Outing of Congressional Staffers

[l_a_dude]

There is a big effort underway to out as many gay Republican staffers as possible.

Here's my question: If a person is a closeted homosexual who chooses to work for a Republican congressman or senator, do they have a right to a private sex life?

 

[SpeedoGuy]

Outings of private sex lives first require appointment of a special prosecutor on an unrelated matter followed by years of expensive, invasive investigations and grandstanding after which impeachment will occur but without conviction.

 

[glenroebuck]

amen brother

 

[FrenumFellow]

I think it's a tough question with regards to those who work for legislators or officials who have made political gain by catering to anti-gay sentiment. And they have chosen to work in the public arena, if not specifically to be public figures.


FF

 

[Sklar]

A persons sexual orientation is a private matter and should be left that way. If someone is in the closet and wants to remain there, then that's their decision and it should be respected no matter how much you disagree with is.

The ONLY time a person should be outed is if they are a predatory such as Mark Foley.

Other than that, people should mind their own damn business.

 

[dreamer20]

...do they have a right to a private sex life?

I believe everyone does. Don't you?

 

[rob_just_rob]

A qualified yes.

I would be more inclined to say "maybe" if the closeted staffer starts making anti-gay statements. But then, staffers don't generally make statements, they write them for their elected bosses to say. And attribution of statements or sentiments to a particular staffer becomes difficult.

I am all in favour of "outing" hypocritical politicians - as homosexuals, as tax cheats, as draft dodgers - whenever possible.

 

[mindseye]

My answer hinges on mutual respect:

Anyone who wants to live their lives in the closet; I'm willing to respect their privacy. But once a person disrepects me by actively working to limit my rights, all bets are off!

If you're working to screw up my life, don't whine about how unfair it is when I screw up yours. Pick a different job, and I'll be glad to leave you alone.

 

[LeeEJ]

If a person is a closeted homosexual who chooses to work for a Republican congressman or senator, do they have a right to a private sex life?

Abso-fucking-lutely YES.

Everyone else's sex life is their own business, so why should it be any different for gays & lesbians, closeted or not?

BTW -- who's behind this witchhun... "effort"?

 

[capt. nemo]

I once met a hot, muscle-bound, cute, and did I say HOT 24-year old guy lurking nervously in the corner of a gay bar in Washington DC. He was so shy! I brought him home and we fucked gloriously. Turns out he was a junior staff-member for a right-wing nut in congress... He was still working through a lot of stuff -- his sexual identity and his politics. He had recently graduated from college, and his job on the hill was the outcome, naturally, of a long-established course, involving family, acquaintances, etc. So I actually felt sorry for him... (It helped that he was hot, of course.)

HOWEVER - my pity does not extend to people who know exactly what they are doing, those who have grown accustomed to a life of lies and hypocrisy, and continue, perversely, to work for anti-gay congress-persons in the anti-gay party. The guys who do this usually become assholes for whom big-time lying comes naturally. They're a dangerous lot. They deserve to be outted.

If you're a Republican congress-person, you've been elected at least in part because yours is the party of "family-values" and the party that vocally opposes equal rights for gays and lesbians. If you're in the closet, you're hiding because you KNOW you wouldn't be elected as a republican otherwise, and your secrecy constitutes a LIE that panders to an anti-gay rights constituency -- all in order for you to maintain power.

So come on, people, how can you reasonably say that such a person should just be left alone, as though he were Joe Hardware Store Clerk down the street? If you ride to power on anti-gay rhetoric, but secretly diddle with men, it is NOT OK.

Listen up, top Republican aides: I wouldn't hesitate one minute to take pics of my big dick in your hole and send them to every media outlet in the country.

 

[l_a_dude]

LeeEJ - Great question. The effort has been led, in large part, by a fellow named Michael Rodgers. His website is http://www.blogactive.com If you check it out, if will give you a good sense of the effort and what has been taking place.

Bill Maher, once host of that late night show called "Politically Incorrect," was on Larry King Live the other night and - in a live interview - said that the head of the Republican National Committee was gay. (The interview was live in the east...but it was tape delayed in the west. CNN edited out his comment on the tape delay for west coasters.)

It's a very interesting debate. I personally hope that, one day, we can get beyond a person's sexuality being the defining characteristic that everyone wants to know.

 

[l_a_dude]

Capt. Nemo -- I loved your story of the 24-year old that you picked up at the DC gay bar. Hot!

I think that there are many kids who move to DC with their parents' (and, increasingly, their colleges') values. Being in a new, big city allows for sexual experimentation - somewhat, as you learned firsthand, anonymously.

For these young, Republican staffers who figure out that they are gay (or bi), I think that they become confused. They might be anti-tax; pro-military; and pro-gun -- issues not traditionally embraced by the Democratic Party. But, if they are closeted, do they leave the Republican Party because of their secret sexuality?

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. It's an interesting issue.

 

[capt. nemo]

Capt. Nemo -- I loved your story of the 24-year old that you picked up at the DC gay bar. Hot!

I think that there are many kids who move to DC with their parents' (and, increasingly, their colleges') values. Being in a new, big city allows for sexual experimentation - somewhat, as you learned firsthand, anonymously.

For these young, Republican staffers who figure out that they are gay (or bi), I think that they become confused. They might be anti-tax; pro-military; and pro-gun -- issues not traditionally embraced by the Democratic Party. But, if they are closeted, do they leave the Republican Party because of their secret sexuality?

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. It's an interesting issue.

Hi LA. I detect a hint of the rhetorical in your concluding question, and I wanted to respond. No, a young, gay Republican staffer -- or even an old, established gay Republican National Committee Chairman -- should not have to leave the party because he is gay. But I do think that as long as the Republican party is associated with often extreme anti-gay sentiment, as gay or bisexual individuals it would really behoove them to change the culture of their party. Needless to say, they'd be a lot better off for it, as would the rest of us. And as long as they continue to operate, closeted, in the anti-gay party, they look for all the world to me like hypocrites and cowards. As importantly, they look like hypocrites to much of the Republican base as well.

There is a huge fault-line in the Republican party between the moderately right-wing who think gay is OK (some of my best friends are gay, just don't be a windbag about it), and the really right-wing who think it's immoral and plainly wrong. I want that fault-line to rumble -- but not because I'm carte blanche in favor of the Democratic party. I support outting closeted Republicans because it will help GLBT people who are suffering right now because of religious fundamentalists and other anti-gay forces in society. If it were the Democratic Party that was broadly anti-gay, I'd be in favor of outting all of the closeted Democrats. If there are individual Democrats who are anti-gay and in the closet, I want them outted too. What's at issue for me is hypocrisy that actively hurts people.

 

[DC_DEEP]

Outings of private sex lives first require appointment of a special prosecutor on an unrelated matter followed by years of expensive, invasive investigations and grandstanding after which impeachment will occur but without conviction.

SG, will you marry me?

 

[DC_DEEP]

I once met a hot, muscle-bound, cute, and did I say HOT 24-year old guy lurking nervously in the corner of a gay bar in Washington DC. <...>.

Hahah, nemo, that didn't happen to be JR's, did it? I've never seen congressional staffers there... (yeah, right!)

 

[DC_DEEP]

My answer hinges on mutual respect:

Anyone who wants to live their lives in the closet; I'm willing to respect their privacy. But once a person disrepects me by actively working to limit my rights, all bets are off!

If you're working to screw up my life, don't whine about how unfair it is when I screw up yours. Pick a different job, and I'll be glad to leave you alone.

mindseye, there is no way I could possibly have said it better. You said it eloquently, I'll be a bit more crude:

Politicians, beware. If you fling shit, it can spatter back on you.

 

[Lex]

My answer hinges on mutual respect:

Anyone who wants to live their lives in the closet; I'm willing to respect their privacy. But once a person disrepects me by actively working to limit my rights, all bets are off!

If you're working to screw up my life, don't whine about how unfair it is when I screw up yours. Pick a different job, and I'll be glad to leave you alone.

I agree totally with these statements.

 

[capt. nemo]

Hahah, nemo, that didn't happen to be JR's, did it? I've never seen congressional staffers there... (yeah, right!)

Hey Deep! It was the Fireplace. He looked terribly nervous. LOL

 

[joyboytoy79]

As usual my perspective is different from any that has thusfar been stated.

I, personally, think everyone has a right to sexual privacy. That being said, i want the government, media, and every-day citizen out of my sex life. What I disclose is up to me, and i feel the same applies to everyone else.

On the flip side, I don't think sexuality should be discussed as a political issue. It ISN'T a political issue!! It's a personal issue! There shouldn't be any discussion of whether or not gays deserve to be married. There shouldn't be discussion of whether or not we "deserve" protected status in terms of employment, housing, etc. In the "land of the free" all of these things should be givens. There should be no need for "protected" classes of citizens. Shouldn't we ALL be "protected" equally?

I'm begining a tangent rant and I shall end it here. My point is that i want the right to disclose my sexuality to the public at will, and therefor, i would extend the same right to others.

 

[Shelby]

Outing is quite a concept.

As best I can tell it's an attempt to discredit someone by saying he's a member of a group that's perfectly normal if not superior. It seems that instead of increasing the groups stature through positive action it plays upon and perpetuates a negative social stigma the group otherwise decries.

Interesting to my already twisted enough mind.
​