I see that NRO has been having a discussion about whether a secretly gay man who opposes gay civil rights is necessarily a hypocrite. I tend to agree that the term hypocrisy is bandied about far too easily these days. And Jonah is right, I think, to argue that it means someone who knowingly violates his own publicly professed principles in private. In that respect, Craig is not a hypocrite. When a psyche is as split and damaged as his, hypocrisy is another name for breathing. His record, moreover, indicates that he believes the right role for gay people is not the responsibilities of civil marriage, or even a publicly acknowledged gay identity, or even the decision to risk life and limb in service to country in the military. These are not values the Christianists want gay people to uphold. They believe that gay people, because we are sick, will always seek love and sex solely in public restrooms, that we should never be involved in committed relationships with one another, that we should be barred from serving our country, and stigmatized at every opportunity. And Craig has been consistent in this view, even with respect to himself.

He admitted his guilt and has lived up to the standards the GOP holds for gay people. He is not a hypocrite in this sense. Jonah looks around to find another gay man or woman who opposes marriage rights, civil unions, military service and everything else Craig opposes. Odd that he cannot find any, isn't it? Or that his virulently anti-gay magazine cannot even find one gay writer willing to jump the anti-gay hoop for a few bucks and a think-tank gig. The current GOP, like NRO, is therefore looking for the only openly gay allies they can find: those who actually hate themselves with the consistency and instability of a Larry Craig. There are fewer and fewer of them out there. And the Christianists wonder why the next generation isn't buying it.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.