A fair Question?

More than one person has raised the issue of how republican/conservative attitudes towards gays may have effected the Foley scandal.

If a republican gay could be as out as, say, Barney Frank would, could it have come out sooner? Were they more afraid of the emails or revelations that a popular republican was gay? I think there is a duality here more and less than meets the eye. Obviously many GOP members of the house knew he was gay and still worked with him; To their credit, many democrats had to have known, many more had heard rumors, yet that fact was never used by them for political gain. Don't think it would not have been effective.

Every day you hear about Rudy Giuliani being too liberal/moderate for the republican base. How comfortable could a gay republican be in those circumstances? How comfortable could his leadership be with the possibility of his sexual orientation becoming public knowledge?

On the other hand, it also shows a split between what many republicans say about gays in public and how they deal with them one on one. It's easy to dislike a group but not so easy to judge individuals one on one because of single issues, like what sex they choose to sleep with. Are the sticking with the old saw of "love the sinner, hate the sin?" Could be. I find it more likely they find out that a persons entire worth, political and social orientation just maybe is not tied up in one aspect of the being. As a moderate/conservative I'd like to think both are true and conservatives continue to wake up to the fact that the people marching in thongs and hosiery down main street are not the majority of gays inn this nation.