Outrage (I) (2009) User Reviews

Kirby Dick takes another look at a facet of American life that's considered a 'no-no' to talk about

[Quinoa1984 · 8/10 · 5 May 2009]

Kirby Dick's attitude to material that's a 'no-no' is to say "yes-yes!" His previous film, a near masterpiece chronicling the hypocrisy of the MPAA on American film censorship since the inception of the NC-17 rating, served as an indictment while also having some fun. While a sense of fun only springs up on occasion in Outrage he still gets right what needs to be shown: an in-depth look at the rampant hypocrisy of government's 'in-the-closet' stance. Gay politicians rarely come out of said closet - in the film we see two such promininent figures interviewed at length, NJ governor Jim McGreevey and Massachusetts rep Barney Frank - and Dick's aim with the documentary is to seek out the hows and whys. It's poignant when it needs to be, but above all else it serves up information we as the public should know about figures. It's a truth-to-power assemblage on public figures who, time and time again, have voted against gay and AIDS rights (it may not surprise some to know it's Republicans who are the ones most in the closet-side) while denying what people can see outright.

Dick frames his doc on two key figures, one being Larry Craig, the disgraced congressman who was caught in a bathroom doing something that, perhaps, was equatable to what he described Bill Clinton as doing in the mid 90s. He propositioned a cop for 'something' and fervently denied it in public, despite allegations that there had been other incidents in the past suggesting more than likely that he was and has been in the closet. It's been one of the great follies of the past couple of years, and opened up the discussion that appears in the film (Craig, it should be added, has something like a 16% voting record on gay rights through his career).

The other figure, not with as much national notoriety as Craig, is Florida governor Charlie Crist, a "bachelor" who had married once and quickly divorced in the 70s and remained a single man for as long as anyone could tell - not to mention having a chief aid allegedly going with him around the world on vacations (the trick being that one would go the day before and the other the day after - every vacation for *decades*), and denied up and down being possibly, at all, gay. Despite all matters on the contrary, Crist denies it (after going through a girlfriend and another wife during and after the election), and continues to put fervent anti-gay judges on the state court.

Dick isn't out to "out" anyone of the closet - at least, anyone that would rather be kept private. But these are public figures, and the aim is that of This Film is Not Yet Rated: open up the lid, look inside, and see what makes this subject tick to hell. And with Washington and US politics and media, there's so much to mine and Dick and his team do a very good job. Hell, we even get Ed Koch! Who knew?

I am not gay. I never have been gay.

[lastliberal · 8/10 · 5 October 2009]

The big question whether or not it serves the cause to out those closeted politicians. That is a question that is outside of this documentary.

The big question here is whether or not the makers of this film did a good job of covering the issue. Expectations were high on my part as Kirby Dick did the outstanding "This Film Is Not Yet Rated." I was captivated throughout by the stories and those who told of their experiences with the individuals covered. I really thought my own Charlie Crist would just have insinuations, but I am convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Florida will have her first gay Senator.

The fact shown that the Republican Party used the marriage issue to get votes was repugnant. But, these people will stop at nothing to gain and maintain power. They truly have no shame.

Outstanding.

Revealing and interesting doc that shows the hypocrisy of gay politicians from their secret lives to dishonest voting records!

[blanbrn · 8/10 · 17 October 2009]

Just watched "Outrage" and I must say that it's a very revealing and interesting doc. As many know politicians are crooks, and they lie and cheat and get involved in scandal mostly bribes and sexual affairs. However one secret that has been hidden which of late is becoming more and more the scandal norm in D.C. and of elected officials all across the land, is that many are closeted homosexuals. Who in engage in affairs and sexual encounters with their own gender. You must stand up and cheer for director Kirby Dick who you can tell as you watch really researched this topic well and was well informed as he interviewed many top sources who knew about the secret lives and sexual scandals of many closeted politicians.

Interviews come from many independent internet people and off beat newspaper reporters who have connections to the political world and have even personally seen many of these closeted politicians at gay spots and been told by others of their activities. As gay journalists Andrew Sullivan even gives his take. Also well displayed is the most well known cases beginning with Idaho senator Larry Craig who was caught by an undercover cop in a bathroom stall at a Minnesota airport asking for sex. What's even more shocking is even after this we see in interviews that Craig will not own up and say that he is gay. As shown during his segments and something that is revealing and hurts gay people the most is it shows along with Craig he and all other outed gay politicians continue to vote no and against gay rights bills time after time. As it shows many other lesser known congressman who were found to be gay vote no on gay rights bills.

As mentioned in the film from many gays that are fighting for rights they state that this voting no hurts the community. As those in power will not own up to their own faults and guilt of being gay as it hurts deep down inside so therefore their power of voting no defeats the hurt they feel as it's better to keep it inside. As the film states those with power can hide their homosexuality with no problem take the case of former New York mayor Ed Koch who had so much power that he banned his ex lover from the city! And the historians of literature and film give their history take as Tony Kushner showed with his "Angels in America" that this underworld of gay life in politicians from the right wing dates back many years as mentioned the most notable closeted figure was right wing attorney Roy Cohn. It even mentions many friends and staff members of both the Reagan and W. Bush administration were gays.

It showcases how politicians work around their hidden homosexuality but yet to stay in the spotlight and to look more acceptable for the right wing they will even do a marriage of convenience. Take the case of Florida republican governor Charlie Crist who married just to look more acceptable for the right wing and Republican voters. Yet still Dick shows an honorable and acceptable side when openly gay Massachusetts congressman Barney Frank talks telling viewers for years that he's been open about his homosexuality and that he feels better for it. And most touching is the words of ex New Jersey governor Jim McGreevey who said it right he was living a lie as he was married to an attractive and elegant looking lady named Dana but inside no matter how hard he tried to hide it he was gay. And coming out and opening up made him feel better and it was a justice feel for all.

Overall "Outrage" is a doc to watch it's interesting and revealing you feel anger at the same time a big thumbs up for Kirby Dick who's interviews and resources have exposed many and elaborated on many that were already lit up as more shocking info was told. Even though it's theme is homosexuality it still proves that those in power especially politicians abuse power and go to any means to hide their deepest darkest secrets. And still they feel as if though their actions are above the law. Clearly it's a film that showcases hypocrisy at it's best. As in the docs end as many gays would agree ex San Francisco supervisor and slain gay hero Harvey Milk said it best it would be best if all gays open up to the truth not only for themselves but to everyone. As clearly that's the message these closeted politicians should take it would be a better world for them and everyone else.

A Serious And Important Topic Handled With The Intelligence, Respect And Humor It Deserves!

[Michael-70 · 10/10 · 29 April 2009]

This is a new documentary from filmmaker Kirby Dick and it is a pleasure.

Outrage looks at notable people in American politics who actively fight against any legislation that may help gay Americans achieve the same equal rights enjoyed by heterosexuals. But the twist is, these politicians are themselves gay and are living a hypocritical double life.

The film also looks at various journalists, mostly from the independent and underground press who investigate gay rumors and then confront the guilty with the truth and in doing so, effectively "out" them.

Outrage makes the salient point that the reason so many of these intrepid journalists come from the non-mainstream media is because the mainstream media outlets simply prefer to ignore these kinds of stories, in part because of guilt over their own complicity in demonizing something that is not wrong, i.e. being gay.

But those people expecting a salacious film full of trashy rumor and innuendo will be disappointed. Outrage is a well researched and balanced documentary that takes a difficult topic and still manages to find moments of humor without sacrificing the necessary seriousness.

And this topic is deadly serious. People have died as a result of closeted gay politicians voting against AIDS funding and hate crimes legislation. And the elected officials who do that while still enjoying the "gay" lifestyle are beyond despicable, they are downright criminal.

It's no surprise that most of the hypocrites are conservative Republicans and Outrage addresses why there is such a clear disparity between the humongous number of hypocritical politicians among Republicans and the vastly fewer number among Democrats.

As it is explained, when Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter ran for the Presidency in 1976, at that time, it could be argued that both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party were about equal in their support for gay rights.

But starting with Ronald Reagan and continuing downward to George W., the Republican Party has made a dangerous Faustian pact with the arrogant and bigoted leaders of the Christian Right (which is neither).

So, in exchange for plenty of money and votes, Republican candidates have been forced to adopt their hateful anti-gay lunacy, along with their misogyny and complete religious intolerance.

This means that many decent Republican candidates who are firm believers in solid Republican values of small government and creating a pro-business climate are now forced to go along with idiotic policies they don't agree with like banning gay marriage or forbidding adoption by gay couples.

But they have to do it or they won't get the cash or votes they need to get elected in some parts of the country. This is a very sad state of affairs and the Christian Right will eventually destroy the Republican Party, if they have not already done so. You have been warned!

Much of the film looks at some recent, but noteworthy cases of famous gay men who have been caught in double lives like former New Jersey Governor Jim McGreevy and former Arizona Senator Jim Kolbe.

It is completely amazing that all of them, to a person says that finally coming out of the closet was the best thing that ever happened to them with Jim McGreevy saying it most eloquently when he says (I'm paraphrasing) "the only right value is living the truth, not someone else's conception of the truth".

But, for every breath of fresh honesty, there are ten douche-bags like Idaho Senator Larry Craig. This sanctimonious fool has been rumored to be gay for his entire career and was eventually arrested for soliciting sex from a cop in an airport bathroom, and the man still denies he's gay.

But, you know something? I believe him. Senator Larry Craig can engage in sodomy or fellatio all day, every day and that won't make him gay. It just makes him a guy that likes homo-sex.

Outrage even manages to make you feel sorry for the supremely deluded Larry Craig. Really, a guy with this much cognitive dissonance affecting the intimate parts of his life is a man in real, demonstrable psychological pain.

He needs our compassion. He needs psychiatric help. What he doesn't need is a vote in the Senate.

It's the same way I feel sorry for an alcoholic who can't stop drinking, I understand it's difficult, but that doesn't mean I'm going to let you drive a car.

Outrage, director Kirby Dick combines very excellent interviews with a treasure trove of local and national news clips that make the filmmakers points with a hefty sense humor combined with a political stridency that you would think would get tiring, but doesn't.

I happened to see the film tonight at a Preview Screening with Kirby Dick in attendance answering questions and he proved to be as quick witted and knowledgeable as his film.

If Outrage plays anywhere near you, please take the time to see it or most certainly add it to your Netflix queue when it is available on DVD

Your argument sounds more like an emotional outburst than logic.

[scope_72 · 9 May 2009]

Here is a much better logistical argument.

1.The government is involved in marriage.

2.All adult citizens of the United States are guaranteed equal protection under law.

3.Therefore, the government has two choices.

A.Not be involved with marriage at all

-OR-

B.Treat all adult citizens equally

This whole debate is not complicated guys. So if you do not like the idea of gay marriage get used to it, because the authors of the constitution laid down the groundwork for this centuries ago.

p.s. as for your "slippery slope" theory about people one day marrying their pets, it should first be noted that a pet does not have a choice in the matter so it would not be able to be defined as marriage. The pet would not even know that it had been married. In other words, that part of your comments is laughable, and can be construed as very rude. Very similar to a comment like this, "I mean, why would anyone be religious, thats just left over tradition from cavemen." Don't be inconsiderate of others please.

persuasive

[Michael Fargo · 10/10 · 21 May 2009]

I walked into this film with quite a bit of ambivalence on "outting" anyone regarding their sexual orientation. True, it would be nice to live in a world where that isn't or shouldn't be an issue.

The phenomenon of "interalized self-hatred" is something I was introduced to in the early 1990's. It may not be the reason someone--in particular a closeted homosexual--takes a position on a particular political issue, yet this film lines up a number of politicians and people who work in Washington's legislative community and lays out quite convincingly the argument that bigotry indeed is at work in our Nation's capitol, and the suppression of a group of people's rights is achieved through collusion with people who cannot or will not be honest with themselves or the people they represent.

Does exposing these individuals accomplish anything other than the satisfaction of calling a spade a spade? This film makes the case that, yes, in more than a few cases it is worthwhile.

A superb example of the art of film-making, together with passionate testimony from people on one side of a fence that often aren't covered in the mainstream press, this is one of the better documentaries of the decade. I was a convert by the time I walked out of this film.

An Interesting Look, Though Not Quite Hard-Hitting

[gavin6942 · 7/10 · 1 April 2013]

An indictment of closeted politicians who lobby for anti-gay legislation in the United States.

I found something missing here, though I am not sure what. I feel like there was some muckraking going on, but the film never completely raked the muck -- there was still something more they could have done. For one thing, they never really touched the religion connection -- perhaps a gay man is in the closet to try to appease what he sees as God's wishes?

Most interesting is viewing the 2009 film from a 2013 vantage point. Here we have the Republicans pushing for a same-sex marriage ban through a federal amendment. Four years later, we have same-sex marriage spreading to more states and even Rush Limbaugh saying the conservatives have lost the issue. What was seemingly impossible a decade ago is almost common sense now. And what this film shows is a step in that path we have taken as a country.

An Aptly Titled Expose of the Grave, Sad and Cyclical Injustice Being Done to the Gay Community Right This Minute.

[jzappa · 10/10 · 26 September 2009]

Outrage is aptly titled. Very aptly. It is an indictment of closeted politicians who lobby for anti-gay legislation in the U.S. They are dishonorable people who do dishonorable things out of weakness. If one were to tell me they thought this film was too judgmental of its subjects, I would disagree on the grounds that it remains objective to its found footage and interviewees, but I still might understand the opinion. The film is designed to outrage us by showing us the grave, sad and cyclical injustice that is being done to the gay community right this minute. But it should, because it is a view of the subject that is sadly muted in day-to-day consciousness.

The reason we have generally successful politicians in a technologically developed melting pot like, apparently, the United States such as Sen. Larry Craig, Gov. Charlie Crist, Rep. David Dreier and Ed Koch is because people have family and friends whose rights as a person they vote against because they think Charlie Crist is just the most charming guy, or Larry Craig wants to do something as abstract and arguable as protecting our family values. The year is 2009 in a superpower country that claims to the rest of the world to be free and ideal. Is there any significant reason to be nice about it anymore? Kirby Dick went to great lengths to be more honest than anyone else has ever been about the MPAA Ratings Board for his vital documentary This Film Is Not Yet Rated. Doing the same here is the sole key to his achieving a state of pure rage and disheartenment at the vanity, the spinelessness, the disingenuousness required to be embraced as a candidate in the Republican Party in this day and age. Yes, even that one. Of course he seems honest and down-to-earth and brave. The subjects of this documentary appear the same to that very constituency.

In This Film Is Not Yet Rated, Dick actually began an official investigation into the lives of his subjects. Similarly here, he accompanies an investigator already working on uncovering the truth about the candidates who have fought to conform to an ideology in order to use a public office to seal the deal against those who share their pain and deal with it to more constructive ends. We see some of them, too. And they make a lot more sense when they talk, because they're Mass. Rep. Barney Frank, playwrights Larry Kramer and Tony Kushner, and columnist Michelangelo Signorile.

The film is exactly what your conservative family and friends need to see. I know about the unspoken peace treaty on talking politics, and you don't have to. Just recommend a documentary that just blew you away called Outrage and tell them to sit down because they've got to watch it. It beats the eggshell-ridden small talk about school and work and other people.

Well handled tough topic

[sergepesic · 9/10 · 7 June 2010]

Outing somebody,s sexual preferences is a complex thing. People are certainly entitled to privacy, even when they are public figures. The trouble starts when people spew hatred for gay people, vote against their basic rights, and in a same time have gay relationships out of public eye. There is an exception to the privacy rule. When you have a man who testifies about sickness of gay people, tries to cure them from their "perversity" and then gets caught with a young gay male escort, he has it coming. " Outrage" is a very good documentary. It lets the subjects of the story tell us all we need to hear. It doesn't lecture or pressure us , it just tells it like it is.

Politicians and the closet

[jotix100 · 8/10 · 21 February 2011]

About half way through the documentary, Michaelangelo Signorili, speaking directly to the camera, explains how, as a young man, he would be side by side with the school tormentors, scaring and beating those kids deemed to be gay. After all, being against the gays gave him a certain status, and being gay himself, he was excluded from the unfair treatment of the bullies. The actions of some of the politicians believed to be gay, clearly proves this theory to be right. Most of these elected officials voted against any legislation that would give rights to a minority in which they were part of, but which they denied by acting against homosexuals in general.

Kirby Dick's documentary is an expose about the hypocrisy of people in high places that happened to be hiding their sexuality. Three prominent men are showcased as examples of the double standard they lived. Larry Craig, Ed Koch and Charlie Crist are examined in somewhat great detail. These men, while not having openly declared themselves to be gay, have certainly acted against the interests of their constituencies, as it is pointed out by Larry Kramer when he recounts how Ed Koch, the famous mayor of New York, could have done a better job in being influential for the community, had he the courage to admit he belonged to it.

There are courageous accounts by James McGreevey, the former governor of New Jersey, who came out to his state and the nation in confessing he was a gay American. His interview is one of the most poignant moments of "Outrage". Same can be said of Jim Kolbe, an older man whose courage in coming out, rather than being "outed", took some guts to declare his sexual orientation.

Kirby Dick the director of the documentary has a long career of tackling controversial topics. His view on the hypocrisy of the men in the story is an eye opening for many Americans.

Good intentions aren't a substitute for deeply flawed logic.

[rburton66 · 4/10 · 17 June 2010]

How funny that a film about the importance of forthrightness is so often dependent on anonymous sources and hearsay. Its politics aren't repellent at first, as Kirby Dick only outs politicians involved in public sex scandals. But then he just goes after whomever he pleases. Dick goes so low as placing a photo of Rep. David Dreier next to a disco ball and underwear-clad men at a pride parade. Then we're shown an embarrassing slip-up by news anchor Shepard Smith, a lead-in to outing him too. Many of these individuals' sexual orientation is none of our business. Being outed for hypocrisy is one thing; being outed anecdotally is quite another.

The more aimless the documentary gets — and it meanders ceaselessly — the more frustrating its politics become, concealing an inconsistent moral standard with flashy graphics and rousing, but outrageous political claims. "If every gay person would come out of the closet, the gay rights movement would be over," claims one interviewee. This is the film's concluding point, with Harvey Milk discussing the importance of gay visibility. Inexplicably, the film fundamentally refrains from analyzing the irony that most of the high profile public figures outed here would never have gotten their positions if they were openly gay. Dick fails to realize his good intentions aren't a substitute for deeply flawed logic.

43/100

Constitutional Issues

[pthornton-2 · 11 May 2009]

Most of the comments left previously do not address the actual legal aspects of this. The worst offender is lady moon.

The Constitution of the U.S. guarantees each and every one of us Freedom of (and FROM) religion. The separation of Church and State is VERY important in this issue. The word "marriage" is semantics, yet it is the most commonly used term world-wide and that is why advocates use it in attempting to secure the rights they were born with but are being denied.

It is organized religion which is fighting this tooth and nail. Yet it is not organized religion which issues "marriage" licenses; It is states, counties, and cities. States who have changed their constitutions denying same-sex marriage will eventually lose this fight because it it is unconstitutional (at the Federal level) to deny any group the same rights as others.

Granting same-sex couples the right to marry will in no way affect organized religion. Why? Because of their right to practice their religion(s) without government interference; "The Freedom of religion" will protect them, which is as it should be.

Additionally, saying those rights are available through various legal avenues is ridiculous! Does a heterosexual couple have to pay (as much as) $60,000.00 to secure only SOME of the rights? No.

And I'm not gay - I have been happily married to the same woman for over 20 years. I just happen to believe that denying a segment of society the same rights that others enjoy is wrong. Plain and simple. Unfortunately, just as was the case for inter-racial marriages until 1967, it is going to take the US Supreme Court to guarantee those rights.

Outrage-When Hypocrisy Was In Session ***1/2

[edwagreen · 9/10 · 11 October 2009]

Excellent documentary dealing with hypocrisy in our government.

If you are a staunch Republican, you will loathe this piece as it brings out that many of our ardent conservatives are condemning the practice of homosexuality, vote constantly against bills that would help homosexuals, when in reality these legislators are closet homosexuals themselves.

Larry Craig and other Republicans are prominently mentioned here. The Democrats don't get away with anything here either. Disgraced Gov. McGreevey and New York ex-Mayor Ed Koch are mentioned. Some really awful things are mentioned about Koch. Glad I never voted for him. Since Koch has never admitted to homosexuality, I am surprised that he did not take umbrage with this documentary coming out.

Lots of speculation but still extremely revealling

[rozeyhill · 8/10 · 7 July 2020]

This documentary was interesting particularly in how it reveals the cognitive dissonance that featured politicians like James McGreevey and Jim Kolbe experienced in their queer journeys. It was especially touching to me hearing from Congressman Kolbe about how a weight-- a weight that had been upon his shoulders for forty years-- was lifted as soon as he came out. To think that generations of those in politics could've felt this burden lifted from them but stopped short due to prejudice and discrimination is awful.

Still, I am unsure if the methods used by Dick to go about securing justice for the LGBTQ+ community-- through outting closeted gay politicians-- is the best. This essentially ruins the lives of these individuals and while that may be justified in that the legislation they support as anti-gay legislated also harms lives, it is still questionable.

Old hat

[michael-3204 · 4/10 · 6 January 2011]

It's difficult to get a handle on just what "Outrage" wants its audience to be outraged about. Ostensibly, it's the hypocrisy of closeted gay elected officials who support anti-gay legislation (or, at least, vote against pro-gay legislation). Yet the film spends considerable time on Jim McGreevey, the former New Jersey Governor, who was progressive on gay rights issues even while in the closet. And it features commentary from several conservative gays with groups like the Log Cabin Republicans -- people who are not in the closet, yet still support many of the politicians whose voting records the film condemns. Even Mary Cheney pops up, another out lesbian working for the Republican establishment the film takes great pains to portray as virulently anti- gay. Despite all this, the film sidesteps any examination of why someone might be gay and conservative other than the tyranny of the closet, for reasons that escape me. Their presence undercuts the film's basic premise, yet the filmmaker does nothing in the way of offering counter-arguments. Go figure.

The end result is a muddle, neither as thoughtful or penetrating an examination of the closet as it might have been, nor as trenchant or consistent an expose as director Kirby Dick's last film, "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" (about the MPAA Ratings Board hypocrisy). Dick is a skillful enough filmmaker to put together the material he has in a way that held my interest, but it doesn't add up to much and doesn't contribute much to the "outing" debate that, frankly, peaked about 20 years ago. It also doesn't help that the film spends so much time on Charlie Crist, whose political fortunes seemed much brighter when the movie was made than they do now that he has lost his run for the U.S. Senate. That just adds to the feeling that this film is plowing over well-trodden ground that not many care much about anymore, which is probably why the film didn't get very much attention (at least, not compared to "This Film Is Not Yet Rated").

"There's a right to privacy, not to hypocrisy".

[Benedict_Cumberbatch · 22 July 2009]

Kirby Dick's ("Twist of Faith", "This Film Is Not Yet Rated") new exposé is as revolting as it is provocative. Featuring interviews with journalists, activists, media personalities and the film subjects themselves, Kirby exposes all the hypocrisy behind closeted elected officials (Larry Craig, Ed Schrock, Jim McCrery, David Dreier and Charlie Crist, among others) who lied their way into high office, claiming to be morally conservative family men while living a double life.

Naturally, the issue of "outing" these men is morally questionable – but as Massachusetts Representative Barney Frank (a former closeted official himself) says, "There's a right to privacy, not to hypocrisy". And hypocrisy is all there is, since once these men are in power, they shockingly, without exception, work against any and every gay right. Theories are discussed about what causes closeted gay men to join those who work against them, joining forces against what would technically be their "community". An interesting analysis goes way back to Roy Cohn and McCarthyism, and to the kid called a "fag" in school that will join the bully to save his own skin. As simplistic as this example sounds, it certainly has a lot of truth in it.

"Outrage" is a terrific documentary because it isn't one sided. It doesn't suggest that every closeted gay person is a hypocrite, and from a predominantly homosexual point of view (documentarians and interviewees), it's acknowledged how difficult the "coming out" process can be and how each person deserves to have their right to privacy respected. However, all citizens also should know what's behind their superiors' speeches, and the fact that these people are working against homosexuals as they lead double lives themselves is repulsing, heartbreaking, and most infuriating. It's one of the most incendiary, straightforward documentaries I've seen in a while, and I hope it gets enough exposure to provoke some serious discussions.

The so-called log cabin Republicans, elected officials or not, tend to put financial and professional reasons above anything else, and since they chose to live a life of lies, they don't care about the rights other people should be allowed to have. I know gay Republicans who will say "Oh, they make such a fuss about gay marriage and such... you can always live with someone, there's no need to have a paper to prove it", etc. Well, personally, I even agree with that in a way, since I don't think I will ever feel the need to legally marry myself (but I'd like to think that, if I change my mind, I will have the right to do it). But what about the concept of equality? Just because you don't care about it, don't you think John and Stuart should have the right to get married if they want to? I can be accused of being biased myself as I say this, that I'm generalizing all gay Republicans by saying this... which is true. But I firmly believe that what they tend to do is put anything that will benefit them professionally or financially above anything else, including the fight for equal rights and the respect for others. In doing that, they lose their own dignity, and if you support just one of these hypocritical officials, you're one of them.

This is a never-ending discussion, but an important one. It's a question of moral integrity to really know those who are being elected so we can actually claim for our rights – whether you are gay, straight, bisexual, pansexual, asexual, black, white, yellow or blue. 10/10.

Disingenuous

[rockynuar · 1/10 · 8 May 2009]

The basic premise is beyond disingenuous. In a republican form of government, legislators are elected to represent the people who elect them. If a legislator is a closet homosexual or an open homosexual, should be completely irrelevant. A legislator is not elected to pander to special interest groups. Unfortunately, some relatively very small special interest groups are very vocal and have the cash to buy politicians votes. Naturally, when the greater public get wind of it, they really are outraged.

For a closet homosexual politician to vote for the interests of his voter base against the legalization of homosexual practices is not hypocritical, but the only honest thing to do. If he were to vote for the homosexual practices he favors but do not find resonance in his base, that would simply be dishonest. For these reasons, I cannot recommend this film as anything more than simply disingenuous.