The fact that you use the few to represent the whole is an indication that you're not actually being a "truth seeker" in this particular area. If you're seeking the truth, then you know that Ted Haggard is a creep and an unrepentant sinner. NOT the face of evangelical Christianity.
Yet Ted still gathers a flock.
I am guided by my own life experiences, starting with the (married) preacher of our church, running away with my father's (married) secretary. Our family was very active. My dad was the "owner-builder" of the new sanctuary, and I lit the candles and took the offering plates.
My wife and I were married in that sanctuary, because her Catholic church would not marry us.
I was really, really turned off by a chaplain in the Army, who dismissed my moral, philosophical worries, with "son, go kill a Commie for Christ."
What I object to is the idea that the President of the US has to first and foremost satisfy "evangelicals," as if they should wield such power above everybody else.
Taking a recent example in the life of our country, many argue that a significant number of evangelicals refused to vote for Romney for religious reasons alone, giving us the current President.
Finally I am a recovered alcoholic. Now over 21 years clean and sober. I am active and have studied recovery. Catholic churches and moderate Protestant churches in my area provide meeting space for 12 step meetings. None of the evangelical churches have meetings. The prevailing idea there is, you don't need those meetings. We can fix you here.
Like I said, I refer to my life experiences. I don't care very much for any organized religions.
