Gee, offending Ted Haggard because I really see no difference between him and Joe Ratzinger, who we only use "chutzpah" to describe because all three of his chosen organisations failed in their attempts to exterminate the Jews?
definitely. I'm just saying he's not a priest, wouldn't identify as one, the priests (Anglican nor Catholic) wouldn't call him one, and maybe we could call him what he is: for lack of confusion, and so this doesn't go down as evidence for "more pervert priests"*.
*obviously homosexuality is not a perversion, but using your position as a spiritual leader to hit on a guy less than half your age hits a little closer to the mark.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-25 10:06 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-25 10:15 pm (UTC)He's a pastor. And being of a Catholic-hating sect of evangelism, he'd probably be offended if you called him a priest.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-25 10:32 pm (UTC)Somehow, that's really not high on my priority.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-25 11:13 pm (UTC)*obviously homosexuality is not a perversion, but using your position as a spiritual leader to hit on a guy less than half your age hits a little closer to the mark.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-26 01:05 am (UTC)