"Five weeks before a midterm election, when Republicans are already on the ropes, the last thing the GOP needed was a homosexual pedophilia scandal."
Unless Ms. Lochhead is suggesting that a "heterosexual" pedophilia scandal would not have been a problem for the GOP, I don't understand why the modifier "homosexual" is necessary in that sentence.
It seems to be in keeping with the right-wing Family Research Council's Tony Perkins' thoughts on the matter (which Lochhead quotes):
"Perkins said neither party 'seems likely to address the real issue, which is the link between homosexuality and child sexual abuse ... ignoring this reality got the Catholic Church into trouble over abusive priests, and now it is doing the same to the House GOP leadership.'"
What link?
Is the Foley scandal just another opportunity for right-wing gay bashing?
My question is quite different from what Newt Gingrich is suggesting:
"I think had they [the House leadership] overly aggressively reacted to the initial round [of sexual harassment of pages], they would also have been accused of gay bashing."
I'm not talking about the House leadership's opportunistic lack of any reaction, but what is actually being said on the Right about the scandal.
It's not a "gay" scandal, it's a sexual harassment scandal. It's of no consequence whether Mr. Foley is gay or straight. But simply, is he a sexual predator? And who knew about it? And when did they know it?
No comments:
Post a Comment