>No one in this discussion has yet raised the question: where does
>Sullivan, who is gay, get off being a Catholic, and a histrionically
>devout one? "His own prescriptions" obviously derive from his
>Catholicism.
I've been following the AS thread with some interest. I've also taken the time to read some of the stuff on his website, and was a bit surprised by what I encountered there. I didn't find any examples of AS championing monogomous gay sex and criticizing homosexual promiscuity. That's not to say he hasn't done so, only that I didn't see it there.
The first article which caught my eye, and which might be of interest to Christopher, was about the Catholic Church's attitude toward sex. The Church, according to Sullivan, says sanctioned sex has two elements, a "unitive" and "procreative" element. That is, it should take place between two people who use sex as a way to enhance intimacy and for the purpose of impregnating a woman. Sullivan argues that while homosexual sex violates Church doctrine, it is the moral equivalent (in the eyes of the Church) of sex between infertile heterosexual couples, or heterosexual couples that have post-menopausal sex.
He then highlights the hypocrisy of the Church, which urges compassion for the infertile (and is essentially silent on post-menopausal sex) and allows them to marry, but alleges homosexual sex as sin and does not allow homosexual marriage. I'm not an expert on the Catholic Church, but if you take Sullivan's word for it, he makes a good point.
A second article concerned gay marriage, "Marriage or Bust." It makes an excellent case for why gays and lesbians should be allowed to legally marry. In the piece he acknowledges that homosexuals, or at least gay men, might be more promiscuous than heterosexual folk, but that behavior isn't denounced (or defended) either.
He even wrote a good piece arguing that the drug war is foolish and futile.
In any case, I'm in agreement with most other folks on the list - if AS really has criticized promiscuity and the sexual behavior of the gay community, then he deserves a comeuppance. But my initial "exposure" doesn't match the things I've seen attributed to him here and elsewhere.