Sunday, January 24, 2010

Governor John Lynch: Guiding the Granite State toward Gomorrah

In his classic work entitled "The Antichrist," Fr. Vincent P. Miceli notes, "Homosexuality and lesbianism are both on the increase. And they too, as abnormal human activities, point up the moral landslide that is burying the family and society. The cause of these perverted activities has been unequivocally traced to childhood experiences within the family. Often it is traced to personalities of the parents and to the warped nature of their relationship. Man's biology is not the cause of this abnormal condition. The increase in this form of psychopathology is directly related to the faulty psychological development of the child within a disturbed family. It is an ominous fact that the gay movement is having its way of life redefined as a simple variant of normal sexuality and woven into the fabric of society. Bills are introduced in Congress and State legislatures to make it illegal to discriminate against anyone because of a different sexual preference. This means gays can 'marry' and have access to any and all aspects of society, including teachers' platforms in classrooms of the young..." (The Antichrist, p. 237).

On June 2, 2009, Governor Lynch (a Roman Catholic) succumbed to homosexual agitprop and signed a same-sex "marriage" bill into law while asserting that, "Today, we are standing up for the liberties of same-sex couples by making clear that they will receive the same rights..and respect - under New Hampshire law." (See here).

But the homosexual movement is not about civil rights or equal rights under the law. As I explained in a previous post, the homosexual hate movement has nothing to do with civil rights. It is, rather, an attempt to impose a moral revolution. Writing in the Chicago Free Press, even homosexual activist Paul Varnell admitted this. He wrote, "The fundamental controverted issue about homosexuality is not discrimination, hate crimes or domestic partnerships, but the morality of homosexuality. Even if gays obtain non-discrimination laws, hate crimes law and domestic partnership benefits, those can do little to counter the underlying moral condemnation which will continue to fester beneath the law and generate hostility, fuel hate crimes, support conversion therapies, encourage gay youth suicide and inhibit the full social acceptance that is our goal. On the other hand, if we convince people that homosexuality is fully moral, then all their inclination to discriminate, engage in gay-bashing or oppose gay marriage disappears. Gay youths and adults could readily accept themselves. So the gay movement, whether we acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a sexual liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people's view of homosexuality." (Paul Varnell, "Defending Our Morality," Chicago Free Press, Aug 16, 2000,

Praising Governor Lynch's decision to sign the same-sex "marriage" bill into law, V. Gene Robinson, the first openly homosexual "bishop" of the Episcopal Church who has made ugly comments about the Catholic Church - see here and here, commented "It's about being recognized as whole people and whole citizens."

Meanwhile, anyone who questions the homosexual "lifestyle" can expect to be villified and persecuted. See here for example. Several years ago I wrote a piece for Mothertown News explaining the Church's Magisterial teaching regarding the sinfulness of homosexual acts (while also citing the Church's teaching about respecting homosexual persons), and received a death threat via the Clinton Police Department.

Make no mistake about it, this is a spiritual and cultural battle. On the one side are authentically Christian Churches and many other people of good will from all walks of life who respect either Divine Revelation or Natural Law or both. On the other side are secular humanists (and secular humanism has most of the characteristics of a religion) who place man at the center of all things, apart from God. For such confused people, progress comes when man shakes off the fetters of religious and moral beliefs.

Again, Fr. Vincent Miceli reminds us, "When the atheist, against the vast evidence of the world in which God's 'visible attributes are clearly seen,' decides against possessing the knowledge of God, he simultaneously arrogates to himself the mission of persuading others to embrace his atheism. The mysterious psychological explanation of this drive to win converts to atheism is that this drive is but the passionate dimension of the atheist's decision against God. His denial of God is simultaneously his assertion of himself as being above God. His rejection of God is his projection of himself into the place formerly held by God." (The Gods of Atheism, p. 461).

The consequences of this "death of God" ideology? Fr. Miceli: "Whoever strikes against God strikes down himself. The atheist denying God degrades himself. The atheist exalting himself above God sinks below the level of animate and inanimate beings. Liberation from God is enslavement in creatures. Absolute humanism is the sure road to absolute despotism. Denial of God as truth begets the imprisonment of man in the self-imposed darkness of his own myths. Flight from total dependence on God guarantees for man the utter loss of his freedom in a brutal enslavement either to sheer anarchy or to the tyrant who must eventually arise to impose upon the chaos of limitless human liberty the artificial, inhuman order of the concentration camp." (The Gods of Atheism, p. 461).

Photo courtesy of Mass Resistance.


John Ansley said...

In Considerations, No. 7, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said, "Homosexual unions are totally lacking in the biological and anthropological elements of marriage and family which would be the basis, on the level of reason, for granting them legal recognition. Such unions are not able to contribute in a proper way to the procreation and survival of the human race. The possibility of using recently discovered methods of artificial reproduction, beyond involving a grave lack of respect for human dignity, does nothing to alter this inadequacy.

Homosexual unions are also totally lacking in the conjugal dimension, which represents the human and ordered form of sexuality. Sexual relations are human when and insofar as they express and promote the mutual assistance of the sexes in marriage and are open to the transmission of new life."

What a shame that Gov. Lynch ignored these realities and chose sides in the Culture War against Natural Law and Christian teaching.

Eric Levan said...

Does the Governor receive Holy Eucharist? If so, how is this justified since canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law states clearly: "Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion."

Stewart said...

Lynch stated on April 19, 2007 that he would sign legislation granting civil unions to same-sex couples because he believes " is a matter of conscience, fairness and preventing discrimination."

Conscience? Only an ill-formed conscience. Fairness? That's his merely his own opinion. Discrimination? How so? As John noted, the CDF teaches that "Homosexual unions are also totally lacking in the conjugal dimension, which represents the human and ordered form of sexuality. Sexual relations are human when and insofar as they express and promote the mutual assistance of the sexes in marriage and are open to the transmission of new life.."

This isn't about fairness and addressing "discrimination." What it is about is advancing an agenda which most Americans do not share.

The governor is engaging in radical homosexual ideology.

Ellen Wironken said...

The following is excerpted from an article published by American Life League:

"So-called 'gay rights' groups know very well that their most damaging enemies are the pedophiles who lurk within their own ranks. If the homosexual pedophiles were exposed to the public, the entire sodomite movement would be discredited, and its carefully-cultured 'victim' persona would be destroyed or heavily damaged.

Homosexual strategists Marshall K. Kirk and Erastes Pill recognize the importance of 'hiding' the organized child molesters, and acknowledge their strong connection to the 'gay rights' movement;

Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers. In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be cast as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to assume the role of protector ... jaunty mustachioed musclemen would keep a very low profile in gay commercials and other public presentations, while sympathetic figures of nice young people, old people, and attractive women would be featured (it goes without saying that groups on the farthest margin of acceptability, such as NAMBLA, must play no part at all in such a campaign: suspected child-molesters will never look like victims.

It would be a grave mistake to disassociate homosexual activity from pedophilic activity. The laws that the pedophiles want could only be formulated, enacted, and enforced after society had been sufficiently numbed to the heinous activities of adult homosexuals.

In fact, the homosexuals are hard at work at this very moment in their drive to undercut and eventually overturn laws against child sexual molestation. As with all other Neoliberals, the sodomites simply ignore laws that they do not like. Therefore, it is not surprising that homosexual activists Karla Jay and Allen Young, in their work The Gay Report, say that 73% of all homosexuals have acted as 'chicken hawks' that is, they have preyed on adolescent or younger boys.

According to the FBI Bulletin, a homosexual guide named 'Where the Young Ones Are' listed 378 establishments in 54 major cities where child sex is marketed.

And 'kiddie porn queen' Kathryn Wilson was arrested in Los Angeles in 1982, while in possession a mailing list of 30,000 men who sodomize young children."

Governor John Lynch's statement demonstrates that he is willing to portray homosexuals as "victims in need of protection."

Ted Loiseau said...

The Catholic News Agency just ran this article

(CNA).- Despite an opposing vote from the United States, the Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) Committee responsible for approving U.N. NGOs has rejected the application of a Brazilian homosexual group because of questions concerning the group’s position on pedophilia.

The Brazilian Association of Gays, Lesbians and Transgendereds (ABGLT) faced scrutiny because of allegations that one of the group’s founders was being investigated for posting pro-pedophilia essays on his blog, the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM) reports.

“The UK pushed hard for the group to be accepted,” C-FAM President Austin Ruse said in a statement. “The Obama administration also voted in favor of granting official status to the group.”

The 19-member NGO Committee is a subcommittee of the U.N. Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) which uses various criteria to decide whether to recommend official status for NGOs. Accredited organizations are invited to participate in U.N. meetings. They may deliver oral and written reports and may organize events on U.N. premises.

According to C-FAM, the committee voted against deferring a decision on AGBLT and rejected the application in a vote of eight to six. The Russian Federation, China and Pakistan were among those who voted to reject the application, while the United States, the United Kingdom and Israel were among those voting against its rejection.

The NGO committee member from Egypt urged that the committee not make a rushed decision on any group where there was even the “slightest shadow of doubt” about its involvement in pedophilia. The committee member charged that the answers provided by AGBLT were not yet sufficient to clear the case and assure committee members that the NGO did not have any members or associates involved in such a “deplorable act.”

After the vote, the representative from the U.K. said she deeply regretted the committee’s decision and claimed the vote reinforced the view that the committee could not properly undertake its assigned work.

The observer from the Czech Republic, speaking on behalf of the EU, agreed with the U.K. statement, arguing that the committee acted in a “discriminatory manner” against the AGBLT, claiming the group “has every right to participate in the work of the U.N.”

The observer for Brazil, who had vouched for the organization, charged that the committee failed to evaluate the merits of the organization and had acted as a “censorship chamber.”

C-FAM says that debates in NGO Committee meetings over applications from homosexual rights groups have become “increasingly heated” in recent years. While ECOSOC almost always accepts subcommittee regulations, it has made exceptions in order to accredit radical homosexual groups. Two homosexual rights groups have received a negative recommendation from the NGO committee, only to have that decision overturned by ECOSOC.

According to C-FAM, the ECOSOC council is expected to review the NGO Committee recommendations at its July session in Geneva.

Alan said...

How abuse (most of which has been homosexual in nature) entered the Church:

ACatholicinClinton said...

Ever since Mario Cuomo's "personally I'm opposed but" speech, politicians have been using that line in an attempt to wash their hands of certain agendas and to place some difference between themselves and those agendas.

It didn't work for Cuomo. It doesn't work period.

Site Meter