Any public official who votes, supports, or is asked questions about GLBTQ issues must be open and honest about their sexual orientation and everything else--no exceptions. Their votes must always be true and never hypocritical.

Private citizens, even high profile ones, don't represent constituencies and their sexuality should remain private unless of course they take dishonest public positions.

Outing people is never ok. It is a violation of privacy and endangers their security. Even if they are fucked up douchebags they still have their rights. Even public officials have a right to privacy when they aren't on the clock. There is a reason we don't spell justice, r-e-v-e-n-g-e in this country.

Although, I also don't think other private citizens should be forced to keep secrets, for example stating they had a relationship with a certain individual.

Actually on further reflection, I feel this is a very very complex issue and needs to be taken on a case by case basis. It seems some actions are justified, that would lead one to appear to be outing, whereas others aren't. For example I don't think a protracted effort to out politicians in this film is justified, but I think the individuals interviewed in the film are perfectly justified in saying what they did.

Public officials are never "off the clock". Outing closeted moral scolds is no vice.

Whenever someone chooses to put their private life into the public sphere, they deserve to be challenged if they represent themselves inaccurately. If a closeted gay elected official refuses to ever talk about or answer questions about his/her private life (good luck with that in this country), then we shouldn't out them. But the moment they start touting their cover spouse, denying their sexual orientation or otherwise implying that they are straight when they are not, we have every right to correct the record.

Same thing with celebrities. I was against outing Anderson Cooper for the whole time that he said he wasn't discussing his private life in public because he didn't want to compromise his journalistic ethics. But the second he went on Oprah and talked about every aspect of his private life EXCEPT his sexual orientation, he became fair game in my book.

Harvey Milk said everyone should be out. I fundamentally agree with him.

GregC and Sam are absolutely correct. The power to decide this issue rests within each and every one of us. Sexual orientation may need to remain private or secret for a myriad of reasons, but if you are voting against my rights and freedoms; then, you should expect to be challenged when you are being hypocritical. Public officials are never "off the clock". Whenever someone chooses to put their private life into the public sphere, they deserve to be challenged if they represent themselves inaccurately.

There are two people I can think of immediately whose lives I could destroy.

One is a conservative commentator (No, NOT Anne Coulter!) who transitioned when very young. She's conservative on most issues, but liberal on GLBT ones. Being stealth makes her more effective.

Another is in an exclusive lesbian social milleiu. If her medical history was made public, she and her partner would be thrown out immediately. She takes stealth seriously - the last time she was outed, their house was firebombed with them in it.

"Outing" for TS women can lead to them being killed. Remember that.

Outing celebs just because they are famous is wrong. Outing someone just because you can is wrong.
That being said when a person is attacking us and our rights and he or she has a closeted history of homosexual activities that is perfectly fine to make public. I would not call that person gay, lesbian or bi simply because those are sociosexual identities which we embrace openly. That person is still sociosexually straight but is a hypocrite to attack those of us who do the same things sexually but have another sociosexual identity.
I am bothered whenever people adhere to a 'drop-in-the-bucket' approach and announce that someone is gay because that person has had or occasionally has same sex relationships even if that person is also having or in a heterosexual relationship. Just as they should not be allowed to dismiss their own homosexual activities we should not dismiss their heterosexual activities and histories.
So yes, announcing that some homophobic activist or politician has a history of homosexual encounters or relationships is fine but it is not acceptable to announce that someone is gay if that person does not identify as gay. Or what has happened to me several times when people have told others that I am gay because of my history even though I am out as bi and the person identifying me as gay knows that I am openly bi.

I think politicians and religious/community leaders earn their outings whenever they vote or speak or act in an anti-gay way. I am thinking of a particular politician who has held office for more than twenty years. Big leather daddy in his private life. I hosted a gay fund raiser for him many years ago. He has never come out, and yet he has done remarkable things for the LGBT community. He should not be outed. I don't care what his reasons are for remaining closeted. What he does sexually is no one's business because he has never judged anyone else and has worked for equality from the beginning of his career.

Since I speak from a T perspective, I'm conflicted on this one. Having spent some years as a leader and founder of a T support group, and having had to escort T people out of the closet before, I am concerned that, if we start outing celebrities and politicians who are T, and we come to our knowledge that they are T (or GLB) because we are in a position where we are entrusted with that information in the position of a support group manager, we cross an ethical boundary. Certainly, if I were managing a T support group these days, and say, the Senate Minority Leader were to come to the meeting, I would not consider it ethically correct to out him, or anyone else at said meeting. I'm not sure if a gay bar would qualify as a private enough place to qualify for this sort of ethical dilemma, however. And I admit to a hatred of the sort of hypocracy that would allow a GLBT person to vote against GLBT interests, just as the LCR makes no sense to me.

It did come out during Mitch McConnell's reelection campaign last year that he was a crossdresser, and he still won - barely. The Democratic candidate didn't capitalize on it. The allegations were not proven. (wink wink).

The entire decision of "outing" anyone who is closeted belongs with the individual. High profile outings are an appeal to the lowest type of "gotcha" politics and pulp sensationalism. If these people are hypocrites that is their problem. It is only our job to take, and make if we have to, a high road.

I do not expect to ever live in a perfect society or world, but when I arrive let my hands be clean and my conscience clear.

Case-by-case basis, of course. But, then again, you can't expect these people to keep quiet if they're talking about their past relationships with someone famous.

Lots of those clips in the trailer I recognize as Larry Craig related. Outing him is no big deal anymore, even though he's not gay and never has been.

Outing is always good.