Posted on 04/09/2004 6:26:21 PM PDT by scripter
I am still in a state of shock; I have been grieving for days. My son, Jamiel Terry, was paid $5,000 by Out magazine (to appear April 20, 2004, on newsstands) to write a story about being Randall Terry's homosexual son. I pray my following words help other grieving parents and serve as a warning to moms and dads of small children to be unflinchingly and unashamedly diligent to protect their children from predators, and bring a reality check to those exploiting my son.
First of all, I love my son. Jamiel is incredibly gifted. He is articulate and handsome. He sings like an angel, he plays the piano, he's a great cook, and he's a great debater. He would make a powerful lawyer and a formidable politician. People like him. I love him. I've poured 16 years of my life into him.
In March of 1988, my then-wife and I took Jamiel in as a foster child when he was 8 years old. We also took in his baby sister (almost 3 years old)) and their older sister (12 years old). We adopted him and his younger sister when he was nearly 15 and she was 9. He came to us as a deeply troubled boy, from a very dark home. He was literally born in jail.
Tragically, by the time we got him as a foster child, he had already learned a lifestyle of deceit from his surroundings and had been a victim of crimes and treacheries that would mar him for life. I knew of some of those things when we got him and have learned more over the years. My hope was that by providing a loving, safe home, his life would be spared the path it would inevitably take if he remained in those surroundings. Unfortunately, my hopes and prayers were not realized.
My son's teen years became a mixed stream of happy times mingled with half-truths, dishonesty and a double life. His behavior grew worse and worse in college, culminating with the story in Out magazine.
For the uninformed, Out magazine specializes in bringing homosexuals "out of the closet." Out is committed to the homosexual agenda – homosexual marriage, special "civil rights" for homosexuals, promoting the fallacy that their sexual activities are normal and even laudable. Their agenda is shameless. My son was offered $5,000 to "write" a story about me and his life with me and my family. However, much of the story was written by Out's editor who put words in my son's mouth to accomplish the magazine's agenda.
For me, the most horrifying part of the story is my son's admission: "I did have numerous sexual encounters with my friends, usually during sleepovers at my parents' house" and "I was home from boarding school in my old bedroom at my parents' house in Windsor, N.Y., where my friend 'Johnny' and I had just finished fooling around ... we had been having sex for ages. ..."
I am so grieved and sorry for those boys and their parents. Those parents trusted us; they believed their sons were safe at our home – so had I. I was wrong. I still am in a state of shock. Please, parents, learn from this tragedy.
Frankly, so much of the story is inaccurate (times, dates, events) it would take too much space to correct it. But worse yet is that the picture the story paints of my son is based in fraud.
For example, the story states, "I was baptized Catholic and raised Protestant, and I later returned to the Roman Catholic Church." This is not true. Jamiel has never been confirmed; he does not believe in nor go to confession; he does not believe in many Catholic dogmas; He rejects papal authority and Catholic teaching on family issues.
The story states: "My father seems to believe that the fact that I'm an adopted child may help explain why I'm gay – not because of the adoption process itself but perhaps because of things that my have occurred before I was adopted at the age of 5." As I stated, Jamiel was adopted when he was nearly 15, not 5. To gloss over the tragic events and surroundings Jamiel was rescued from at age 8 is deceitful. (Social Services took the children because of prostitution, drugs and deeds committed against them.) Many homosexuals want to ignore the causal links to their sexual addiction; they want us to believe their homosexuality is genetic, not behavioral. They're "made this way."
The story stated, "My father is still trying to get me to go to a three-month retreat to be 'delivered' from homosexuality." This is also not true. Jamiel has repeatedly asked me to pay for him to go to "Love in Action," which offers sound clinical, in-patient therapy to those who want freedom – and they have a great success rate with homosexuals. Even after the article was done, he asked me to help. I have offered to pay for the in-patient care, and the offer still stands.
Probably the most painful part for me as a dad is that my son prostituted my name for $5,000: He sold out our family's privacy and private discussions for cold cash. Can you imagine a family member doing that to you?
He knows that the only reason Out, and now CNN, (and God knows who else before it's over) want to talk with him is because he's "Randall Terry's son." He knows he is going to get his 15 minutes of fame because he's the adopted son of a high profile Christian leader who has fought against homosexual marriage.
Adding pain to pain, he told CNN and a journalist from the Washington Post that he is no longer welcome in my home because he is a homosexual. That is not true. I have had him in my home for many days after knowing he was a homosexual.
But when I saw the Out article, I went to Charlotte, N.C., (where he is now) to tell him I love him, and how hurt I was that he betrayed our families privacy, and that he was not welcome in my home right now – not because of his homosexuality, but because he could sell us out again. At any point, he could come for a holiday, make mental notes and find another buyer for another story. I have a great wife, a teenage daughter and two small boys; I will not let that type of intrusion happen again.
My son is being paraded around as the latest homosexual "trophy" that had the guts to "come out." What they aren't telling you – and this grieves me to my core – is that by anyone's standard – homosexual or heterosexual – my son's life is in shambles. He was recently arrested for DWI; he is knowingly writing bad checks on a closed bank account; he dropped out of school; he doesn't have a job (and refuses to get one); he bounces from house to house living off other people; he's racked-up huge bills for friends and family that he cannot pay; he's been taken to court by former friends to get him to pay money he owed them; he's lied to his friends, telling them his "famous dad" was going to send him money to pay for his debts (I get calls or e-mails from college friends looking for money); he has "borrowed" money from countless numbers of my friends; he has a trail of wrecked friendships and family relationships because of deceit, money fraud and crossed boundaries – a mirror image of the home he was in from birth to 8.
I am a father in anguish; my son is a young man in crisis who needs intervention and therapy, not heady interviews with CNN. And Out magazine is despicable for their participation in a sham and exploiting my son for their own political agenda. If my son is their latest "hero," we should wonder how many more of their homosexual leaders and trophies that they present as "model citizens" have lives that are this unraveled.
Let all who read the Out story, or any other that spins off of it, know that the story about my son is laced with fraud and deceit from beginning to end. And please pray for my son's redemption, and pray for our family's healing.
Even so, I will add that aggressive slapdowns make your posts less persuasive, and more grating on the ears, I mean, eyes. Using epithets like "pal," "bub," "genius," "creep," etc. over and over, post after post is abrasive. Most of us don't need Pavlovian training when it comes to the right light in which to see people.
In order for me to elaborate, you would first have to apologize for calling my recollections "delusions."
IF you don't elaborate, how do we know whether your "recollections" are delusional or not?
He didn't. His ex-wife said so, and a judge agreed.
You seem to think that Terry's recent sordidness can somehow be separated from his relationship with his son.
A man who can "snap" as Terry did, and shack up with a woman who could be his daughter is not to be trusted, morally.
Why do you believe anything he says?
But earlier that same month, Mr. Terry had submitted an affidavit to a New York State family court on his financial condition. The court had ordered him to account for his finances in response to a petition Cindy Terry had filed earlier, saying that Mr. Terry was not paying a fair share of child support. In the affidavit, Mr. Terry wrote, "The past two years have been difficult financially for me.... I am three months behind in my rent, in addition to my numerous other debts. Since June, in order to pay necessities, we have been selling many items...."
In a May 7, 2002, order, the court noted that "Mr. Terry is possessed of actual or income-producing ability significantly greater than that which is set forth in his financial disclosure affidavits or [2001] Income Tax Returns," and ordered him to pay $75 more each week in child support.
I said he may have kept in close contact with the kids and paid child support all along. You stated that he didn't. You said his wife and a judge agreed on that point. That is factually incorrect. His wife said he wasn't paying 'a fair share' and a judge agreed. The fact is he was paying all along. As for a woman being able to go back and get more funds after a few years, it's just a matter of procedure. It doesn't imply that the father has done a single thing wrong. Family courts will strip the guy clean if he hasn't got a sharpie on his payroll, something few men can affort BTW.
Frankly, I'm having a hard time believing anything you say.
Exchange Two
His wife was in her forties, and he met someone in her twenties.
THAT is what wasn't right in Randall Terry's home! Little head over big head.
Could you please explain in 100 words or less why the other kids didn't turn homosexual when Terry wasn't there why they needed him?
Have they declared their sexual proclivities?
I'll bet they're not too fond of their "dad."
To: DoughtyOne
Please name the woman who was in here twenties. Thanks
Andrea. Her name is in the WORLD article I posted above.
I'm not as convinced as you are that you have your facts straight. On the surface one could surmise that Mr. Terry did strike up a fling with Kollmorgan and divorce his wife over it. Let's look at what other data was availble in your articles.
Snippet Two
Letter of Church Censure: Randall Terry, November 6, 1999
1. For leaving his wife in preparation to divorce, annul or otherwise dissolve their Christian marriage, and for his unwillingness to repent of this sin we do hereby censure him.
2. For a pattern of repeated sinful relationships and conversations with both single and married women we do hereby censure him.
On the surface it looked like Terry struck up a relationship with Kollmorgan. You have determined from these articles that he was having an affair with Kollmorgan. Perhaps they were. I'm not convinced at all that he left his wife to be with her.
Look at the articles of censure from the church. ...for a pattern of repeated sinful relationships and conversations with both single and married women...
Who is to say which woman he left his wife for, or whether he actually left his wife for one woman? He left his wife in August of 1999. After he left her he evidently played the field quite a bit. Otherwise the church would have to be inaccurate with their assertions.
The facts are that the marriage soured and Terry left the family home. He probably had improper relations before and after he left home. I don't know what caused him to venture outside the home anymore than you do. It is certain that upon leaving the home he did have an active social life. Wow, imagine that. That's a first.
You stated that he left his wife for a lover, and that lover was Kollmorgan. If that was true, then Kollmorgan would have had to put up with a lot of infidelities herself according to the church. Perhaps you'd like to rethink this assertion of yours as well.
Terry married Kollmorgan in about May of 2001. That's just three months shy of two years after he left his wife.
On this whole thread, you've been trashing Terry, for what reason I don't know. You even steped over the bounds of truth to get at him. Evidently you have nothing else to do, or perhaps your dog did a number in your favorite shoe.
The guy appears to be a flake, but I'm not sure what that has to do with his son. He made his support payments. I know that must frustrate the hell out of you. For the record, you don't have the slightest idea what kind of a relationship he had with his son or his other children.
It was that fact that led me to wonder why you found it necessary to trash a man who made some pretty rational comments about a son who had gone public trashing him.
Are you that into defending homosexuals who come out, or is this just a special case? Frankly I don't care. I thought your information dump on this tread was unwarranted and I said so.
Later.
Doughty, if you want to believe, and follow, Randall Terry, be my guest.
I have not "stepped over the bounds of truth" in anything I've posted.
You don't like my exposure of Terry's recent escapades.
I don't like Randall Terry, and have never liked Randall Terry. He's a self-aggrandizing egomaniac.
Obviously, a middle-aged man leaving a wife of 18 years for a 22 year-old woman doesn't bother you.
It bothers me.
You don't. Couldn't you tell that? But finding out is not the most important thing, and since "first things first" is part of my philosophy, I won't explain what I was saying if we can't talk about your calling them delusions. If we can get that out of the way, we can move on to drawing wrong inferences:
As I suspected, you couldn't back up your contentions.
I don't suppose you realize that you do this sort of thing over and over again on FR.
Yes. I do. I ask people to back up what they say.
Why can't you back up what you say?
Doughty, if you want to believe, and follow, Randall Terry, be my guest.
I never advocated that people agree or follow Randall Terry. I simply made the case that his comments were a rational response to his kid taking $5000 to out himself and talk about the Terry family in the national media. If someone talked about you in a dubious national magazine then went on CNN, you'd probably have something to say also.
I have not "stepped over the bounds of truth" in anything I've posted.
I made that charge in this thread. LINK Others are welcome to check it out if they like.
You don't like my exposure of Terry's recent escapades.
Terry's son is a homosexual who sold an interview to "Out' magazine. On this whole thread you have trashed Terry as being unbelieveable, but evidently think "Out" magazine and the lifestyle it promotes are both trustworthy. Is that inaccurate?
I don't like Randall Terry, and have never liked Randall Terry. He's a self-aggrandizing egomaniac.
Okay, you have a beef with Randall Terry. The forum now knows what lengths you'll go to, to carry out this vendetta. Whoopie!
Obviously, a middle-aged man leaving a wife of 18 years for a 22 year-old woman doesn't bother you.
Obviously you're not capable of reading a post to you and responding on topic. I did not make a value judgement about Terry and his new wife. I did say quite a bit on the topic. Those comments are linked here. LINK
It bothers me.
And his remarrying has what to do with his son outing himself in "Out" magazine and appearing on CNN?
It shouldn't surprise anyone that his kid is messed up.
I'm going to bed, and we don't agree here.
I hope this doesn't reflect negatively on our encounters in the future.
I'd hate to drag this baggage on to other threads, especially since I respect you so much.
It shouldn't surprise anyone that his kid is messed up.
And I'm sure it doesn't surprise anyone that his other two kids are doing just fine.
I'm going to bed, and we don't agree here.
Have a good night's sleep.
I hope this doesn't reflect negatively on our encounters in the future.
How many times have I gone across thread on you? That's right, and I'm not going to start.
I'd hate to drag this baggage on to other threads, especially since I respect you so much.
Nope, I leave issues on the thread where they started.
That's not all you did. First things first.
Why can't you back up what you say?
I won't bite on that question. My last post made it inapplicable. But it seems to suggest that you throw words around loosely (and we're all imperfect in our own ways), and you might very well have no regrets about it. Since I'm feeling pretty patient tonight, I'll just decline to elaborate on my original point as long as you go on like that.
Some parents have a terrible time remembering that they are parents. They often stoop to their children's level. This is terrible for kids.
Why are you resorting to such an obviously false dichotomy? Criticizing Randall Terry is not an endorsement of Out magazine. Simple as that.
You're obviously a Randall Terry fan who is going to great lengths to dismiss the relevance of what sinkspur has been posting. You seem to think no matter how messed up his own life, it has no bearing on his son or his relationship with his son. What world do you live in?
Randall Terry himself is a man in shambles with a lot of questions about his own integrity and character. It's very obvious this might be a factor in his relationship with his son. Perhaps the son decided the father he saw in person was not the person the public sees and decided it's time the truth came out.
I also find it fascinating from a psychological standpoint that Randall Terry criticizes his son for a laundry list of things including not having a job, not paying bills, being taken to court, and a trail of wrecked friendships and family relationships, when all of this sort of sounds like Randall Terry himself.
Randall should have changed the poor lad's name at adoption.
Although I've appreciated some of the things that Terry has done, this story should have remained in his mind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.