First Openly Gay Congressman dies... hero or villain?

I for one would like to see this discussion turn back toward the very interesting OP rather than this mundane talk of porn and serial killers.Why was Foley treated differently?

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

You don't think it has anything to do with the particular comittee he chaired or the legislation he fought to pass?Could it possibly be that Foley is treated differently because America actually DOES hate hypocrisy more than a little sexual misconduct?Clinton's issue was blown way up and yet he was not going around championing the cause of legislation to outlaw sex with interns. He did lie, but it does not seem to be nearly as ironic as Foley given the circumstances.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

I am sort of disillusioned that it took THIS to get the outcry to the paltry level that it currently is at. In other countries there are riots (not that I want riots) for much less of a 'flashpoint' that what we are currenly seeing.Are we just that fucked up that it takes a champion of anti-exploitation laws wanting to boink some teenage boys for us to finally pause Survivor look up and and say, "Hey, I think we are not being adequatly represented by our government!"I got so burnt on the last election that I have a measure of doubt about the american people. Sure Foley is in the news now and he MIGHT be a flashpoint for some actual change although I am going to remain skeptical until after the elections.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

Foley fought for laws to make it a federal crime to solicit sex from a minor on the internet. Even if this kid was not technically a minor in the area of jurisdiction, how can you sit there and say that that has nothing to do with the level of attention this is getting? I find that to be incredible! Sorry, my brain does not bend that way. Yes. Unless you feel that the outrage should be about the homosexuality, there is a BIG difference in what Stubbs and Foley did. Stubbs was in a relationship with one of these young men. Foley had a HISTORY of actions constituting an abuse of his power as congressman for the direct purpose of exploitation. About the only thing similar between Foley and Stubbs is the age of the participants and the fact that they all have a penis. Even for the Republicans?If so then that does not make any sense.As crashfrog has also pointed out, the other reason that people are so worked up about this is that there is an old paper trail connecting the knowledge of this incident to other high ups in the GOP.The reason I brought up Clinton is exactly to contrast the two actions as he is a favorite of the Republicans to criticize in comparison to their own failures. In this case I feel there is no comparison because Clinton:1. Did not break any laws by his sexual action. Foley may be saved by the definition of a minor but it is still treading a fine line.
2. Did not hypocritically involve himself in the creation of legislation to outlaw the very acts he committed and was committing continuously at the time.
3. Was not involved in an extensive cover up involving other high level Democrates that lasted for years where there was the potential for harm to other potential victims of his depravity.Clinton's embarassment was only to himself. Foley has disgraced the entire GOP because their leaders were involved and did nothing.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

I am basing most of my judgements on limited information so I will caveat my statements by saying that I am under the assumption that the contact that Studds had was more 'healthy' than the multiple contacts that Foley had. I recall that the person Studds was involved with reacted positivly to his relationship with Studds. I also don't recall there being any mention of repeat advances by Studds to any other pages. We DO know that in Foley's case that this behavior definitly WAS a pattern and that the nature of the contact was exploitive.If there is any information that I need to know to change those assumptions then I would like to see it.We can also hypothesize all day about how Foley might have been different had he been in a more 'normal' relationship with one of the pages similar to Stubbs but given the content of the messages I subjectivly doubt that such a scenario would have had any impact.My mention of depravity in this instance is in regards to the exploitive nature of Foley's advances on the pages given what I know. I do not know if Stubbs' scenario could equally be called exploitive but everything I know so far gives me the indication that it should not be.Beyond that, there are other differences with Foley including the GOP coverup or inaction whatever you want to call it AND the public and vigorous stace OF FOLEY AGAINST child exploitation laws. If the pages are to be considered child are not is irrelevant to the fact that even if they are technically not it is a very fine line to walk for someone so vocal about anti-exploitation laws. It is hypocricy at its finest.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

I guess my criticism boils down to that we know Foley was acting in a way that given his position and actions was exploitive. While this may be true for Stubbs, we have some information to suggest that it is not. We would need to know more about the specifics of the relationship of Stubbs and his boy toy to make any further determination.If there is reason to suspect that Stubbs was being as exploitive as Foley then your criticism of bias MIGHT have merit. The other factors to consider are, like others have suggested, the different generation in which these two cases have occurred and the ABJECT FAILURE of the Republican administration on a number of OTHER issues for which this is just one of the bubbles bursting on a pot of boiling water.You cannot take this Foley situation in a vacume of the other events of this Republican run administration. They have screwed up domestic policy, they have screwed up foreign policy, they have screwed up national security, they have screwed up education. Now this last event has cast grave doubt about the last thing the Republicans had laid claim to being the arbiters of, morality and family values.Regardless of the fact that Foley is just one member in the GOP, he tried very had to make himself the face of the crusade to protect children. So not only by this scandal is he defamed in the face of the liberals, he has defamed himself in the face of the entire segement of 'value voters' who have been welcomed into the Republican party. How many Florida conservatives do you think are totally pissed off now and potentially questioning the very fabric of the party they were counting on to bring morality and accountability 'back into politics'.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

The whole point of my post though was to challange your position that this outrage is merely because of Foley's party affiliation. Care to address any of that or have you abandoned that opinion?

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)