PZ Myers. 2006 Jan 05. Stand up for Lonnie Latham. <http://pharyngula.org/index/weblog/stand_up_for_lonnie_latham/>. Accessed 2008 Dec 04.

Posted on M00o93H7pQ09L8X1t49cHY01Z5j4TT91fGfr on Thursday, January 05, 2006

Stand up for Lonnie Latham

DefCon reports on a "dog bites man" story. This stuff isn't surprising anymore.

An executive committee member of the Southern Baptist Convention, and an outspoken opponent of homosexuality, was arrested on Tuesday night after propositioning a male police officer.

Oh dear.

From the Associated Press:

Lonnie Latham, senior pastor at South Tulsa Baptist Church, was booked into Oklahoma County Jail Tuesday night on a misdemeanor charge of offering to engage in an act of lewdness, police Capt. Jeffrey Becker said. Latham was released on $500 bail Wednesday afternoon.

Latham, who has spoken out against homosexuality, asked the officer to join him in his hotel room for oral sex. Latham was arrested and his 2005 Mercedes automobile was impounded, Becker said.

My first thought wasn't that it was shocking that a Baptist anti-gay crusader wanted illicit sexual release, but to wonder that it is apparently illegal to simply ask for oral sex in Oklahoma. Is it coercive? Are Oklahomans all so flamingly gay (but repressed) that they can't just say no?

I say, Free Lonnie Latham! He's a martyr to the suppression of the rights of gay men in Oklahoma!

Posted by PZ Myers on 01/05 at 02:15 PM
Politics • Rethuglicans • 4 Trackbacks • Other weblogs • Permalink
  1. Are Oklahomans all so flamingly gay (but repressed) that they can't just say no? Is that how Oral Roberts got his name?
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  01:21 PM
  2. Why do all these homosexuals keep sucking my cock?
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  01:27 PM
  3. I say, Free Lonnie Latham! He's a martyr to the suppression of the rights of gay men in Oklahoma!

    That would be a fun protest to undertake, but as the story says, he's already free.

    I take it the bust was more of a please-don't-do-that-HERE operation than a serious anti-gay crackdown. I mean, it sounds like the same sort of thing they'd do to a hetero john.
    #: Posted by just john  on  01/05  at  01:33 PM
  4. Latham was arrested and his 2005 Mercedes automobile was impounded, Becker said.

    2005 Mercedes, eh? He must also be getting the Jim and Tammy-Faye blessings from the Lord package.
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  01:42 PM
  5. I'd guess that he offered the cop money in exchange for the desired services. That's (I think) more serious than just asking.

    My first thought was that this was funny.
    #: Posted by The Chemist  on  01/05  at  01:43 PM
  6. That's what repression breeds. Had Latham been free to date guys back in high school, with no fear of persecution or hellfire, he'd probably be a happy, functional, productive member of the society today.
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  01:53 PM
  7. There's no mention of money involved.

    Or is it that asking for money in exchange for performing oral sex is solicitation, but offering money in exchange for performing oral sex isn't?
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  02:05 PM
  8. I'll join you on the picket line for this one.
    #: Posted by Andrew Brown  on  01/05  at  02:20 PM
  9. The police officers were investigating complaints about male prostitution in the area. I guess if a man approaches you to have sex in a hotel in area known for it male prostitutes, he could assume there going to be exchange of money afterwords. Although, I would think that little to hasty to draw to that conclusion.

    BTW, a Google search of "lewdness" (http://www.google.com/search?q=lewdness+) bring up a 'Christian Answers' website, and story about another minster caught with a man.
    #: Posted by Babbler  on  01/05  at  02:33 PM
  10. The Daily Oklahoman online newspaper says money wasn't brought up - he'd have been charged with "solicitation" if it had been. I'll bet that exactly the same statute would be used if the cop had been female.

    And he was there on a "prayer ministry," too. Well, something with kneeling involved, anyway.

    http://newsok.com/article/1724872/?template=home/main
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  02:45 PM
  11. That's funny -- that was my reaction too. I wondered, how to people ever manage to have sex if they aren't allowed to ask each other for it?
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  03:02 PM
  12. I had the same reaction as well.

    Also I'm wondering whether and why Tulsa has undercover police officers devoted to cracking down on such behavior.
    #: Posted by Mithras  on  01/05  at  03:17 PM
  13. CrackWilding - in Oklahoma, at least, you have to ask if you can buy 'em a beer first.
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  03:18 PM
  14. From the Tulsa statutes:

    Lewdness. The term "lewdness" as used in this code shall be construed to include:
    1. Any lascivious, lustful or licentious conduct; or
    2. The giving or receiving of the body for indiscriminate sexual intercourse, fellatio, cunnilingus, masturbation, anal intercourse, or lascivious, lustful or licentious
    conduct with any person not his or her spouse; or
    3. Any act in furtherance of such conduct or any appointment or engagement for prostitution.

    Tulsa Ord. No. 19128 (Title 27, Chapter 6, Sec. 604) states that "It shall be an offense for any person to engage in prostitution or lewdness," with punishment to be no less than thirty days and no more than six months in jail.

    This is a pretty typical example of a pretty typical law, though it's none the less a bad law for that. Consensual sodomy laws live on in some (non-Model Penal Code) states, although they've been subject to intermittently successful vagueness attacks. (And, in fact, the MPC's laws on homosexual solicitation are unconstitutional under Lawrence.) These sorts of arrests happen infrequently, and sometimes state courts strike them down because, well, what the hell is "indiscrimate sexual intercourse," anyway? (All together now: "I don't know, but where can I get some?")

    Leaving aside vagueness, a Lawrence attack on this law might have some validity, but, hey, it's Tulsa, so good luck. The nice thing about Oklahoma is that it gives Texas a good name.
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  03:38 PM
  15. Wakboth wrote on 01/05 at 01:53 PM

    "Had Latham been free to date guys back in high school, with no fear of persecution or hellfire, he'd probably be a happy, functional, productive member of the society today."

    And the decor in his house would be FABULOUS. wink
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  03:57 PM
  16. I swear that The Onion had a story just like this a month ago called "Anti-Homosexuality Sermon Suspiciously Well Informed." I guess this is just life imitating art.

    I think that the "lewdness" mentioned here might be similar to sexual harrassment. In other words, if I walk up to a woman on the street ask her to perform oral sex on me, I could be charged with an act of lewdness, whereas asking a close female friend after we'd both had a few drinks would not be considered lewd.

    Of course, I think it would be hilarious if the whole thing was a misunderstanding along these lines:

    Officer: "I need to see your license and registration, sir."

    Latham: "I don't have to give you my license, and if you have a problem with that, blow me."

    Well, maybe not quite as funny as if he actually was soliciting gay sex.
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  04:07 PM
  17. Mithras: Also I'm wondering whether and why Tulsa has undercover police officers devoted to cracking down on such behavior.

    Maybe they're copying the Sarasota, FL porn theater patrol. Ask Pee-Wee Herman.
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  04:18 PM
  18. His church now has a statement.
    #: Posted by Michael Hopkins  on  01/05  at  04:20 PM
  19. Aside from the question of how asking for a blow job gets you arrested, I'm mostly enjoying the fact that this guy probably lobbied for these very laws and crackdowns. Hoist by his own petard, basically.

    Of course, laughing at these people is admittedly a lot of fun, but at the same time I think he's just another gay guy who's life has been hurt by the rampant homophobia of our culture. Every gay group or bar for 100 miles should send him an honest invitation to one of their mixers. He's accidentally outed himself, so let's show him how nice it is outside.
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  05:00 PM
  20. Maybe they're copying the Sarasota, FL porn theater patrol. Ask Pee-Wee Herman.


    Seriously. What did they expect to find people doing in there?
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  05:02 PM
  21. I choose to think of the Anti-Homosexual Crusaders as simply self-loathing and deeply closeted. Its the only way I can make sense of their behavior.
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  05:39 PM
  22. WatchfulBabbler, those Tulsa ordinances have no effect outside Tulsa city limits. Latham was arrested in Oklahoma City, in Oklahoma County.

    City ordinances are rarely the basis of arrests, since municipal court isn't a particularly good venue to try most cases (it's pretty good for trying parking violations or trespassing by skateboarders, though). Most likely, Latham was arrested under Oklahoma state statutes.
    #: Posted by Ereshkigal  on  01/05  at  06:12 PM
  23. I'm *sure* he was just doing a deep-cover operation to find homosexuals and bring them to the Lord. Nothing untoward... just two men kneeling and being covered in the bounty of the Lord, exulting in the ecstasy of the spirit.....

    Ok, I'll stop.

    I wonder how many "Barney Fag" jokes this individual has made over the years.

    PS- my submittal word is "sperm".
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  08:41 PM
  24. Ereshkigal, I read "pastor of South Tulsa Baptist Church" and somehow ended up with "booked in Tulsa." My bad.
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  09:52 PM
  25. I've been saying for years, that the most vicious homophobes are closet cases.

    Let's hope that Latham finds a good shrink, and learns to accept himself as god made him.

    -jcr
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  10:49 PM
  26. WatchfulBabbler, hardly a "bad"-- but you did go to a lot of work. I live in Tulsa, and we c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y distinguish ourselves from Oklahoma City most of the time.

    We're a little hypersensitive.
    #: Posted by Ereshkigal  on  01/05  at  11:26 PM
  27. Pastor Latham, meet Mayor West of Spokane, WA (former mayor that is).
    #: Posted by  on  01/05  at  11:55 PM
  28. Of course he was "pastoring" to those policemen! He was trying to convince them to not arrest the homosexuals but to "befriend them and convince them that they can be heterosexual"!
    #: Posted by  on  01/06  at  01:23 PM
  29. okay you know what.
    you guys really take it.
    you know what maybe if you
    knew the whole story you would
    understand. and as a member of south
    tulsa baptist church. i have known him
    pretty much all of my life. and guess what
    he isn't gay. and he has been struggling with
    this all his life. so you guys can go suck a cock.
    because this site is gay. and everyone else commenting
    on here is too.

    just go fuck yourselfs.
    #: Posted by  on  01/06  at  04:29 PM
  30. That is quite possibly the funniest defense of a homophobe I've seen yet!
    #: Posted by PZ Myers  on  01/06  at  04:59 PM
  31. Emma,

    If, as you say, the man isn't gay, then what exactly has he beeen "struggling with all his life"?

    I'm a straight man myself, and I can tell you from direct, personal knowledge that straight men simply don't have an issue with gays. Truth to tell, we're glad for the reduced competition. I'm sure any of the other straight guys who read PZ's blog would concur.

    I'm sorry that your friend is going through a hard time, but the razzing he's get isn't for being gay, it's for being a god damned hypocrite of the first order. He didn't have a choice about his sexual orientation, but he most certainly *did* have a choice about whether to make a career of harassing those who share his orientation.

    -jcr
    #: Posted by  on  01/06  at  05:23 PM
  32. Yikes! I'm afraid to know how long it took emma to type up that gem.

    So, a man soliciting oral sex from another man doesn't make him gay, but because all of us commenting here are gay we should all go engage in oral sex.

    Are you a Southern Baptist Theological Seminary student, emma? Because with your skills in logic, you'd be a prized student!
    #: Posted by  on  01/06  at  05:24 PM
  33. Are you sure emma isn't just trying out her poetry on a different audience? The punctuation and line geometry all suggests something of the sort.
    #: Posted by Dan Nexon  on  01/06  at  05:33 PM
  34. Well, but to Emma, a homophobe is evidently a good person, even if the homophobe in question is a self-proclaimed defender of heterosexuality who also has irresistable homosexual desires he has been "struggling with ... all his life."

    The "secret" part of that glorious--but not very successful!--struggle evidently involves Lonnie repeatedly giving in to the very urges that Lonnie and Emma condemn. Lonnie's lack of success in his struggle does not, of course, make him "homosexual" in Emma-world, because Lonnie can always turn to the South Tulsa Baptist Church for "forgiveness," and the ensuing (though unfortunately only temporary)re-heterophication!

    The "open" part of Lonnie's struggle, therefore, necessarily requires him to mercilessly castigate the "real" homosexuals of Emma-world--meaning, one gaters, all those who have failed to seek or attain the STBC's "forgiveness" for the "sin" of "giving in" to to their own utterly inoffensive sexual selves.

    This seemingly reduces the difference between contemptible gayness and righteous hetero-ness, not to how one actually behaves sexually, but to whether one (repeately) feels guilty enough about one's own behavior to dishonestly keep it secret while trying as hard and as hypocritically as possible to make other people also feel just as bad about themselves. Which "pretty much" reveals the whole charade of Lonnie's homophobia to be nothing more than the most pitiful possible attempt to project upon innocent others the contemptible feelings Larry has internalized for himself.

    And, of course, Lonnie feels so bad about himself because some other pitiful idiot projected all this self-disgust outward on Lonnie. And back it goes...

    Whether we are atheists, agnostics, or true believers, "good" ol' time religion that wallows in putrescence this deep this deserves nothing but utter and unremitting villification.
    #: Posted by  on  01/06  at  05:39 PM
  35. Emma writes, "... and as a member of South Tulsa Baptist Church... go suck a cock... go fuck yourself..."

    Wow. If this sort of language is typical of what their congregation finds acceptable, I think they are a long way off the Christian ideal.
    #: Posted by  on  01/06  at  05:40 PM
  36. Huh. Looked a little like freeform poetry to me to. Kind of inspired me. So I jotted down my own:

    When christians shriek with words so vile
    And spew their righteous, angry bile
    They show us all what they believe
    And trust me, it ain't the bible, Steve
    Hatred and Bigotry and Violent Rot
    I'm pretty sure that's not what jesus taught
    It's not just the anger, but the WORDS they say
    It makes ME blush to this very day
    For those who think god wants them to hate
    And kill the infidel and the apostate
    I say let's ask reverand Lonnie a thing or two
    Like just what HE thinks would jesus do?

    OK, for shear power it can't match emma, or that babe maureen, and it really ain't that clever (except rhyming "apostate"--I'm pretty proud of that), but I couldn't resist..

    mikey
    #: Posted by mikey  on  01/06  at  05:52 PM
  37. Hehe, yeah "I was set up. I was in the area pastoring to police." This is gold. Excuse me I need to go "pastor" to my big hairy mexican boyfriend (he has fabulous boots!). I got 6.5" of Christ's love right here next to my hairy pussy and I want to make sure that he is filled with Christ's love before the evening is out!

    NO I'M SERIOUS!
    #: Posted by  on  01/06  at  06:08 PM
  38. "because this site is gay. and everyone else commenting
    on here is too."

    I'm gay. What of it? I wouldn't offer oral sex to a priest to save my life, though. I might be gay, but I'm not easy.
    #: Posted by  on  01/06  at  06:49 PM
  39. so you guys can go suck a cock.
    because this site is gay. and everyone else commenting
    on here is too.

    just go fuck yourselfs.

    Believe me, if I could physically fuck myself, I'd be sucking a cock right now....hell, i'd never stop.
    #: Posted by MAJeff  on  01/06  at  06:58 PM
  40. I wonder if "emma" is really a guy--and in what sense has she "known" the Dirty Pastor?
    #: Posted by  on  01/06  at  07:02 PM
  41. "...it really ain't that clever (except rhyming "apostate"--I'm pretty proud of that)..." - mikey

    #: Posted by Max Udargo  on  01/06  at  08:12 PM
  42. I don't know if this emma is legitimate or a hoax meant to make matters worse or at least funnier but everyone here has to realize that these people do not consider homosexuality to be anything more than a lifestyle choice. To her Latham is a victim of diabolical mind conrol from gays who probably seduced him with drugs and alcohol to *choose* to *act* gay for mere sick sex. To them Latham was not born gay but somehow corrupted by sick gays trying to destroy christianity.

    Nothing anyone here says will change these people's minds.

    MYOB'
    .
    #: Posted by  on  01/06  at  08:21 PM
  43. So the pastor wants to have sex with men, decided he didn't want to do that, has been trying unsuccessfully to avoid doing that to the point where the congregants of his church know about it, and has decided to become "not gay" by, um, dedicating his life to profound dishonesty and loveless anonymous sex?

    Of course, the pastor agrees with Emma, and since she appears to feel that disagreeing with her makes you "gay," the pastor is clearly not gay.

    He just likes to have dishonest, anonymous, loveless sex with strange men.

    Lemme tell you, Emma - loveless, anonymous, dishonest sex doesn't make men gay. Neither does disagreeing with you.

    Wanting to have sex with men, on the other hand? Pretty high correlation, toots.

    You're a remarkably stupid woman, Emma, and I very much doubt you'd want to have to face Jesus and explain why you decided to cast that stone.

    If you believe in him, you know he knows you're not qualified.
    #: Posted by julia  on  01/06  at  08:24 PM
  44. hey emma:

    it's not the man's homosexuality (bisexuality?) we're attacking, it's his hypocrisy!
    #: Posted by  on  01/06  at  08:31 PM
  45. It has been proposed by some and I wish I could remember where I saw it documented that for a number of people immersed in religious dogma at an very early age there is a conflict between their fantatical devotion to their faith and the realities of their physical condition. For some, discovering that they are gay might simply be a test from god or demonic possession. They will never be able to differentiate between their faith and the fact of their born condition. For them it is the 'born again' condition that matters and in this case Latham probably found himself acting like a drug addict who simply said "once won't be enough to go to hell so maybe I can do it just once, get it out of my system and then I'll know it's all a lie."
    These people are in the worst of all worlds because they are having to deal with mental programming vs physical programming.

    MYOB'
    .
    #: Posted by  on  01/06  at  08:37 PM
  46. I am also a member of Latham's church in Tulsa and I would like to apoligize for "emma's" comments. It is by no means the Christian spirit to react with such anger. It is the Christian spirit to forgive the man for what he has done. His actions in no way diminish the ministry that he led in our church. God holds the ultimate forgiveness. As far as whether or not he is gay is concerning to me. I am a devout Christian, but do not profess to have all the answers to every situation, and I am not sure at what point a person is considered gay. If physical actions have not occurred but desired...is this considered gay or just homosexual tendencies within the person? If a person tried it and did not like it...are they considered gay? If the are bisexual...are they considered gay?
    #: Posted by Jim Jackson  on  01/06  at  08:38 PM
  47. "As far as whether or not he is gay is concerning to me. I am a devout Christian, but do not profess to have all the answers to every situation, and I am not sure at what point a person is considered gay. If physical actions have not occurred but desired...is this considered gay or just homosexual tendencies within the person? If a person tried it and did not like it...are they considered gay? If the are bisexual...are they considered gay?"

    Only he can tell you, if he's inclined to answer honestly and is honest enough with himself to have the answer. Is he turned on by guys? If so, and girls don't do much for him sexually, then he's gay. If he's turned on by both guys and girls in a rough parity, I'd say he's likely bisexual. The sex is an outward expression of the desires, just like having straight sex is an expression of the physical attraction one feels for the opposite gender.

    But in my book, soliciting sex from a man is not exactly straight behavior. It might be bisexual behavior. This isn't actually a complicated issue. What is complicated is that he apparently has some religious opinions which may make it harder for him to process and arrive at the real answer.

    I should note that having sex with a woman, even being married with a boatload of kids and a happy family life, does not a straight person make. With enough fantasizing, I'm sure I could have sex with a woman and I'm not cognizant of being impotent. Those are the only real prerequisites for a successful procreation. Our culture continues to broadcast this as the preferred (and often only acceptable) path. By contrast, actively seeking some same-sex action is, to my mind, far more diagnostic of homosexuality or bisexuality.

    I don't recognize some kind of fuzzy level of homosexual tendencies existing independent of being gay or bisexual. This isn't a TV. It doesn't turn off or change channels whenever one gets curious or bored.
    #: Posted by  on  01/06  at  09:15 PM
  48. Sounds like the Tulsa church is typical in that it has some very decent people and also some people who are quite defensive and insecure.

    Many years ago I was interim pastor of a fundy church and made the suggestion that perhaps the apostle Paul's famous 'thorn in the flesh' was homosexual interest in Timothy. Suffice it to say no one was interested in publically entertaining that possibility even for illustrative purposes.
    #: Posted by decrepitoldfool  on  01/06  at  10:59 PM
  49. decrepitoldfool, you shold note that former Episcopal Bishop of Newark John Spong put forward the same hypothesis and was vilified ever after.

    The fundies are everywhere!
    #: Posted by  on  01/06  at  11:30 PM
  50. As far as whether or not he is gay is concerning to me. I am a devout Christian, but do not profess to have all the answers to every situation, and I am not sure at what point a person is considered gay. If physical actions have not occurred but desired...is this considered gay or just homosexual tendencies within the person? If a person tried it and did not like it...are they considered gay? If the are bisexual...are they considered gay?

    Jim, I will attempt to provide a perspective on your questions. The majority of gay people know full well who they are from a very young age, just as hetersexuals do. Sexual orientation is said to be well established prior to the age of 5 although the sexual awareness may not emerge until puberty, the knowing that you are "different" is definitely there. Family, society or church pressures can cause supression of true inner self whether those pressures are overt or more subtle. A great many gay people are able to suppress their true identities for decades but, that in no way makes them a heterosexual I can assure you. It is factually incorrect for religions to look at sexual orientation as non-existant or a set of behaviours as often is the case. That is over simplifying a person's identity and is an over used excuse to deny gay and lesbian equality. So in a nutshell, I have a hunch that Latham is gay and always has been, he's just crafted at hiding it and what better way to hide it than to be a rabid homophobe. Been there, done that.
    #: Posted by Tim W  on  01/07  at  12:06 AM
  51. Gay men offering bj's to priests should be a cardinal sin against gayness.
    #: Posted by  on  01/07  at  12:13 AM
  52. Maybe I am taking my liberalism too far but actually I am taking sides with Brother Lennie against the police.

    A police officer, posing as a male prostitute, was offering sex for money to this suffering homophobic Man of God, encouraging him to commit the very "crime" he was later arresting for.

    A fatal instant, "un santiamén", and Brother Lennie found himself convicted, arrested and his life destroyed: he lost his job, his reputation, his career, possibly his family and friends too.

    If not because the police let him go, I would be one to join PZ's call to "Free Brother Lennie".
    #: Posted by  on  01/07  at  12:31 AM
  53. Maybe I am taking my liberalism too far but actually I am taking sides with Brother Lennie against the police.

    A police officer, posing as a male prostitute, was offering sex for money to this suffering homophobic Man of God, encouraging him to commit the very "crime" he was later arresting for.

    "En un santiamén", in a fatal instant, Brother Lennie found himself convicted, arrested and his life destroyed: he lost his job, his reputation, his career, possibly his family and friends too.

    If not because the police let him go, I would be one to join PZ's call to "Free Brother Lennie".
    #: Posted by  on  01/07  at  12:33 AM
  54. According to the story I read, the police report claims that this "holy" (read "superstitious") man approached the undercover officer and sang the lyric "come-on 'a my house, come-on 'a my house, I'm gonna give you candy" as part of his solicitation. Hardly sounds anything like entrapment to me. Unless of course, you think that there is something utterly tempting about having sex with other men that is so overpowering that it can't be resisted, even if you are 100% heterosexual.

    Remember, you can't spell "pastoral" without "oral."



    (Why is my verification word "mutant?")
    #: Posted by Milo Johnson  on  01/07  at  12:58 AM
  55. Come on-a my house my house, I'm gonna give you candy
    Come on-a my house, my house, I'm gonna give a you
    Apple a plum and apricot-a too eh
    Come on-a my house, my house a come on
    Come on-a my house, my house a come on
    Come on-a my house, my house I'm gonna give a you
    Figs and dates and grapes and cakes eh
    Come on-a my house, my house a come on
    Come on-a my house, my house a come on
    Come on-a my house, my house, I'm gonna give you candy
    Come on-a my house, my house, I'm gonna give you everything

    Come on-a my house my house, I'm gonna give you Christmas tree
    Come on-a my house, my house, I'm gonna give you
    Marriage ring and a pomegranate too ah
    Come on-a my house, my house a come on
    Come on-a my house, my house a come on
    Come on-a my house, my house I'm gonna give a you
    Peach and pear and I love your hair ah
    Come on-a my house, my house a come on
    Come on-a my house, my house a come on
    Come on-a my house, my house, I'm gonna give you Easta-egg
    Come on-a my house, my house, I'm gonna give you
    Everything - everything - everything
    #: Posted by R. Clooney  on  01/07  at  02:31 AM
  56. Perhaps he just wanted a change from the wine used when celebrating the devouring of his God. After all, it isn't often one can get both from the same source.
    #: Posted by  on  01/07  at  04:01 AM
  57. Two things:

    First, I am impressed by the hypocrisy of Loverod Lonnie, not surprised, just impressed. One has to applaud doublethink of such magnitude. I'm surprised his brain doesn't melt. "God hates all fags, repent ye sinners!.......Oh a cock? For me? How kind!".

    Second, As another poster alluded to, were us males capable of fucking or fellating ourselves (as encouraged by that oh such a good christian Emma, whose hypocrisy also impresses me) Emma would be posting to herself. In an empty blog. On a non existant internet. Using a non existant computer. In a desert.
    #: Posted by  on  01/07  at  04:33 AM
  58. On a non existant internet. Using a non existant computer. In a desert.

    ... because technology and civilisation can only be created by men. Right.

    (Your first paragraph made me laugh a lot, though.)
    #: Posted by  on  01/07  at  05:01 AM
  59. Eleanor: No, it's more that successive generations that build such things can only be created with the active participation of men, and we'd likely be somewhat distracted ;)

    Personally I'd like to think I could make time, of course!
    #: Posted by PaulH  on  01/07  at  06:13 AM
  60. Fair enough! Strong evolutionary pressure in favour of longer spines, then...

    Must say it reminds me of the fable about someone being shown Heaven and Hell and finding they consist of exactly the same scenario - banqueting halls with tables groaning under the weight of fabulous foodstuffs, but the people there are only allowed to eat with three-foot-long chopsticks. "Ah, but in Heaven we feed each other..."
    #: Posted by  on  01/07  at  06:36 AM
  61. Give the guy a break, he can't help it that he was brought up a Southern Baptist.
    #: Posted by  on  01/07  at  06:49 AM
  62. According to the story I read, the police report claims that this "holy" (read "superstitious") man approached the undercover officer and sang the lyric "come-on 'a my house, come-on 'a my house, I'm gonna give you candy" as part of his solicitation.

    He actually used a Rosemary Clooney song from the forties to entice someone to sex?

    Hate to say it, but that is really gay...
    #: Posted by  on  01/07  at  11:20 AM
  63. "he isn't gay. and he has been struggling with this all his life"

    He was born in 1946 according to his mugshot posted over on Jesus's General. Very, very sad.
    #: Posted by  on  01/07  at  11:52 AM
  64. Steviepinhead et al, I vote for "heterophication" as the Word of the Day. That is too funny!
    #: Posted by  on  01/07  at  04:04 PM
  65. Jim, if his episode on the street 'in no way diminish(ed) his ministry" in your church, why did you guys fire him?
    #: Posted by  on  01/07  at  04:43 PM
  66. Mr. Jackson,

    Whether your friend is gay or not is, frankly, none of your business. It's not for you to classify him, and what he does on his own time behind closed doors with consenting adults shouldn't affect your friendship with him.

    Any other person's sexual orientation should only matter to you if you're their lover. If not, live and let live.

    -jcr
    #: Posted by  on  01/08  at  02:56 AM
  67. Jim:"As far as whether or not he is gay is concerning to me. I am a devout Christian, but do not profess to have all the answers to every situation, and I am not sure at what point a person is considered gay. If physical actions have not occurred but desired...is this considered gay or just homosexual tendencies within the person? If a person tried it and did not like it...are they considered gay? If the are bisexual...are they considered gay?"

    Republican, right?

    I was gonna say that getting himself cought doing what he condems in others, is another form of 'fucking yourself', and making third type of sexual orientation, hetero, homo, and mono, now my word is "trisomy"
    #: Posted by  on  01/08  at  04:37 AM
  68. For sake of utter precision, Rosemary Clooney's song is from the fifties and not from the forties. She is a gay icon.

    Brother Lonnie's double life and apocalypse (Gr.=uncovering, revelation) could be the subject matter for Sophocles. In the end, one realizes that the tragic climax had been pre-ordained from the beginning, and one leaves the theater with a feeling of compassion.
    #: Posted by  on  01/08  at  05:09 AM
  69. Eleanor,

    Whoa there! Cancel that leap for a high horse!

    No I don't think that technology and civilisaion can only be created by men. Paul H had it about right. If men were {cough} pleasing themsleves all day, the species would have evaporated into the mists of history long ago. It was the cooperative element of forming generations that I was lampooning.

    After all a "wise" person once paraphrased: "Sex with someone else is all well and good. But it's no substitue for the real thing".

    It is all, as is the situation referred to in the original post, just humour.
    #: Posted by  on  01/08  at  07:16 AM
  70. He was born in 1946 according to his mugshot posted over on Jesus's General. Very, very sad.

    It is immensely sad -- and it's a classic example of what that fundie mindset does to gay people. Poor bastard should have left Oklahoma long ago...
    #: Posted by  on  01/08  at  12:27 PM
  71. Good discussions of Lonnie Latham here:
    http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2021215&mesg_id=2029349

    And here is his Wikipedia entry:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lonnie_Latham
    #: Posted by Ian  on  01/09  at  08:43 AM
  72. though i am not a member of South Tulsa Baptist Church (although I do know they are a wonderful congregation and they are built on GOD and not LONNIE) I have heard Dr.Latham speak. Yes, his recent actions did show signs of hipocracy but, his sermans were of God. What he said came directly from the bible. if one were to doubt what Lonnie had said, they would be doubting the Lord. And though his recent actions may be hippocritical you have to think to yourselves, who isn't a hippocrit? A pastor is a man. like any other man, he makes mistakes. he sins. In God's eyes offering oral sex to a gay man is just as bad as telling a lie. Don't put Lonnie on the same throne as Jesus. Jesus was the only perfect man to ever walk the face of the earth. everyone else on this EARTH is a hippocrit. your PARTNER, MOTHER, BEST FRIEND, YOU! every one! Lonnie is just a man! Yes, he made a mistake (who doesn't).. but just wait before you start criticizing the man and remember he is like any other sinner.


    and for the most part i think most of these people commenting on here are rude, ignorant, and speaking with emotional blocks.
    #: Posted by  on  01/19  at  04:37 PM
  73. "In God's eyes offering oral sex to a gay man is just as bad as telling a lie."

    Remember folks, doing something gay is just as bad as being Hitler. Apparently.
    #: Posted by PaulH  on  01/20  at  09:07 AM
  74. Wow. Emma's comments are more than a little painful. First let me point out, if Emma's 'known' Lonnie 'most of her life' and he was at the church 4 or 5 years? She must be young. So consider that, while you attack her immature comment. She is Y O U N G.

    I know Emma. I used to be her Sunday School teacher. And, although I in no way APPROVE of her crudeness in commenting, I must approve of her heartfelt support of a pastor, that for the most part, we all at STBC love, and miss. Jesus clearly tells us, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Should Lonnie be burned at the stake for his supposed actions? Is he gay? Who but he and OUR Heavenly Father knows for sure. Am I ALSO A SINNER? Yessiree. Did Christ die on the cross FOR ME, YOU, EMMA AND LONNIE? Sadly, yes. Because we were going to be unworthy, HE BORE OUR SIN. That's not a pretty picture. It is at once sad, painful, and GLORIOUS.

    So please don't judge Emma. And don't judge Lonnie. Take this situation for what it is. Only one perfect MAN ever walked on this earth, and He IS JESUS. Learn from Lonnie. He's not perfect. And if everything we have heard is TRUE, then we can count it as praise, that we as sinners, are loved by Christ. Not because we are sinless, or WORTHY. But because Christ himself is (was) will always be sinless and worthy.
    #: Posted by  on  01/22  at  01:35 PM
  75. Put your money where your mouth is, then, and give him his job back.
    #: Posted by  on  01/22  at  03:13 PM
  76. If only that choice were mine, not Lonnie's.
    #: Posted by  on  01/22  at  08:04 PM
  77. First of all, Jesus was not perfect. He was human. He despaired on the cross. Despair is a sin. That was the point of his becoming man, that he became man and man isn't perfect. To say that he was perfect is to obviate the point of the sacrifice he was making.

    I appreciate your attempt to be balanced. It's just that a few people from your church have said that so far, and it's just wrong.
    #: Posted by julia  on  01/22  at  09:12 PM
  78. Good for you, then.
    #: Posted by  on  01/23  at  11:01 AM
  79. "and for the most part i think most of these people commenting on here are rude, ignorant, and speaking with emotional blocks."

    And for the most part I have great trouble with people who can't spell or use proper punctuation or grammar (as in language, not your mammie's mammie) and who have pretentions to special knowlege.

    Has anyone checked to see if Emma has any nude pics of herself?
    #: Posted by  on  01/25  at  06:49 PM
  80. Attn: Archbishop Raymond Burke

    pretensions not pretentions
    knowledge not knowlege

    "I have great trouble with people who can't spell"

    You're an idiot.

    Judge not, lest you be judged, the theme of this blog? Yes, I think you are a terrific example.

    An 'archbishop'that is online looking for pictures of little girls? What a minority.

    You are disgusting, but then I think you knew that.
    #: Posted by  on  01/26  at  07:17 PM