gay? That would explain a few things about our current political climate. Certainly Abu Ghraib makes a lot more sense in terms of deviance inspired by repressed sexuality than it does as an integral part of the national security apparatus.
But lessons will not be learned, the hypocrisy will continue. Consequently, repression will continue to pollute our society:
At the same time, [Albert] Mohler, [president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary] says Haggard was, as a pastor, “absolutely right to preach against same-sex marriage,” an issue on the ballot in Colorado and seven other states in Tuesday’s election. “But the problem was not in his preaching. The problem was in his life.”
I might agree if the preaching were against a behavior with a tangible harm. Say a shoplifting minister who preached against stealing. But with homosexuality, the only harm comes from the guilt felt by those taught to loathe themselves and the hatred felt by those taught to fear something different than what they are. There is nothing intrinsically evil about homosexuality; its negative effects are entirely the results of social constructs. We change the social construction, we limit or eliminate the negative effects. But so long as guys like Mohler and Haggard are preaching that homosexuality is malum in se instead of merely malum prohibitum, we are unlikely to be able to accomplish this.
“But the problem was not in his preaching. The problem was in his life.â€
These terms ‘malum is se’and malum prohibitum’are great terms to use when defining moral trangressions. Legal terms really help us put deeds into perspective.The fact that Haggard was being unfaithful to his wife should be the issue here,and it would be if ‘gay’ were not part of the discussion.Also, having his wife and 5 children in the car when he agreed to discuss the allogations with CNN would seem to speak volumns about his ‘moral character’.
that was a really good post, doug. well said.
I agree with Gigi and I also wonder why hypocrisy is so easy to sell to so many people. And especially why do so many cast the hypocritical vote on these issues in an election,seemingly oblivious of their own thinking? Where is Science? where is Biology? For that matter, where is common sense and basic experience in life?
I especially agree with Lou’s point about Haggard’s lack of approbrium– the whole discussion with the wife & kids present was sickening.
What a lout!