The Family Research Council, the same organization that brought you the "war on porn" and pushed hard for the Clinton impeachment debacle, is now blaming the folly of Mark Foley on - what else? - the cutlural influences of liberals. When you can't blame a Clinton, it's the old conservative standby.
Family Research Council (FRC) President Tony Perkins released the following statement:
"We are all shocked by this spectacle of aberrant sexual behavior, but we shouldn't be. This is the end result of a society that rejects sexual restraints in the name of diversity. When a 16-year-old boy is not safe from sexual solicitation from an elected representative of the people, we should question the moral direction of our nation. If our children aren't safe in the halls of Congress, where are they safe? Maybe it's time to question: when is tolerance just an excuse for permissiveness?
"Both political parties need to be more serious about protecting children from sexual predators. We need public policy in our country that protects marriage, respects parental authority and aggressively polices boundaries around our children."
Who exactly, besides NAMBLA, hardly an organization with much political clout, is pushing for a rejection of sexual restraints in the name of diversity? What does it even have to do with diversity? The landmark Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which is the best I can decipher Perkins' words to imply, had nothing at all to do with diversity, but was about privacy and the what the scope of government can be in people's personal lives. Which, by the way, has been a staple cause of libertarian-influenced conservatives since time immemorial.
Crooks and Liars has a different take on what the real problem is with the entire Foley scandal, however:
Many on the right are starting to turn this into a gay issue. This is a gay issue. What is at issue here is the fact that a gay man in the United States of America can not be open about his sexuality in the year 2006. Having to hide his chosen life style is what causes someone to sink to the low and possibly criminal levels that Foley did. If Foley could have been openly gay and possibly even had a companion in life then we very well may not be having this discussion today.
Tough to say - being gay does not equate with pedophilia, which is a fallacy that Christian conservative groups have been pushing for decades. So even if Foley had been out of the closet the result may have been the same - repressed pedophilia manifesting itself in creepy IM conversations. However, the fact that so many conservatives have been fixating on the gay aspect of this rather than the pedophilia aspect suggests that homosexual advocates still have a long way to go before openly gay politicians can expect to be accepted. Will and Grace can only accomplish so much.













































phrogg
Greenville, SC
August 2005
OCT 03, 2006 04:47 PM
quagmirething
I'm lost
June 2005
OCT 03, 2006 04:48 PM
Subrosa
San Francisco, CA
July 2004
OCT 03, 2006 05:28 PM
SockPuppet
I'm lost
July 2006
OCT 03, 2006 05:43 PM
ThisIsWhoWeAre
Oakland, CA
July 2004
OCT 03, 2006 06:45 PM
Dead_Ringer
I'm lost
September 2004
OCT 03, 2006 07:09 PM
Sick
Minneapolis, MN
June 2003
OCT 03, 2006 08:11 PM