Thursday, October 05, 2006

Foley, Perkins, and abusing abuse

I've been silent so far on the Mark Foley scandal, partly because there's been plenty of coverage elsewhere (everybody loves stories of teenage sex), and partly because I've been so disgusted by it.

Disgusted by Foley's actions, first and foremost, disgusted by the way others in the House of Representatives have apparently aided and abetted in these crimes by covering them up for (possibly) several years, second of all, and now, finally, disgusted by the way the Republicans have spun the story to 1) make Foley immune from criticism, and 2) turn it around to attack homosexuality.

More detail... 1) Making Foley immune from criticism... This is a two-pronged strategy.

The first part is to make Foley the victim (rather than the teenaged boys he was seducing). First, he officially came out as a gay man. Do you have a problem with his actions? Then you are prejudiced against homosexuals! That'll shut those liberals up.

Then, he came out as an alcoholic seeking treatment (even though none of his associated ever suspected he drank). Still bashing Foley? You're insensitive to the plight of a sick man!

The second prong of the Foley immunization plan is to emphasize how it's all the Democrats fault. They simply want to make an issue of this poor drunk gay man's problems to try to swing the election next month. The timing alone shows that this is nothing but dirty politics.

Nevermind the fact that the same people shielding Foley (including Foley himself) were the same people who spent two years investigating Monica's blue dress and impeaching Clinton for getting a hummer. That was different, the Republicans say. After all, Clinton was a married man, whereas Foley is single!

2) Using gays to attack homosexuality...

The defense of Foley's advances on underage boys as a result of his homosexuality is, in itself, an attack on gays. How? By implying that homosexual men can't help but to be attracted to young boys. Let's get something clear here, "Gay" and "pedophile" are NOT synonyms!

Foley's problems are not the results of his being gay, and they're not the results of his being an alcoholic. They are the result of his being a criminal and a predator. There is no scientific evidence that gays are more prone to be attracted to children than anybody else. Just as the thousands of sexually abused girls doesn't prove that all heterosexuals are attracted to children.

Still, that hasn't stopped Mark Perkins, President of the Family Research Council, from claiming that "homosexual men are more likely to abuse children than straight men." Moreover, Perkins then uses that "fact" to say that if the Republican party "is giving deference and protection and safe haven to those who are on a path of sexual deviancy and abusing children, that's a problem."

Excellent. Perkins defends Foley by saying we should have expected this when we elected a fag in the first place. (And we'll just ignore the fact that this guy's name is the same as a famous gay actor).

Okay now, Foley has resigned. Now let's see if he goes to prison as any child predator should, gay or straight. Then, let's see how far the cover-up goes. Yes, this is serious, and I'm not being partisan when I say it is more serious than Lewinskygate.

Why is it more serious? Two reasons, the first and most important of which is the underaged victim. This wasn't just a personal breach of a marriage's trust with a consenting adult - this was a crime involving a minor. Second, if others were involved in covering for Foley, they are guilty of aiding and abetting in the crime, and should be prosecuted as well.

Tags: , , , , , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Twitter Feed