It’s not up to the good state of Virginia to define adultery. They can define a hug as murder but that doesn’t make it so.
As a resident of Virginia, I’ve adopted their definition. I don’t claim this is the only reasonable definition, or that everyone shoudl accept it, but it’s what I mean when I say the word.
Um – it’s up to the State [technically, “Commonwealth” but we all understand ‘state’] to define the crime. Every valid crime has to be defined so clearly that a reasonable man can identify when he is doing or not doing the prohibited act. If the official crime [say, ‘parkland trespass’] is defined as, among other things, “walking on the grass in a public park or other public place where prohibited by clear signage,” and you walk on the shrubbery borders instead, you have not violated that particular law. I remember in my college days hearing of a case where a state had defined petit larceny as stealing less than $500 and grand larceny as stealing more than $500, and a good defense attorney got his client acquitted, because he had stolen exactly $500. (The state rapidly changed the law, of course.)
Certainly, the state cannot define what popular usage means by the term. Right-to-life protesters regularly claim, “Abortion is murder!” when it is not even a crime of any sort. (And yes, I know there are circumstances and places where some abortions are criminal offenses – you know what I’m driving at here, folks!) The point is that popular usage tends to be sloppy – contemplate the ‘technical virgins’ who have pleasured their boyfriends in many different ways, not including penile-vaginal intercourse. And you can’t criminalize “what everybody means by ___” – you need to define it in such a clear way that all reasonable people can say, “If he did in fact do that, he’s guilty of ___” and mean the same thing by it.
Anybody see the kid on Anderson Cooper? Really cute and well spoken.
I don’t have cable, but I’m sure it’ll be available on the internet soon enough.
Yep, that was quick: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAiIXb9Aql0
Maybe I’m a gullible sucker, but I find it kind of endearing that he really seems to care about trying to show some responsibility to the gay community. I don’t think he comes off as a cynical, calculating hustler at all, but deer-in-the-headlights kid who’s trying figure out the most ethical avenue to take even while his life blows up around him.
The kid’s a hooker. What’s he got to blow up?
Second Gay Escort Claims Sexual Encounter With George Rekers
The train wreck continues…
I like how at the end, when they mention the statement from the Family Research Council, and it said that they actually had to go back and check their archives to make sure that he really was a member.
Ouch.
As the above posts show, the FRC is also lying.
From that:
So… first, I find that account very credible.
And second: the denial this guy must be in is enormous. “It’s not gay to want a fingertip naked massage from a man!”
You will find “Adultery Helper” in Aisle 12, in the pharmacy section, between the condoms and pregnancy test kits, sir.
Yeah, that was really below the belt.
“In Soviet Colorado Springs, if you sin, you become an unperson.”
(Yeah, it’s not very funny. But that’s kind of the point.)
I think someone once asked her if she liked gay people and she said basically, Well, look at me! Do you think I could look this way without an army of gay guys for backup?
I recall her also once being quoted as saying that gay guys were the only people who were nice to her after her divorce.
Finally, I understand her son (a rather cute punk) now runs a queer-(and a lot of other people)-inclusive evangelical ministry in New York.
I thought it spoke extremely well of him that he seems to care about Rekers- even said he enjoyed the trip and would like to remain his friend. He could also very easily lie about the level of sexual contact and claim there was full-on contact and nobody could dispute him, but remains with the ‘no, just nude massages’ version that is probably true.
Meanwhile, and not surprisingly, her ex-husband Jim (about whom there were many gay rumors and allegations) has moved in the opposite direction in his post-prison ministry. Last time I caught him while channel surfing he’s become more Fundie and condemning than he was on PTL against gays and other fornicatrixes.
I just saw Rachel Maddow’s commentary for the first time, but her sum-up is great. She tells about the letter Rekers recently sent to 14,000 schools about curing the gay, debunks the “American College of Pediatricians” (a professional sounding title that is just an anti-gay group) and concludes with:
“Being gay cannot be cured. Being a contemptible pathetic hypocrite can be cured. Come out come out wherever you are.”
Want me to send over some hookers?
If you’re going that way anyway, could you pick me up a brunette twink, some lottery tickets and a copy of the new THE ATLANTIC?