Political Crossfire Forums

XiangYu · Joined: 03 Mar 2005 Posts: 3835 Location: US

Wow, this guy just keeps getting more and more interesting. First he was accused of having Cybersex with a teenager, goes into treatment for alcoholism and mental illness

Now he comes out with the story that he is Gay, and was molested by Catholic priests in his younger years. You dont' have to be one of the Tabloids to be salivating over this story...

Quote: WEST PALM BEACH, Florida (CNN) -- Former Rep. Mark Foley was molested by a clergyman when he was between the ages of 13 and 15, his attorney said Tuesday amid allegations that the congressman exchanged inappropriate e-mails and instant messages with teen congressional pages.

Foley, a Florida Republican, resigned Friday amid questions over e-mails he allegedly wrote to a former page, asking the boy what he liked to do and requesting a photograph.

The scandal has been troublesome for House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who has been criticized over his handling of the matter. (Full story)

Foley's attorney, David Roth, said Foley had never had sexual contact with a minor and said any assertion that Foley is a pedophile is "categorically false."

Roth would not release details of Foley's alleged molestation, saying only that making it public "is part of Mark's recovery" and that Foley would discuss it further when he is released from a center where he's being treated for alcoholism and mental issues. It will be at least 30 days before he is discharged, Roth said. (Watch the attorney explain that Foley is not a pedophile -- 2:07 )

Roth added that "Mark Foley wants you to know he is a gay man."

Though the attorney would not provide the religious affiliation of the clergyman who allegedly molested Foley, Foley lists his religion as Catholic, according to a congressional directory.

"He continues to offer no excuse whatsoever for his conduct," said Roth, who spoke to Foley on Tuesday. "This was a life decision, not a tactical one made by others."

Asked why Foley waited to divulge the alleged molestation, Roth replied, "Shame."

Roth's announcement came shortly after ABC News published correspondences it said indicated Foley had Internet sex with a former page before going to a vote on the House floor in 2003.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/03/foley.scandal/index.html

00timh · Joined: 08 Nov 2004 Posts: 13037 Location: upstate NY

TwinkieDP wrote: Wow, this guy just keeps getting more and more interesting. First he was accused of having Cybersex with a teenager, goes into treatment for alcoholism and mental illness

Now he comes out with the story that he is Gay, and was molested by Catholic priests in his younger years. You dont' have to be one of the Tabloids to be salivating over this story...

Quote: WEST PALM BEACH, Florida (CNN) -- Former Rep. Mark Foley was molested by a clergyman when he was between the ages of 13 and 15, his attorney said Tuesday amid allegations that the congressman exchanged inappropriate e-mails and instant messages with teen congressional pages.

Foley, a Florida Republican, resigned Friday amid questions over e-mails he allegedly wrote to a former page, asking the boy what he liked to do and requesting a photograph.

The scandal has been troublesome for House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who has been criticized over his handling of the matter. (Full story)

Foley's attorney, David Roth, said Foley had never had sexual contact with a minor and said any assertion that Foley is a pedophile is "categorically false."

Roth would not release details of Foley's alleged molestation, saying only that making it public "is part of Mark's recovery" and that Foley would discuss it further when he is released from a center where he's being treated for alcoholism and mental issues. It will be at least 30 days before he is discharged, Roth said. (Watch the attorney explain that Foley is not a pedophile -- 2:07 )

Roth added that "Mark Foley wants you to know he is a gay man."

Though the attorney would not provide the religious affiliation of the clergyman who allegedly molested Foley, Foley lists his religion as Catholic, according to a congressional directory.

"He continues to offer no excuse whatsoever for his conduct," said Roth, who spoke to Foley on Tuesday. "This was a life decision, not a tactical one made by others."

Asked why Foley waited to divulge the alleged molestation, Roth replied, "Shame."

Roth's announcement came shortly after ABC News published correspondences it said indicated Foley had Internet sex with a former page before going to a vote on the House floor in 2003.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/03/foley.scandal/index.html I don't find sexual exploitation via the internet of minors anything to "salivate" about.

Rankor and Pissing · Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 10232

There's already a sticky on this... why do we need to open another thread?

F'losrix · Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 11:14 am Post subject:

Rankor and Pissing wrote: There's already a sticky on this... why do we need to open another thread?
Why, to use the latest revelation to support the spurious claim that molestation makes a person gay, or that all gay people get that way as the result of some childhood/teenage trauma.

Why else?

And it won't matter what evidence is brought forth in an attempt to debunk either assertion, because in the long run people will believe what they want to believe. Many will take this as confirmation of what they already believe, falsely applying the particulars of Foley's situation to the universal, and reaching the foregone conclusion that they've been 'right all along' about what makes a gay person gay.

I wish I'd never heard the name 'Mark Foley'. He's exactly what the rest of the gay community doesn't need right now. It's bad enough that we've had to put up with all the hype over McGreevey's new book. Now this.

Yeah, I know you and the other poster didn't allude to any of this, and you can call it a straw man all you like. I maintain that I've seen enough of this kind of thing before to know what would likely come next.

Fido · Joined: 16 Mar 2006 Posts: 3936

They still had guns when I was a kid. A priest might get away with kicking the livin s**t out of some kid, and the parents might sell tickets; but they wouldn't think of doing so with their unit.

The only reason I want to excuse Foley is that I know all that republican crap he supported is far worse than what he did to page one. That winner take all, and all for the rich mentality is destroying this country fast. Sure, he is a criminal, but if you kicked every criminal out of the republican party they could have a convention in a phone booth. We need a party for criminals as much as one for misguided saints. Let the Republicans distance themselves. The Right Christians, who are more right than Christian will support them no matter what they do because they like what they say. Churches are like parties: filled with people who say good things and do the usual. So boot Foley, and bring on the new Foley. What is going to change? Are they actually going to hold some one besides the citizen to a higher standard?

XiangYu · Joined: 03 Mar 2005 Posts: 3835 Location: US

Rankor and Pissing wrote: There's already a sticky on this... why do we need to open another thread? There is another thread, but Rep. Foley coming out of the closet is still news. Therefore the reason for this thread. Since the MOds have not locked this yet, I believe there is nothing wrong with this. If this thread is offending to Gay people, just to let you know that was not my intention, although I do not subscribe to homosexual practices.

XiangYu · Joined: 03 Mar 2005 Posts: 3835 Location: US

Fido wrote: They still had guns when I was a kid. A priest might get away with kicking the livin s**t out of some kid, and the parents might sell tickets; but they wouldn't think of doing so with their unit.

The only reason I want to excuse Foley is that I know all that republican crap he supported is far worse than what he did to page one. That winner take all, and all for the rich mentality is destroying this country fast. Sure, he is a criminal, but if you kicked every criminal out of the republican party they could have a convention in a phone booth. We need a party for criminals as much as one for misguided saints. Let the Republicans distance themselves. The Right Christians, who are more right than Christian will support them no matter what they do because they like what they say. Churches are like parties: filled with people who say good things and do the usual. So boot Foley, and bring on the new Foley. What is going to change? Are they actually going to hold some one besides the citizen to a higher standard? I think the second part of your post is pretty good , but the first part of it makes no sense whatsoever to me...

F'losrix · Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:55 pm Post subject:

TwinkieDP wrote: If this thread is offending to Gay people, just to let you know that was not my intention, although I do not subscribe to homosexual practices.
Sorry if I misapprehended your intentions in opening up a new thread on this subject.

That said, let me just say that I don't have a 'subscription' either. More of a 'life membership'. :wink:

XiangYu · Joined: 03 Mar 2005 Posts: 3835 Location: US

F'losrix wrote: TwinkieDP wrote: If this thread is offending to Gay people, just to let you know that was not my intention, although I do not subscribe to homosexual practices.
Sorry if I misapprehended your intentions in opening up a new thread on this subject.

That said, let me just say that I don't have a 'subscription' either. More of a 'life membership'. :wink: You must be Uriels Fyre!! I thought your avatar looked familiar... :P

F'losrix · Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 2:51 pm Post subject:

TwinkieDP wrote: F'losrix wrote: TwinkieDP wrote: If this thread is offending to Gay people, just to let you know that was not my intention, although I do not subscribe to homosexual practices.
Sorry if I misapprehended your intentions in opening up a new thread on this subject.

That said, let me just say that I don't have a 'subscription' either. More of a 'life membership'. :wink: You must be Uriels Fyre!! I thought your avatar looked familiar... :P
Nope, I'm the former Skeptical Mystic. Uriel's Fyre is now going by the username Enoch. But since we're probably two of the more active participants in debates on such issues, your confusion is understandable and forgiven (at least by me). It probably doesn't help that we both changed our names at around the same time.

puffin · Joined: 24 Jun 2006 Posts: 1077

I'm about as 'right wing' as you'll ever find.
I have some close life long friends who are openly gay male and female. I love and respect them as they do me.
I have made some comments about Hillary and her 'sexuall leanings'. I do this because I can't abide someone who is dishonest. Frankly if she were to 'come out' I'd probably vote for her but as long as she isn't able to face her own sexuality and be honest with the people she is seeking votes from in 08 she is just another person living in denial and I don't want someone like that ever to be 'commander-in-cheif'. It's how a person lives their life that's most important. Are they trustworthy? Can you depend on them when they give you their word? Who cares what they like to do with their 'bits'.

Superfly · Joined: 07 Apr 2006 Posts: 5243 Location: Tornado Alley

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

It seems that every time someone gets caught doing something they shouldn't be doing, they pull the "I was molested by my priest" card.

Now he is pulling a gay card? "I did this because I am gay"?

So? He's gay. So what. What would being gay have to do with him wanting to molest young boys?

I'm quite sure that being gay is not a prerequisite to pedophilia.

I hope this isn't going to be the new place to lay blame, like it has been for Catholic priests.

"Sir, why did you stand on a clock tower and blow away college students?"

"Oh, I don't know. I'm gay."

----

"Ma'am, why did you stand down on that street corner and sell your body for $20?"

"But I'm gay!"

----

"Sir, do you know how fast you were driving?"

"Well of course, but I am gay."
----

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

I think this is aaaallllllll just damage control for good ole' Marky boy. He's looking anywhere and everywhere to try to lay blame for the fact that he got busted, instead of accepting the personal responsibility for what he did, and moving on.

XiangYu · Joined: 03 Mar 2005 Posts: 3835 Location: US

F'losrix wrote: TwinkieDP wrote: F'losrix wrote: TwinkieDP wrote: If this thread is offending to Gay people, just to let you know that was not my intention, although I do not subscribe to homosexual practices.
Sorry if I misapprehended your intentions in opening up a new thread on this subject.

That said, let me just say that I don't have a 'subscription' either. More of a 'life membership'. :wink: You must be Uriels Fyre!! I thought your avatar looked familiar... :P
Nope, I'm the former Skeptical Mystic. Uriel's Fyre is now going by the username Enoch. But since we're probably two of the more active participants in debates on such issues, your confusion is understandable and forgiven (at least by me). It probably doesn't help that we both changed our names at around the same time. :!oops: :!oops:

XiangYu · Joined: 03 Mar 2005 Posts: 3835 Location: US

F'losrix wrote: TwinkieDP wrote: F'losrix wrote: TwinkieDP wrote: If this thread is offending to Gay people, just to let you know that was not my intention, although I do not subscribe to homosexual practices.
Sorry if I misapprehended your intentions in opening up a new thread on this subject.

That said, let me just say that I don't have a 'subscription' either. More of a 'life membership'. :wink: You must be Uriels Fyre!! I thought your avatar looked familiar... :P
Nope, I'm the former Skeptical Mystic. Uriel's Fyre is now going by the username Enoch. But since we're probably two of the more active participants in debates on such issues, your confusion is understandable and forgiven (at least by me). It probably doesn't help that we both changed our names at around the same time. :!oops: :!oops:

Fido · Joined: 16 Mar 2006 Posts: 3936

TwinkieDP wrote: Fido wrote: They still had guns when I was a kid. A priest might get away with kicking the livin s**t out of some kid, and the parents might sell tickets; but they wouldn't think of doing so with their unit.

The only reason I want to excuse Foley is that I know all that republican crap he supported is far worse than what he did to page one. That winner take all, and all for the rich mentality is destroying this country fast. Sure, he is a criminal, but if you kicked every criminal out of the republican party they could have a convention in a phone booth. We need a party for criminals as much as one for misguided saints. Let the Republicans distance themselves. The Right Christians, who are more right than Christian will support them no matter what they do because they like what they say. Churches are like parties: filled with people who say good things and do the usual. So boot Foley, and bring on the new Foley. What is going to change? Are they actually going to hold some one besides the citizen to a higher standard? I think the second part of your post is pretty good , but the first part of it makes no sense whatsoever to me...

In case you didn't figure it out, I was raised Catholic. We had a priest for a while named Hartman. He was built like a fire plug with male pattern baldness. He caught this kid chewing gum while he was teaching a catechism class. First he berated the boy for doing so while he was preaching the word of God. The boy got up and tossed the gum in the waste bin without being told, and the father got on him about that and fetched the gum out of the trash and tried to stick it on the boy's nose, but by that time the boy was sweating so profusely that freckles wouldn't have stuck, if he had had any. So that didn't go any where.
I'll tell you, Between the penguins and the priests, only the hard core criminally inclined ever had a chance of making it to the penitentiary alive.
Yet, none of us feared for our sexual safety. All positions of authority attract those who need authority to feel complete. I suspect them all, and resist them all. It is not wrong to have influence, but influence is better without authority because then it must invite reason.

Fido · Joined: 16 Mar 2006 Posts: 3936

puffin wrote: I'm about as 'right wing' as you'll ever find.
I have some close life long friends who are openly gay male and female. I love and respect them as they do me.
I have made some comments about Hillary and her 'sexuall leanings'. I do this because I can't abide someone who is dishonest. Frankly if she were to 'come out' I'd probably vote for her but as long as she isn't able to face her own sexuality and be honest with the people she is seeking votes from in 08 she is just another person living in denial and I don't want someone like that ever to be 'commander-in-cheif'. It's how a person lives their life that's most important. Are they trustworthy? Can you depend on them when they give you their word? Who cares what they like to do with their 'bits'.

Why is everyone looking for a reason to dishillery. Just look at her ankles. They are as big as fence posts. How is she going to get elected without showing the boys a little leg? How can she get votes on national defense when she can't figure out she was being used by Bush from the start? Being stupid is not a quality I want in my president. Sexually, I wouldn't care if they were all neutered. It could not possibly make them worse.