Most importantly, what right did this blogger have to "out" McCain's chief of staff?

Is it ok to infringe on someone's sexual privacy to make a political point?

"Is it ok to infringe on someone's sexual privacy to make a political point?"

When you're the right hand man for a man who makes a political point of others' "sexual privacy," then I'd say yes.

yeah, we outted a closeted gay Republican! let's all pat ourselves on the back

If you want "sexual privacy" perhaps you shouldn't walk around being a hypocrite.

The GOP is the party of degenerates.

"What else does the reality of Mark Buse's life say about John McCain? Does he see his own chief of staff, someone he has known now for 20 years, as someone who should have no rights ...? Does he see his own loyal chief of staff as someone who should be hounded by Christian conservatives, pressured to enter damaging "conversion" therapy programs, and made a target of violence that is inspired by the hate spewed by agents of intolerance?"

C'mon, Signorile. You know better than this. Buse has no rights? He's an American. Enough said.

He will be "pressured to (enter a) damaging 'conversion therapy program'"? Who does this? I want names. Let's out them because I will report them in a heartbeat on TheFormers.com. At the end of the day, I am willing to bet this is one area where your outing will be unsuccessful. But I am open-minded. Show me.

So, McCain is not entitled to show Christian love to a gay friend? Since when? Relationships and policy are on two separate planes. I can support policies that insure proper penalties and humane treatment for those convicted of crimes, but can I not also go into the prisons where they are incarcerated and serve their needs? Should I just damn them altogether?

So, when are you going to write about hatred and violence targeted at ex-gays? You are a reputable journalist. It's time.

Debbie, please tell me you did not just equate gays with convicted criminals.

"hatred and violence targeted at ex-gays? You are a reputable journalist. It's time."

There is no such thing as an "ex-gay" Debbie. Only a person who has subverted their sexuality due to deep-seated hatred brought on by "Christian (or insert religion here) love".

Amy, of course I did not equate gays with criminals. Please. I was citing an example of how one could have a meaningful relationship with a person while realizing the necessity of supporting policies that would serve the common good rather than the perceived special needs of that individual (i.e., their freedom). This was not a "lipstick on a pig" moment. Come to think of it, that's the way God sees us all. He cares for our needs, not necessarily our wants, and loves us unconditionally. How wonderful it would be to see more of that kind of love in the world.

"Buse has no rights? He's an American. Enough said."

Buse does not have the right to marry who he loves.

11 words are more than enough.

No such thing as an ex-gay, says Beer Batter. What if I said there was no such thing as a gay person, only one who had traded his or her birthright for a "mess of pottage"? I don't go around saying such things because I know better than to insult people whose gay identity goes to their very core. Those who reject the old same-sex self and put on the new self (sorry, I tend to speak in biblical terms) deserve that same kind of respect and understanding. Not to render it is selfish and small-minded, is it not?

On some things, people must agree to disagree ... agreeably, preferably. The world is too complex for any of us to understand it completely. If we did, we'd be God.

"Buse does not have the right to marry who he loves."

But he has the right to marry, doesn't he? He also has the right to love whomever he chooses, and I would defend that right unequivocally. It's constitutional. The "right" to same-sex marriage is not. Even some thoughtful gay activists agree that gay marriage does not sere the greater good.

Sorry, The word is "serve," not "sere" -- whatever that is.

Much as I hate it, let's stop acting like McCain is alone on this policy issue. Obama is no friend of gays either.

Once again, it just seems hypocritical of the republicans. There's McCain's pandering to the f*kdamentalists, as well as the fact that McCain has opposed every gay rights measure in recent years. I realize that Buse needs to work, but how can a relatively "out" gay man work for McCain? Please don't tell me that he can affect change from within, because he's had YEARS to do that, and it hasn't worked a bit. Further, isn't it hypocritical of Palin to grab onto McCain's apron strings if her personal theological beliefs support ex-gay ministries?

Let's recap what we've learned about homosexuality and being republican, shall we?

Mark Foley, Ted Haggard, Larry Craig, Bob Allen, Glenn Murphy, Jr.