Yesterday, the lawyer for disgraced Florida congressman Tom Foley informed us that: 1) Foley is gay; and 2) Foley had been molested by a clergy member as a teenager. [Read story.]
What does either thing have to do with Foley's disgusting pedophilic tendencies? Probably not the kinds of parallels that some people might draw from these excuses. And that's what makes me so angry about these kinds of statements.
1) Being gay has nothing to do with being a pedophile. Most gay people are not child molesters. In fact, most pedophiles are actually heterosexual. But, of course, it's convenient to blame gays for all the world's evils.
2) I would think that someone who had been molested would understand the kinds of emotional damage that it can do, and would want to save others from the same kind of suffering, not cause more of it. Foley's lawyer seems to imply that Foley's own experience at being molested turned him into a molester. By that logic, if someone is a rape victim, I suppose she or he would be more likely to go out and rape another person. I don't think so.
Foley's lawyer told us that the congressman isn't making excuses for his behavior. So then what is this?
The implications of these statements are harming even more people. Aren't there already enough victims in this case?