I would think it’s safe to say that most of my readers know who Bishop Eddie Long is. I also think it’s safe to say that you are probably more familiar with his alleged sexual exploits then you are with his work as a preacher, and that’s ok because so am I.
It was a big thing in the news for a while. Was what these four men saying true or was it all an attempt to exploit the Bishop? That’s what the world continued to ask as the media covered the story progression. Even when the pictures were shown of the bishop, it did little to prove anything other than how surprisingly muscular the Bishop was.
He never even addressed the situation directly, only that he was going to ‘fight these ugly charges’ etc etc. which drew plenty of skepticism, both voiced and unvoiced.
So what happened? Nobody really knows for sure if he did the deeds or not. The lawsuits were settled out of court for an undisclosed amount(we all know those four guys got PAID) and the situation was swept underneath the proverbial rug UNTIL…
…That Happened. Now I understand Fox News doesn’t hold the same level of popularity that it once did but the ‘facts’ are still there. Apparently this dude was also allegedly involved with Eddie Long at one point, got his name tattooed on his wrist and doesn’t want to talk about the situation.
Now let’s just say that the Bishop was able to publicly prove his innocence. You think that this would be happening? Of course not. Even if this guy was the one person that Eddie Long really did sleep with, his story would be irrelevant in the overwhelming ‘light’ of Long’s innocence.
But seeing how Eddie Long probably did do something with those four boys, and still didn’t publicly fess up to it, this fifth one is going to get his fair share of media time and probably a nice check of ‘hush’ money.
So what’s the lesson to be learned from this? The title sums it up pretty up well. Honesty never needs an excuse. It really doesn’t. Even if he came before his congregation and said “Yes I did have sex with those four guys” the next thing you would hear out of his mouth is a profuse apology, not a reason as to why he did what he did.
I had a situation happen to me a year ago where someone accused me of doing something that I didn’t do and told a convincing enough story by twisting a lot of facts to the point where I had to prove to a number of important people that none of those allegations were true. I was beyond pissed and a little hurt by the situation because this was the same person whom I could’ve gotten into a lot of trouble had I chosen to report some of the incidents they’d caused earlier that year but had chosen not to as to not tarnish their name. It was quite the ironic scenario to say the least.
When the time came for me to present my side of the story I simply told the truth. I addressed every listed incident as honestly as possible, even if some of the information I provided didn’t always hold me in the most innocent of lights, I figured that just stating what happened instead of playing hapless victim was the best route to choose.
As it turns out, My honesty ended up poking more holes into my accusers story than any attempt to intentionally poke holes might have. Facts were left out to favor them, not too mention a lack of proof, and they ended up looking worse in the eyes of those people than I initially had.
If these media stories teach us nothing else, it should teach that you have more to lose by lying then you doing by telling the truth. If you did it you did it, and if you didn’t or did something in between the two, then prove that. Who looks worse for their infidelity? Arnold Schwarzenegger or Tiger Woods? I would bet money that Ah-nold bounces back from that quicker than Tiger Woods will. It goes without saying but nobody likes a liar in any situation.
