Terence Weldon, a homosexual activist who authors the "queering the church" Blog, writes, "The Gospel of John is of particular interest to queer people of faith for its repeated references to the “beloved disciple”, or to “the disciple that Jesus loved”. These references make clear that whoever he was, this disciple had a relationship with Jesus of particular intimacy. There’s the well-known scene from the Last Supper where he rests his head on Jesus’ breast (or lap), and at the crucifixion, he is the only man standing among the women at the foot of the cross. He is the one to whom Christ entrusts the care of his mother – rather as a surviving spouse in marriage would assume some responsibility for the care of a mother-in-law. The existence of this special relationship provides much of the argument for the proposition that Jesus’ sexual orientation may have been what we call “gay”. See here.
Like most homosexual activists who seek to justify the sinfulness of homosexuality and even to "baptize" the disordered lifestyle, Mr. Weldon has a perverse tendency to twist facts and to engage in outright falsehood. He refers to the "disciple whom he loved" (John 13:23) in a blasphemous attempt to convince others that Our Lord Jesus had a homosexual orientation. What Mr. Weldon does not mention, being the ardent propagandist that he is, is that the Greek word agapan used in this passage implies the idea of disinterested, pure and dispassionate love. In other words, the love mentioned here has absolutely nothing to do with a homosexual relationship.
In his Encyclical Letter Deus Caritas Est (God is Love) Pope Benedict XVI explains that: "of the three Greek words for love, eros, philia (the love of friendship) and agape, New Testament writers prefer the last, which occurs rather infrequently in Greek usage. As for the term philia, the love of friendship, it is used with added depth of meaning in Saint John's Gospel in order to express the relationship between Jesus and his disciples. The tendency to avoid the word eros, together with the new vision of love expressed through the word agape, clearly point to something new and distinct about the Christian understanding of love.
(Deus Caritas Est, No. 3).
Agape, as our Holy Father explains, refers to a "love grounded in and shaped by faith" as opposed to eros, a term which indicates "worldly" love which is possessive or covetous. (Deus Caritas Est, No. 7).
Terence Weldon has engaged in blasphemy against the Lord Jesus. Blasphemy, as Father John Hardon, S.J., explains, "..is every form of speaking against God in a scornful or abusive way. Blasphemy need not be expressed in speech. It can be purely internal in thought or desire. And it can become externally manifest in actions that are blasphemous twice over: once because of the internal contempt for God which inspires the action, and once again because the blasphemer goes so far as to profess his opposition to God so that others are scandalized by the blasphemy." (Pocket Catholic Catechism, pp. 237-238).
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches us that: "Blasphemy is directly opposed to the second commandment. It consists in uttering against God - inwardly or outwardly - words of hatred, reproach, or defiance; in speaking ill of God; in failing in respect toward him in one's speech; in misusing God's name. St. James condemns those "who blaspheme that honorable name [of Jesus] by which you are called." The prohibition of blasphemy extends to language against Christ's Church, the saints, and sacred things. It is also blasphemous to make use of God's name to cover up criminal practices, to reduce peoples to servitude, to torture persons or put them to death. The misuse of God's name to commit a crime can provoke others to repudiate religion.
Blasphemy is contrary to the respect due God and his holy name. It is in itself a grave sin." (2148).
Blasphemy is in itself a grave sin. In other words, a mortal sin. And if unconfessed, a mortal sin will lead a soul to Hell.
Mr. Weldon has sunk to a new low in his desire to propagandize for the "queer gospel." Pray for him. That he repents and returns to the Lord Jesus and the Church He founded - the one, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church.
Related reading: Deacon Nick Donnelly on Terence Weldon.
Showing posts with label Homosexual Propaganda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Homosexual Propaganda. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Monday, October 03, 2011
Major study shows that changing sexual orientation is possible...Will homosexual propagandists now admit their veritaphobia?
LifeSiteNews is reporting:
"Therapists who favor normalizing homosexuality say that it is impossible to change sexual orientation, and that the attempt to change is inherently harmful. However, the final results of a long-term study published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy has joined hundreds of other studies in concluding that such therapy is both possible and potentially well-indicated for many individuals.
Psychologists Stanton L. Jones of Wheaton College and Mark A. Yarhouse of Regent University are the authors of the longitudinal study, which tracked individuals who sought sexual orientation change through involvement in a variety of Christian ministries affiliated with Exodus International.
The authors note that the study overcomes a primary criticism of same-sex attraction (SSA) therapy data - that the results are not adequately documented over a period of time - by assessing its 98 candidates over a period of six to seven years after therapy concluded.
Jones and Yarhouse’s results show the majority of candidates were successful in their goal of changing sexual orientation, and that the attempt was not harmful on average..." (See here).
Which is why, as this article explains, Dr. Francis Collins, one of the world's leading scientists who works on the cutting edge of DNA, has said that, "Homosexality is not hardwired...whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predeterminations" and "..there is an inescapable component of heritability to many human behavioral traits. For virtually none of them is heredity ever close to predictive."
Translation: while genes might predispose a person toward homosexuality, they do not predetermine the behavior. A person still has free will. Which is why homosexual persons can change their sexual orientation as the longitudinal study proves.
Homosexual propagandists such as Dr. Jerry Maneker, an anti-Catholic bigot who frequently rails against the Catholic Church at his Blog, would have you believe that homosexual persons are born that way and that science validates homosexuality. But the Catholic Medical Association, in Homosexuality and Hope, summarizes the reality:
"A number of researchers have sought to find a biological cause for same-sexual attraction. The media have promoted the idea that a 'gay gene' has already been discovered...but, in spite of several attempts, none of the much-publicized studies...has been scientifically replicated. A number of authors have carefully reviewed these studies and found that not only do the studies not prove a genetic basis for same-sex attraction; the reports do not even contain such claims...If same-sex attraction were genetically determined, then one would expect identical twins to be identical in their sexual attractions. There are, however, numerous reports of identical twins who are not identical in their sexual attractions." (Homosexuality and Hope, Catholic Medical Association, p. 2).
Homosexual propagandists need to reflect very carefully on the hard science which disproves the notion that "gay" people are "born that way." If they don't, it will become increasingly obvious to thinking people that they suffer from veritaphobia.
"Therapists who favor normalizing homosexuality say that it is impossible to change sexual orientation, and that the attempt to change is inherently harmful. However, the final results of a long-term study published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy has joined hundreds of other studies in concluding that such therapy is both possible and potentially well-indicated for many individuals.
Psychologists Stanton L. Jones of Wheaton College and Mark A. Yarhouse of Regent University are the authors of the longitudinal study, which tracked individuals who sought sexual orientation change through involvement in a variety of Christian ministries affiliated with Exodus International.
The authors note that the study overcomes a primary criticism of same-sex attraction (SSA) therapy data - that the results are not adequately documented over a period of time - by assessing its 98 candidates over a period of six to seven years after therapy concluded.
Jones and Yarhouse’s results show the majority of candidates were successful in their goal of changing sexual orientation, and that the attempt was not harmful on average..." (See here).
Which is why, as this article explains, Dr. Francis Collins, one of the world's leading scientists who works on the cutting edge of DNA, has said that, "Homosexality is not hardwired...whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predeterminations" and "..there is an inescapable component of heritability to many human behavioral traits. For virtually none of them is heredity ever close to predictive."
Translation: while genes might predispose a person toward homosexuality, they do not predetermine the behavior. A person still has free will. Which is why homosexual persons can change their sexual orientation as the longitudinal study proves.
Homosexual propagandists such as Dr. Jerry Maneker, an anti-Catholic bigot who frequently rails against the Catholic Church at his Blog, would have you believe that homosexual persons are born that way and that science validates homosexuality. But the Catholic Medical Association, in Homosexuality and Hope, summarizes the reality:
"A number of researchers have sought to find a biological cause for same-sexual attraction. The media have promoted the idea that a 'gay gene' has already been discovered...but, in spite of several attempts, none of the much-publicized studies...has been scientifically replicated. A number of authors have carefully reviewed these studies and found that not only do the studies not prove a genetic basis for same-sex attraction; the reports do not even contain such claims...If same-sex attraction were genetically determined, then one would expect identical twins to be identical in their sexual attractions. There are, however, numerous reports of identical twins who are not identical in their sexual attractions." (Homosexuality and Hope, Catholic Medical Association, p. 2).
Homosexual propagandists need to reflect very carefully on the hard science which disproves the notion that "gay" people are "born that way." If they don't, it will become increasingly obvious to thinking people that they suffer from veritaphobia.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Stacy Trasancos, homosexual activists and dialogue...
Earlier this year I posted on how an Ontario panel, organized by the University of Toronto's Institute for Studies in Education, discussed how to silence religious opposition to LGBT propaganda in schools. See here. Although there are, of course, homosexual persons who are people of good will, the homosexual movement itself is totalitarian in nature and seeks to impose its agenda on all. Even if this means silencing religious opposition.
Most of those who advance the radical homosexual agenda are simply not interested in authentic dialogue. See here for example. Stacy Trasancos discovered this recently when she blogged on homosexual activity and received many insults and even threats directed against herself and her family. Readers of this Blog know that I have been threatened repeatedly. One homosexual activist called the Mothertown News to tell them that he was going to kill me with his high-powered rifle because I had written a piece for that paper explaining the magisterial teaching of the Church regarding homosexual acts.
In his Encyclical Letter Redemptoris Missio (The Mission of the Redeemer), Pope John Paul II said that, "The Church proposes; she imposes nothing." (No. 39). Such was the teaching of Vatican II: "The Church strictly forbids forcing anyone to embrace the faith, or alluring or enticing people by worrisome wiles. By the same token, she also strongly insists on this right, that no one be frightened away from the faith by unjust vexations on the part of others." (Ad Gentes, No. 13). And Dignitatis Humanae, No. 10 teaches that: "It is one of the major tenets of Catholic doctrine that man's response to God in faith must be free: no one therefore is to be forced to embrace the Christian faith against his own will. This doctrine is contained in the word of God and it was constantly proclaimed by the Fathers of the Church. The act of faith is of its very nature a free act. Man, redeemed by Christ the Savior and through Christ Jesus called to be God's adopted son, cannot give his adherence to God revealing Himself unless, under the drawing of the Father, he offers to God the reasonable and free submission of faith. It is therefore completely in accord with the nature of faith that in matters religious every manner of coercion on the part of men should be excluded. In consequence, the principle of religious freedom makes no small contribution to the creation of an environment in which men can without hindrance be invited to the Christian faith, embrace it of their own free will, and profess it effectively in their whole manner of life."
But while the Church respects freedom of conscience and shuns any form of coercion, our Holy Father reminds us that, "We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one's own ego and desires.
We, however, have a different goal: the Son of God, the true man. He is the measure of true humanism. An "adult" faith is not a faith that follows the trends of fashion and the latest novelty; a mature adult faith is deeply rooted in friendship with Christ. It is this friendship that opens us up to all that is good and gives us a criterion by which to distinguish the true from the false, and deceit from truth."
This dictatorship of relativism seeks to impose its immoral agenda on Christians in the name of "tolerance." But this "tolerance" is a sham. It is simply an attempt to make an idol out of a false conception of freedom. Again, our Holy Father explains that, "..what clearly stands behind the modern era's radical demand for freedom is the promise: You will be like God...The implicit goal of all modern freedom movements is, in the end, to be like a god, dependent on nothing and nobody, with one's own freedom not restricted by anyone else's...The primeval error of such a radically developed desire for freedom lies in the idea of a divinity that is conceived as being purely egotistical. The god thus conceived of is, not God, but an idol, indeed, the image of what the Christian tradition would call the devil, the anti-god, because therein lies the radical opposite of the true God: the true God is, of his own nature, being-for (Father), being-from (Son), and being-with (Holy Spirit). Yet man is in the image of God precisely because the being-for , from, and with constitute the basic anthropological shape. Whenever people try to free themselves from this, they are moving, not toward divinity, but toward dehumanizing, toward the destruction of being itself through the destruction of truth. The Jacobin variant of the idea of liberation...is a rebellion against being human in itself, rebellion against truth, and that is why it leads people - as Sartre percipiently observed - into a self-contradictory existence that we call hell. It has thus become fairly clear that freedom is linked to a yardstick, the yardstick of reality - to truth*. Freedom to destroy oneself or to destroy others is not freedom but a diabolical parody. The freedom of man is a shared freedom, freedom in a coexistence of other freedoms, which are mutually limiting and thus mutually supportive: freedom must be measured according to what I am, what we are - otherwise it abolishes itself."
In the name of "tolerance," the New World Order seeks to impose its rebellion from truth on all. It will not tolerate any dissent, any disagreement. Coercion is an acceptable tool in a dictatorship. Soon, the New Order will use violence to achieve its goals and not just coercion and propaganda. In the end, every dictatorship must rely on violence in its vain attempt to hold onto power.
Already the signs are emerging. Catholics who oppose homosexuality on religious and moral grounds are being demonized. So too the teaching authority of the Catholic Church. See here for example. Before a dictatorship can resort to violence, it must first demonize the group it wants to suppress or eliminate.
Most of those who advance the radical homosexual agenda are simply not interested in authentic dialogue. See here for example. Stacy Trasancos discovered this recently when she blogged on homosexual activity and received many insults and even threats directed against herself and her family. Readers of this Blog know that I have been threatened repeatedly. One homosexual activist called the Mothertown News to tell them that he was going to kill me with his high-powered rifle because I had written a piece for that paper explaining the magisterial teaching of the Church regarding homosexual acts.
In his Encyclical Letter Redemptoris Missio (The Mission of the Redeemer), Pope John Paul II said that, "The Church proposes; she imposes nothing." (No. 39). Such was the teaching of Vatican II: "The Church strictly forbids forcing anyone to embrace the faith, or alluring or enticing people by worrisome wiles. By the same token, she also strongly insists on this right, that no one be frightened away from the faith by unjust vexations on the part of others." (Ad Gentes, No. 13). And Dignitatis Humanae, No. 10 teaches that: "It is one of the major tenets of Catholic doctrine that man's response to God in faith must be free: no one therefore is to be forced to embrace the Christian faith against his own will. This doctrine is contained in the word of God and it was constantly proclaimed by the Fathers of the Church. The act of faith is of its very nature a free act. Man, redeemed by Christ the Savior and through Christ Jesus called to be God's adopted son, cannot give his adherence to God revealing Himself unless, under the drawing of the Father, he offers to God the reasonable and free submission of faith. It is therefore completely in accord with the nature of faith that in matters religious every manner of coercion on the part of men should be excluded. In consequence, the principle of religious freedom makes no small contribution to the creation of an environment in which men can without hindrance be invited to the Christian faith, embrace it of their own free will, and profess it effectively in their whole manner of life."
But while the Church respects freedom of conscience and shuns any form of coercion, our Holy Father reminds us that, "We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one's own ego and desires.
We, however, have a different goal: the Son of God, the true man. He is the measure of true humanism. An "adult" faith is not a faith that follows the trends of fashion and the latest novelty; a mature adult faith is deeply rooted in friendship with Christ. It is this friendship that opens us up to all that is good and gives us a criterion by which to distinguish the true from the false, and deceit from truth."
This dictatorship of relativism seeks to impose its immoral agenda on Christians in the name of "tolerance." But this "tolerance" is a sham. It is simply an attempt to make an idol out of a false conception of freedom. Again, our Holy Father explains that, "..what clearly stands behind the modern era's radical demand for freedom is the promise: You will be like God...The implicit goal of all modern freedom movements is, in the end, to be like a god, dependent on nothing and nobody, with one's own freedom not restricted by anyone else's...The primeval error of such a radically developed desire for freedom lies in the idea of a divinity that is conceived as being purely egotistical. The god thus conceived of is, not God, but an idol, indeed, the image of what the Christian tradition would call the devil, the anti-god, because therein lies the radical opposite of the true God: the true God is, of his own nature, being-for (Father), being-from (Son), and being-with (Holy Spirit). Yet man is in the image of God precisely because the being-for , from, and with constitute the basic anthropological shape. Whenever people try to free themselves from this, they are moving, not toward divinity, but toward dehumanizing, toward the destruction of being itself through the destruction of truth. The Jacobin variant of the idea of liberation...is a rebellion against being human in itself, rebellion against truth, and that is why it leads people - as Sartre percipiently observed - into a self-contradictory existence that we call hell. It has thus become fairly clear that freedom is linked to a yardstick, the yardstick of reality - to truth*. Freedom to destroy oneself or to destroy others is not freedom but a diabolical parody. The freedom of man is a shared freedom, freedom in a coexistence of other freedoms, which are mutually limiting and thus mutually supportive: freedom must be measured according to what I am, what we are - otherwise it abolishes itself."
In the name of "tolerance," the New World Order seeks to impose its rebellion from truth on all. It will not tolerate any dissent, any disagreement. Coercion is an acceptable tool in a dictatorship. Soon, the New Order will use violence to achieve its goals and not just coercion and propaganda. In the end, every dictatorship must rely on violence in its vain attempt to hold onto power.
Already the signs are emerging. Catholics who oppose homosexuality on religious and moral grounds are being demonized. So too the teaching authority of the Catholic Church. See here for example. Before a dictatorship can resort to violence, it must first demonize the group it wants to suppress or eliminate.
Friday, July 08, 2011
St. Cecilia's "Rainbow Ministry" is advancing the lie of "homosexual love."
Father Leonard Kennedy, c.s.b., in a review of Dr. Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg's book "The Battle for Normality," writes: "...homosexual 'love' is not love but ego-satisfaction, and acting it out only deepens the void inside. That is why 'the vast majority of active homosexuals are promiscuous, and much more so than promiscuous heterosexuals.' The fairy tale faithful homosexual 'union' is a propaganda item, to win privileges from the law and acceptance within Christian churches."
Dutch psychologist Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, Ph.D., a specialist on homosexuality, says that the claim that homosexuality is normal is one of those statements that are "so foolish that only intellectuals could believe them." It is like saying that anorexia nervosa is healthy. Dr. Aardweg notes that, "The term neurotic describes such relationships well. It suggests the ego-centeredness of the relationship; the attention-seeking instead of loving...Neurotic, in short, suggests all kinds of dramas and childish conflicts as well as the basic disinterestedness in the partner, notwithstanding the shallow pretensions of 'love.' Nowhere is there more self-deception in the homosexual than in his representation of himself as a lover. One partner is important to the other only insofar as he satisfies that other's needs. Real, unselfish love for a desired partner would, in fact, end up destroying homosexual 'love'!" (Dr. Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, The Battle for Normality, Ignatius Press, 1997, pp. 62-63).
At its website, St. Cecilia's "rainbow ministry" has a photograph of the late Franciscan Father Mychal Judge and a quote from the priest who was a self-identified homosexual: "Is there so much love in the world that we can afford to discriminate against any kind of love?" Fr. Mychal here assumes that all discrimination is "unjust." While it is true that we must accept homosexual persons with "respect, compassion and sensitivity," we're also told in 2358 of the Catechism that the homosexual inclination is "objectively disordered." And this paragraph does not say that homosexual persons must be accepted "without discrimination." Rather, it states clearly, "Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided." What's the point I'm trying to make? Not all discrimination is unjust. "Homosexual love" is not possible because it seeks to transform the love of friendship between two people of the same sex into conjugal love. But conjugal love requires psychological and physical complementarity which can only exist between opposite sexes:
"There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family. Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against the natural moral law. Homosexual acts 'close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.'" (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, No. 4).
So the answer to Fr. Judge's question is: yes. Not all discrimination is unjust. Reflect upon Pope Benedict XVI's teaching in No. 11 of Deus Caritas Est: "The first novelty of biblical faith consists, as we have seen, in its image of God. The second, essentially connected to this, is found in the image of man. The biblical account of creation speaks of the solitude of Adam, the first man, and God's decision to give him a helper. Of all other creatures, not one is capable of being the helper that man needs, even though he has assigned a name to all the wild beasts and birds and thus made them fully a part of his life. So God forms woman from the rib of man. Now Adam finds the helper that he needed: 'This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh' (Gen 2:23). Here one might detect hints of ideas that are also found, for example, in the myth mentioned by Plato, according to which man was originally spherical, because he was complete in himself and self-sufficient. But as a punishment for pride, he was split in two by Zeus, so that now he longs for his other half, striving with all his being to possess it and thus regain his integrity. While the biblical narrative does not speak of punishment, the idea is certainly present that man is somehow incomplete, driven by nature to seek in another the part that can make him whole, the idea that only in communion with the opposite sex can he become 'complete'. The biblical account thus concludes with a prophecy about Adam: 'Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife and they become one flesh' (Gen 2:24).
Two aspects of this are important. First, eros is somehow rooted in man's very nature; Adam is a seeker, who 'abandons his mother and father' in order to find woman; only together do the two represent complete humanity and become 'one flesh'. The second aspect is equally important. From the standpoint of creation, eros directs man towards marriage, to a bond which is unique and definitive; thus, and only thus, does it fulfil its deepest purpose. Corresponding to the image of a monotheistic God is monogamous marriage. Marriage based on exclusive and definitive love becomes the icon of the relationship between God and his people and vice versa. God's way of loving becomes the measure of human love. This close connection between eros and marriage in the Bible has practically no equivalent in extra-biblical literature."
This is the teaching of the Catholic Church. The "Rainbow Ministry" of St. Cecilia's Parish in Boston, the "Gay Pride" parish, does not advance this teaching but instead a dissenting view. Thus far, after weeks of ongoing controversy, Cardinal Sean O'Malley has not addressed the dissent of the "Rainbow Ministry." It is not enough to simply articulate or re-affirm the teaching of the Church in a Blog post. A Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ has a deeper responsibility than that. See here.
Dutch psychologist Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, Ph.D., a specialist on homosexuality, says that the claim that homosexuality is normal is one of those statements that are "so foolish that only intellectuals could believe them." It is like saying that anorexia nervosa is healthy. Dr. Aardweg notes that, "The term neurotic describes such relationships well. It suggests the ego-centeredness of the relationship; the attention-seeking instead of loving...Neurotic, in short, suggests all kinds of dramas and childish conflicts as well as the basic disinterestedness in the partner, notwithstanding the shallow pretensions of 'love.' Nowhere is there more self-deception in the homosexual than in his representation of himself as a lover. One partner is important to the other only insofar as he satisfies that other's needs. Real, unselfish love for a desired partner would, in fact, end up destroying homosexual 'love'!" (Dr. Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, The Battle for Normality, Ignatius Press, 1997, pp. 62-63).
At its website, St. Cecilia's "rainbow ministry" has a photograph of the late Franciscan Father Mychal Judge and a quote from the priest who was a self-identified homosexual: "Is there so much love in the world that we can afford to discriminate against any kind of love?" Fr. Mychal here assumes that all discrimination is "unjust." While it is true that we must accept homosexual persons with "respect, compassion and sensitivity," we're also told in 2358 of the Catechism that the homosexual inclination is "objectively disordered." And this paragraph does not say that homosexual persons must be accepted "without discrimination." Rather, it states clearly, "Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided." What's the point I'm trying to make? Not all discrimination is unjust. "Homosexual love" is not possible because it seeks to transform the love of friendship between two people of the same sex into conjugal love. But conjugal love requires psychological and physical complementarity which can only exist between opposite sexes:
"There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family. Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against the natural moral law. Homosexual acts 'close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.'" (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, No. 4).
So the answer to Fr. Judge's question is: yes. Not all discrimination is unjust. Reflect upon Pope Benedict XVI's teaching in No. 11 of Deus Caritas Est: "The first novelty of biblical faith consists, as we have seen, in its image of God. The second, essentially connected to this, is found in the image of man. The biblical account of creation speaks of the solitude of Adam, the first man, and God's decision to give him a helper. Of all other creatures, not one is capable of being the helper that man needs, even though he has assigned a name to all the wild beasts and birds and thus made them fully a part of his life. So God forms woman from the rib of man. Now Adam finds the helper that he needed: 'This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh' (Gen 2:23). Here one might detect hints of ideas that are also found, for example, in the myth mentioned by Plato, according to which man was originally spherical, because he was complete in himself and self-sufficient. But as a punishment for pride, he was split in two by Zeus, so that now he longs for his other half, striving with all his being to possess it and thus regain his integrity. While the biblical narrative does not speak of punishment, the idea is certainly present that man is somehow incomplete, driven by nature to seek in another the part that can make him whole, the idea that only in communion with the opposite sex can he become 'complete'. The biblical account thus concludes with a prophecy about Adam: 'Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife and they become one flesh' (Gen 2:24).
Two aspects of this are important. First, eros is somehow rooted in man's very nature; Adam is a seeker, who 'abandons his mother and father' in order to find woman; only together do the two represent complete humanity and become 'one flesh'. The second aspect is equally important. From the standpoint of creation, eros directs man towards marriage, to a bond which is unique and definitive; thus, and only thus, does it fulfil its deepest purpose. Corresponding to the image of a monotheistic God is monogamous marriage. Marriage based on exclusive and definitive love becomes the icon of the relationship between God and his people and vice versa. God's way of loving becomes the measure of human love. This close connection between eros and marriage in the Bible has practically no equivalent in extra-biblical literature."
This is the teaching of the Catholic Church. The "Rainbow Ministry" of St. Cecilia's Parish in Boston, the "Gay Pride" parish, does not advance this teaching but instead a dissenting view. Thus far, after weeks of ongoing controversy, Cardinal Sean O'Malley has not addressed the dissent of the "Rainbow Ministry." It is not enough to simply articulate or re-affirm the teaching of the Church in a Blog post. A Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ has a deeper responsibility than that. See here.
Thursday, June 02, 2011
The well-documented and strong correlation between male homosexuality and child sexual abuse
Brian Clowes, in an essay entitled "Homosexuality and the Church Crisis," explains that, "Due to clergy sex abuse scandals centered primarily in the Northern hemisphere, the moral authority of the Roman Catholic Church has been subjected to an opportunistic siege by prominent individuals and organizations who see the chance to advance their goals, including the ordination of women and the suspension of the requirement for priestly celibacy.
There is also a strongly defensive element to this strategy. Opponents of the Church know that there is a well-documented and strong correlation between male homosexuality and child sexual abuse, but claim that there is no evidence supporting this connection.
And, of course, those who are currently attacking the Church hope that they can undermine its moral authority to preach on the sinfulness of homosexual behavior and weaken its opposition to ersatz homosexual 'marriage.'
This paper demonstrates that there is indeed a very strong link between male homosexuality and child sexual abuse. It also shows that there is a similar rate of child sexual abuse among other very large groups of adult males (e.g., Protestant clergy, who are usually married), thus proving that celibacy is not the root of the problem — homosexuality is...
A very small number of Catholic priests and other leaders have taken advantage of their positions of authority and influence in order to gain sexual favors or to take advantage of the helpless. The problem of clerical child sexual molestation, particularly in the United States and Europe, has been widely exposed and publicized over the past decade.
During the crisis currently being discussed, homophile activists within and outside the Catholic Church have done everything they can to divert attention away from even the possibility that there may be a higher percentage of homosexuals among the priesthood than in the general public, and that this may be the root cause of the problem of child sexual molestation within the Church. These activists particularly seek to deny the link between homosexuality and child sexual molestation.
For example, the dissenting organization 'Dignity USA' kicked off its 'Stop Blaming Gay Priests' campaign in 2002. The group said 'DigntyUSA [sic] is calling on the U.S. Catholic bishops to stop blaming gay priests for the clergy sexual abuse scandal. All credible evidence discounts any link between the molestation of children and homosexuality.'
More recently, Tarcisio Cardinal Bertone, the Holy See's Secretary of State, suggested that there is a link between homosexuality and child sexual abuse. 'Gay' groups all over the world reacted with horror and fury, and echoed what Dignity USA had said years before. As one example, Rolando Jiminéz, president of Chile's Movement for Homosexual Integration and Liberation, said that 'No reputable study exists to support the cardinal's claims.'
The situation has become so charged that anyone who even suggests that there may be a connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse is instantly and reflexively labeled a 'homophobe' and a 'gay basher.' The powerful homosexual lobby reacts instinctively to negative publicity and information by "ritually defaming" those who dare raise their voices. Organized homosexual groups and their supporters first attempt to ignore the evidence, or, if it simply cannot be disregarded, aggressively smear and discredit those who produced it.
Such wholesale dismissal of documented facts, and the accompanying refusal to even discuss the possibility of a link between an active homosexual lifestyle and child sexual abuse, is a grave disservice not only to the victims, but to society at large. Obviously, a proven link between homosexual orientation and child sexual molestation would badly damage the carefully crafted public relations image of the 'gay rights' movement. Therefore, instead of calmly and rationally discussing the issues, homosexual rights leaders subscribe to the axiom 'the best defense is a good [and loud] offense.' They remain in a permanent attack mode.
In general, the media and liberal groups seem almost pathologically careful to avoid stereotyping an entire group of people because of the actions of just a few. For example, we are told repeatedly that we must not perceive jihadists as representing Islam. Yet, when dealing with the Catholic Church, the media and others cast even the vestiges of decency and restraint to the wind. As one example, a writer described the Vatican as 'an international criminal conspiracy to protect child rapists.' Naturally, the Pope is singled out for the most vicious and ridiculous abuse. According to The Irish Times, 'Pope Benedict has made worse just about everything that is wrong with the Roman Catholic Church and is directly responsible for engineering the global cover-up of child rape perpetrated by priests.'
The only way to get at the root of the problem of priestly child molestation is to ignore this smear campaign and proceed methodically. We must first objectively study all facts relating to the situation, and then muster the courage to respond by taking the appropriate steps. If this is not done, any effort to address the problem, no matter how well intentioned or vigorously pursued, will be utterly squandered.
Certainly we owe it to the victims — and to the Catholic Church itself — to determine the truth behind this volatile topic...Dignity USA and other homosexual groups strenuously deny any connection whatever between a homosexual orientation and child sexual molestation. They repeatedly claim that 'All credible evidence discounts any link between the molestation of children and homosexuality.'
Yet these groups seem curiously reluctant to cite this 'credible evidence.'
In fact, a number of studies performed over a period spanning more than half a century — many of which were performed by homosexuals or their sympathizers — have shown that an extremely large percentage of sexually active homosexuals also participate in child sexual molestation.
This is not 'homophobia' or 'hatred.' This is mere scientific fact. For example:
Homosexual Alfred Kinsey, the USA's preeminent sexual researcher, found in 1948 that 37 percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old.
A recent study published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that 'The best epidemiological evidence indicates that only 2 - 4% of men attracted to adults prefer men. In contrast, around 25 - 40% of men attracted to children prefer boys. Thus, the rate of homosexual attraction is 6-20 times higher among pedophiles.'
Another recent study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that '... all but 9 of the 48 homosexual men preferred the youngest two male age categories.' These age categories were fifteen and twenty years old.
A third study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that 'Pedophilia appears to have a greater than chance association with two other statistically infrequent phenomena. The first of these is homosexuality ... Recent surveys estimate the prevalence of homosexuality, among men attracted to adults, in the neighborhood of 2%. In contrast, the prevalence of homosexuality among pedophiles may be as high as 30 - 40%.'
A study in the Journal of Sex Research noted that '... the proportion of sex offenders against male children among homosexual men is substantially larger than the proportion of sex offenders against female children among heterosexual men ... the development of pedophilia is more closely linked with homosexuality than with heterosexuality.'
A study of 229 convicted child molesters published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that 'eighty-six percent of [sexual] offenders against males described themselves as homosexual or bisexual.'
A study by The Institute for Sex Research, which was founded by Alfred Kinsey, determined that 25% of white homosexual men have had sex with boys sixteen years and younger.
There are occasional desultory attempts to deny or obscure the fact that a disproportionately high percentage of active homosexuals sexually molest children. These studies are invariably afflicted with one or more fatal flaws.
A typical example, oft quoted by 'gay rights' activists, is the July 1994 Pediatrics article by Jenny, Roesler and Poyer that says 'Using the data from our study, the 95% confidence limits of the risk children would identify recognizably homosexual adults as the potential abuser, are from 0% to 3.1%. These limits are within current estimates of the prevalence of homosexuality in the general community.'
The fatal flaw of this study is that it examined sexually abused children with a mean age of just 6.1 years. Children this young are usually targets of true pedophiles, those persons with no sexual attraction to adults of either sex. By contrast, homosexual pedophiles are usually classified as 'ephebophiles,' persons sexually attracted to pubescent or post pubescent children." See full essay here.
The dishonesty of the homosexual hate movement continues unabated. One radical homosexual propaganda Blog is a prime example of this. See here. Last year I documented how a priest from the Archdiocese of Boston criticized Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone for saying that homosexuality is at the root of the clerical abuse crisis. See here. Father Emile Boutin was later arrested and charged with indecent assault against another male.
If it's the truth which sets us free (John 8:32), why is our culture so afraid of pursuing the truth about male homosexuality and child sexual abuse?
There is also a strongly defensive element to this strategy. Opponents of the Church know that there is a well-documented and strong correlation between male homosexuality and child sexual abuse, but claim that there is no evidence supporting this connection.
And, of course, those who are currently attacking the Church hope that they can undermine its moral authority to preach on the sinfulness of homosexual behavior and weaken its opposition to ersatz homosexual 'marriage.'
This paper demonstrates that there is indeed a very strong link between male homosexuality and child sexual abuse. It also shows that there is a similar rate of child sexual abuse among other very large groups of adult males (e.g., Protestant clergy, who are usually married), thus proving that celibacy is not the root of the problem — homosexuality is...
A very small number of Catholic priests and other leaders have taken advantage of their positions of authority and influence in order to gain sexual favors or to take advantage of the helpless. The problem of clerical child sexual molestation, particularly in the United States and Europe, has been widely exposed and publicized over the past decade.
During the crisis currently being discussed, homophile activists within and outside the Catholic Church have done everything they can to divert attention away from even the possibility that there may be a higher percentage of homosexuals among the priesthood than in the general public, and that this may be the root cause of the problem of child sexual molestation within the Church. These activists particularly seek to deny the link between homosexuality and child sexual molestation.
For example, the dissenting organization 'Dignity USA' kicked off its 'Stop Blaming Gay Priests' campaign in 2002. The group said 'DigntyUSA [sic] is calling on the U.S. Catholic bishops to stop blaming gay priests for the clergy sexual abuse scandal. All credible evidence discounts any link between the molestation of children and homosexuality.'
More recently, Tarcisio Cardinal Bertone, the Holy See's Secretary of State, suggested that there is a link between homosexuality and child sexual abuse. 'Gay' groups all over the world reacted with horror and fury, and echoed what Dignity USA had said years before. As one example, Rolando Jiminéz, president of Chile's Movement for Homosexual Integration and Liberation, said that 'No reputable study exists to support the cardinal's claims.'
The situation has become so charged that anyone who even suggests that there may be a connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse is instantly and reflexively labeled a 'homophobe' and a 'gay basher.' The powerful homosexual lobby reacts instinctively to negative publicity and information by "ritually defaming" those who dare raise their voices. Organized homosexual groups and their supporters first attempt to ignore the evidence, or, if it simply cannot be disregarded, aggressively smear and discredit those who produced it.
Such wholesale dismissal of documented facts, and the accompanying refusal to even discuss the possibility of a link between an active homosexual lifestyle and child sexual abuse, is a grave disservice not only to the victims, but to society at large. Obviously, a proven link between homosexual orientation and child sexual molestation would badly damage the carefully crafted public relations image of the 'gay rights' movement. Therefore, instead of calmly and rationally discussing the issues, homosexual rights leaders subscribe to the axiom 'the best defense is a good [and loud] offense.' They remain in a permanent attack mode.
In general, the media and liberal groups seem almost pathologically careful to avoid stereotyping an entire group of people because of the actions of just a few. For example, we are told repeatedly that we must not perceive jihadists as representing Islam. Yet, when dealing with the Catholic Church, the media and others cast even the vestiges of decency and restraint to the wind. As one example, a writer described the Vatican as 'an international criminal conspiracy to protect child rapists.' Naturally, the Pope is singled out for the most vicious and ridiculous abuse. According to The Irish Times, 'Pope Benedict has made worse just about everything that is wrong with the Roman Catholic Church and is directly responsible for engineering the global cover-up of child rape perpetrated by priests.'
The only way to get at the root of the problem of priestly child molestation is to ignore this smear campaign and proceed methodically. We must first objectively study all facts relating to the situation, and then muster the courage to respond by taking the appropriate steps. If this is not done, any effort to address the problem, no matter how well intentioned or vigorously pursued, will be utterly squandered.
Certainly we owe it to the victims — and to the Catholic Church itself — to determine the truth behind this volatile topic...Dignity USA and other homosexual groups strenuously deny any connection whatever between a homosexual orientation and child sexual molestation. They repeatedly claim that 'All credible evidence discounts any link between the molestation of children and homosexuality.'
Yet these groups seem curiously reluctant to cite this 'credible evidence.'
In fact, a number of studies performed over a period spanning more than half a century — many of which were performed by homosexuals or their sympathizers — have shown that an extremely large percentage of sexually active homosexuals also participate in child sexual molestation.
This is not 'homophobia' or 'hatred.' This is mere scientific fact. For example:
Homosexual Alfred Kinsey, the USA's preeminent sexual researcher, found in 1948 that 37 percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old.
A recent study published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that 'The best epidemiological evidence indicates that only 2 - 4% of men attracted to adults prefer men. In contrast, around 25 - 40% of men attracted to children prefer boys. Thus, the rate of homosexual attraction is 6-20 times higher among pedophiles.'
Another recent study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that '... all but 9 of the 48 homosexual men preferred the youngest two male age categories.' These age categories were fifteen and twenty years old.
A third study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that 'Pedophilia appears to have a greater than chance association with two other statistically infrequent phenomena. The first of these is homosexuality ... Recent surveys estimate the prevalence of homosexuality, among men attracted to adults, in the neighborhood of 2%. In contrast, the prevalence of homosexuality among pedophiles may be as high as 30 - 40%.'
A study in the Journal of Sex Research noted that '... the proportion of sex offenders against male children among homosexual men is substantially larger than the proportion of sex offenders against female children among heterosexual men ... the development of pedophilia is more closely linked with homosexuality than with heterosexuality.'
A study of 229 convicted child molesters published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that 'eighty-six percent of [sexual] offenders against males described themselves as homosexual or bisexual.'
A study by The Institute for Sex Research, which was founded by Alfred Kinsey, determined that 25% of white homosexual men have had sex with boys sixteen years and younger.
There are occasional desultory attempts to deny or obscure the fact that a disproportionately high percentage of active homosexuals sexually molest children. These studies are invariably afflicted with one or more fatal flaws.
A typical example, oft quoted by 'gay rights' activists, is the July 1994 Pediatrics article by Jenny, Roesler and Poyer that says 'Using the data from our study, the 95% confidence limits of the risk children would identify recognizably homosexual adults as the potential abuser, are from 0% to 3.1%. These limits are within current estimates of the prevalence of homosexuality in the general community.'
The fatal flaw of this study is that it examined sexually abused children with a mean age of just 6.1 years. Children this young are usually targets of true pedophiles, those persons with no sexual attraction to adults of either sex. By contrast, homosexual pedophiles are usually classified as 'ephebophiles,' persons sexually attracted to pubescent or post pubescent children." See full essay here.
The dishonesty of the homosexual hate movement continues unabated. One radical homosexual propaganda Blog is a prime example of this. See here. Last year I documented how a priest from the Archdiocese of Boston criticized Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone for saying that homosexuality is at the root of the clerical abuse crisis. See here. Father Emile Boutin was later arrested and charged with indecent assault against another male.
If it's the truth which sets us free (John 8:32), why is our culture so afraid of pursuing the truth about male homosexuality and child sexual abuse?
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Homosexual propaganda blog "MassResistance Watch" gets it wrong
LifeSiteNews.com is reporting that, "A leading authority on the clerical sex abuse crisis has criticized those who conclude that new data has ruled out homosexuality as a significant cause in the scandal - even though the vast majority of priest abuse was perpetrated against adolescent males.
Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, a top psychiatrist and expert in handling sexually abusive priests, says criminologists 'crossed a line' by pronouncing on the psychological causes behind the data released May 18.
'Analysis of the research demonstrates clearly that the major cause of the crisis was the homosexual abuse of males,' said Fitzgibbons in an interview with the Catholic News Agency.
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/critics-say-new-study-misses-real-reasons-for-priest-abuse-crisis/
The new study, conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice and commissioned by the U.S. Bishops, shows that nearly 80 percent of victims were post-pubescent and adolescent males. However, the study concludes that available data 'do not support the hypothesis that priests with a homosexual identity ... are significantly more likely to sexually abuse.'
The report marks the third such effort by U.S. Bishops to address the causes and manifestations of the clerical sex abuse scandal since it first erupted publicly in 2002.
The data also shows that less than 5 percent of abuse involved prepubescent children, contravening rumor that the scandal largely manifested as acts of pedophilia. But homosexuality, according to Fitzgibbons, was clearly the primary sexual aberration driving the bulk of abuse.
'One can conclude that these priests have strong same-sex attraction,' said Fitzgibbons. 'When an adult is involved with homosexual behavior with an adolescent male, he clearly has a major problem in the area of homosexuality.'
The psychologist said that, while the college has done good work collecting data, criminologists 'lack the professional expertise to comment on causes of sexual abuse.'
'If the (U.S. bishops) conference wanted an analysis of the causes of complex sexual behavior with adolescents, don’t turn to criminologists,' said Fitzgibbons. 'They are not trained to understand those causes - that training is given to mental health professionals.'" (Article here).
It didn't take long for a homosexual propaganda blog called "MassResistance Watch" to jump on the faulty conclusions of criminologists who lack the expertise to comment upon the root causes of complex sexual behavior. In a post authored by a troubled soul who refers to himself as "Boston Bud," we read, "Researchers at John Jay College of Criminal Justice at the City University of New York, who spent five years conducting the most expensive and extensive study of sexual abuse in the Catholic church to date, concluded that homosexual priests were no more likely to abuse than heterosexual priests...If you recall Santorum and the anti-gay loonies were blaming gay priests for all the molestation." See here.
Who better to write about "loonies" than an individual referring to himself as "Boston Bud" who believes that homosexuality is somehow healthy. Dutch psychologist Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, Ph.D., a specialist on homosexuality says that the claim that homosexuality is normal is one of those statements that are "so foolish that only intellectuals could believe them." It is like saying that anorexia nervosa is healthy. See here. Dr. Aardweg notes that, "The term neurotic describes such relationships well. It suggests the ego-centeredness of the relationship; the attention-seeking instead of loving...Neurotic, in short, suggests all kinds of dramas and childish conflicts as well as the basic disinterestedness in the partner, notwithstanding the shallow pretensions of 'love.' Nowhere is there more self-deception in the homosexual than in his representation of himself as a lover. One partner is important to the other only insofar as he satisfies that other's needs. Real, unselfish love for a desired partner would, in fact, end up destroying homosexual 'love'!" (Dr. Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, The Battle for Normality, Ignatius Press, 1997, pp. 62-63).
No, most of the abuse within the Church was committed by sick men suffering from the psychopathology of homosexuality. Crippled in personality, these homosexual men acted out sexually against adolescent males. There is no way around this. Nor should this really come as a surprise. The Father of so-called "Gay Rights," Harry Hay, was a pervert who was fully supportive of NAMBLA, the North American Man/Boy Love Association, a group which advocates for the legalization of sex between men and boys. See here. Talk about "loonies."
Sex between men and boys has long been a part of homosexual culture and history as documented by openly homosexual history professor William Armstrong Percy III in his book entitled "Pederasty and Pedagogy in Archaic Greece." See here. Of course, propagandists for the Homosexual Hate Movement - like "Boston Bud" - will never admit to this.
But the facts of history tell the real story.
Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, a top psychiatrist and expert in handling sexually abusive priests, says criminologists 'crossed a line' by pronouncing on the psychological causes behind the data released May 18.
'Analysis of the research demonstrates clearly that the major cause of the crisis was the homosexual abuse of males,' said Fitzgibbons in an interview with the Catholic News Agency.
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/critics-say-new-study-misses-real-reasons-for-priest-abuse-crisis/
The new study, conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice and commissioned by the U.S. Bishops, shows that nearly 80 percent of victims were post-pubescent and adolescent males. However, the study concludes that available data 'do not support the hypothesis that priests with a homosexual identity ... are significantly more likely to sexually abuse.'
The report marks the third such effort by U.S. Bishops to address the causes and manifestations of the clerical sex abuse scandal since it first erupted publicly in 2002.
The data also shows that less than 5 percent of abuse involved prepubescent children, contravening rumor that the scandal largely manifested as acts of pedophilia. But homosexuality, according to Fitzgibbons, was clearly the primary sexual aberration driving the bulk of abuse.
'One can conclude that these priests have strong same-sex attraction,' said Fitzgibbons. 'When an adult is involved with homosexual behavior with an adolescent male, he clearly has a major problem in the area of homosexuality.'
The psychologist said that, while the college has done good work collecting data, criminologists 'lack the professional expertise to comment on causes of sexual abuse.'
'If the (U.S. bishops) conference wanted an analysis of the causes of complex sexual behavior with adolescents, don’t turn to criminologists,' said Fitzgibbons. 'They are not trained to understand those causes - that training is given to mental health professionals.'" (Article here).
It didn't take long for a homosexual propaganda blog called "MassResistance Watch" to jump on the faulty conclusions of criminologists who lack the expertise to comment upon the root causes of complex sexual behavior. In a post authored by a troubled soul who refers to himself as "Boston Bud," we read, "Researchers at John Jay College of Criminal Justice at the City University of New York, who spent five years conducting the most expensive and extensive study of sexual abuse in the Catholic church to date, concluded that homosexual priests were no more likely to abuse than heterosexual priests...If you recall Santorum and the anti-gay loonies were blaming gay priests for all the molestation." See here.
Who better to write about "loonies" than an individual referring to himself as "Boston Bud" who believes that homosexuality is somehow healthy. Dutch psychologist Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, Ph.D., a specialist on homosexuality says that the claim that homosexuality is normal is one of those statements that are "so foolish that only intellectuals could believe them." It is like saying that anorexia nervosa is healthy. See here. Dr. Aardweg notes that, "The term neurotic describes such relationships well. It suggests the ego-centeredness of the relationship; the attention-seeking instead of loving...Neurotic, in short, suggests all kinds of dramas and childish conflicts as well as the basic disinterestedness in the partner, notwithstanding the shallow pretensions of 'love.' Nowhere is there more self-deception in the homosexual than in his representation of himself as a lover. One partner is important to the other only insofar as he satisfies that other's needs. Real, unselfish love for a desired partner would, in fact, end up destroying homosexual 'love'!" (Dr. Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, The Battle for Normality, Ignatius Press, 1997, pp. 62-63).
No, most of the abuse within the Church was committed by sick men suffering from the psychopathology of homosexuality. Crippled in personality, these homosexual men acted out sexually against adolescent males. There is no way around this. Nor should this really come as a surprise. The Father of so-called "Gay Rights," Harry Hay, was a pervert who was fully supportive of NAMBLA, the North American Man/Boy Love Association, a group which advocates for the legalization of sex between men and boys. See here. Talk about "loonies."
Sex between men and boys has long been a part of homosexual culture and history as documented by openly homosexual history professor William Armstrong Percy III in his book entitled "Pederasty and Pedagogy in Archaic Greece." See here. Of course, propagandists for the Homosexual Hate Movement - like "Boston Bud" - will never admit to this.
But the facts of history tell the real story.
Labels:
Boston Bud,
Catholic Church,
Harry Hay,
Homosexual Hate Movement,
Homosexual Propaganda,
In,
Mass Resistance Watch,
NAMBLA,
Nature,
Pedagogy,
Pederasty,
Pervert,
Psychopathology,
Sexual Abuse
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



