O They Will Know We Are Christians...


Oh. He's DAVID and the young boys he abused are Goliath? What a twisted hypocrite. Those ignoramuses in his congregation who continue to follow him now should go to jail for stupidity.
It is clear to me now that religion was created to satisfy the depraved needs of the pulpit and it is only in this era that the raped and assaulted can come forward to report these perverse religious leaders without fear. And come forward they should to protect future children from the same twisted fate.
Yeah I was right.
okay I agree that he was a victim and everything but... he was 17. I knew how to say no at 17 if I didn't want to have sex with someone. I did it all the time. I already feel like a dick for saying it but seriously. If I didn't want to have sex with someone I didn't follow them out to a guest house or call them daddy..

"okay I agree that he was a victim and everything but . . . "

Fool, there is no but. Comparing your personal experience of saying "no" to the gangly, awkward 18-y.o. dorks who likely hit on you is hardly comparable.

Were the people who were pressuring you to have sex with them figures of authority? Were they people you were taught throughout your life that you should respect and follow? Were they people who were worshipped by 25,000 every Sunday, 25,000 people that you knew would never, ever believe you, much less take your side against such a powerful predator?

One thing you were right about, though: you should feel like a dick.
Due to his followers, Jesus will never stop weeping.
@5: Thank you.
@6 Jesus died two thousand years ago. Get over it!

how do these people live with themselves?
Now the defenses of an impressionable young person who puts stock in his pastor's religious mumbo jumbo are so low that it would never occur to him to run screaming from his pastor's little "covenant ceremony"—I don't want to blame the victims here—but if some creepy, pumped-up peacock like Bishop Long put me through a "ceremony" like that, well, I would've run from the room and kept on running until my shoes disintegrated in some neighboring state or other.'
-dan savage on slog two days ago.
What 5 said. Personally, I believe that you can consent to sex with an older person as a 17 year old. But just because you can doesn't mean that in every situation it's that easy.

What's the difference between a 21 year old who hits on me in a bar and a 20 year old I meet as a volunteer counselor for runaway gay teens? A lot more than the 1 year that separates the 14/15 year old age gap.

And because of that, Dan's comment that was pointed out by #11 is still just as douchey. I understand it (I probably would have run too.) but it still isn't right.
The difference here between a rock star and Bishop Long is authority. A rock star is trading on fame, money, etc. to draw in willing young groupies. That is much different than a person in authority, who you've been told has a direct line to God, coercing you into sex after setting himself up as a father figure in your life. In at least in one allegation there's reference to him giving a young man sleep medication before initiating sexual contact as well.
I'd just like to point something out:

This Bishop guy has not been found guilty of anything yet. Everything to this point is alleged. Yet everyone here is already condemning him.

Now, don't get me wrong. He definitely could be guilty. In fact, I'd say he probably is.

But if he wasn't a conservative pastor, would he get the same treatment? If he was, say, a well known liberal blogger or activist, would he be vilified like he is?

Just something to think on.
Every time I see one of these my eyes glaze over. I can't even see a refutation exposing the hypocrisy of the church. All I see is, oh, here's another post where angry Dan insults the Christians again.

Stupid Christians! (shakes fist) Many of you persecute gays and lesbians, but look! It is YOU who are sexual deviants! (repeat ... repeat ... repeat ... repeat ... )

Come on, Dan -- what is your point? What is your argument? Who are you trying to convince, and of what?
am I the only one confused by the term "oral sodomy"? is that supposed to be a blowjob or a rimjob? either way, there are terms for that. like blowjob and rimjob. ok, this is a legal document, so they would say fellatio. (what's a more proper term for a rimjob?) but oral sodomy? someone help me out here please.
@18 It's analingus

@4 Given that he has a 25,000 person church, and there are probably people there who have their entire families and most of their friends as members - while perhaps most 17 year olds would have been able to say no and leave, he probably purposely found the most vulnerable 17 year old boys he could find.

He was probably looking for boys who had it rough, perhaps with no dad, whose families were very involved in the church (you don't try that with newcomers, because their families won't think the pastor is above reproach), and he used his power, authority and money to groom them and control them.

Regardless of whether you think that's illegal (as far as I can tell, it's probably not), regardless of the fact that it only works because there are thousands of dupes willing to believe his religious bullshit (which is even bullshit by Christian standards), it still makes him a piece of shit.
asking Slog to Think is asking WAY TOO MUCH....
Long is a ChickenHawk.

get over it.
@16 --- If you can't see the point of publishing stories about the hypocrisy of self-haters, then nobody can say anything to you, i guess....

No one has any obligation to prove anything to you.
Anal sodomy? For a really big surprise, google The First Scandal Adam and Eve. Then click once or twice to get the surprise, which will be...too much work?