Box Turtle Bulletin

Viva Mexico City

On Tuesday, November 7, 2006,

• 51.8% of South Dakotans voted against same-sex marriage;
• 55.7% of Coloradans voted to ban same-sex marriage;
• 57.1% of Virginians voted against same-sex marriage;
• 59.4% of Wisconsinites voted against same-sex marriage.
• 63.3% of Idahoans voted to ban same-sex marriage;
• 78% of South Carolinians voted against same-sex marriage;
• 81.3% of Tennesseans voted against same-sex marriage;
• But only 48.6% of Arizonans voted to enshrine the existing ban on same-sex marriage in the state constitution.

And today comes news that the Mexico City assembly voted 43-17 to allow civil unions. This means that gay couples in the Federal District will be granted inheritance, pension rights and other social benefits upon registering their unions.

Congratulations, chilangos!

De-Gaying The Marriage Debate?

The Los Angeles Times this morning published an analysis of various marriage amendment outcomes across the country. Two quotes jumped out at me. The first is from Scott Duffy, who led Colorado’s campaign against their anti-marriage amendment:

“Our whole campaign was about explaining the commitment of same-sex couples who spend 15, 30 years together in a monogamous relationship, and the media here was wall-to-wall with stuff that was decidedly the opposite…. We had a tough sell,” Duffy said.

The fact is, they really did have a tough sell. Colorado’s proposal, unlike Arizona’s, was a “clean” proposal, defining marraige as the union of a man and a woman and ending there. There were no additional clauses trying to limit partnerships, civil unions, etc. This left Colorado’s Amendment 43 opponents with little choice but to talk about same-sex couples.

Things were different in Arizona, which brings me to the second quote. This is from Kyrsten Sinema, who led Arizona Together’s campaign against Prop 107, which continues to lose 48.6%-51.4% as the mail-in ballots are being counted:

Kyrsten Sinema, who chaired the campaign to defeat Arizona’s proposed ban, said Wednesday that opponents of the amendment focused on how the initiative would take benefits away from all unmarried couples — not just gays and lesbians.

I have no doubt that marriage opponents will seize on this as an admission of dishonesty or sneakiness. But the fact is these amendments really do take away benefits from all unmarried couples. It has already happened in Michigan, Ohio, and several other states. It took Arizona Together’s disciplined message to drive that point home.

But because the Arizona election turned on what Prop 107 would do to straight couples, it’s hard to argue that this outcome represents some sort of advancement for gay rights. In reality, we haven’t turned any corners. Instead, I think this is a perfect demonstration of how much work we really have ahead of us.

See also:

Center for Arizona Policy Concedes
Were Arizona’s Same-Sex Marriage Ban Opponents Deceptive?
Arizona Is Still Going Strong
Appraising Arizona
Gay Marriage Is Still Illegal In Arizona

Appraising Arizona

Update 11/9/06: There are still 341,000 mail-in ballots to be counted, and these ballots probably won’t be counted for several days. With Arizona’s Proposition 107, the so-called “Protect Marriage Amendment”, stlll teetering inthe balance, I’ve updated this post to reflect that uncertainty.

A few weeks ago, Arizona was derided for ranking dead last in Morgan Quitno’s annual reference book, Education State Rankings, 2006-2007. While Arizona was derided as the “dumbest state in the union”, its citizens displayed a remarkable level of simple common sense in the 2006 mid-term elections by defeating Proposition 107, the so-called “Protect Marriage Amendment.”

The results are in still tricking in, but Prop 107 appears to have been defeated. Current results show it going down by 32,226 votes out of 1,151,012 votes cast (48.6% “yes” vs. 51.4% “no”). However, there are still some 341,000 ballots left to be counted so the final result can still change. But win or lose, this is a good day to be an Arizonan. I couldn’t be more proud.

Even though it may be early, LGBT and allies around the country are cheering this as a historic triumph. I imagine that gay-advocacy offices from coast to coast were looking over the data to see if this reversal can be repeated elsewhere. And we all hope that this represents a harbinger for things to come. At the very least, political scapegoating of gays and lesbians is not the reliable tactic it used to be.

But I’m afraid its too easy to look at Arizona’s potential defeat of Proposition 107 and assume it’s some sort of high-water mark for anti-gay extremists. What happened here was the result of a very unique set of circumstances, a combination of luck, organization, and Western common sense. Many factors lead to the proposition’s apparent defeat, and as I see it these factors boil down to:

1. a hapless organization supporting the proposition,
2. a brilliant, well-researched and disciplined campaign against the proposition,
3. A “de-gayed” message that focused on the proposition’s impact on heterosexual couples,
4. and the unique climate and circumstances of the LGBT community in Arizona.

Let’s look at what happened in detail.

A Hapless Organization Supporting Prop 107

Prop 107 was authored and supported by the Center for Arizona Policy (CAP), which often lobbies the state legislature on social conservative issues. Len Munsil was CAP’s president when they proposed the measure and began ushering it through the process of getting it on the ballot. As the measure was going through the petitioning process he resigned to run for governor, and this prompted suspicions that Prop 107 was nothing but a ploy to energize the conservative base and propel him to the governor’s office. (In fact, he was soundly defeated 63%-35%, losing in all seventeen counties)

When Len Munsil resigned, the task of ushering Prop 107 fell to his replacement, Cathi Herrod, who struggled to get the measure on the ballot. They had difficulties with lining up petition circulaters, difficulties with getting the minimum number of signatures, and dificulties getting the petitions gathered and turned in on time.

But in the end, CAP managed to get it done and their next task was to sell the measure to Arizona voters. And again, they ran into difficulties.

The truth is, Prop 107 never polled very well in Arizona, and CAP never mounted a wide-ranging campaign in response to the polls. They apparently assumed it would pass simply because Arizona is a very conservative state and, well, these measure always passed everywhere else.

CAP’s message was unfocused and aimed largely at the choir. Most members of CAP appear to have an evangelical background, and their message was presented using the cultural language of evangelicals. Because they did little outreach outside of evangelical, fundamentalist, or Catholic circles, they were never able to connect with Arizona voters outside of their own little Amen-corner. The guest editorial columns they submitted to Arizona newspapers were often illogical, inconsistent, and poorly written. What’s more, Arizona doesn’t have much in the way of mega-churches, and except for CAP and the Alliance Defense Fund, there are very few organized anti-gay organizations. This means CAP had few allies to help carry their message to a larger audience.

A Brilliant, Well-Researched and Disciplined Campaign Against Prop 107

Soon after the anti-marriage onslaught of 2004, a small group of Arizona activists got together to discuss what to do if an anti-marriage amendment was proposed for Arizona. They didn’t know when it would happen but they felt that it was only a matter of time. They began a post-mortem on campaigns in other states and identified several strengths and weaknesses. With that data, they began to formulate a strategy for responding to an amendment in Arizona. In other words, they didn’t wait for Prop 107 to show up. They were strategizing before CAP began their efforts.

Arizona Together was the result of all that work, and their first big break came when CAP decided to go for the Cadillac of anti-marriage proposals, basing it on the Ohio amendment that passed in 2004. CAP’s proposal read:

To preserve and protect marriage in this state, only a union between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage by this state or its political subdivisions and no legal status for unmarried persons shall be created or recognized by this state or its political subdivisions that is similar to that of marriage. [emphasis mine]

When Arizona Together saw they second half of the amendment’s wording, they knew it was their best shot at defeating it. Based on what was happening in Ohio, Michigan, and other states to heterosexual couples because of their amendments, Arizona Together knew that the unintended consequences of banning gay marriages and anything similar to it would be their opening. And Arizona Together was ready, with polling data, market research, a superb fundraising campaign (almost all of their funding was raised in the state), a massive outreach strategy that went far outside the usual LGBT and progressive political organizations, and a clearly defined and disciplined message.

A “De-Gayed” Message

The disciplined message that Arizona Together sent out didn’t rely on arguments about marriage equality or gay rights. Instead, they focused their arguments on what the ballot measure’s passage would mean for straight people:

Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix, chair of the campaign to defeat Proposition 107, conceded that the strategy of the media campaign was to show straight couples who would lose their domestic partner benefits. That’s because the initiative would not only have constitutionally barred gay marriage but also precluded governments from adopting policies that allow employees to add their domestic partners — whether of the same or opposite sex — to their health insurance or to gain any other benefits.

Sinema, who is bisexual, justified that by saying that out of an estimated 112,000 unmarried couples living together in Arizona, only about 18,000 are gay. She said the $2.1 million campaign was necessary to convince Arizona voters that this is more than just an issue affecting gays.

I attended a message training session last summer where this was hotly debated. Many were upset that the LGBT community was invisible in Arizona Together’s campaign messages. Some felt that we were passing up a good opportunity to educate the public about LGBT issues and concerns. But Arizona Together representatives pointed out that supporters of gay marriage have an easy bumper sticker message with “one man and one woman”, while our issues are too complex to be told in the short span of a campaign season.

They also had focus-grouped research that said that people vote according to their own personal concerns and priorities, and less so from an altruistic sense of helping others. When messages about equality and fairness were put before focus groups, the messages fell flat. But when concrete examples were presented about what happened to straight couples in Ohio and elsewhere, they sat up and took notice.

For example, Arizona Together pointed out that Arizona is a retiree haven. And many of these retirees are widows and widowers who meet, fall in love and move in together. But they often don’t marry because pension plans often force a spouse to give up his or her pension upon remarriage. With Prop 107, they had a lot to lose, especially those who take advantage of Tucson’s domestic partner registry which makes city services and fees based on marriage status available to domestic partners. For senior on fixed incomes this can be important. Also, Tucson’s domestic partner registry guaranteed hospital visitation and medical decision-making rights. This too would have disappeared with Prop 107 along with the registry.

This message seems to have taken root among Arizona’s retirees. Older Americans tend to be very strongly supportive of same-sex marriage bans, but according to exit poll results posted at CNN, 45% of Arizona’s voters aged sixty-five or older voted against Prop 107. This compares to only 35% in Virginia and 29% in Wisconsin who voted against their marriage amendments.

So, while it may be a great victory if the amendment go down in defeat, it would be a terrible mistake to take it as a victory for the LGBT community. It wasn’t. Prop 107 was failed or nearly failed because of what it would do to unmarried heterosexual couples. Gays and lesbians were largely invisible in the debate.

The Unique Climate and Circumstances of the LGBT community in Arizona

Arizona is a classically western state which famously values the idea of rugged individualism. Arizonans, while deeply conservative, prefer their governments small, their freedoms large, and their neighbor’s noses very far away. Mr. Conservative himself, Barry Goldwater, was a supporter of gay rights. Arizona’s conservatism often has a distinctly libertarian feel.

Arizona’s gay community largely fits in well with that spirit. Phoenix and Tucson both have very large and active gay communities, but neither city has much of a “gayborhood.” In Phoenix, most gay businesses are scattered around the north-central part of the city, but the concentration of LGBT residents in that area is quite low, especially compared to “gayborhoods” in most other cities. Tucson has no recognizable gay neighborhood at all; its gay citizens are spread pretty evenly throughout the city.

What this means is that while Arizona is about average in terms of the proportion of gay people, almost all of its LGBT citizens live among straight neighbors. This means that Arizonans in general are more likely to know someone who is gay than citizens in many other states.

Think about it: if the bulk of Arizona’s gays lived in just a few neighborhoods, if there were Arizona Castros, WeHos and Chelseas, then that means that there would be fewer straight people with constant casual contact with the nice gay couple down the street. This geographic integration, I think, is an important part of why Prop 107 failed. An awful lot of straight Arizonans know their gay neighbors, and they are apparently reluctant to vote on something that would be harmful to their neighbors.

Conclusion

It was a great thing that Arizona has apparently defeated Prop 107. If the result doesn’t hold, then its passage is likely to be razor-thin. In any case, I’m immensely proud of my adoptive state, and I am especially proud my own neighbors.

I hope that the Arizona Together’ success can be repeated elsewhere when our opponents look for someone to scapegoat. But I think it is important to recognize the possibility that what happened here may be unique. If CAP had offered a “cleaner” amendment without the domestic partnership prohibitions, if CAP had reached out beyond its own base, if Arizona’s gay community were less integrated, if Arizona Together hadn’t gotten its act together before CAP began their efforts — if any of this had been different, we might not be celebrating today. As it is, the margin of Prop 107’s defeat so far is not large. But it may be large enough.

See Also:

Center for Arizona Policy Concedes
Were Arizona’s Same-Sex Marriage Ban Opponents Deceptive?
Arizona Is Still Going Strong
De-Gaying The Marriage Debate?
Gay Marriage Is Still Illegal In Arizona

Gay Marriage Is Still Illegal In Arizona

Sorry to throw cold water in everyone’s faces, but the truth is nothing has changed in Arizona. When we woke up this morning, Chris and I still could not get married.

Nevertheless, I could not be more proud to be an Arizona citizen than I am right now. But before we get too carried away, we should remember that while just about all of the precincts have reported their one million votes, there are still some 300,000 mail-in ballots left to be counted. A quarter of the results hasn’t been counted yet (my vote is somewhere in that stack). With the No-Yes margin barely over a single percentage point, this can be significant.

I am crazy busy right now at work, as I was yesterday. But this evening, I hope to be able to sit down and offer some thoughts on what I think this possible victory really means for equality — and what it doesn’t mean. Given that Chris and I still can’t marry, we still have a very long and difficult road ahead of us.

Update: These unofficial results from the Arizona Secretary of State are pretty strong. The margin is 51.4 against verses 48.6 for, a difference of 32,599 votes. It’s unclear how many mailed-in votes are included in this total, but if 300,000 votes are still out, those votes would have to break more than ten percent the other way to make a difference.

See Also:

Center for Arizona Policy Concedes
Were Arizona’s Same-Sex Marriage Ban Opponents Deceptive?
Arizona Is Still Going Strong
De-Gaying The Marriage Debate?
Appraising Arizona

“There Is a Part of My Life So Repulsive and Dark…”

Rev. Ted Haggard apologized in a letter to his congregation (PDF: 124KB/5 pages):

The fact is I am guilty of sexual immorality. And I take responsibility for the entire problem.

I am a deceiver and a liar. There’s a part of my life that is so repulsive and dark that I have been warring against it for all of my adult life. for extended periods of time, I would enjoy victory and rejoice in freedom. Then, from time to time, the dirt that I though was gone would resurface, and I would find myself thinking thoughts and experiencing desires that were contrary to everything I believe and teach.

Repulsive and dark. Such is life in the closet. It is a life of fear and self-loathing, of obsessive secrets and dangerous behavior, and it manifests those fears in lying, cheating, and seeking physical comfort with a paid prostitute.

Ted Haggard clearly didn’t choose to be gay. This much is obvious. He says he fought against it his entire life. But he did choose what to do with his sexuality, and he chose a very repulsive and dark path. In doing so, he makes the same mistake that many others make who denigrate gays and lesbians. He confuses his own sexuality with the dark choices he made.

He’s suffering right now, but he’s not the only one suffering. His wife, Gayle, has pledged to remain firmly by his side. I wonder if she really knows what she’s up against. And I wonder if he will be honest enough to tell her. And there are his five children who now have to live with the shame of knowing that their father cheated on their mother with a prostitute while he was away in Denver “to write.”

Will he do the right thing and honestly examine his life and the events that have led up to where he is today? He has acknowledged struggling with his sexuality his entire lifetime. Will he pretend that somehow this struggle will go away? Will he lead his wife in that illusion?

Or will he realize that God did not create him to be a repulsive and dark man? Will he come to realize that he is not repulsive and dark, but that his choices were?

I hope he discovers that there are far better choices, and these choices include honoring God by living in honesty and integrity. He may yet discover, as millions of gays and lesbians have, that when there is nothing to hide and to be ashamed of, purely physical sex with a prostitute will lose all of its dark allure. Love does not grow in the dark, and there is nothing as repulsive as a life lived duplicitously.

Freedom from the closet means freedom to accept options which are far, far better than those offered by prostitutes, bathhouses or anonymous sexual encounters. Millions of gays and lesbians know this freedom, and they freely choose the better options which give love, joy and happiness to their lives. When you are not constrained by the closet, the options are suddenly and gloriously numerous.

Ted Haggard can discover all this if he chooses to turn away from the darkness of the closet. The closet’s closed door ensures an all-enveloping darkness. It’s time to open that door and step into the light.

See Also:

Ted Haggard: “I’m Not Gay”
The Megachurch, Mike Jones, and the Suspension of Disbelief
“There Is A Part Of My Life So Repulsive and Dark…”
Blessed Are The Opportunists
Haggard Resigns; “I Know What You Did Last Night”
Prayers and Assistance for the Haggard Family
I Did Not Have Sex With That Man!
Jones “Fails” Lie Detector?
Fall of the House of Haggard

Blessed Are the Opportunists

A prominent conservative pastor, seen on television and followed by millions, falls from grace in a sordid sex scandal. The accusations are first met with strong and angry denials, but these denials crumble as more evidence is revealed. His wife is visibly shocked; his children are left to suffer their grief in the glare of the spotlight while wondering how they will face school the next day. Church members are bewildered, although some are convinced that it’s all part of a nefarious plot. Meanwhile, fellow pastors and church leaders promise to pray for him and to stand by his side as he undergoes a long road to rehabilitation.

Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, and now Ted Haggard. There is a familiar ring to all of this, and if there is any truth to the notion that history repeats itself, talk of rehabilitation for Ted Haggard is just that: talk. Already we can see that the long knives are out for him.

Steven Bennett was the first to exploit the scandal with a cynically crass act of self-promotion. In his press release of Friday morning, he took the time to get the name of his tiny little church out in the press (and to mention that he’s writing a book and is available for media interviews). He claims that before he found God, he dated two male prostitutes and was a cocaine dealer. And he contradicts himself several times over in his reaction to the scandal:

“If these allegations are true about Rev. Haggard – America’s Top Evangelical Christian – I am completely disgusted and dismayed. After being in major Christian circles for many years, the hypocrisy that I have found and personally seen in main stream Christianity is unfortunate and heartbreaking.

“I understand Rev. Haggard is innocent until proven guilty. However, seeing the reports that I have – along with millions of other Americans – this is a time we need to pray. The Bible says, ‘Judgment begins in the house of God’,” said Bennett. …

“The more and more hypocrisy I see each day, the more I realize next Tuesday we are going to get EXACTLY what we deserve. Yet I must NEVER forget where I came from and always remember ‘But for the grace of God, there go I.'”

What an act of shameless self-promotion. Haggard’s innocent until proven guilty, so I call on everyone to judge and condemn him. I am disgusted and we are getting exactly what we deserve, “but for the grace of God go I.” And don’t forget the name of my church, and I’m writing a book and I am available for media requests. Here’s my contact info…

Others see Haggard’s fall as an explanation for his very few “moderate” stances. Christianity Today points out:

Haggard is a loyal member of the Religious Right who dials in for a White House conference call every Monday. Yet he embraces ecological concerns and says the Supreme Court made a good decision in the Lawrence v. Texas case, ordering the government out of the private lives of homosexuals.

These very modest deviations from the hard-right’s stance are now seen as an infection that must be exercised. Bob Schenck is in charge of the rival Evangelical-dominated National Clergy Council, a rival to Haggard’s National Association of Evangelicalsm, and he isn’t shy about calling his competition out:

The moral failure of recently resigned president of the National Association of Evangelicals, Rev. Ted Haggard, may explain in part the leftward drift of the organization over the last several years. It has been a mystery to many of us who watched this venerable institution shake lose of its once secure foundation and slide onto the shifting sands of political correctness, postmodern jargon and social trends.

I recommend NAE leadership call all of us who label ourselves Evangelicals to a time of humble repentance, contrition and seeking the Lord and His will. Instead of concerning ourselves with what rock superstar Bono thinks we ought to do, let’s instead inquire of the Lord and His Word.

Of course, that’s it. Haggard’s queer. That’s why he is concerned about the environment and doesn’t think Lawrence vs. Texas was such a bad thing — even though he strongly condemned homosexuality from the pulpit many times and was a vocal advocate for constitutional bans on gay marriage.

In Scriptures, we are constantly reminded of the need to forgive our neighbors. This commandment is not conditional; we are called to forgive whether our forgiveness is asked for or not. But Scripture is also clear on something else: when someone asks for forgiveness, the response isn’t just acceptance, but celebration. The prodigal son is rewarded with a banquet of the fatted calf; the first shall be last and the last shall be first.

But that reaction is not very likely here. It doesn’t matter what course of action Haggard follows from this point forward. Rehabilitation is likely to remain elusive. In the heavens created by conservative Christian politics, he will always be last from now on.

See Also:

Ted Haggard: “I’m Not Gay”
The Megachurch, Mike Jones, and the Suspension of Disbelief
“There Is A Part Of My Life So Repulsive and Dark…”
Blessed Are The Opportunists
Haggard Resigns; “I Know What You Did Last Night”
Prayers and Assistance for the Haggard Family
I Did Not Have Sex With That Man!
Jones “Fails” Lie Detector?
Fall of the House of Haggard

Haggard Resigns; “I Know What You Did Last Night”

This just appeared on the USA Today website:

The Rev. Ted Haggard agreed to resign as leader of the New Life Church after its independent investigative board recommended removal, saying he was guilty “of sexually immoral conduct.”

“We, the Overseer Board of New Life Church, have concluded our deliberations concerning the moral failings of Pastor Ted Haggard,” a statement from the church said. “Our investigation and Pastor Haggard’s public statements have proven without a doubt that he has committed sexually immoral conduct.”

Up until now, the only thing that Haggard admitted to was buying methamphetamine. When it came to the sex allegations, he paraphrased former President Clinton in saying, “I did not have a homosexual affair with a man in Denver.”

But the investigative board at New Life Church saw things differently and concluded that “without a doubt” he did have sex with that man. Did Haggard admit to something to the board that he hasn’t revealed publicly? Or did they simply conclude the obvious based on the evidence so far?

Meanwhile, Time offers this fascinating glimpse from the documentary Jesus Camp, a film about the religious training of children in Pentecostal seminars:

In it, he [Rev. Haggard] is seen telling a crowd, “We don’t have to have a debate about what we think about homosexual activity. It’s written in the Bible.” Shortly after that, Haggard looks mockingly into the camera to say, “I think I know what you did last night. If you send me a thousand dollars, I won’t tell your wife.” The crowd responds with peals of laughter. Then he says with a wide smile, “If you use any of this, I’ll sue you.”

Freud would have had a field day with this.

See Also:

Ted Haggard: “I’m Not Gay”
The Megachurch, Mike Jones, and the Suspension of Disbelief
“There Is A Part Of My Life So Repulsive and Dark…”
Blessed Are The Opportunists
Haggard Resigns; “I Know What You Did Last Night”
Prayers and Assistance for the Haggard Family
I Did Not Have Sex With That Man!
Jones “Fails” Lie Detector?
Fall of the House of Haggard

Welcome Out, Neil Patrick Harris

A few days ago, the internet was buzzing with rumors that Neil Patrick Harris, former Dougie Houser, M.D. star and currently of the TV sitcom How I Met Your Mother, had helped his “longtime sweetheart” David Burtka land a part on the show. This prompted Harris’ publicist to issue a statement claiming, “He’s not of that pursuasion.”

It appears the publicist spoke too soon. Harris now tells People Magazine that the denial never should have been issued:

The public eye has always been kind to me, and until recently I have been able to live a pretty normal life. Now it seems there is speculation and interest in my private life and relationships.

So, rather than ignore those who choose to publish their opinions without actually talking to me, I am happy to dispel any rumors or misconceptions and am quite proud to say that I am a very content gay man living my life to the fullest and feel most fortunate to be working with wonderful people in the business I love.

No word yet on whether David Burtke really is his “longtime sweetheart” or not. But if he is, all I can say is you go!

In any case, welcome out, Neil Patrick Harris.

Prayers and Assistance for the Haggard Family

Rev. Ted Haggard had been president of the National Association of Evangelicals until the recent allegations of liaisons with a male prostitute came to light. He resigned yesterday, and many observers noted that the NAE’s web site went dark, with just a note saying that it was being updated. Moments ago, the NAE brought a stripped-down version of their website back online and released this press release:

Yesterday, National Association of Evangelicals President Ted Haggard submitted his resignation from NAE leadership when serious allegations were made on a Denver radio talk show. In response to Rev. Haggard’s admission yesterday to church leaders in Colorado that there were some indiscretions, the eleven-member Executive Committee met today via teleconference and unanimously accepted his resignation with regret. …

We are thankful for the grace and mercy of Christ who is able to forgive all sorts of sin. Yet, due to the seriousness of Rev. Haggard’s misconduct while in the leadership roles he held, we anticipate that an extended period of recovery will be appropriate. We pray that the overseers’ ministry to him will lead to his eventual moral healing, restoration in Christ, and service in the Church.

We pray for and stand with Rev. Haggard, his wife Gayle, and their children, and the New Life Church congregation at this difficult time. We also pray for the man who has accused Rev. Haggard.

I join the NAE in their prayers for everyone concerned. I also would like to recommend the services of the Straight Spouse Network and PFLAG for his wife and children. Also, his children may benefit from contacting a nearby COLAGE chapter.

See Also:

Ted Haggard: “I’m Not Gay”
The Megachurch, Mike Jones, and the Suspension of Disbelief
“There Is A Part Of My Life So Repulsive and Dark…”
Blessed Are The Opportunists
Haggard Resigns; “I Know What You Did Last Night”
Prayers and Assistance for the Haggard Family
I Did Not Have Sex With That Man!
Jones “Fails” Lie Detector?
Fall of the House of Haggard

I Did Not Have Sex With That Man!

The whole thing gets curiouser and curiouser. The Christianity Today web site reports that last Sunday, Rev. Ted Haggard began his sermon with this prayer:

“Father, give us grace and mercy. Father, help us this next week and a half as we go into national elections, and Lord we pray for our country. Father, we pray that lies would be exposed. We pray that deception would be exposed.”

It would appear his prayers were answered. Rev. Haggard has admitted to buying methamphetamine from Mike Jones, the 49-year-old “massage therapist”. (That’s his ad at left). But he denied using it. He also denied having sex with Mike Jones:

Talking to reporters outside his house Friday, Haggard denied the sex allegations but said that he did buy meth from the man because he was curious.

“I bought it for myself but never used it,” he said. “I was tempted, but I never used it.”

So let’s get this, er, “straight”. He bought meth, but “didn’t inhale” it. And he admits to being alone in a hotel room with a male prostitute but he did not have sex with that man. Where have I heard all this before?

In my view, Haggard’s denials stretch credibility to the snapping point. We should remember however that Mike Jones’ credibility hasn’t been firmly established either. But the careful way in which Haggard framed his denials has a very familiar ring to them.

First, he denies having known Mike Jones or purchasing methamphetamine. When the voice mails are made public, Haggard admits to buying meth but claims he threw it away. Yet his own voice mails have him asking Jones to get more — $100 or $200 worth. It looks like things aren’t exactly looking up for the good reverend. He also admits to getting a “massage” from a guy he first claimed never to have met. And he claims that he got the massage based on a referral by the hotel, but can’t remember which one.

If you were in a hotel and asked for a massage, how many hotels do you know would pick a massage therapist whose web site promises, “if you like a strong muscle man to bring pleasure to you then please call me”?

Haggard’s denials simply don’t add up.

See Also:

Ted Haggard: “I’m Not Gay”
The Megachurch, Mike Jones, and the Suspension of Disbelief
“There Is A Part Of My Life So Repulsive and Dark…”
Blessed Are The Opportunists
Haggard Resigns; “I Know What You Did Last Night”
Prayers and Assistance for the Haggard Family
I Did Not Have Sex With That Man!
Jones “Fails” Lie Detector?
Fall of the House of Haggard

Jones “Fails” Lie Detector?

Breaking news reports indicate that Michael Jones, Ted Haggard’s accuser, failed a polygraph test early this morning. I have no doubt that many of Haggard’s supporters will rush accuse Jones of lying. But the test administrator doubted that the test was accurate:

The test administrator, John Kresnik, said Jones’ score indicated “deceptions” in his answers. However, Kresnik said he doubted the accuracy of the test he administered because of the recent stress on Jones and his inability to eat or sleep, according to KHOW producer Greg Hollenback.

Kresnik suggested that Jones be re-tested early next week after he was rested.

Other reports indicate that Jones was also suffering from a migrane and hadn’t had much sleep. All of these can throw a polygraph off.

Polygraphs are notorious unreliable as “lie detector” tests. They can be too easily manipulated, or the results can be thrown off by stress and illness, as appears to be the case here. That’s why they are not admissible in court when they purport to show someone is lying. There a reason for that. They cannot detect a lie. Nor are they much good at detecting the truth.

See Also:

Ted Haggard: “I’m Not Gay”
The Megachurch, Mike Jones, and the Suspension of Disbelief
“There Is A Part Of My Life So Repulsive and Dark…”
Blessed Are The Opportunists
Haggard Resigns; “I Know What You Did Last Night”
Prayers and Assistance for the Haggard Family
I Did Not Have Sex With That Man!
Jones “Fails” Lie Detector?
Fall of the House of Haggard

The Fall of the House of Haggard

The lead story on all the news channels this morning is the resignation of Rev. Ted Haggard, pastor of the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, and head of the National Association of Evangelicals. His resignation comes on the heels of revelations that he had a three-year sexual relationship with a male prostitute.

Michael Forest Jones, 49, of Denver told a local radio station that he had sex on a monthly basis with Haggard over the past three years. Jones also said that Haggard used methamphetamine before having sex to enhance the experience.

When the story first broke, Haggard forcefully denied the charges, saying:

“I did not have a homosexual relationship with a man in Denver. I am steady with my wife. I’m faithful to my wife.”

He went on to claim that the charges were politically motivated to derail the vote next week on Colorado’s proposed amendment to ban same-sex marriage. His pal, Dr. James Dobson also rushed to his defense:

It is unconscionable that the legitimate news media would report a rumor like this based on nothing but one man’s accusation. Ted Haggard is a friend of mine and it appears someone is trying to damage his reputation as a way of influencing the outcome of Tuesday’s election — especially the vote on Colorado’s marriage-protection amendment — which Ted strongly supports.

He has shown a great deal of grace under these unfortunate circumstances, quickly turning this matter over to his church for an independent investigation. That is a testament to the character I have seen him exhibit over and over again through the years.

Rev. Haggard is a very big fish in evangelical circles. New Life Church claims 14,000 members while the National Association of Evangelicals represents some 30 million conservative Christians. Time magazine named Haggard one of the 25 most influential Evangelicals in America. Harpers describes New Life Church as America’s most powerful megachurch. Haggard is among the small cadre evangelical leaders who talk to President George Bush every Monday. According to Harpers, “No pastor in America holds more sway over the political direction of evangelicalism than does Pastor Ted, and no church more than New Life.”

In the latest sign of Haggard’s high regard in evangelical circles, a news conference was called for later yesterday in Colorado Springs, where civic and religious leaders planned to rally in support for Haggard. But it was quickly cancelled for reasons no one would explain. But we soon found out.

Mike Jones didn’t just have baseless allegations, he had proof. He released two voicemail messages that Haggard left (using the alias “Art”) to a local Denver television station. That station called on voice recognition expert Richard Sanders to listen to the tapes. He verdict: “This certainly sounds like the same person.” Here is what the tapes revealed:

August 4, 2:18 pm

“Hi Mike, this is Art. Hey, I was just calling to see if we could get any more. Either $100 or $200 supply. And I could pick it up really anytime I could get it tomorrow or we could wait till next week sometime and so I also wanted to get your address. I could send you some money for inventory but that’s probably not working, so if you have it then go ahead and get what you can and I may buzz up there later today, but I doubt your schedule would allow that unless you have some in the house. Okay, I’ll check in with you later. Thanks a lot, bye.”

August 4 at 5:10 p.m.

“Hi Mike, this is Art, I am here in Denver and sorry that I missed you. But as I said, if you want to go ahead and get the stuff, then that would be great. And I’ll get it sometime next week or the week after or whenever. I will call though you early next week to see what’s most convenient for you. Okay? Thanks a lot, bye.”

The Denver Post describes their relationship this way:

They met at least once a month at Jones’ Denver apartment, and Haggard paid cash, Jones said. “He was very nice and very soft-spoken,” Jones said. “We never talked about anything heavy-duty.” …

About six months ago, Jones said, he was watching TV when he saw a History Channel program on the Antichrist that included Haggard as an expert. He researched Haggard on the Internet. “Once I pulled him up, I’m going, ‘He’s big.”‘

According to Denver’s KUSA-TV Channel 9, Jones contacted the station two months ago saying that Haggard has been paying him for sex over the past three years, all the while preaching that homosexuality is a sin. This angered Jones, who said:

“People may look at me and think what I’ve done is immoral, but I think I had to do the moral thing in my mind and that is expose someone who is preaching one thing and doing the opposite behind everybody’s back.”

In retrospect, one might have recognized some of the warning signs earlier. Haggard was inordinately preoccupied with homosexuality, preaching that it wasn’t just evil, but evil incarnate. According to that same Harpers article:

The life of the gay man, in the evangelical imagination, seems to be an endless succession of orgasms, interrupted only by jocular episodes of male bonhomie. The gay man promises Christian men a guilt-free existence, the garden before Eve. As such, he is not just tempting but temptation embodied…

He was always on the lookout for spies. At the time, Colorado Springs was a small city split between the Air Force and the New Age, and the latter, Pastor Ted believed, worked for the devil. Pastor Ted soon began upsetting the devil’s plans. He staked out gay bars, inviting men to come to his church; his whole congregation pitched itself into invisible battles with demonic forces, sometimes in front of public buildings.

This scandal is huge; bigger, I think, than the Mark Foley scandal. A leading light among “values voters” has been revealed to be a hypocrite — a term that I almost never use. But what other term is there to describe someone who has made a very comfortable living and whose power reached as far as the White House by demonizing millions of Americans, but all the while he is cheating on his wife by having sex with another man?

My heart goes out especially to his wife and children. I also offer my prayers and condolences to all of those who trusted him for their own spiritual and moral formation. But it will take a very long time for me to fulfill my Christian mandate to forgive our enemies in his case. I suspect I am not alone in that. Haggard was not a man of God. He made an idol out of power and influence. But his idol, like all idols do in the end, let him down.

See Also:

Ted Haggard: “I’m Not Gay”
The Megachurch, Mike Jones, and the Suspension of Disbelief
“There Is A Part Of My Life So Repulsive and Dark…”
Blessed Are The Opportunists
Haggard Resigns; “I Know What You Did Last Night”
Prayers and Assistance for the Haggard Family
I Did Not Have Sex With That Man!
Jones “Fails” Lie Detector?
Fall of the House of Haggard

Trotting Out “The Gay Report”

A disturbingly virulent new website by Peter LaBarbara has appeared on the web with a laughably ill-considered title, “Americans for Truth.” The web site however, contains nothing but outrageous distortions of the truth. It would be a full-time job to keep up with them.

One great example is a recent post in which they regurgitate this from World Net Daily:

English professor Karla Jay, Ph.D., and well-educated journalist Allen Young, both homosexual activists, conducted the first major survey on homosexuality in America in 1979. Their work is still cited in academic studies and involved over 5,000 homosexuals from all walks of life. Titled “The Gay Report,” the study published data on underage sex, disease, gross promiscuity, suicidal tendencies and more.

One cannot help but applaud the honesty of these two homosexuals in publishing the results of their study, which documented that “23 percent of respondents admitted to having had sex with youths aged 13-15, while 19 percent felt positive about sexual activity within this age group.”

The Gay Report is one of the far-right’s favorite sources for “what homosexuals do”. That report however, suffers from several massive flaws which prevent it from being representative. These flaws are reflective in the fact that the response rate was less than 1%, far too low to be even minimally usable. With a response rate so low, it is fair to wonder why 99% of those who recieved the survey simply threw it away. And its fair to ask about the motivations of the tiny few who invested the hours it took to complete it and turn it in.

You can read our recently updated review of The Gay Report. And the next time you see anti-gay extremists trot it out, you’ll know exactly how unreliable their charges are — and how desperate they are to denigrate their fellow neighbors and citizens.

The Priest, the Levite and Focus on the Family

It’s getting hard to keep up with the statistical spins coming out of the Focus on the Family factory lately. They’ve become so productive, I’m beginning to wonder of maybe they’re starting to outsource their work.

Last Thursday, they issued a CitizenLink release claiming that the “FBI finds few sexuality-based hate crimes.” They pretend to examine the FBI’s hate crime statistics and conclude:

Near the bottom of the list? Hate crimes based on a victim’s sexual orientation. …

Fifty-five percent of hate crimes were committed because of racial bias, while 17 percent were on religious bias.

“And once again, sexual orientation as a category of hate crimes comes in well behind crimes based on race and religion,” said Caleb H. Price, a gender issues analyst for Focus on the Family. “The problem is, when gay activists come to the table to play their victim card — they are bluffing. The card isn’t even in their hand.”

Bottom of the list? Out of five categories, hate crimes motivated by sexual orientation came in third. Where I learned to count, that would place sexual orientation square in the middle of the list.

I have constantly preached that when it comes to statistics, nobody should take anyone’s word for anything. And since the FBI’s Hate Crime Statistics are very conveniently posted on their web site, I invite you to have a look at Table 4, where they present offense types by hate crime motivation. (You can also download the Excel file so you can do your own math.)

Overall, the break down of hate crime statistics by bias motivation goes like this:

As you can see, sexual orientation trails religion by a mere two percentage points — that’s a funny definition for “well behind” crimes for religion.

Now let’s look further at the FBI’s Table 4. This table breaks down hate crimes according to different types of personal crimes and crimes against property. And when you look at who is at the greatest risk of personal crimes — assaults, rape, bullying, etc. — the trend is considerably more disturbing:

So according to official statistics, when gays, lesbians and bisexuals are singled out for hate crimes, they are are more likely to to suffer from personal attacks than any other group except Ethnicity/National Origin. And sexual orientation accounts for the second largest category for personal attacks behind race. That’s hardly “near the bottom of the list.”

Anti-gay activists often claim that many hate crime allegations are nothing more than name-calling. Since the intimidation category is so poorly defined, let’s take that away from the statistics. This leaves only the truly violent crimes:

Now we can clearly see that when gays, lesbians and bisexuals are victims of hate crimes, they are far more likely to be victimized by serious acts of violence than any other group besides the disabled. And sexual orientation is still firmly in the number two spot behind race.

When gays are singled out for hate crime attacks, the attacks are more likely to be personal and violent, and less likely to involve property crimes. This may explain why gays are more likely to suffer from depression, anger, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress when they become hate crime victims.

This makes Focus on the Family’s callous dismissal of this suffering especially inexcusable. Instead of trying to deny that a very serious problem exists, it would be better if they would instead join all of us to find a solution.

But like the priest and the Levite in the story of the Good Samaritan, they don’t want you to see the suffering of the stranger on the side of the road. Their acting in the role of the Levite and the priest instead the Samaritan speaks volumes about the values at Focus in the Family.

The “Root Cause” of AIDS

Focus on the Family, in an October 19th online CitizenLink article, joins the chorus in denouncing U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s remarks at the swearing-in ceremony for Mark Dybul as deputy global AIDS coordinator. Ambassador Dybul, who is openly gay, was joined by his partner Jason Claire, who held the Bible as Secretary Rice administered the oath of office and first lady Laura Bush looked on. Also in attendance was Claire’s mother, who Secretary Rice referred to as Dybul’s mother-in-law.

According to the Focus on the Family report, Secretary Rice’s chief of staff tried to backpeddle a bit, but Focus wasn’t having any of it:

Tom Minnery, senior vice president of government and public policy for Focus on Family, called Rice’s comments “astonishing.”

“This is very provocative,” he said, “and very disappointing.”

In response to inquiries from Focus, Minnery heard from the State Department on Wednesday.

“Secretary Rice’s chief of staff called to say it was a mix-up,” he said. “That somebody should have checked this mother-in-law business, didn’t do it, and it got out.”

Perhaps, but such nuances are Rice’s stock in trade. Besides, she was standing right next to Dybul’s partner as he held the Bible for the swearing-in.

Peter Sprigg, vice president for policy at the Family Research Council, claimed this was evidence that “they’re really rather apathetic about the efforts to defend traditional marriage.” He also went on to cite a “conflict of interest” in having a gay man lead HIV/AIDS prevention efforts:

“If we are not willing to say that men should not engage in sex with other men,” Sprigg noted, “then we are really not willing to tackle the root causes of the AIDS problem.”

Sprigg added it’s unlikely a gay man can effectively articulate that point — if it’s still the point the administration wants to make

Clearly Peter Sprigg needs to be much more educated on the issue. Gay men are quite capable of articulating how to prevent AIDS. What other explaination is there for the dramatic drop in AIDS cases since the mid-1990’s? Since then, new AIDS cases fell by more than 60% in New York and Los Angeles while in San Francisco — that ever famous gay mecca — that drop was more than 80%.

But when it comes to “root causes of the AIDS problem,” it’s not men having sex with men. It’s people of all sexual orientations engaging in unsafe sexual practices. AIDS began as a heterosexually transmitted disease which was quietly killing generations in the Congo River basin of central Africa since the late 1950’s, long before the deaths of five gay men in Los Angeles grabbed the medical community’s attention twenty-five years ago. (You can read more about it in our report Opportunistic Infections.)

Demagoguery surrounding HIV/AIDS has been a persistent obstacle in dealing with AIDS, both here and around the world. Words like these continue to shore up the stigma associated with HIV/AIDS. And as long as that stigma continues, real answers to the problem will continue to remain elusive.