Former RNC chief Ken Mehlman: I’m gay

posted at 6:37 pm on August 25, 2010 by Allahpundit

He says he realized it “fairly recently,” in Marc Ambinder’s words, which has Tammy Bruce chuckling on Twitter. Honestly, I thought the guy came out years ago. Remember when Bill Maher talked about the rumors surrounding him on Larry King’s show — back in 2006? I guess you were the last to know, Ken.

He’s doing this now, it seems, because he wants to drum up publicity for the cause of gay marriage and figures that “Republican whom everyone thought was gay actually is gay” headlines will do the trick. Could be, although Ambinder’s careful to remind readers of the sort of social con initiatives that the GOP pushed during Mehlman’s RNC tenure. That won’t endear him to gay activists, and his newly public identity won’t endear him to social cons. Maybe he should have just worked for gay marriage like Ted Olson and kept his orientation private?

Privately, in off-the-record conversations with this reporter over the years, Mehlman voiced support for civil unions and told of how, in private discussions with senior Republican officials, he beat back efforts to attack same-sex marriage. He insisted, too, that President Bush “was no homophobe.” He often wondered why gay voters never formed common cause with Republican opponents of Islamic jihad, which he called “the greatest anti-gay force in the world right now.”

Mehlman’s leadership positions in the GOP came at a time when the party was stepping up its anti-gay activities — such as the distribution in West Virginia in 2006 of literature linking homosexuality to atheism, or the less-than-subtle, coded language in the party’s platform (“Attempts to redefine marriage in a single state or city could have serious consequences throughout the country…”). Mehlman said at the time that he could not, as an individual Republican, go against the party consensus. He was aware that Karl Rove, President Bush’s chief strategic adviser, had been working with Republicans to make sure that anti-gay initiatives and referenda would appear on November ballots in 2004 and 2006 to help Republicans.

Mehlman acknowledges that if he had publicly declared his sexuality sooner, he might have played a role in keeping the party from pushing an anti-gay agenda.

“It’s a legitimate question and one I understand,” Mehlman said. “I can’t change the fact that I wasn’t in this place personally when I was in politics, and I genuinely regret that. It was very hard, personally.” He asks of those who doubt his sincerity: “If they can’t offer support, at least offer understanding.”

I couldn’t care less either way, but with all the buzz lately about new conservative support for gays — here’s the latest surreal episode in the Coulter/Farah HomoCon saga, incidentally — this is a bracing reminder that an openly gay RNC chief probably would still be a problem. Or would it?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

sharrukin in point of fact they want to do more than ignore me, they want to criminalize being gay. Since being open about my sexuality helps thwart this I choose to be so. Even if gays only constitute a small percentage of the population it is in the end a sizable population. I do not accept your rationalization that i should suffer because i am not as many as you. We have a constitution that protects minority rights from the majority exactly for this reason. If the education of the population is the cost of maintaining these rights than that’s what i have to support.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 12:53 AM

You really need to take yourself down off that cross. You are playing the tried and true game of victimization. I am more of a sad pathetic victim than you are! Far too many people play the PoorPitifulMe’s these days and it doesn’t get anyone anything except pity.

Never had much use for pity as it seems a close relative of contempt.

You want to be a victim. Blacks claim victimization. Feminists use it frequently as well. The list goes on. Its getting more and more common. Pretty soon everyone will get to be a victim and we will have a grand old time feeling sorry for ourselves.

Why not try being an individual?

sharrukin on August 26, 2010 at 1:02 AM

So what does he think the bar next the the Ground Zero Msoque should be called?

Pecca Mecca?

Dialog?

Camelnose?

profitsbeard on August 26, 2010 at 1:03 AM

So what does he think the bar next the the Ground Zero Msoque should be called?

Ace (of Spades) says the finalists are “Suspicious Packages” and “Outfidels.”

Emperor Norton on August 26, 2010 at 1:05 AM

@Sharrukin why is standing up for myself being a victim? You ever had someone hit you because you had your hand on your bf’s back? Have you ever looked around before you kissed someone because you were afraid for your safety? Have you eer had your own dad tell you hat people like you deserve to be put in jail? I don’t have to play a victim card these are just events that happen in my life. I don’t feel sorry for myself I get up and I advocate for my rights like a citizen, if you can only see that as a victim than I’m sorry. I’m not going to keep taking abuse so that other people can tell me what a stiff upper chin i have. I spent 10 years trying to make my parents happy and I’m done with creating a fake persona so that other people can feel comfortable in their ignorance of the real world.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 1:07 AM

Lezzsee:
Liz Cheney: Darling of the right and openly gay. (check)
Ken Mehlman “comes out” and the right doesn’t bat an eye (check)
MLK’s sister stands strong with Glenn Beck at the 8/28 Rally and I don’t hear a peep from the right denouncing this (check)
Women are running for–and winning–(primaries at least)congressional and senatorial seats in the republican party in record numbers (check)
Black conservatives like Andre Harper, Kevin Jackson, Thomas Sowell, J.C. Watts, Walter Williams are personas non gratis in the MSM…
But republicans are members of that evil, hatefilled party of the right.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch:
Chas. Rangel, Rev.s Wright, Jackson, Farakan, Flager; Maxine Waters, Bawney Fwank, Rahmy (twinkletoes), etal can tell us why we all need to buck up and take one for the team, yet, we’re the racists/bigots/homophobes.
OK, I get it now!
Glad it’s become crystal clear!

Chewy the Lab on August 26, 2010 at 1:11 AM

Ace (of Spades) says the finalists are “Suspicious Packages” and “Outfidels.”

Emperor Norton on August 26, 2010 at 1:05 AM

Bridges would be apt, also.

In rainbow neon.

profitsbeard on August 26, 2010 at 1:11 AM

I hope not to be vulgar here, but to simply be blunt…what man would choose another man’s hairy ass over a woman by choice?

BobM88 on August 26, 2010 at 12:39 AM

Best argument that sexual orientation is not choice. But of course because it is ’sin’ it must be choice, despite the disgusting and disturbing evidence to the contrary.

trailboss on August 26, 2010 at 12:55 AM

I’m not the Pope, right? Sin is up to God, not me or anyone in Washington, or any Statehouse…I’m just saying that, in my opinion, no man would choose a dude over a woman.

It’s just aesthetics. Who chooses a 74 pinto painte primer gray with bondo showing all over it, versus a brand new Mustang…???

BobM88 on August 26, 2010 at 1:12 AM

Emperor Norton on August 26, 2010 at 1:02 AM

Eh, once it reaches a certain level, it sort of maxes out.

A few years back, I got my pinkie finger torn off rather violently. It actually didn’t hurt any worse than when I had smashed it in a car door several years before.

And it took my mind off the no sex thing.

For a while.

notropis on August 26, 2010 at 1:14 AM

Chewy the Lab on August 26, 2010 at 1:11 AM

I think you have the wrong Cheney, Liz is not a lesbian.

bluemarlin on August 26, 2010 at 1:15 AM

@Chewy you do know that Farakan is like really really really anti gay right? I’m going to assume that you know gays don’t control the media, down’t own all the news agencies and have one openly gay Representative in the House who only helps people in Ma. The meme that gays have huge political capital can be debunked when you look at causes like DADT, DOMA, or EDNA and see no movement despite the democrats having an majority in both houses.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 1:16 AM

Emperor Norton on August 26, 2010 at 1:05 AM

How ’bout “The Ground Zero Mosque and Pork Emporium?”
I think it has a nice ring to it. In fact, I have long felt that if we really want to put the kabosh on this nightmare, someone just needs to march a truckload of unsuspecting porcine passengers there, let them “do their business” all over the site and then, um, well, make bacon of their cute little curly tailed @sses. No mo mosque!

In fact, I believe one of the ways to make our airlines uber safe is a)Have a cute little pot bellied pig on each and every flight as a mascot or b)serve pork rinds instead of peanuts, or c): both a) and b).

Chewy the Lab on August 26, 2010 at 1:18 AM

night peeps

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 1:21 AM

Listen, please, school me someone….I’m naive I guess.

I became a Reagan fan when I was 9 when he was running for President in 1980…I’ve been ever since. What does a person’s sexual orientation have to do with political ideology? Further…why should any of us care who is, or isn’t, gay? A conservative is a conservative, no matter what their sexual orientation, or race, or religion. If you’re not a conservative, you’re the enemy, regardless of your sexual orientation, or race, or religion.

I think I’m missing something here, and I’m not being sarcastic. I honestly don’t understand what it matters?

BobM88 on August 26, 2010 at 1:22 AM

bluemarlin on August 26, 2010 at 1:15 AM

I’ll take you at your word, but I’m pretty sure she is, and is in a long term relationship with a woman who has a child…maybe there is another Cheney sister??? I’ll be happy, and not feel inferior if I’m wrong.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 1:16 AM

Um, you know that Farakan is pretty much anti-anyone that doesn’t have a very healthy dose of melanin in their skin, right?

Chewy the Lab on August 26, 2010 at 1:23 AM

@Chewy you do know that Farakan is like really really really anti gay right? I’m going to assume that you know gays don’t control the media, down’t own all the news agencies and have one openly gay Representative in the House who only helps people in Ma. The meme that gays have huge political capital can be debunked when you look at causes like DADT, DOMA, or EDNA and see no movement despite the democrats having an majority in both houses.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 1:16 AM

If you have no representation, how do you explain hate laws/crime? Apparently your life, and some others, means more than some others. Look I have zero problem with you being gay, could actually care less. I have a hard time understanding why a crime against you is more imprtant that a crime against me. If it is wrong against one then it wrong against all equally! As far as the dems go, I can see from your point of view how you feel let down. Why take that out on us here, WE (CONSERVATIVES) did not do it.

bluemarlin on August 26, 2010 at 1:24 AM

bluemarlin on August 26, 2010 at 1:15 AM
I’ll take you at your word, but I’m pretty sure she is, and is in a long term relationship with a woman who has a child…maybe there is another Cheney sister??? I’ll be happy, and not feel inferior if I’m wrong.

Chewy no hard feelings whatsoever! This is the daughter you are thinking of.

Mary Cheney

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Cheney

bluemarlin on August 26, 2010 at 1:28 AM

BobM88 on August 26, 2010 at 1:22 AM

I think if you go back and read the posts on this thread, you’ll see that 99.9% of the peeps agree with you…and that’s the point. WGARA (Who gives a rat’s…), it’s about substance! The ones who are being disagreeable seem to be saying that those with a different sexual orientation are being discriminated against, and therefore (boo-hoo)need to have the rules changed for them while professing at the same time to be conservative…sorry, that line of thinking doesn’t jibe with me.
Live your life…hopefully without gub-ment intervention, MYOB, stay out of mine, but DON’T, I repeat DON’T WHINE about poor little you. I care about poor little me, and my poor little family, which I will take care of myself (thank you very much!). I suggest you do the same and quitcherbitchin! (Not aimed at you Bob, talking to the whiners.)

Chewy the Lab on August 26, 2010 at 1:36 AM

Thanks Blue! You actually made my day cuz’ I adore Liz and would love to see her run for office, but was afraid that little factoid would hold her back! Now I’m less worried about her possibilities going forward.
However, I consider myself pretty well informed, am I the only maroon out there that thought there was only one Cheney daughter??

Chewy the Lab on August 26, 2010 at 1:42 AM

However, I consider myself pretty well informed, am I the only maroon out there that thought there was only one Cheney daughter??

Chewy the Lab on August 26, 2010 at 1:42 AM

Well, actually I always thought Liz Cheney was his wife.

Don’t judge me!

sharrukin on August 26, 2010 at 1:44 AM

Well, actually I always thought Liz Cheney was his wife.

Don’t judge me!

sharrukin on August 26, 2010 at 1:44 AM

No judging…but isn’t Dick Cheney’s wife’s name Lynn? Lynne? something like that…

BobM88 on August 26, 2010 at 1:47 AM

No judging…but isn’t Dick Cheney’s wife’s name Lynn? Lynne? something like that…

BobM88 on August 26, 2010 at 1:47 AM

Yeah, I just looked it up.

sharrukin on August 26, 2010 at 1:50 AM

BobM88 on August 26, 2010 at 1:22 AM

Sigh, second post of the night that went into the ether…Bob, I think that 99.9% of the peeps here agree with you.
There are a few folks whining (Koss Kids plants???)that Gays and Lesbians should be treated the same as everyone else…oh, um, except they should have additional rights, and um, (said in whiniest possible voice)”It’s just not faaaaaaiiiiiir.” Oh, I forgot, “You have no idea what it’s like to be oppressed!”
If they were truly conservatives (which I doubt), they wouldn’t subscribe to the victim mentality.
From that standpoint, I find it very telling that they define themselves as “conservative victims,” an oxymoron if ever there was one.

Chewy the Lab on August 26, 2010 at 1:53 AM

No judging…but isn’t Dick Cheney’s wife’s name Lynn? Lynne? something like that…

BobM88 on August 26, 2010 at 1:47 AM

I LOVE Lynn Cheney…talk about a steel magnolia, or, um, tumbleweed? Snowball? What the H#@@ do they have in Wyoming that can describe a strong, smart woman (no livestock references, please!)

Fencepost???? Naw, that doesn’t seem very complimentary.

Chewy the Lab on August 26, 2010 at 1:57 AM

Who cares.

iamse7en on August 26, 2010 at 2:05 AM

Sigh, second post of the night that went into the ether…Bob, I think that 99.9% of the peeps here agree with you.
There are a few folks whining (Koss Kids plants???)that Gays and Lesbians should be treated the same as everyone else…oh, um, except they should have additional rights, and um, (said in whiniest possible voice)”It’s just not faaaaaaiiiiiir.” Oh, I forgot, “You have no idea what it’s like to be oppressed!”
If they were truly conservatives (which I doubt), they wouldn’t subscribe to the victim mentality.
From that standpoint, I find it very telling that they define themselves as “conservative victims,” an oxymoron if ever there was one.

Yes, exactly…we’re all people, right? Who gives a darn who is what?

My long felt belief…there’s no such thing as a “hate crime”…(I’m going to use murder here as an example, but any other crime will do).

Killing a Muslim because they’re a Muslim…killing a Jew because they’re a Jew…killing a Christian because they’re Christian…killing a Black because they’re Black….

Isn’t it all MURDER?

Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy were killed by white men….if a black man killed him, would it be a “hate crime”? If it was, what would it matter? We still lost these men as Presidents. Murder is murder. Crime is crime.

BobM88 on August 26, 2010 at 2:08 AM

I think I’m missing something here, and I’m not being sarcastic. I honestly don’t understand what it matters?

BobM88 on August 26, 2010 at 1:22 AM

It doesn’t.

The problem comes when a so-called “conservative” would willingly use the iron fist of government power to re-define and codify marriage as something that it has never been, and force the nation to recognize no distinction between two completely different concepts as if they were the same thing. That is not conservative ideology.

Even worse, they want to re-define marriage, but they are unwilling to put it into words so it can be debated substantively.

This is clearly not a conservative trait.

Saltysam on August 26, 2010 at 3:23 AM

Former RNC chief Ken Mehlman: I’m gay

Me: yawn.

Cylor on August 26, 2010 at 3:56 AM

I’m heterosexual. There, I said it and I am glad.

Let my 15 minute clock start now.

itzWicks on August 26, 2010 at 5:39 AM

Lezzsee:
Liz Cheney: Darling of the right and openly gay. (check)

Chewy the Lab on August 26, 2010 at 1:11 AM

I think Liz is straight, it is her sister Mary that is gay, I think. But this might be why Dick Cheney does not have a problem with gay marriage. I also thought Mehlman came out a long time ago. I just do not think this is that big a deal.

Terrye on August 26, 2010 at 6:52 AM

Why is it that these self absorbed beltway types think that their sexual preference is something we want or need to know?
Just go on Oprah, tell your story, and be done with it.

ncjetsfan on August 26, 2010 at 7:45 AM

Cheney was the reason I voted for Bush in much the same way palin was the reason I voted for McCain. Next election can we just have Cheney and Palin?

Good for Ken, btw. I have never understood the argument against gay marriage. You can’t force the churches to perform the ceremonies if they chose not to, but two parents are two parents as far as I am concerned and a persons love life is none of my business. It’s just easier if you live your own life instead of others lives for them.

BrideOfRove on August 26, 2010 at 7:56 AM

I just want to know why guys like Mehlman “come out” to all of us anyhow? I don’t send out a press release informing everyone who I’d rather look at in the shower, so why do these tools do it? I mean, heck, outside of political junkies, NO ONE on earth knows who Mehlman is, and among political junkies, I’m pretty sure no one cares.

Then again, I find it bizarre that homosexuals so often tend to view themselves in terms of who they have sex with. Not being gay, I tend to tell people what I like to do in terms of hobbies or interests, and it usually ends there. Gays, too often, tend to wear their sexual pleasures on their sleeve as if THAT is what defines them. It’s always seemed bizarre to me.

TheBlueSite on August 26, 2010 at 8:37 AM

Remember the gay old times when one’s sexuality and when abortion were the subject of the right to privacy emanating from a penumbrum of Thurgood Marshall’s “living constitution?” Seems like a century ago.

Another question…..what’s so “gutsy” about Mehlman outing himself as a queer? If he REALLY wanted to make a splash, he’d out himself as a pedophile, or a practioner of beastiality!!!! Now THAT would be gutsy!!!!!!!

olesparkie on August 26, 2010 at 8:39 AM

So Ken you are Gay. Why should it mean anything?

antisocial on August 26, 2010 at 8:45 AM

I think Liz is straight, it is her sister Mary that is gay, I think.

Terrye on August 26, 2010 at 6:52 AM

Right you are. Liz Cheney is married and has a couple of kids. Mary Cheney is the gay daughter.

halfastro on August 26, 2010 at 8:55 AM

Right you are. Liz Cheney is married and has a couple of kids. Mary Cheney is the gay daughter.

halfastro on August 26, 2010 at 8:55 AM

A couple? More like 5 kids.

Blake on August 26, 2010 at 9:33 AM


By what right, on whose authority, does Mehlman claim this power? While you’re pondering that metaphysical question, read this paragraph from Ambinder:

Chad Griffin, the California-based political strategist who organized opposition to Proposition 8, said that Mehlman’s quiet contributions to the American Foundation for Equal Rights are “tremendous,” adding that “when we achieve equal equality, he will be one of the people to thank for it.” Mehlman has become a de facto strategist for the group, and he has opened up his rolodex — recruiting, as co-hosts for the AFER fundraiser: Paul Singer, a major Republican donor, hedge fund executive, and the president of the Manhattan Institute; Benjamin Ginsberg, one of the GOP’s top lawyers; Michael Toner, a former chairman of the Federal Election Commission; and two former GOP governors, William Weld of Massachusetts and Christie Todd Whitman of New Jersey.

There you go. The fox is in the henhouse and now both the Democrat and your beloved GOP are being used as tools to destroy the family. Marxists long ago targeted the Christian family, and they knew that particular groups, wrapped around a “rights” package, would be ideal in it’s aim. And so many of you are simply nodding your head like marionettes being manipulated by forces you do not even see or care to understand because you’ve bought into the Marxist line.

The goal is not the reaching of some manufactured “right” but the destruction of God and his natural law using subversive means. You either stand on His principles, or you do not.

It’s funny to read where some “conservatives” stand on this issue. Eventually this will take take the form of hate speech laws and everyone here will scream against them, yet you will have enabled them by your willingness to compromise the family.

Yes, I do believe this is an issue best left to the states, but the gay agenda is not about states rights, it is about federalization of the agenda, with the eventual introduction of hate speech laws targeting Christian speech that dare speak of God’s position on this matter.

The gay marriage movement is a movement against God. It’s really that simple.

True_King on August 26, 2010 at 9:42 AM

I just want to know why guys like Mehlman “come out” to all of us anyhow?

That should be pretty frickin’ obvious in this “GOTCHA/TMZ(check some of these comments)” age, for cryin’ out loud!

Because a person, especially one in a high profile position, eventually gets to a place where his/her life seems to take on one of its own and you get damn tired, I’ll bet. So throw the BS flag and say, “This is me.”

There’d be a HUGE hue and cry if he’d been caught in a liplock with a boyfriend, right? Oooo, big scandal and why put yourself through it, when it’s so completely unwarranted?

Good for him.

tree hugging sister on August 26, 2010 at 9:54 AM

Who cares if the guy is gay? Big whoopee.

francesca on August 26, 2010 at 9:56 AM

Zeke… I’ve read your post and understand what you want but also understand that you are asking humans to give you what God says you can’t have and so to me your quest is futile. Also, I don’t want the GOP courting gays. I want the GOP to stand on it’s core principles including strong social conservative family oriented principles as well as fiscally conservative principles. If it stops doing that to entice a minority population I guarantee the GOP will lose more than it gains. There are many conservatives like me who are no longer willing to “be part of the world” because we live in the world. I’m more interested now in serving and obeying God than trying to please man. I, in my mid 40′s, have my eyes open to the slide Ametica is taking into immorality and know to be part of this would lead to my death and destruction. So no thanks.

CCRWM on August 26, 2010 at 9:59 AM

Ace (of Spades) says the finalists are “Suspicious Packages” and “Outfidels.”

Emperor Norton on August 26, 2010 at 1:05 AM

How about “In Fidel”?

dthorny on August 26, 2010 at 10:21 AM

I’m not the Pope, right? Sin is up to God, not me or anyone in Washington, or any Statehouse…I’m just saying that, in my opinion, no man would choose a dude over a woman.

It’s just aesthetics. Who chooses a 74 pinto painte primer gray with bondo showing all over it, versus a brand new Mustang…???

BobM88 on August 26, 2010 at 1:12 AM

Careful there….Count to 10 thinks you’re gay if you express such ideas.

Oh, I know what you’re saying, I said the same thing, but after making it clear why I could never be gay (the biological response necessary, at least from a man’s point of view, to engage in intercourse) he accused me of, in fact, being gay. I still think he was protesting too much and doesn’t want anyone to know his “proclivities”, shall we say, but don’t say I didn’t warn ya!

runawayyyy on August 26, 2010 at 10:40 AM

Maybe Mehlman can do for the gay marriage movement what he did for the Republican party as RNC chief (2005-2007). I certainly hope so.

Tres Angelas on August 26, 2010 at 10:50 AM

@CCRWM I kind of tune people out that 1 pretend to talk about what a metaphysical god they can’t see wants for other people, and two when said person than professes a strong desire to legislate morality based on their personal interpretations of an old book. What’s next? stockpiling nukes for the great battle with santa satan? Should we perhaps start mandating that women not cut their hair? should all blood sausage products be taken off the market? (poor germans). Also should we get rid of banks because jesus didn’t like money lenders?

“When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its professors are obliged to call for help of the civil power, ’tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.”
- Benjamin Franklin: in letter to Richard Price, October 9, 1780

If you feel the need to legislate your morality I suspect it is because you lack any true ability to convince others to follow it.
I’m 35 and I’m not religious, and I fail to see the point of follow a book that has no documented proof, was written and compiled no less than a century after the fact, and isn’t even taught by anyone that is fluent in the tongue and cultural mores it was written in. Until your god starts manifesting as something more than the westboro church picket line I’m going to preach secular rights, not religious persecution.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 11:17 AM

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

John Quincy Adams

kingsjester on August 26, 2010 at 11:29 AM

Careful there….Count to 10 thinks you’re gay if you express such ideas.

Oh, I know what you’re saying, I said the same thing, but after making it clear why I could never be gay (the biological response necessary, at least from a man’s point of view, to engage in intercourse) he accused me of, in fact, being gay. I still think he was protesting too much and doesn’t want anyone to know his “proclivities”, shall we say, but don’t say I didn’t warn ya!

runawayyyy on August 26, 2010 at 10:40 AM

Say what?

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 11:31 AM

runawayyyy on August 26, 2010 at 10:40 AM

I’ve been quite clear that I find all sexuality to be learned behavior, and I only use the term “gay” as “those who self identify a homosexual” and occasionally as “those who regularly engage in strictly homosexual sex”. I also don’t make assumptions about how people self identify unless they come out and say so.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 11:35 AM

“That the desires of the majority of the people are often for injustice and inhumanity against the minority, is demonstrated by every page of the history of the whole world” John Quincy Adams

“This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it”
John Adams quotes

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 11:40 AM

@count to 10, I would say that sex is a learned behavior but that sexuality is innate. There is a fairly large difference in the two.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 11:41 AM

John Adams also said:

The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.

Thomas Jefferson said:

The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man.

The practice of morality being necessary for the well being of society, He [God] has taken care to impress its precepts so indelibly on our hearts that they shall not be effaced by the subtleties of our brain. We all agree in the obligation of the moral principles of Jesus and nowhere will they be found delivered in greater purity than in His discourses.

I am a Christian in the only sense in which He wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to His doctrines in preference to all others.

I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ.

kingsjester on August 26, 2010 at 11:48 AM

I will say this, though: the most destructive part of the whole homosexual issue is the idea that sexual orientation is inborn. Individual homosexual acts are only a minor concern, in so much as they cause physical damage and spread disease. But the problem with the”inborn gayness” idea is that it is used to:
-excuse personal choices, making it “I found my true self” instead of “I took up a habit”
-excuse the seduction of others into that habit: “I didn’t cause you harm, I just help you find your true self”
-prevent persons from forming mother-father families, by promoting the idea that any homo-erotic thought makes one irreversibly “gay”, and thus unsuitable for a heterosexual relationship.

There is a bit of a bargaining aspect to it, as well: the heterosexual reinforce his identity as a heterosexual by believing that one must be born “gay”, and the normalization of relationships being about sexual attraction and enjoyment also normalizes the culture of serial divorces.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 11:48 AM

@count to 10, I would say that sex is a learned behavior but that sexuality is innate. There is a fairly large difference in the two.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 11:41 AM

What big difference?
Also, the physical reactions to tactile stimulation are probably largely physiological, but the association of sexual arousal with mental images (like the hair buts mentioned earlier) must be at least as learned as language.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 11:51 AM

@Count to 10 um in 5th grade I went looked up and saw a classmate named Matt, and he was the most beautiful thing I ever saw, I had the strong urge to kiss him despite never having an urge to kiss anyone male or female. If you can describe this as a “habit or learned behavior” than I would have had to been taught that or seen it some where, which I can assure you that I had not. I was raised in a fairly sheltered christian environment and only learned the word for gay relationships later when i was around 14. So I had three years of same sex attractions before that with no education and based solely on natural feeling. I don’t think your understanding of human sexuality is really tha complete.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 12:05 PM

@kingsjester you do know that Thomas jefferson did not believe in any divine magic, and wrote his own version of the new testament with all such references striped out?

“In 1797, the United States Senate ratified a treaty with Tripoli that stated in Article 11:
As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion” a document that was largely written by Jefferson, under the direction of Washington.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 12:11 PM

incidentally — this is a bracing reminder that an openly gay RNC chief probably would still be a problem. Or would it?

Yes. There is no trust of the gay alliance, which asks not for simple tolerance, but demands gay marriage, and institutional normalization of gay marriage, which means teaching kiddies from the youngest ages that gay marriage is good and normal.

The example of the UK, where foster parents can no longer foster children if they raise children in Christian belief that gay marriage is a sin, or if they refuse to send children, including very young children to state run classes created for the single purpose of normalizing gay marriage and homosexual practice to all foster children – regardless of the religions of the blood parents or foster parents

There is no question from the current practices in public schools, and the movements in the courts regarding adoption and child rearing, that the gay movement intends to eventually outlaw the sources of opposition to gay practice.

Canada is ahead of the curve on this, and various parts of the Bible are now hate speech. There is a move in the US military to control chaplain speech, in all the politically correct areas.

Because of the correlation between institutionalizing gay practice, and legal acts against practicing Christians, there is no reason to trust the leadership of a political party, with all the back room strategizing, to a person with interests which conflict with the base

entagor on August 26, 2010 at 12:17 PM

Zeke it makes no difference to me if you tune me out. I understand that you can’t believe in God and live your lifestyle in peace. I get that you have to take Old Testament commands out of context to try to make us who follow the New Testament absurd. But in the United States you will find 84% of us are believing Christians. We will not conform to this world where a minority rages against a God they don’t believe in. You are fighting people who won’t betray their faith to make you feel better about the way you choose to have sex. And you will get the fight of your life if you persist in trying to shove the gay agenda down our throats in an effort to fool yourself it’s ” normal” and to shut up those of us who believe it will lead to your “death”.

CCRWM on August 26, 2010 at 12:23 PM

Jefferson’s own words explain that his intent for that book was not for it to be a “Bible,” but rather for it to be a primer for the Indians on the teachings of Christ (which is why Jefferson titled that work, “The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth”). What Jefferson did was to take the “red letter” portions of the New Testament and publish these teachings in order to introduce the Indians to Christian morality. And as President of the United States, Jefferson signed a treaty with the Kaskaskia tribe wherein he provided—at the government’s expense—Christian missionaries to the Indians.

kingsjester on August 26, 2010 at 12:29 PM

“This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it”
John Adams quotes

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 11:40 AM

Zekecorlain, Adams was using a traditional language choice of terms. Christianity was discussed as a faith; denominations were discussed as religions. If you look at the context of what he said, he was discussing interdenominational squabbles, not the Christian faith.

DrMagnolias on August 26, 2010 at 1:06 PM

Yeah, Ken. We’d guessed.

mojo on August 26, 2010 at 1:16 PM

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 12:11 PM

Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli was to establish to a foreign country that the treaty was between to sovereign nations, not two religious powers. In other words, it is an explanation to outsiders who might not understand that this very Christian nation was not a theocracy.

DrMagnolias on August 26, 2010 at 1:18 PM

@Count to 10 um in 5th grade I went looked up and saw a classmate named Matt, and he was the most beautiful thing I ever saw, I had the strong urge to kiss him despite never having an urge to kiss anyone male or female. If you can describe this as a “habit or learned behavior” than I would have had to been taught that or seen it some where, which I can assure you that I had not. I was raised in a fairly sheltered christian environment and only learned the word for gay relationships later when i was around 14. So I had three years of same sex attractions before that with no education and based solely on natural feeling. I don’t think your understanding of human sexuality is really tha complete.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 12:05 PM

Your mistake is not thinking that you could be trained to have that reaction by things you don’t recognize as sexual. Little cues like the shape of his jaw, the color of his lips, or even just the perfection of his completion can combine to trigger stronger responses than you have had before. It’s fairly likely that that one incident set you to training yourself toward what your sexual responses are now — basically a positive feedback loop.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 1:25 PM

Zekecorlain, Adams was using a traditional language choice of terms. Christianity was discussed as a faith; denominations were discussed as religions. If you look at the context of what he said, he was discussing interdenominational squabbles, not the Christian faith.

DrMagnolias on August 26, 2010 at 1:06 PM

Interesting. Does that mean Adams was one of the deists?

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 1:35 PM

CCRWM on August 26, 2010 at 12:23 PM

You got to the bottom line, CC. In the end, it’s what it is all about.

Gob on August 26, 2010 at 1:37 PM

@Count to 10 HAHA no it was probably He-man but matt was just a scrawny little kid that I barely knew. I’m going to pretty much discount your musings on sexual attraction or your going to go on about them like they must be true. Since I’ve spoken at length about this with a neuro-chemist and a biologist who studies mammalian brains I’m going to go with their findings. Which basically are that the brain has normal firing routines that engage during puberty, for most people they fire and trigger an instinctual desire and curiosity about the female form. In some people this doesn’t happen, after your links are made they cannot be unmade your brain will always have receptors for same sex attraction, some more and some less. Whether to factors that cause this cascade failure are caused by genetics, womb conditions, environmental conditions, or even all of the above it really can’t be proven either way. However given that the size of the gay population appears to be consistent world wide and stable, the chances that it is predominantly caused by the neural misfire or womb conditions gains credence.
Telling all gay people that they should be celibate is as ridiculous as expecting all priest to maintain their vows. Humans are social and sexual creatures, it’s our nature to have sex. The fact that your bible is not complex enough to understand actual human nature because of a primitive grasp of humanity is a problem of it’s nature. It was written by people who had no grasp of dna, chemistry, or bacteria. Expecting answers to questions like that is not going to happen, they were still struggling with the concept of ‘unclean food’ and ritualized genital mutilation.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 2:03 PM

But in the United States you will find 84% of us are believing Christians. We will not conform to this world where a minority rages against a God they don’t believe in.

CCRWM on August 26, 2010 at 12:23 PM

Only about half your 84% of believers regularly attend church, leaving the faithful Christian church attendees as yet another minority. Fortunately, fundamental rights in the US are protected regardless of population percent. One neither has to believe in Christ nor the gays to allow each group to live freely.

dedalus on August 26, 2010 at 2:03 PM

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 2:03 PM

Let me return your “Ha ha”, because that was pretty ridiculous.
Quite frankly, anyone who tells you that recognition of male or female forms can be coded in your DNA is full of it. The sexes are just too similar for that to be realistic. Heck, most of our recognition of gender isn’t based on biological factors at all, but how we dress and act. How much of what turns you one has to do with what the person you are looking at is waring?

Additionally, I can tell you that the processes that affect our sexual preferences are by no means permanently set at puberty (though that is probably the time that they are most rapidly created). They are constantly evolving, moved by what is available too us at the right time.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 2:24 PM

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 1:35 PM

The whole question of deism is an interesting one. John Adams began a Congregationalist, but became a Unitarian. I believe he considered himself a Christian in the same way Thomas Jefferson did (which will come as a surprise to some people)–that we should all follow Christ. Whether he rejected the divinity of Christ, as Jefferson did, I do not know. Adams did state that he rejected some of the dogmas of orthodox Christianity, and in fact believed this made him a better Christian.

I should clarify what I said earlier–the traditional term for Christianity (or Judaism, etc.) is faith. The term religion was for denominations or “sects” within the faith; however, people have used those terms interchangeably throughout history (much as people now say theory when they should say hypothesis). The Founding Fathers also would use both the terms faith and religion when referring to Christianity–it is through the context that we understand what they meant. This is why pulling single quotes in which the Founders seem to be criticizing religion is so dishonest, even when the person doing so doesn’t realize he is misrepresenting the person’s beliefs.

DrMagnolias on August 26, 2010 at 2:25 PM

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 2:03 PM

Oh, and lets not forget that the entire male citizen population of ancient Sparta was bi-sexual. Any commonality of frequency is going to come down to the rate at which children miss-cue and then build on the experience (as you did).

Also, I am atheist, so don’t start preaching to me on the bible. I don’t really put one sexual act above another, either. What I object to is the removal of people from the standard system of mother-father families just because they have learned to like one kind of sex over another, and, worse, that they set out to encourage other people to do the same. So, go ahead and have gay sex — just don’t eliminate the possibility of settling down with a member of the opposite sex to start a family, and for goodness sake, stop trying to convince kids that they shouldn’t try to have that kind of family just because they got aroused by a member of their own sex once.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 2:36 PM

@Count to 10 I’m assuming you missed the line about “intense curiosity”? as for your line about

Additionally, I can tell you that the processes that affect our sexual preferences are by no means permanently set at puberty

do you have any actual proof of these, your quite certain of it, so you must have peer reviewed studies, and research notes for this curious gay to go over?

“How much of what turns you one has to do with what the person you are looking at is wearing?”

um much of the porn i look at is naked dudes not wearing anything but some dirty smudges.. personally honest eyes and good skin do it for me.
I can honestly ell you that all my gay friends have at one time or another tried to get it on with a woman. If what we wear is what turns us on, why aren’t we attracted to dykes than?

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 2:39 PM

@Count to 10 I’m assuming you missed the line about “intense curiosity”? as for your line about

Additionally, I can tell you that the processes that affect our sexual preferences are by no means permanently set at puberty

do you have any actual proof of these, your quite certain of it, so you must have peer reviewed studies, and research notes for this curious gay to go over?

“How much of what turns you one has to do with what the person you are looking at is wearing?”

um much of the porn i look at is naked dudes not wearing anything but some dirty smudges.. personally honest eyes and good skin do it for me.
I can honestly ell you that all my gay friends have at one time or another tried to get it on with a woman. If what we wear is what turns us on, why aren’t we attracted to lesbians than?

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 2:39 PM

Zekecorlain, my advice is avoid the subject altogether with Count to 10. Don’t even try to humor him. He considers himself to be the world’s expert on human sexuality when it comes to homosexuality. I am sure that he and his spouse only do “it” in the missionary position and never on Sunday.

SC.Charlie on August 26, 2010 at 2:44 PM

@Count to 10 oh dear god you think gays recruit??? seriously? what are you like 12? do you really want to know about being gay? it’s mostly about disappointment, we’ve all had a crush on a straight friend and we all have to learn that gays and straight do not a healthy match make. We all have to learn that if we want a relationship we have to forge it with a fellow gay, gay’s that marry women most often can’t return the same level of romantic feelings for their wives let alone maintain a healthy sex life with them. This is why gays are not encouraged to try male female relationships, not because it can’t be done, but because it rarely makes for a happy marriage. Search craigslist for married gays trying to have sex on the downlow. If that’s your solution, I suggest trying again. Getting married won’t “fix” you, it might simply mean you pass on your genes in a tragic marriage.
As for sparta, even institutionalized male sex did not turn them gay so what is your point? The modern construct of an out gay person is relatively new and hard to compare against historical anecdotes. But same sex relations have always been documented. Gilgamesh and Enriku, Jonathan and David are two which touch on the point.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 2:50 PM

@SC.Charlie yeah i should probably be working :-/

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 2:51 PM

Zekecorlain, my advice is avoid the subject altogether with Count to 10. Don’t even try to humor him. He considers himself to be the world’s expert on human sexuality when it comes to homosexuality. I am sure that he and his spouse only do “it” in the missionary position and never on Sunday.

SC.Charlie on August 26, 2010 at 2:44 PM

Ah, no. See above.

I am simply telling you what I have found. Basically, every body has been so set on preserving the hypotheses that serve their interests best that they have missed the obvious. It is really frustrating to watch people repeat the same mistakes over and over, driving themselves and those they interact with into misery, because they are to cooped up in group think to see it.
You are totally misreading me if you think I am railing against kinky sex. I’m all for it (in general). What I am getting at is the harmful social trends that people have built up around sex — particularly the idea that love is about finding the person who sexually excites you the most.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 2:54 PM

@Count to 10 so you don’t really have any proof of any of your ideas do you? :-\ these are just ideas you came up with?
You see i get really sad at watching people who are gay try to be straight for their friends and family and waste years of each others time and love trying to make something work that was inherently flawed. It is possible that in another culture it would be more acceptable to have a wife for procreation and a male lover for romance, but that isn’t a very popular idea here.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 3:05 PM

What I am getting at is the harmful social trends that people have built up around sex — particularly the idea that love is about finding the person who sexually excites you the most.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 2:54 PM

Whole industries are built on the idea of finding “that one” special person who sexually excites you–love, marriage, baby carriage. The idea that marriage and parenthood is a also a practical endeavor seems to be the minority view–at least until a few years into parenthood.

Based on what’s published, people seem to believe that a sexual bond is essential for an enduring relationship. Perhaps the idea is stupid, but it seems unrealistic to ask only gays to forego romance while straights spend much of their lives pining for it.

dedalus on August 26, 2010 at 3:06 PM

I am sure that he and his spouse only do “it” in the missionary position and never on Sunday. SC.Charlie on August 26, 2010 at 2:44 PM

Funny, a pillow biter speculating on a normal guy’s sex life.

Akzed on August 26, 2010 at 3:06 PM

Gay…..schmay.

The real question is what did you do for the GOP? Oh that’s right you left us a crippled RINO / ruling class infested GOP leadership.

Thanks Ken.

Next thread please.

PappyD61 on August 26, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 12:05 PM

Once I looked up and saw a bike someone left against a tree. It was the most lovely bike. I had never thought of stealing before. I resisted it, and didn’t become a thief.

No one ever died from not stealing a bike, and no one ever died from not _______ a _______.

Akzed on August 26, 2010 at 3:09 PM

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 2:50 PM

You are missing something big in this — the whole set up that convinces you as a kid that you should serialize your relationships. Are you under the mistaken idea that only kids with homosexual leanings are lonely? A lot of us are well into our twenties before anyone takes a romantic interest in us.
At any rate, the problem is with confusing sexual arousal with an emotional relationship. It’s hardly confined to those who identify as homosexual, but they represent it in its most obvious form.

Don’t worry about it being passed down in genes. If it was, they would have found it already, given the size of the population — and it pretty clearly doesn’t run in families.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 3:09 PM

Whole industries are built on the idea of finding “that one” special person who sexually excites you–love, marriage, baby carriage. The idea that marriage and parenthood is a also a practical endeavor seems to be the minority view–at least until a few years into parenthood.

This is exactly the problem I am talking about.

Based on what’s published, people seem to believe that a sexual bond is essential for an enduring relationship. Perhaps the idea is stupid, but it seems unrealistic to ask only gays to forego romance while straights spend much of their lives pining for it.

dedalus on August 26, 2010 at 3:06 PM

Again, that’s the trap. The real problem is with the new idea of “romance” as practiced by much of the straight population. The homosexual lifestyle is really just a symptom of that — but it is also the means by which the concept of the mother-father family is suppressed.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 3:14 PM

The homosexual lifestyle is really just a symptom of that — but it is also the means by which the concept of the mother-father family is suppressed.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 3:14 PM

I’d guess the number of single (financially empowered) women running around have done more than the gays to “suppress” the concept of “mom+dad”–at least Jennifer Aniston tells me so.

What are the stats on single moms vs married moms? I’d heard it was approaching 30%. Whatever it is, it dwarfs the number of gays who want to start families.

dedalus on August 26, 2010 at 3:21 PM

@Count to 10 I’ve already asked you if you have any proof for your ideas and it is becoming increasingly unlikely that you are going to pull a study out of your hat.
most gays have more understanding about the difference between emotional love and physical love than straights do simply because we are men. We all feel the full bluster of physical attraction but we have to look into a different place for emotional love, combining the two into a single person is a great and happy day. I may never find the perfect man for me, but I would rather keep looking than waste the time of a woman who most likely can never have the part of me might help her feel complete.

@Count to 10 your not gay though, you really have a set idea of what we go through because you are making assumptions and apparently without even applying basic scientific principals to your thoughts. I appreciate your thoughts on the matter but please be careful trying to ‘advise’ young gays. My father thought he was doing me a service rattling off the same lines and he was tragically wrong and it nearly cost me everything.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 3:22 PM

Count to 10 so you don’t really have any proof of any of your ideas do you? :-\ these are just ideas you came up with?
You see i get really sad at watching people who are gay try to be straight for their friends and family and waste years of each others time and love trying to make something work that was inherently flawed. It is possible that in another culture it would be more acceptable to have a wife for procreation and a male lover for romance, but that isn’t a very popular idea here.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 3:05 PM

Some parts of it (the observations about sexuality) I have derived from my own experiences. Basically, in my twenties, I realized that my experience was impossible under the hypotheses assumed by the public at large — and, in fact, that those hypotheses were not consistent with a whole lot of things. They were being pushed by people who wanted desperately to believe in them (you know, like a Faith). So I had to work out the general structure of it on my own.

What is sad is that people seem to think that sex is everything in a relationship — or worse, that you can’t live with one person if you have feelings for another. I would suggest that most of the problems you are talking about come from a misguided notion that everything has to be perfect, and that anything that isn’t perfect must be abandoned in search so something that might be perfect.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 3:23 PM

“Funny, a pillow biter speculating on a normal guy’s sex life. – Akzed on August 26, 2010 at 3:06 PM”

Pillow biter? I must lead a sheltered life. Never heard the phrase.

SC.Charlie on August 26, 2010 at 3:26 PM

I’d guess the number of single (financially empowered) women running around have done more than the gays to “suppress” the concept of “mom+dad”–at least Jennifer Aniston tells me so.

What are the stats on single moms vs married moms? I’d heard it was approaching 30%. Whatever it is, it dwarfs the number of gays who want to start families.

dedalus on August 26, 2010 at 3:21 PM

Exactly. Think leverage.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 3:27 PM

If only Ken Mehlman had prayed just a little bit harder he could have been “normal” just like Count to 10 or Akzed.

SC.Charlie on August 26, 2010 at 3:28 PM

Pillow biter? I must lead a sheltered life. Never heard the phrase.

SC.Charlie on August 26, 2010 at 3:26 PM

I don’t really get it either. Some kind of play on doggy-style or something?

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 3:28 PM

If only Ken Mehlman had prayed just a little bit harder he could have been “normal” just like Count to 10 or Akzed.

SC.Charlie on August 26, 2010 at 3:28 PM

Nah.
He would have been better off watching porn together with his wife (did he ever have one?).

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 3:29 PM

@Count to 10 your not gay though, you really have a set idea of what we go through because you are making assumptions and apparently without even applying basic scientific principals to your thoughts. I appreciate your thoughts on the matter but please be careful trying to ‘advise’ young gays. My father thought he was doing me a service rattling off the same lines and he was tragically wrong and it nearly cost me everything.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 3:22 PM

If by “basic scientific principals” you mean sociological surveys, forget it. Not much real science in the field yet, as far as I can tell. I’ve a physicist, so science to me means thought experiments on observed phenomena.
Good advice can’t save everyone, and is generally lost on those intent on ignoring it.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 3:35 PM

@Count to 10 o.m.g…. i suddenly understand your perspective and I’m so sorry. Your at “that” stage, here go to my old blog and drop me a line. I think you might need an ear to talk to.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 3:36 PM

If only Ken Mehlman had prayed just a little bit harder he could have been “normal” just like Count to 10 or Akzed.

SC.Charlie

haha maybe if he had magic underwear.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 3:43 PM

@Count to 10 o.m.g…. i suddenly understand your perspective and I’m so sorry. Your at “that” stage, here go to my old blog and drop me a line. I think you might need an ear to talk to.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 3:36 PM

That’s another thing that irritates me: the “Oh, I know where you are…”. It’s basically a weapon, with an edge made by the implied threat against the targets social status. Can we climb down from such childish games, please?
For instance:
At this point in your life, you feel you’ve given up too much to go back. Admitting that it didn’t have to be this way would be an unsustainable blow to your ego. So your pride carries you down the same path and doesn’t let you leave.

Count to 10 on August 26, 2010 at 3:44 PM

@Count to 10 I’m sure it must seem that way and I don’t mean any offense. I didn’t mean it in a bad way I suddenly recognized arguments I made to myself and others for many years.
As I was explaining to my co-worker, you’ve become confused because things that are permissible in other cultures are not permissible here. If you were in italy or India your perspective would be the norm, however you appear to live in the US and it is not as common to expect a woman to put up with a loveless marriage for reasons other than money or political power. If you have neither of those perhaps you can find a woman who is willing to endure the situation because of her religious faith. Beyond that most people would call it rude or self serving to force a person into that situation.
Honestly if someone had a pill that could make me straight i would have to think seriously about taking it, I’ve spent 25 years becoming comfortable knowing that I’m gay and what the rules of the game are. I like that i don’t have to put up with women on their periods, I’m happy that I can read my partners moods because I know what they are going through. Relearning all of that might be worth it but I’m pretty sure I can find a man to love and be with in a reasonable amount of time. If you think I didn’t go though at least a decade trying not to be gay you got another thing coming. but everyone has to move on from hope eventually and start dealing with reality.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 3:55 PM

Look we all want a magic cure in the beginning, we all pray, we all try the most ridiculous things, and maybe if you hold out long enough something will come around. But in the mean time you would be missing out on the possibility of finding love. Time is both shorter and longer than you think. If your lucky your bi, and you can form relationships with men or women, if your not lucky your gay and can still have sex with women. You get stuck in a sexless marriage and you troll for sex on craigslist or grindr. Make your own path but don’t let your faith hurt others.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 4:07 PM

Look we all want a magic cure in the beginning, we all pray, we all try the most ridiculous things, and maybe if you hold out long enough something will come around

– Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 4:07 PM

Zeke, as I say, I don’t think that anyone wakes up one day and says: Whoopee, I am gay.

SC.Charlie on August 26, 2010 at 4:21 PM

I sometimes wonder why people chose to make their main self-identifier what makes them “different”, like being gay or African-American or Hispanic, and then whine because people treat them differently.

katiejane on August 26, 2010 at 4:36 PM

@SC.Charlie no…no it’s kinda slow process that goes 1. ooh that guy makes me hot, 2. wow I must be bi, 3.hmm these chicks actually want sex eww 4. fuck if I’m not bi, I must not have found the right chick. 5. hmm why does she want sex all the time? 6. fck it guys are so much hotter and easier to deal with 7. god dang i might be gay.

Zekecorlain on August 26, 2010 at 4:46 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5