How Larry Craig Shows us the Hypocrisy of our Morality

We all know the story by now. Senator Larry Craig, a conservative republican from the quiet state of Idaho, attempted to solicit a male prostitute in a Minnesota bathroom. The problem was that the "male prostitute" was actually Sgt. Dave Karsnia, an outstanding and honorable undercover police officer (in the released tapes, Karsnia only gets riled with Craig for continuing to deny he sent the signals that Karsnia had recorded in his report -- which at one point led Karsnia to say, "I guess I am just saying that I am disappointed in you, sir." Karsnia kept his word and did not call the media and still refuses to become part of the fracas).

Sadly, Karsnia seems to be the only one with some honor in this situation. Craig has shown a incredible lack of honor, good judgment, and personal integrity. He was caught in a dirty bathroom soliciting sex from a man sitting on a toilet next to him. He tried to use his position to intimidate the police officer into letting him go. He lied about his behavior, pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor, and is now trying to blame his behavior on the liberal media.

There is no doubt: this is a shameful episode of personal and political hypocrisy -- and if there is one thing our electorate seems slow to forgive, it is hypocrisy.

But what about the hypocrisy of the GOP, the press, and the public in this mess? It seems at this point like Craig is going to be fried for his infraction. The calls for his resignation are increasing from his GOP ex-friends and the media attention continues to focus on every minor detail of the ongoing saga. In fact, from the first break of this news story, the republicans as a whole completely distanced themselves from Craig to allow him to twist in the wind by himself.

The liberal bloggers are having a field day with this, but they have a good point. Is the reason that Craig is being vilified from every side because (a) he solicited a prostitute in a bathroom stall instead of calling an upscale "escort service," or (b) because he was soliciting a man instead of a woman, or (c) all of the above?

What if he had been caught calling a service for a highly attractive, well-paid escort instead of rubbing some poor guy's foot in a bathroom? I am not saying one is better than the other (if fact, I personally hold that both are sinful deviations from God's design for sex), but it seems that our political leaders do, our press does, and we as a public do. And that hypocrisy is just as wrong -- a poor prostitute is not more evil than a rich one. A man who sells himself for money for his drug fix is not more "defiling" than a woman who does the same. An immoral sexual affair is not worse for taking place in a bathroom than in a bedroom.

My complaint isn't that we see some things as wrong -- it is that we see some things as wrong, and self-righteously assume they are more wrong. The double standards in our morality is simply a reflection of our own hypocrisy.