What else can be said about Larry Craig that hasn't been constantly hashed, rehashed, analyzed, and dissected?
No doubt there is a massive amount of hypocrisy inside the GOP, particularly in its members who are fulfilling a long tradition of closeted behavior. I feel the same way about gay Republicans as I feel about Mormons of color. Have you ever met a black Mormon? I certainly haven't.
Until the 1970s, the official church position regarding African-Americans was this: "We're not saying you're going to hell, we're just saying that hell is where you came from."
An article today in the local paper asked us to think of Senator Craig as a tragic figure. I'm not sure I buy it. His very hypocritical posture as a family values conservative is justification enough. His behavior immediately after arrest lends itself not to sympathy but to scorn. He was the perfect example of an elected legislator trying to use his power and influence to place himself above the law. He comes across as yet another elected official graced with the heavy tint of sleaze.
I do not absolve him of sin because of the tragedy of his homosexuality. I instead hold him responsible for his behavior because it reinforces a stereotype of gay men as amoral and hyper-sexual. Granted, if we really wanted to dissect this issue further, we would acknowledge that sex is a powerful force among men and that many heterosexual males would engage in such behavior if women were inclined to the practice.
I have a lot of problems with any party claiming it has some sort of monopoly over moral purity, as the GOP has done for the past several years. Most of them stem from the fact that politicians are, by in large, amoral and corrupt. It doesn't matter what side of the aisle to which you ascribe. I've seen and read about decent people who have sold their souls for the good graces of power and greed. There are too many temptations for any good person to remain pious for very long.
I'll be honest with you. Politics have always been a dirty business. No era of American history has been blessed by moral politicians despite heavily nostalgic musings otherwise. Ethical politics is an oxymoron. What we call a clean office is likely one that either covers its tracks well or doesn't engage in flagrant lawbreaking.
I pose a question to all of you out there. We're very good at throwing rocks at politicians, but if we were placed in their position, could we do any better?
Would you be strong enough to fight human temptation on a scale almost beyond human conception? Would you decline the advances of lobbyists? Would you use your power judiciously? Would you decline the ability to pad your own pockets?
If you didn't make concessions, there would be any number of people around you who would.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
"I do not absolve him of sin because of the tragedy of his homosexuality. I instead hold him responsible for his behavior because it reinforces a stereotype of gay men as amoral and hyper-sexual. Granted, if we really wanted to dissect this issue further, we would acknowledge that sex is a powerful force among men and that many heterosexual males would engage in such behavior if women were inclined to the practice."
This is a powerful statement and one that I too hold true. It is interesting that we criminalize men for being well, perhaps, men.
Jacqueline,
Thank you for your comment. The matter comes down to a question of self-control. As I mentioned, sex is a powerful force among men but that doesn't mean that fact alone should absolve men from personal responsibility. It's no different than any other desire that unrestrained and taken to an extreme can be detrimental.
Post a Comment