Last month, the Associated Press reported that a church which Vice Presidential hopeful Gov. Sarah Palin currently attends was promoting the recent Love Won Out conference in Anchorage, Alaska. Truth Wins Out called on her to speak out about this, but she never did. TWO’s Wayne Besen was present along with many supportive organizations and individuals to counter LWO with peaceful demonstrations that encouraged the truth to be told about the LGBTQ community.Gov. Palin did not at first address homosexuality by calling it a “choice.” She gave one of her first interviews to Charlie Gibson and said the following:
In her first interview with Charlie Gibson last month, Gov. Palin indicated that she is aware of the nature vs. nurture debate on the cause of homosexuality, and that she seems to consider the answer based on belief, rather than science.
Oh, I don’t know, but I’m not one to judge and, you know, I’m from a family and from a community with many, many members of many diverse backgrounds and I’m not going to judge someone on whether they believe that homosexuality is a choice or genetic. I’m not going to judge them. [emphasis added]
Later, a clip of Gov. Palin speaking to journalist Katie Couric was posted to the Internet where Palin had this to say:
And you know, I don’t know what prayers are worthy of being prayed and I don’t know what prayers are going to be answered or not answered. But as for homosexuality, I am not going to judge Americans and the decisions that they make in their adult personal relationships. I have one of my absolute best friends for the last 30 years who happens to be gay, and I love her dearly, and she is not my “gay friend,” she is one of my best friends, who happens to have made a choice that isn’t a choice that I have made. But I’m not going to judge people. [emphasis added]
In response to the comments made in the second interview, former ex-gay Daniel Gonzales released a video telling Palin how he tried to go straight by praying and participating in years of therapy costing thousands of dollars but was still unsuccessful. Wayne Besen has also sent her a gratis copy of his ex-gay expose book, Anything But Straight: Unmasking the Scandals and Lies Behind the Ex-Gay Myth.
—
XGW does not officially endorse any particular party or ticket as doing so would be contrary to our mission. This article involving Alaska Governor and Vice Presidential hopeful Sarah Palin is not a tacit endorsement of another politician – rather, the term “ex-gay” has come up numerous times in conjunction with her name. Please limit the discussion to that scope and avoid political or ad-hominem attacks. Thank you.
I would say that Palin used a poor choice of words. I do wish that her lesbian friend would step forward
I agree. The way Governor Palin talks about this issue, it seems like she considers “homosexuality is a choice” and “homosexual behavior is a choice” to be the same thing.
And Charles, I think you’re on to something: where ARE all of these “friends” of gay-tolerant politicians? Call me cynical, but somehow I doubt that you can be best friends with someone for three decades and deny them the rights and benefits that you take for granted every day…
Well, I don’t know about Sarah Palin, but John McCain’s friendships with Jim Kolbe and Neil Giuliano are pretty well-known, though they are probably more professional than personal.
In regards to Palin’s quotes, they seem typical of someone who hasn’t really spent much time examining this issue. I think her attitude is well-meaning, but obviously this isn’t something that she gives too much thought to, otherwise I think her language would sound a bit less, well, shaky.
And even if homosexuality was a complete choice (and I clearly don’t think that it is), at least she recognizes that it would be a choice an American would have a right to make, and though she drove the “I’m not judging people” point a little too much, I do at least think she’s sincere about it.
Jay,
Those are all good points. I was actually quite surprised by Palin’s answers – that she would support basic rights for same-sex couples as long as it doesn’t lead to redefining marriage, which actually matches my personal beliefs anyway. Considering her background, I was expecting worse. I often forget that “Republican” doesn’t necessarily mean “no rights for gay couples.” Whenever I get discouraged, I just look at what’s happened under President Bush: during the administration one of the most overtly religious presidents America has ever had, two states have legalized same-sex marriage, and several more now offer civil unions/domestic partnerships. Not too shabby. 🙂
Still, the amount of gay friends a politician has shouldn’t dictate his or her ability to tolerate same-sex partnership legislation, so I’m not sure why Palin makes such a point to bring that up.
Jay, I did not get that–she seemed to be suggesting that those benefits mean getting closer to marriage, and she would oppose that.
Alex,
I would not go so far as to say that Palin supports same-sex partnership rights. The debate question from Ifil was framed from the point that Alaska has recongnized this. The only reason that Palin vetoed a bill to overturn the recognition of same-sex partnership rights was because she was told it would be overturned by the Supreme Court and cost her administration time and money on a losing cause. She never expressed any support for same sex couples.
Also, in the debate with Biden, she flubbed around on the gay question and Biden ended the exchange by putting words in Palin’s mouth. Palin did not actually agree with Biden on equal rights for gay couples (partnered or married, depending on state). But the exchange ended leaving that impression. I have been waiting for all the post debate clarifications on this issue, but it seems to have been dropped. I guess the Religious Right doesn’t need to be reassured about Palin.
McCain has been generally staying away from gay issues, and I am sure that Palin has been instructed to downplay gay questions and direct away from the subject.
I don’t think we will get any real honest answers about any of Palin’s positions, as long as she is McCain’s running mate. If McCain/Palin lose this election, I think that Palin will be let off her leash, and we all might learn a bit more about her.
As usual, it’s not what someone says but what they don’t say that upsets me. Look no further than the failure of Exodus – a group who “loves” gays – to speak out against the crime of killing gay people not because murder is wrong, but because murdering someone for who they are is wrong. I’m sure they would say something analogous if Alan Chambers were killed by someone who hated Christians.
So in this case, it’s Palin not speaking out against ex-gay ministries, not saying gays are ok being who they are, not saying “yes my friend [whomever that may be, if she exists] has shown me that gays are people too, they are committed human beings seeking love just like I sought love in finding my husband Todd.”
But she hasn’t said that. All she says is that she has “a dear friend who is gay and I love.” Exodus has a lot of “dear friends who are gay (er, ‘gay-identified’)” that they “love.” Who knows what this love even means.
To be honest, I have a difficult time finding any politician who doesn’t waffle around when talking about this issue. Palin certainly isn’t the first to be guilty of it, and it’s not just a Republican problem, either. Major Democrats have also had the ability to tiptoe around it.
My take on this is:
I think Sarah Palin approaches homosexuality in the same way that I approch getting a face tattoo.
I don’t understand the motivation behind it, I think its kinda icky and not something I’d do, I think it can be limiting towards life’s experiences and I think it says something about the person and that they are part of a community that I will never really understand and that I find somewhat threatening. That being said, I don’t want to be judgmental towards those who make that choice. I think we all are equal Americans and should all be treated with respect. And I could quite happily have a life-long friend with a snake tattooed across his nose.
Of course, there’s a difference between a face tattoo and sexual orientation. A face tattoo is optional and there are few if any groups seeking to take away the rights of those who have them. And even if there were, I’d not be likely to agree.
I don’t see Palin as actively hostile, but I think when she’s presented with choices she is likely to select those that are not in the best interest of gay individuals and couples. She’ll likely see them as “special priveleges” for those who “chose a gay lifestyle”.
This is probably not the place to write this. But I don’t know where else to go. Is it possible to feel that you are evolving towards an “ex-gay” identity — without going through all sorts of crackpot therapy? I feel almost like a “bi-curious” guy who has mostly sated his curiosity. After about a decade of pursuing it, I’ve lost most of my desire for actual sex with men over the past couple of years; I now mostly fantasize about women. I’m probably attracted , emotionally and physically, to men and women on an equal basis. Before I became “gay,” I wasn’t all that physically drawn to particular men. I just had intense fantasies about sex with men.
I had limited experience with women before I became sexually active with men. (But I had no problem “performing” with women). My first lover strongly encouraged me to take on a gay identity, even though it never felt entirely like me. People who pride themselves on their “gaydar” never spot me. I have no gaydar myself, and have a history of mistaking friendships with straight men for sexual interest on their part. I’m prone to outbursts like, “I don’t feel like a gay man! I feel like a straight man with a hobby.” Indeed, I have a history of some very nice sex with non-gay-identified men; I usually felt more “at home” with them than with gay men. Indeed, sex with men basically has had the chief advantage of being easily available.
My zeal for gay life was never that strong, and it long ago became something I felt like I had to do rather than I wanted to do. “Gay culture” leaves me cold. I can put together a decent list of women who I wanted to pursue, but realized that I couldn’t possibly explain myself to them.
Is it possible that I wasn’t gay to begin with? Maybe the sort of Kinsey 1-2 who finds sex with men to be grand fun, but usually ends up with a woman?
Glen,
You’re right in that this isn’t the right place to address this, as it is extremely off-topic here. But, if David Roberts (editor of XGW) will please allow me to, I very much want to address your question because I believe it raises some very pertinent issues. I’ll answer it ONCE here in public and then any further discussion you want to have you may do so through email. This is just so we keep the thread clean. Any follow-up comments from XGW participants relating to your query will be deleted as well, FYI to our commentariat.
1. You first talk about “evolving” toward an “ex-gay” lifestyle. But you also mention the possibility of being “bi-curious” or “1-2 on the Kinsey Scale.” The way you describe yourself it sounds exactly that – you sound like a bisexual man. (Yes they do exist.) Many people experience sexuality on a continuum, which sounds like what you are doing. You don’t “have” to stick with one or they other, or one part of the scale or another part of the scale. It’s fine. Just be honest with yourself and others.
2. You mention gay sex being a “hobby,” and that having sex with men who “don’t identify as gay” as being easier than being with *actual* gays. This sounds like you are or were dabbling in the “down-low” culture, where men don’t admit they like men sexually even though they participate in sexual acts them them. I cannot emphasize safety enough when doing this. Please please please protect and educate yourself – HIV is transmitted like wildfire through this culture.
3. You say you never had a “zeal” for “gay culture.” You don’t have to have a zeal for rainbows, cross-dressing and pride-marching to be gay. You don’t have to like liberal politics and wine-tasting and musical theatre. You can just be a guy who likes guys. That’s what “gay” means. It means you, a man, are attracted to other men. Or, in your specific case, bisexual would describe you. You could even just say “queer” which just means “doesn’t fit a sexual norm.” Don’t box yourself in. The only “right way” to be attracted to the same sex is to be honest with yourself about it. Other than that, it’s your life. And it’s okay to be picky about who you are attracted to. Straight people are.
4. You worry about having to explain yourself to women. All I can say is don’t worry about people having to “get” you. It’s your sexuality and your life; and as long as you are truly living it honestly, you don’t owe anybody a real explanation. Bisexual people encounter unique stereotypes from the gay and straight communities – they are accused of promiscuity, “flakiness,” or being “half in the closet” – don’t worry about this. Many gays who choose to remain celibate for personal reasons are often misunderstood by non-celibate gays – but they are just as welcome and a part of the gay community as any other type of guy who is attracted to other guys.
The difference between you and an ex-gay is this: You are not parading as a person who has completely morphed their sexual being through sheer will (or prayer, or therapy) and are not prescribing this for everybody else. You are not claiming that you “struggle” with same-sex attractions that you fight against and have to pray away every day. You are describing a personal journey; a personal sexual orientation that you have embraced rather than fought, and are now facing confusing times because (from what you describe) you are at a crossroads. That is perfectly human.
And above all, remember there is no single “gay identity,” just sexual honesty: and be safe while exploring this part of your humanity.
In her repeated usage of the sentence “I am not going to judge”, in the basis that God judges the matters of the heart and not the action itself, I believe she is already judging.
She judge homosexuals as a “choice”. If not, she would not have made those statements.
I am also curious about her “absolute best friends for the last 30 years who happens to be gay”. If I have a friend like Palin, who I know in her heart believes my very existence and experiences to be nothing but a “choice”, I would feel very uncomfortable to even be seen with her, knowing that she is thinking I am somewhat a “deviant” by her standards.
Yuki said:
I agree with you Yuki. Unfortunately, these brands of Christianity want to do what only God (according to the Christian faith) can do – and that is judge whether someone is going to heaven or hell. They skip around the issue by siting irreoneously interpreted and translated passages from Scripture, and claim they are only judging the “sin” not the one committing the “sin.”
It always seems like when Jesus says, “Ye without sin cast the first stone,” it’s “Christians” like Palin’s cue to go shopping for a stone factory. And even then, in this country, people have the freedom to believe what they want whether it is Christianity true to the founder or not, or whatever other religions exist in the world. But what these Republican candidates offer is a theocracy accorinding to the Holy Gospel of the Almighty Dollar, and not the Almighty. It’s not “suffer the little children” but rather “make the little children suffer.” It’s “love thy neighbor” by eliminating your neighbors who are not like you – expecially if they “choose” to be gay. Not the US of A I want to live in if that’s the case.