Randy, I see your point. This is a tough one, though. I think both of these are captured in the scriptures that discuss true and ultimate justice as only coming from God. Until then, we are right to complain and shake our heads at the obvious in-justice that we see all around us. Personally, I feel bad for Mel. He obviously has an addictive personality due to his smoking and drinking. It's too bad that he said those hurtful things. I know when I lived in LA there is a pretty palpable anti-Semitic undercurrent there. As for George, I shake my head and think "what's new here?"
Natalie
· 3 years ago
What a double standard we live with when a good man makes a bad mistake, feels utter remorse and can't be forgiven, while a strange man makes equally sickening mistakes and is applauded for his pride and his mistakes brushed under the rug.
Amanda
· 3 years ago
I read another post today written by someone who has completely changed the way he feels about Mel Gibson based on this single incident. I don't condone Mel, at all, for his actions. But I do believe that his remorse was sincere and that he really does love God. Some of the most misguided folks I know truly love God the way that they understand loving God to be.
I was raised in the South and there is still a generation of "God fearin' folks" who believe racism is okay. Misguided? Absolutely. Does that mean they can't be Christian? Of course not.
The unfortunate thing about humanity is that we are...well...human. That doesn't give any of us the right to disappoint God the way we do, but it also means that when we do, we can't turn our backs on each other.
george
· 3 years ago
I respect that man for his honesty. i would have probably said the same thing in his place.
Amanda
· 3 years ago
I read another post today written by someone who has completely changed the way he feels about Mel Gibson based on this single incident. I don't condone Mel, at all, for his actions. But I do believe that his remorse was sincere and that he really does love God. Some of the most misguided folks I know truly love God the way that they understand loving God to be. I was raised in the South and there is still a generation of "God fearin' folks" who believe racism is okay. Misguided? Absolutely. Does that mean they can't be Christian? Of course not. The unfortunate thing about humanity is that we are...well...human. That doesn't give any of us the right to disappoint God the way we do, but it also means that when we do, we can't turn our backs on each other.
PdubDC
· 3 years ago
Randy, I see your point. This is a tough one, though. I think both of these are captured in the scriptures that discuss true and ultimate justice as only coming from God. Until then, we are right to complain and shake our heads at the obvious in-justice that we see all around us. Personally, I feel bad for Mel. He obviously has an addictive personality due to his smoking and drinking. It's too bad that he said those hurtful things. I know when I lived in LA there is a pretty palpable anti-Semitic undercurrent there. As for George, I shake my head and think "what's new here?"
Natalie
· 3 years ago
What a double standard we live with when a good man makes a bad mistake, feels utter remorse and can't be forgiven, while a strange man makes equally sickening mistakes and is applauded for his pride and his mistakes brushed under the rug.
Cheryl
· 3 years ago
I wonder if the Body of Christ has some responsibility in Mel's situation. He has been very loud about his faith and used his stature to promote the Gospel. It should have been our job to uphold him in prayer because of how common post mountaintop humiliation occurs. That's when you are most vulnerable. The Bible is full of examples. I am sorry for what he has to go through.
Randy
· 3 years ago
Great thoughts everybody. This incident doesn't change my thoughts on Mel. It helps give information as to what he deals with on a personal level but a man in pain isn't the whole man and doesn't disqualify every single thing he has done in the past. Nor does it dictate what is in the future for him.
Randy
· 3 years ago
Great thoughts everybody. This incident doesn't change my thoughts on Mel. It helps give information as to what he deals with on a personal level but a man in pain isn't the whole man and doesn't disqualify every single thing he has done in the past. Nor does it dictate what is in the future for him.
george
· 3 years ago
I respect that man for his honesty. i would have probably said the same thing in his place.
Cheryl
· 3 years ago
I wonder if the Body of Christ has some responsibility in Mel's situation. He has been very loud about his faith and used his stature to promote the Gospel. It should have been our job to uphold him in prayer because of how common post mountaintop humiliation occurs. That's when you are most vulnerable. The Bible is full of examples.
I am sorry for what he has to go through.
Randy
· 3 years ago
Hi George :), it is good to see you.
Cheryl, I think you have a point too and agree. The same could be said for George Michael's situation. The Body of Christ needs to lift him up in prayer as well.
Steve Schalchlin
· 3 years ago
What Mel did was drive drunk down a highway at 80 miles an hour. He could have killed someone. In fact, he could have killed more than a few people. And it's not his first offense.
What George did endangered no one but himself, and that's only assuming he met some maniac.
DM
· 3 years ago
Not that it's really any of my business, but haven't Mr. Michael's actions endanger his partner as well? (Ie. risky behavior regarding STD's) And it seems that it's had an impact on their wedding plans as well.
When you have a sexual encounter with someone, there are effects to others beyond that encounter - it never affects only yourself.
(Not sure if I used "effects" & "affects" properly there.)
grace
· 3 years ago
Randy, You are exactly right in your final analysis of both men...they will stand before God alone, as we all will. Neither one of them did anything to me, personally, BUT, if they had, I'd still be called to forgive them and offer them the same boundless grace that's been extended to me. In the end, it doesn't really matter what any of us think about any of it, which seems to be your point. We could, however, be judged individually based on how we respond to them. Just thinking out loud mostly! Thanks for not skirting around tough issues and allowing this space to talk and discuss amongst our community here.
love, grace
Randy
· 3 years ago
Steve Well of course I don't agree. George Michael proclaims himself to be a role model who exemplifies a gay identified man who has "made it" in the music industry. He is role modeling, to millions and millions of people gay identified and not, irresponsible sexual behavior. He is having sex with anonymous people in a public park in the name of "...that's what gay men do."
Plus, he was arrested a few weeks ago for passing out at the wheel of his car while possessing pot.
His actions look a little like an addict to me.
There is no difference between the two men except their orientation and that Mel will catch a heck of a lot of heat whereas Michael will be celebrated and/or excused.
I also agree with DM. Good reminder about Kenny.
and Grace Thanks! I hope to hit the issues. I don't have time for them all but when I can I think it is important. You also have an EXCELLENT point about we being judged for our judging of these men. I think it is very true.
I want to clarify that I think both of these men are out of control. The ending point that I was making is that they stand as equals in the light of making mistakes that affects millions. Yet, I guarentee, George will fare very well whereas Mel will have a horrible time. No matter, in the end, they will stand before God alone and not us.
It should also be said that I have always been a huge fan of both men. From the time that I was a "raging gay liberal" to today, I have always thought they are two artists who are true timeless artists. I love George's voice. I love Mel's vision. And if they both can break my heart ... I can't imagine the grief that the Father feels for both of them. I know He loves them both equally enough to die for them both and be raised again for them to have hope of freedom from addicton.
I pray they find their way out.
Steve Schalchlin
· 3 years ago
George Michael can proclaim himself as representative of "all gays" if he wants, but that doesn't make it so. That's the sound of a man in denial. I have not heard anyone in the gay community proclaim George Michael to be some kind of hero. In fact, all I've heard is condemnation that he would be such a fool, and to embarrass his partner so blatantly. What he didn't do was tell the world how terrible Jews are.
And his "sexual" actions only harm the lives of others if he has HIV and is having unsafe sex. The effect he has on his partner is sad, but it's not going to kill someone the way Gibson's reckless drunk driving could have.
Neither situation is a happy one, and I'm not excusing George Michael's foray into the bushes. I'm just saying that they're not the same morally. Not even remotely. As for George Michael's intoxicated driving, THAT one IS an equivalent to Gibson's driving. He also could have killed someone with his car. There's no doubt that he's a troubled man.
grace
· 3 years ago
Randy, You are exactly right in your final analysis of both men...they will stand before God alone, as we all will. Neither one of them did anything to me, personally, BUT, if they had, I'd still be called to forgive them and offer them the same boundless grace that's been extended to me. In the end, it doesn't really matter what any of us think about any of it, which seems to be your point. We could, however, be judged individually based on how we respond to them. Just thinking out loud mostly! Thanks for not skirting around tough issues and allowing this space to talk and discuss amongst our community here. love, grace
Randy
· 3 years ago
::: hand poised over the big red cyber delete button ::: ::: AHA, there is a new comment from Steve! ::: ::: in the famous words of Homer ::: DOH! ::: no reason to delete :::
Steve Schalchlin
· 3 years ago
Of course they will face different consequences, but not because George Michael is gay. They will receive different consequences because Mel Gibson drove drunk on a public highway and then told the entire world what he probably really thinks about Jews, despite his protestations to the contrary. George Michael stupidly got caught with his pants down in a public park. His sin is that he thinks this is "normal" behavior. Already he has been decried in the gay press here: http://www.afterelton.com/columns/2006/7/lastga.... Unlike Mel, he wasn't immediately putting peoples' lives in danger. His sin is thinking he's a role model. Mel had a big chance to refute the antisemitic rantings of his lunatic father, but he dodged around and played games with that. Now, "in vino veritas." Anyone who watched him in his interviews for The Passion could see the madness in King Mel's eyes. I'm sorry the guy is an alcoholic. I'm sorry he ranted on about how much he hates Jews. He has a chance to make up for it, I suppose, but it's not going to be easy. The wine loosens the lips in ways most people don't want to admit. So, yes, the consequences will be different. And they should be.
cparks
· 3 years ago
I see George's actions as very destructive and would hope others would too. It's just my speculation, but I suspect most people do. I keep thinking of that old joke about how if you put 10 Baptists in a room, you'll get 11 different opinions they're all willing to die for. But put a Catholic in the room, and a mystical unity overtakes them.... I think that's often the case in these types of debates. And thanks for the welcome....
DM
· 3 years ago
Not that it's really any of my business, but haven't Mr. Michael's actions endanger his partner as well? (Ie. risky behavior regarding STD's) And it seems that it's had an impact on their wedding plans as well. When you have a sexual encounter with someone, there are effects to others beyond that encounter - it never affects only yourself. (Not sure if I used "effects" & "affects" properly there.)
Amanda
· 3 years ago
Steve, I have to wonder if you've actually read any of the posts Randy has made on this blog other than this one. You've made several character accusations against him that just aren't true and if you had read Randy's thoughts you would know that. It seems like you have some preconceived notions about who Randy must be based on what you know about him. Too bad stereotypes are rarely right.
Mike Ensley
· 3 years ago
Randy, what you've said about the consequences of both these celebrities' actions is right on. It also shows a lot about their inner world of brokenness. Steve, what saddens me about your comments is your (and George's)belief that there's nothing dangerous about anonymous sex unless terminal diseases are involved. What about what this behavior says about a person's soul and self-perception? A person having sex publicly and anonymously isn't driven by a healthy sex drive and well-rounded dispositon. This kind of behavior is indicative of deep deception and wounding. What's widely damaging to others is the spin that there's nothing wrong with it; in other words, that if you too are being drawn to this behavior, don't worry about it, you're fine. As someone who used to be terribly promiscuous, I'm glad that God and others were willing to reach into my situation and tell it like it is. I'm healthier and happier now because of it.
Randy
· 3 years ago
Steve says ...
... his "sexual" actions only harm the lives of others if he has HIV and is having unsafe sex.
Again, he's having sex in bushes with strangers in public. There is nothing safe about role modeling public sex in bushes with strangers is an acceptable thing to millions of people.
I am glad to hear that the gay identified community is holding George accountable. However, if your minimization of this type of sexual behavior is typical of their treatment of the situation as a whole ... it is a travesty for all those who believe the lie that somehow having sex with strangers in public can be done in a risk free manner.
For the one person who does meet that one stranger with AIDS, Syph or a whole host of other STD's, I am sure they would consider getting hit by a car at 80 mph comparable.
Back in the day, mid to late 80's, people in my gay identified community were murdered or badly beaten during park sex as well.
Both George and Mel took a risky chance in getting themselves killed and killing others. They have hurt their loved ones, friends and fans. The methods were different but the affects are very similar.
Morally they have both failed in upholding their social responsibilities (as everyday people and celebrities) by feeding their respective addictions.
And again, I am no better than they are in that I do not consider myself holier or superior to either of them. If not for the grace of God, I am completely capable of doing the same or something similar.
Mike Ensley
· 3 years ago
Randy, what you've said about the consequences of both these celebrities' actions is right on. It also shows a lot about their inner world of brokenness.
Steve, what saddens me about your comments is your (and George's)belief that there's nothing dangerous about anonymous sex unless terminal diseases are involved. What about what this behavior says about a person's soul and self-perception?
A person having sex publicly and anonymously isn't driven by a healthy sex drive and well-rounded dispositon. This kind of behavior is indicative of deep deception and wounding. What's widely damaging to others is the spin that there's nothing wrong with it; in other words, that if you too are being drawn to this behavior, don't worry about it, you're fine.
As someone who used to be terribly promiscuous, I'm glad that God and others were willing to reach into my situation and tell it like it is. I'm healthier and happier now because of it.
Steve Schalchlin
· 3 years ago
I said in my earlier comment that it's dangerous if the person meets some psycho, so when you respond to my comments, reply to them all. Yes, it's sad that he's a bad role model. Boo hoo. And everyone knows that unsafe sex leads to STDs. That's a given.
My issue with you, Randy, is that you are conflating two totally disparate events in order to get a cheap shot in against gays (as is usual with you exgays -- you are wholly and completely obsessed with us, and you cannot seem to discuss anything without throwing a pitchfork at us just to make sure everyone knows how much you hate homosexuality. WE GET IT.)
It's no wonder no one outside your little cultural/religious bubble takes you seriously. HE WAS DRIVING DRUNK. That is not even REMOTELY in the same ballpark except in some weird right wing land where all the gays are evil and all the heteros are angels from God.
Steve Schalchlin
· 3 years ago
And yes, Mike Ensley, promiscuity is terrible for the soul and the heart. I said earlier that I'm not excusing George Michael's actions. My sole issue here is Randy trying to jam them together as if they were remotely on the same level.
Look at his post where he said the George Michael would be held up as some hero for his position on public, anonymous sex. Where did that happen? Nowhere. So, once again, another cheap shot so that his followers can believe the worst about gay people.
Amanda
· 3 years ago
Steve, I have to wonder if you've actually read any of the posts Randy has made on this blog other than this one. You've made several character accusations against him that just aren't true and if you had read Randy's thoughts you would know that.
It seems like you have some preconceived notions about who Randy must be based on what you know about him. Too bad stereotypes are rarely right.
Randy
· 3 years ago
Respond to all your comments? I respond to what I want to respond too. Your expectations bordering on tantrums will not dictate my response.
So... I will choose to answer the one thing you said I didn't answer, which I thought was covered but will indeed clarify ...
Psycho or not, strangers in bushes having public sex is dangerous. It's not like a psycho is going to introduce themselves by saying, "Hi I'm an STD infected psycho, please hold me while I ruin your life."
Cheap shot? I think your comment was full of them ... Right wing ex-gay bubble? Throwing pitch forks...no one takes me seriously ... yelling via ALL CAPS?
I didn't call the gay identified community irrelevant, mean spirited, pawns of their own groupthink and yell at you. I didn't say those things because I don't believe them on a community wide basis and two... that didn't even cross my mind.
I didn't come after you personally Steve and yet you attack me, and others of the same beliefs, quite directly and personally.
I was writing about a similarity I saw between two celebrities (addictive behavior) and yet how vastly different I believe they will be treated. I wasn't even thinking of just the gay community, religious bubbles or American political culture wars or any of that.
Obsessed with the gay community? That is simply a ridiculous statement. Homosexuality is one of forty eight categories on this blog and doesn't even make the top five categories discussed. And even then, it is mostly from my perspective not in reaction to or directed by anyone else.
The work I do at Exodus is in the interest of people like myself who are formerly gay identified, never gay identified and/or experienced sexual orientation change. My work there is not about you, not about the gay identified community as a whole.
I do what I do for those who are or want to live beyond the "gay" paradigm of relationships and identity.
That said, often we all have a vested interests in speaking into some of the same cultural topics but it's because it is of interest to us, not in reaction to you or the whims of someone else.
I represent myself and a group of people who will be heard, whether we are taken seriously or not.
Randy
· 3 years ago
Actually the word hero only shows up twice in this thread and both times it is in Steve's comments. I said in part of my resulting comments that George would probably be celebrated and/or excused. My original post even said that I hoped the gay identified community would hold George accountable.
I am glad to hear they are.
Steve Schalchlin
· 3 years ago
For the record:
RANDY SAID: I didn't come after you personally Steve and yet you attack me, and others of the same beliefs, quite directly and personally.
Every time you appear before congress and anti-gay political groups with the intention to turn the Constitution of the United States against us, you are making a personal attack against my home, my family and my community. And, YES, I absolutely will hold you accountable for these actions.
Lumping Mel and George together was just another subtle way of letting the world know how "bad" the gays are, implying that we'll celebrate his obnoxious behavior. Just because you say you "hope" we "won't" doesn't excuse your actions.
Yes, Randy. You who judge us constantly; who want to turn the entire law of the land against us, you will be held accountable for your words. I know you don't like it, but there it is, my brother.
And yes, it is a personal attack. Your whole paycheck depends upon you attacking our homes and our families.
Randy
· 3 years ago
Well...okay then. I don't think I need to make any more of a response. You are holding me responsible for a false view of my reality, motivations and the true consequences of the very few debates we actually cross paths on.
Steve, you need to chill and to ensure at least some small measure of that you can email me but I won't let this continue on this thread.
Randy
· 3 years ago
And ... one final thought on the Steve determined topic on this thread. I am held accountable for my words by A LOT of people from every angle. I don't mind it a bit. But there is a difference between accountability/holding responsible and attack.
Now, back to the point which was not about me or the culture war ...
I still think George Michael and Mel Gibson are suffering for their respective addictive behaviors and will face different consequences ... do you?
Steve Schalchlin
· 3 years ago
Of course they will face different consequences, but not because George Michael is gay. They will receive different consequences because Mel Gibson drove drunk on a public highway and then told the entire world what he probably really thinks about Jews, despite his protestations to the contrary. George Michael stupidly got caught with his pants down in a public park. His sin is that he thinks this is "normal" behavior. Already he has been decried in the gay press here: http://www.afterelton.com/columns/2006/7/lastga.... Unlike Mel, he wasn't immediately putting peoples' lives in danger. His sin is thinking he's a role model.
Mel had a big chance to refute the antisemitic rantings of his lunatic father, but he dodged around and played games with that.
Now, "in vino veritas." Anyone who watched him in his interviews for The Passion could see the madness in King Mel's eyes.
I'm sorry the guy is an alcoholic. I'm sorry he ranted on about how much he hates Jews. He has a chance to make up for it, I suppose, but it's not going to be easy. The wine loosens the lips in ways most people don't want to admit.
So, yes, the consequences will be different. And they should be.
cparks
· 3 years ago
Hey, I'm a friend of Steve's. Please don't hold it against me. LOL
George lives in a society that apparently believes that if an action is considered something "gay" people do, than it must be ok as long as you don't see it. They believe that "gay" "open" marriage is still somehow marriage. One gay activist, instead of calling this situation for what it is (sexual addiction) chose to point out all the broken heterosexual problems and how the right wing will try to use this to smear all gay identified people.
I don't know. I've been surfing around and it appears that any number of gay people recognize a sex addiction when they see one. Yes, Michael is going to be viewed as representative because of his public visibility. I think that's understandable, but not necessarily fair. This fellow, at least, seems to get it.
Randy
· 3 years ago
Steve, since your latest comment actually addressed the subject instead of my character I will let it stand ... the delete key is still in the wings though :). Thanks for registering your thoughts.
CParks, I would never hold your friendship with Steve against you. After the past 8 years of knowing him, I think Steve is a nice guy (at least half the time) and never met one of his friends that weren't thoughtful.
I think I have been very clear that I hope the gay community sees George's actions as sexual addiction. At the same time, George has obviously bought into something somewhere that told him his actions are what "gay people do." Whether you agree with me on the morality of pursuing homosexual relationships or not ... I see George's actions as very destructive and would hope others would too.
The article you linked to was thoughtful. I don't agree with most of it's content (of course) but I do think it is honest and reflective.
Welcome to my blog CParks.
cparks
· 3 years ago
I see George's actions as very destructive and would hope others would too.
It's just my speculation, but I suspect most people do.
I keep thinking of that old joke about how if you put 10 Baptists in a room, you'll get 11 different opinions they're all willing to die for. But put a Catholic in the room, and a mystical unity overtakes them....
I think that's often the case in these types of debates.
And thanks for the welcome....
Randy
· 3 years ago
That's a pretty good joke and I think, unfortunately, is true more often than noticed.
It certainly isn't true about this blog... you folks sure are opinionated! I love that if it's honest.
And not personal attack ...
Steve Schalchlin
· 3 years ago
For the record, cparks came to my discussion board as mostly conservative (though he might not defined himself that way -- he's very independently minded). He's been challenging me a lot of things. Very intelligent and fair guy.
Randy
· 3 years ago
::: hand poised over the big red cyber delete button :::
::: AHA, there is a new comment from Steve! :::
::: in the famous words of Homer :::
DOH!
::: no reason to delete :::
Steve Schalchlin
· 3 years ago
LOL.
You never know, do you??????
(diabolical laugh)
Randy
· 3 years ago
::: one eyebrow arched :::
followed by
::: big grin :::
Amanda
· 3 years ago
I have to say that I am very impressed with both Randy and Steve. I admire the way the conversation turned from a potentially very bad place to a good one.
I didn't realize you had known each other so long so Steve...I apologize for my earlier comment. Looks like I did what I was accusing you of. I'm sorry.
Randy
· 3 years ago
Amanda, as for my opinion of Steve and I's relationship ... we have freedom to be honest with each other.
I think since Steve and I have traveled a very difficult road together, at different times over the years. We can be abrupt with one another and it is just par for the course of our relationship. People not used to our banter must think we can't stand each other when in reality, I really like Steve because he is talented in so many ways, fun and honest about his convictions. I don't love arguments but I appreciate them if they are honest.
Steve can speak to me the way he does, and it is easier for me to allow it, because he has earned it by standing the test of time. Over the years he has often showed humility and self-reflection on our journey as opponents and friends. I am going to listen to him.
It's weird talking about him like he isn't in the blog room but... such is online dynamics.
All that's not to say that there are times when we need to stop the escalation in public. We came close to that this time.
I am allowing dialog like this on my blog, in part, because I want ETC readers to know it's ok to be human and not have text book answers. It's ok to get riled up and emotional ... that's honest. Hopefully this will show folks that you can still love each other in the midst of heated conversation.
Also, I believe, sometimes tension needs to happen to get people to pay attention.
:)
Now I am speaking for myself. Steve probably hates me now ... but ... this comment contains what I see in and at the base of what I hope is our continued friendship.
And Amanda, thank *you* for showing maturity and humility. That is very cool of you.
Is this thread hopelessly of course or just evolving into what it needs to evolve into?
Jack Yan
· 3 years ago
This incident opens up quite a few things and I thank you for linking me, Randy. When I think about it, there are all these extremists indoctrinated to hate the west. Say the western campaigns get through and they begin seeing that freedom is the right direction. Now, they may practise it, and live it, and even love it—but when alcohol enters their minds, they could revert back to a deep-seated behaviour. If Mr Gibson’s father is a Holocaust denier, and has taught his son that, then alcohol could well cause those earlier teachings to blurt out. The man was akin to being unconscious at the time—and as the event dies down, I am beginning to feel that his apology is sincere.
Amanda
· 3 years ago
Jack I linked to your post about it today, and I think I agree with you. I even quoted you in my post!
Randy, thank you. You always have kind words of encouragement for everyone. You rock!
Steve Schalchlin
· 3 years ago
I always love hearing good things about myself. I'm glad Randy allows me the space to say my peace. He's deleted a couple of posts in the past, but I understood why and I never resented him for it. It's his space and I accept that he has his limits. It's actually impressive to me that he allows me as much leeway as he does. I honestly try not to abuse the privilege.
We have clear issues over the political direction that Exodus has taken. He knows that I take his actions against my home and family very personally. I don't think he agrees with me that this is what he's doing, but at least he gives me that chance to say it out loud and get it off my chest.
In a way, it's a clear example of how our culture should work. That opponents can have rigorous debate and still call each other up, put it all aside and just saw howdy -- something we definitely do.
Jack Yan
· 3 years ago
Amanda, thank you! That is so kind of you.
Steve Schalchlin
· 3 years ago
I always love hearing good things about myself. I'm glad Randy allows me the space to say my peace. He's deleted a couple of posts in the past, but I understood why and I never resented him for it. It's his space and I accept that he has his limits. It's actually impressive to me that he allows me as much leeway as he does. I honestly try not to abuse the privilege. We have clear issues over the political direction that Exodus has taken. He knows that I take his actions against my home and family very personally. I don't think he agrees with me that this is what he's doing, but at least he gives me that chance to say it out loud and get it off my chest. In a way, it's a clear example of how our culture should work. That opponents can have rigorous debate and still call each other up, put it all aside and just saw howdy -- something we definitely do.
Amanda
· 3 years ago
Jack I linked to your post about it today, and I think I agree with you. I even quoted you in my post! Randy, thank you. You always have kind words of encouragement for everyone. You rock!
All Comments
I see your point. This is a tough one, though. I think both of these are captured in the scriptures that discuss true and ultimate justice as only coming from God. Until then, we are right to complain and shake our heads at the obvious in-justice that we see all around us.
Personally, I feel bad for Mel. He obviously has an addictive personality due to his smoking and drinking. It's too bad that he said those hurtful things. I know when I lived in LA there is a pretty palpable anti-Semitic undercurrent there.
As for George, I shake my head and think "what's new here?"
I was raised in the South and there is still a generation of "God fearin' folks" who believe racism is okay. Misguided? Absolutely. Does that mean they can't be Christian? Of course not.
The unfortunate thing about humanity is that we are...well...human. That doesn't give any of us the right to disappoint God the way we do, but it also means that when we do, we can't turn our backs on each other.
I was raised in the South and there is still a generation of "God fearin' folks" who believe racism is okay. Misguided? Absolutely. Does that mean they can't be Christian? Of course not.
The unfortunate thing about humanity is that we are...well...human. That doesn't give any of us the right to disappoint God the way we do, but it also means that when we do, we can't turn our backs on each other.
I see your point. This is a tough one, though. I think both of these are captured in the scriptures that discuss true and ultimate justice as only coming from God. Until then, we are right to complain and shake our heads at the obvious in-justice that we see all around us.
Personally, I feel bad for Mel. He obviously has an addictive personality due to his smoking and drinking. It's too bad that he said those hurtful things. I know when I lived in LA there is a pretty palpable anti-Semitic undercurrent there.
As for George, I shake my head and think "what's new here?"
I am sorry for what he has to go through.
I am sorry for what he has to go through.
Cheryl, I think you have a point too and agree. The same could be said for George Michael's situation. The Body of Christ needs to lift him up in prayer as well.
What George did endangered no one but himself, and that's only assuming he met some maniac.
When you have a sexual encounter with someone, there are effects to others beyond that encounter - it never affects only yourself.
(Not sure if I used "effects" & "affects" properly there.)
You are exactly right in your final analysis of both men...they will stand before God alone, as we all will. Neither one of them did anything to me, personally, BUT, if they had, I'd still be called to forgive them and offer them the same boundless grace that's been extended to me. In the end, it doesn't really matter what any of us think about any of it, which seems to be your point. We could, however, be judged individually based on how we respond to them. Just thinking out loud mostly! Thanks for not skirting around tough issues and allowing this space to talk and discuss amongst our community here.
love,
grace
Plus, he was arrested a few weeks ago for passing out at the wheel of his car while possessing pot.
His actions look a little like an addict to me.
There is no difference between the two men except their orientation and that Mel will catch a heck of a lot of heat whereas Michael will be celebrated and/or excused.
I also agree with DM. Good reminder about Kenny.
and Grace Thanks! I hope to hit the issues. I don't have time for them all but when I can I think it is important. You also have an EXCELLENT point about we being judged for our judging of these men. I think it is very true.
I want to clarify that I think both of these men are out of control. The ending point that I was making is that they stand as equals in the light of making mistakes that affects millions. Yet, I guarentee, George will fare very well whereas Mel will have a horrible time. No matter, in the end, they will stand before God alone and not us.
It should also be said that I have always been a huge fan of both men. From the time that I was a "raging gay liberal" to today, I have always thought they are two artists who are true timeless artists. I love George's voice. I love Mel's vision. And if they both can break my heart ... I can't imagine the grief that the Father feels for both of them. I know He loves them both equally enough to die for them both and be raised again for them to have hope of freedom from addicton.
I pray they find their way out.
And his "sexual" actions only harm the lives of others if he has HIV and is having unsafe sex. The effect he has on his partner is sad, but it's not going to kill someone the way Gibson's reckless drunk driving could have.
Neither situation is a happy one, and I'm not excusing George Michael's foray into the bushes. I'm just saying that they're not the same morally. Not even remotely. As for George Michael's intoxicated driving, THAT one IS an equivalent to Gibson's driving. He also could have killed someone with his car. There's no doubt that he's a troubled man.
You are exactly right in your final analysis of both men...they will stand before God alone, as we all will. Neither one of them did anything to me, personally, BUT, if they had, I'd still be called to forgive them and offer them the same boundless grace that's been extended to me. In the end, it doesn't really matter what any of us think about any of it, which seems to be your point. We could, however, be judged individually based on how we respond to them. Just thinking out loud mostly! Thanks for not skirting around tough issues and allowing this space to talk and discuss amongst our community here.
love,
grace
::: AHA, there is a new comment from Steve! :::
::: in the famous words of Homer :::
DOH!
::: no reason to delete :::
Mel had a big chance to refute the antisemitic rantings of his lunatic father, but he dodged around and played games with that.
Now, "in vino veritas." Anyone who watched him in his interviews for The Passion could see the madness in King Mel's eyes.
I'm sorry the guy is an alcoholic. I'm sorry he ranted on about how much he hates Jews. He has a chance to make up for it, I suppose, but it's not going to be easy. The wine loosens the lips in ways most people don't want to admit.
So, yes, the consequences will be different. And they should be.
It's just my speculation, but I suspect most people do.
I keep thinking of that old joke about how if you put 10 Baptists in a room, you'll get 11 different opinions they're all willing to die for. But put a Catholic in the room, and a mystical unity overtakes them....
I think that's often the case in these types of debates.
And thanks for the welcome....
When you have a sexual encounter with someone, there are effects to others beyond that encounter - it never affects only yourself.
(Not sure if I used "effects" & "affects" properly there.)
It seems like you have some preconceived notions about who Randy must be based on what you know about him. Too bad stereotypes are rarely right.
Steve, what saddens me about your comments is your (and George's)belief that there's nothing dangerous about anonymous sex unless terminal diseases are involved. What about what this behavior says about a person's soul and self-perception?
A person having sex publicly and anonymously isn't driven by a healthy sex drive and well-rounded dispositon. This kind of behavior is indicative of deep deception and wounding. What's widely damaging to others is the spin that there's nothing wrong with it; in other words, that if you too are being drawn to this behavior, don't worry about it, you're fine.
As someone who used to be terribly promiscuous, I'm glad that God and others were willing to reach into my situation and tell it like it is. I'm healthier and happier now because of it.
Again, he's having sex in bushes with strangers in public. There is nothing safe about role modeling public sex in bushes with strangers is an acceptable thing to millions of people.
I am glad to hear that the gay identified community is holding George accountable. However, if your minimization of this type of sexual behavior is typical of their treatment of the situation as a whole ... it is a travesty for all those who believe the lie that somehow having sex with strangers in public can be done in a risk free manner.
For the one person who does meet that one stranger with AIDS, Syph or a whole host of other STD's, I am sure they would consider getting hit by a car at 80 mph comparable.
Back in the day, mid to late 80's, people in my gay identified community were murdered or badly beaten during park sex as well.
Both George and Mel took a risky chance in getting themselves killed and killing others. They have hurt their loved ones, friends and fans. The methods were different but the affects are very similar.
Morally they have both failed in upholding their social responsibilities (as everyday people and celebrities) by feeding their respective addictions.
And again, I am no better than they are in that I do not consider myself holier or superior to either of them. If not for the grace of God, I am completely capable of doing the same or something similar.
Steve, what saddens me about your comments is your (and George's)belief that there's nothing dangerous about anonymous sex unless terminal diseases are involved. What about what this behavior says about a person's soul and self-perception?
A person having sex publicly and anonymously isn't driven by a healthy sex drive and well-rounded dispositon. This kind of behavior is indicative of deep deception and wounding. What's widely damaging to others is the spin that there's nothing wrong with it; in other words, that if you too are being drawn to this behavior, don't worry about it, you're fine.
As someone who used to be terribly promiscuous, I'm glad that God and others were willing to reach into my situation and tell it like it is. I'm healthier and happier now because of it.
My issue with you, Randy, is that you are conflating two totally disparate events in order to get a cheap shot in against gays (as is usual with you exgays -- you are wholly and completely obsessed with us, and you cannot seem to discuss anything without throwing a pitchfork at us just to make sure everyone knows how much you hate homosexuality. WE GET IT.)
It's no wonder no one outside your little cultural/religious bubble takes you seriously. HE WAS DRIVING DRUNK. That is not even REMOTELY in the same ballpark except in some weird right wing land where all the gays are evil and all the heteros are angels from God.
Look at his post where he said the George Michael would be held up as some hero for his position on public, anonymous sex. Where did that happen? Nowhere. So, once again, another cheap shot so that his followers can believe the worst about gay people.
It seems like you have some preconceived notions about who Randy must be based on what you know about him. Too bad stereotypes are rarely right.
So... I will choose to answer the one thing you said I didn't answer, which I thought was covered but will indeed clarify ...
Psycho or not, strangers in bushes having public sex is dangerous. It's not like a psycho is going to introduce themselves by saying, "Hi I'm an STD infected psycho, please hold me while I ruin your life."
Cheap shot? I think your comment was full of them ... Right wing ex-gay bubble? Throwing pitch forks...no one takes me seriously ... yelling via ALL CAPS?
I didn't call the gay identified community irrelevant, mean spirited, pawns of their own groupthink and yell at you. I didn't say those things because I don't believe them on a community wide basis and two... that didn't even cross my mind.
I didn't come after you personally Steve and yet you attack me, and others of the same beliefs, quite directly and personally.
I was writing about a similarity I saw between two celebrities (addictive behavior) and yet how vastly different I believe they will be treated. I wasn't even thinking of just the gay community, religious bubbles or American political culture wars or any of that.
Obsessed with the gay community? That is simply a ridiculous statement. Homosexuality is one of forty eight categories on this blog and doesn't even make the top five categories discussed. And even then, it is mostly from my perspective not in reaction to or directed by anyone else.
The work I do at Exodus is in the interest of people like myself who are formerly gay identified, never gay identified and/or experienced sexual orientation change. My work there is not about you, not about the gay identified community as a whole.
I do what I do for those who are or want to live beyond the "gay" paradigm of relationships and identity.
That said, often we all have a vested interests in speaking into some of the same cultural topics but it's because it is of interest to us, not in reaction to you or the whims of someone else.
I represent myself and a group of people who will be heard, whether we are taken seriously or not.
I am glad to hear they are.
RANDY SAID: I didn't come after you personally Steve and yet you attack me, and others of the same beliefs, quite directly and personally.
Every time you appear before congress and anti-gay political groups with the intention to turn the Constitution of the United States against us, you are making a personal attack against my home, my family and my community. And, YES, I absolutely will hold you accountable for these actions.
Lumping Mel and George together was just another subtle way of letting the world know how "bad" the gays are, implying that we'll celebrate his obnoxious behavior. Just because you say you "hope" we "won't" doesn't excuse your actions.
Yes, Randy. You who judge us constantly; who want to turn the entire law of the land against us, you will be held accountable for your words. I know you don't like it, but there it is, my brother.
And yes, it is a personal attack. Your whole paycheck depends upon you attacking our homes and our families.
Steve, you need to chill and to ensure at least some small measure of that you can email me but I won't let this continue on this thread.
Now, back to the point which was not about me or the culture war ...
I still think George Michael and Mel Gibson are suffering for their respective addictive behaviors and will face different consequences ... do you?
Mel had a big chance to refute the antisemitic rantings of his lunatic father, but he dodged around and played games with that.
Now, "in vino veritas." Anyone who watched him in his interviews for The Passion could see the madness in King Mel's eyes.
I'm sorry the guy is an alcoholic. I'm sorry he ranted on about how much he hates Jews. He has a chance to make up for it, I suppose, but it's not going to be easy. The wine loosens the lips in ways most people don't want to admit.
So, yes, the consequences will be different. And they should be.
George lives in a society that apparently believes that if an action is considered something "gay" people do, than it must be ok as long as you don't see it. They believe that "gay" "open" marriage is still somehow marriage. One gay activist, instead of calling this situation for what it is (sexual addiction) chose to point out all the broken heterosexual problems and how the right wing will try to use this to smear all gay identified people.
I don't know. I've been surfing around and it appears that any number of gay people recognize a sex addiction when they see one. Yes, Michael is going to be viewed as representative because of his public visibility. I think that's understandable, but not necessarily fair. This fellow, at least, seems to get it.
CParks, I would never hold your friendship with Steve against you. After the past 8 years of knowing him, I think Steve is a nice guy (at least half the time) and never met one of his friends that weren't thoughtful.
I think I have been very clear that I hope the gay community sees George's actions as sexual addiction. At the same time, George has obviously bought into something somewhere that told him his actions are what "gay people do." Whether you agree with me on the morality of pursuing homosexual relationships or not ... I see George's actions as very destructive and would hope others would too.
The article you linked to was thoughtful. I don't agree with most of it's content (of course) but I do think it is honest and reflective.
Welcome to my blog CParks.
It's just my speculation, but I suspect most people do.
I keep thinking of that old joke about how if you put 10 Baptists in a room, you'll get 11 different opinions they're all willing to die for. But put a Catholic in the room, and a mystical unity overtakes them....
I think that's often the case in these types of debates.
And thanks for the welcome....
It certainly isn't true about this blog... you folks sure are opinionated! I love that if it's honest.
And not personal attack ...
::: AHA, there is a new comment from Steve! :::
::: in the famous words of Homer :::
DOH!
::: no reason to delete :::
You never know, do you??????
(diabolical laugh)
followed by
::: big grin :::
I didn't realize you had known each other so long so Steve...I apologize for my earlier comment. Looks like I did what I was accusing you of. I'm sorry.
I think since Steve and I have traveled a very difficult road together, at different times over the years. We can be abrupt with one another and it is just par for the course of our relationship. People not used to our banter must think we can't stand each other when in reality, I really like Steve because he is talented in so many ways, fun and honest about his convictions. I don't love arguments but I appreciate them if they are honest.
Steve can speak to me the way he does, and it is easier for me to allow it, because he has earned it by standing the test of time. Over the years he has often showed humility and self-reflection on our journey as opponents and friends. I am going to listen to him.
It's weird talking about him like he isn't in the blog room but... such is online dynamics.
All that's not to say that there are times when we need to stop the escalation in public. We came close to that this time.
I am allowing dialog like this on my blog, in part, because I want ETC readers to know it's ok to be human and not have text book answers. It's ok to get riled up and emotional ... that's honest. Hopefully this will show folks that you can still love each other in the midst of heated conversation.
Also, I believe, sometimes tension needs to happen to get people to pay attention.
:)
Now I am speaking for myself. Steve probably hates me now ... but ... this comment contains what I see in and at the base of what I hope is our continued friendship.
And Amanda, thank *you* for showing maturity and humility. That is very cool of you.
Is this thread hopelessly of course or just evolving into what it needs to evolve into?
Randy, thank you. You always have kind words of encouragement for everyone. You rock!
We have clear issues over the political direction that Exodus has taken. He knows that I take his actions against my home and family very personally. I don't think he agrees with me that this is what he's doing, but at least he gives me that chance to say it out loud and get it off my chest.
In a way, it's a clear example of how our culture should work. That opponents can have rigorous debate and still call each other up, put it all aside and just saw howdy -- something we definitely do.
We have clear issues over the political direction that Exodus has taken. He knows that I take his actions against my home and family very personally. I don't think he agrees with me that this is what he's doing, but at least he gives me that chance to say it out loud and get it off my chest.
In a way, it's a clear example of how our culture should work. That opponents can have rigorous debate and still call each other up, put it all aside and just saw howdy -- something we definitely do.
Randy, thank you. You always have kind words of encouragement for everyone. You rock!