Replies

"The article is one small effort to make a public statement when his son has published and article in a nationwide magazine, and participated in interviews on CNN. I doubt Terry relished the idea of airing this in public, but I doubt he could stomach allowing his son to air untruths that would go unresponded to."

"Folks, if you can't understand the grief this guy is having to deal with, please go to another thread and contribute there in a positive manner. This article deals with a very real issue and doesn't deserve to be trashed."

"I'm not sure why you would say something like that, but it flabbergasts me the stupidity shown on this thread.
I can think of at least five families right now who raised excellent kids, all except for one. Sometimes it's girls. Sometimes it's the boys. For some unknown reason one child goes south and never returns.
One family had five children. Of the five children three went on to obtain advanced degrees. Four found success in business and had families of their own.
The fifth, raised with all the advantages, care and support the other kids had, even more than some of them did, was a miserable failure. BTW, the parents never wrote him off.
There is no rhyme or reason why some kids fail. If there was, society could adjust and prevent the problem child syndrome. That will never happen.
Please understand that you simply cannot always blame parents.
As for Terry's falling out with his wife and church, I doubt he is the first person to experience that, and I'm thinking most kids don't go homosexual over it. For all I know Terry may not be a very good human being, but jumping on him for this situation is silly. Are we going to hold his wife responsible as well? I don't see mention of anything she has done that is wrong, but if we're going to hold Terry responsible, then as one of his parents, his mom would have to be half the problem since she was right in there sowing also."

These are just a couple of the posts that you wrote before I posted to you. You were, if fact, defending more than Randall Terry's right to defend himself. You were defending Terry.

In your first post you said that "this article deals with a very real issue..." I agree, it deals with the issue of the homosexual agenda to make all who stand against homosexuality seem evil. In this case, it is Randall Terry. The point that I was trying to make, and the point that I think sinkspur was trying to make, is that to stand up and defend Terry in this situation is probably not the best idea. The reason is because he has been such a public figure in the fight against abortion and, more recently, gay marriage, and his dirty laundry can be easily aired and exploited by the leftist media. His son's homosexuality is not Terry's fault, it was the kid's decision. But that can be turned around and twisted all to hell by the media. I can see it now, "Randall Terry abandons family, leaves homosexual son in wake of breaking home." and, "Ultraconservatives back Randall Terry in disowning loving gay son."

In this case, I think we should take the fight elsewhere.