In the past year or so, I've written several posts in this blog referring to the fact that, for many people, homosexuality is a moral issue. I'm not sure my brain registered the real meaning of those words when I used them, because, today, as I read a "Vancouver Sun" article--about the dismissal of a teacher from a local independent Roman Catholic girls school because she's a lesbian--I felt utterly incensed. The article, written by Douglas Todd, referred to the potential rights of the school to prevent the teacher from finishing the school year with her students because of its moral position on homosexuality. And that got the wheels turning in my head.
First of all, in light of the recent sexual abuse scandals shattering the credibility of the Roman Catholic church worldwide, the first thought that came to me was, how can the church take a moral stand on homosexuality when it can't even get its own house in order? How is it possible that the church has historically shuffled many of its priests around, in all different countries, when allegations of the sexual abuse of minors is made against them, instead of turning them over to the law, where they should be prosecuted in the same way anyone not involved in the church would be? This, and Pope Benedict's recent refusal to adequately address this issue with the faithful--not to mention the possible hand he may have had in the discreet relocating of offending priests in past decades--tell me the church, as an imperfect, human institution, is not in a position to judge me as a gay man. I don't buy it. I never have, and I never will.
But here's what really got to me: According to the Google dictionary, morality is "principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior." Thus, according to the church, engaging in homosexual conduct is wrong, or bad behavior. And, as a result, homosexual conduct is a sin, which is defined, in the same source, as "an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law."
First, I don't believe God considers homosexuality to be a sin. I don't care what Bible reference is thrown in my face to support anyone's position that God considers it a sin. I believe God considers promiscuity, whether at the hands of gay or straight people, as immoral and therefore a sin, but not the sex act itself, particularly if the two people having sex are partners and in love. (And don't get me started on the issue of sex being a sin if it's engaged in outside of wedlock. For some, that's still a moral issue, based on their religious beliefs, but, sometimes, I believe the church needs to catch up with the times and get out of people's bedrooms. There are far worse things on this earth than people having sex, particularly in a committed relationship.)
Which leads me to my next point: I think we can all readily agree that murder is a moral issue, as theft is a moral issue, as rape is a moral issue. You don't need to be religious in any way to see that. But homosexuality a moral issue? Not even close. I can't begin to compare murder, theft, and rape with homosexuality, or wrap them all together and say they are one and the same. Because, simply, they're not. How can someone who engages in gay sex be looked at in the same way as a murderer? How can someone who engages in gay sex be looked at in the same way as a thief? How can someone who engages in gay sex be looked at in the same way as a rapist? They're not even close to the same thing, so don't tell me that homosexuality is a moral issue.
And, finally, I have been with the same partner for nearly eighteen years. We love each other deeply, in the same way that straight couples love each other deeply (or are supposed to). We are committed to each other in the same way that straight couples are committed to each other (most of them, anyway). We are monogamous in the same way that straight couples are (or should be). We have sex with each other in the same way that straight couples have sex (and hopefully with no one else). If you say that homosexuality is a moral issue, what you're effectively saying is that what Chris and I share is immoral. We can love each other, we can be devoted to each other, we can be exclusive to each other--but we can't have sex because it's considered immoral? That's utter crap. I refuse to look at what I have with Chris as immoral. I will not tolerate my relationship marginalized in that way. I outright reject any religion--including Catholicism, which is how I was raised--that considers my relationship with Chris to be immoral.
I am gay. Whether I was born gay or I turned out gay because of how I was raised makes no difference whatsoever. I am what I am. I can't change it. And I refuse to be considered immoral because I engage in gay sex, because I don't want to be alone, because I want the same things that straight people want--companionship, love, stability, commitment, monogamy, and, yes, sex. No human being on this earth, I don't care what religion you're affiliated with, has the right to consider me immoral because I'm gay. As far as I'm concerned, you are worse off judging me for being gay than you would be if you accepted me because I am gay. So take your religious doctrine, and your misinterpretation of Bible passages, and your holier than thou attitude, and do you-know-what with them. In the end, I will answer to one being and one being only about being gay, and that's God--not you. Mind your own damn business about who I have sex with. You worry about your own soul; I'll worry about mine. End of story.
PART 1:
ReplyDeleteTo a certain degree, you're correct in stating your mutually consenting gay relationship is nobody else’s business. I agree that the Catholic church is being hypocritical with its stance on homosexuality. The lesbian in question is likely being used as a martyr in an attempt to restore faith in a failing religion.
Though I consider myself a Christian, I believe for the most part that organized man-made religion is a sham. Jesus never had a church of his own, nor did he expect people to bow down to him or offer payment. He never asked what religious denomination someone was, or if they believed in the Holy Spirit. Jesus said "Those that worship me shall do so not in a building built with hands but in spirit and in truth". It's curious that the centre of Christianity is the Vatican in Rome, yet Jesus never set foot there.
I'm not biblically savvy but I know that Jesus often spoke in parables so at times scripture cannot be taken literally. “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits”. As you eluded to, God gives man free will and the choices we make largely determine our fate.[1]
When you state homosexuality is not a moral issue, I would have to disagree. If you consider that the lifestyle of a typical homosexual shortens a lifespan by 20 years[2], greatly increases the risk of STD's[3][4], and is responsible for an epidemic of AIDS[5] and other sexually transmitted diseases disproportionately, there should be no question about whether homosexuality is good or bad, righteous or unholy.
As with any monogamous relationship like yours, the odds for a long and healthy live greatly increase. What I think you’d admit though is that the average gay relationship is anything but monogamous. At least all the studies would concur.
Although gay activists often argue that legalizing homosexual marriage would help make such relationships more permanent, the reality is that most gays desire variety in their sex partners, not the monogamy of traditional marriage. Numerous studies throughout North America and Europe show that the plea for legal homosexual marriage is less about marriage than the push for legitimacy. Most gays and lesbians are not in monogamous relationships, and in fact often live alone by preference.[6]
Homosexuality becomes a personal issue to me, as it should with the general public when it’s presented to young children as something normal and virtuous[7], or when it’s taken to the streets and displayed in a lewd and licentious manner.[8]
Recently, a Toronto school board backed off from a planned sex-ed course due to opposition from many of the parents who felt that subjects regarding masturbation, oral and anal sex were not appropriate for their children. I don’t think anyone could convince these parents that morality and ethics weren’t a major issue here.
In some Boston high schools, known sex-offenders have been giving classes to students not only in oral and anal sex, but in rimming and fisting.[9]
You don't need a PhD to see that indoctrination of this nature is unconscionable and has no place in the school system. Anyone who thinks otherwise would clearly be suffering from something far worse than a mere “phobia”.[10]
Again, I don’t hold the entire homosexual community responsible for extremist behaviour like this, but it casts a dark shadow over everyone involved in "gay liberation". As John McKellar states, the actions of “gay activists” is what’s responsible for the push for homosexual marriage.[11]
PART 2:
ReplyDeleteYou raised the question as to how can someone who engages in gay sex be looked upon in the same manner as a murderer, thief or rapist.
Let me cite you a few examples of how the comparison can be made:
Dean Corll ("Candyman") was a homosexual who murdered teenagers in Huston. Other notable homosexual serial killers were Randy Steven Kraft ("Score Card Killer"), David Maust, Wayne Williams, Fritz Haarmann (”Butcher of Hanover”), Luis Alfredo Garavito, Michael Swango (“Doctor of Death”), David D. Hill, Huang Yong, Adolfo de Jesus Constanzo ("Matamoros Cult Killer"), Henry Lee Lucas, Ottis Toole, Jeffrey Dahmer (homosexual cannibal) and Canada’s infamous, sadistic, homosexual rapist, Clifford Olsen.[12]
Before he was executed in Utah State prison for the killing of five boys, Arthur Gary Bishop said of his crimes, "With great sadness and remorse, I realize that I allowed myself to be misled by Satan. I am a homosexual pedophile convicted of murder and pornography was a determining factor in my downfall."[13]
There have been many instances of homosexuals and bisexuals wittingly or unwittingly infecting their partners with AIDS. If the person was aware they were carriers of the disease before the liaison transpired, it’s fairly easy to perceive that as an act of manslaughter. If it were a pre-meditated event, a charge of first-degree murder might even be warranted.[14][15]
The homosexual lobby likes to cite stories of violence against them as a justification of acceptance. As my references cite, much of this violence towards the gays is emanating from their own community. As usual, the MSM is silent on these issues.[16][17][18][19][20]
The Mass Resistance organization has reported that gays have terrorized groups that oppose the homosexual agenda. PFOX (Parents & Friends of ex-gays) have stated they have been targets of harassment and hatred by gays.[21]
You stated that you and you partner have sex with each other in the same way that straight couples have sex. How is that possible, unless your partner has a vagina? If you're talking about anal sex, I think I speak for the majority of straight couples when I say that sodomy isn’t a standard form of copulation between mates. Certainly anal sex has become more commonplace with the advent of widespread pornography in the media but I believe if people were aware of the inherent dangers of this aberrant activity, they would think twice before indulging.[22]
I’d also like to contest your statement that whether you were born gay or turned out gay because of how you were raised makes no difference whatsoever. Actually, it makes a monumental difference since being “born gay” is one of the myths that homosexual activists use to further their cause. The fact that you even give consideration that your sexual propensity was attributed to your upbringing indicates the questionable validity of the “born gay” argument.
The truth is that homosexuality is not a lifestyle pre-determined by genetics or God. If it were, it could not be altered by mere choice. You cannot "choose" to be blonde, Caucasian, tall or attractive. But homosexuals, bisexuals, pedophiles, and the like, CAN choose to alter their behavior.
Some people mistakenly equate a black person to a homosexual. Skin color is a neutral, immutable characteristic. Being “black” is what someone is. On the other hand, being “gay” is what someone does. It involves feelings and changeable behaviors. Homosexual conduct is more akin to alcoholism, gambling or pot smoking behaviors than it is to skin color (and for those in the lifestyle, especially men, sodomy most definitely involves rolling the dice). Comparing “black” or “heterosexual” to “gay” is a deception and one that is totally erroneous. Understandably, many African Americans find this disingenuous comparison tremendously offensive
PART 1:
ReplyDeleteTo a certain degree, you're correct in stating your mutually consenting gay relationship is nobody else’s business. I agree that the Catholic church is being hypocritical with its stance on homosexuality. The lesbian in question is likely being used as a martyr in an attempt to restore faith in a failing religion.
Though I consider myself a Christian, I believe for the most part that organized man-made religion is a sham. Jesus never had a church of his own, nor did he expect people to bow down to him or offer payment. He never asked what religious denomination someone was, or if they believed in the Holy Spirit. Jesus said "Those that worship me shall do so not in a building built with hands but in spirit and in truth". It's curious that the centre of Christianity is the Vatican in Rome, yet Jesus never set foot there.
I'm not biblically savvy but I know that Jesus often spoke in parables so at times scripture cannot be taken literally. “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits”. As you eluded to, God gives man free will and the choices we make largely determine our fate.[1]
When you state homosexuality is not a moral issue, I would have to disagree. If you consider that the lifestyle of a typical homosexual shortens a lifespan by 20 years[2], greatly increases the risk of STD's[3][4], and is responsible for an epidemic of AIDS[5] and other sexually transmitted diseases disproportionately, there should be no question about whether homosexuality is good or bad, righteous or unholy.
As with any monogamous relationship like yours, the odds for a long and healthy live greatly increase. What I think you’d admit though is that the average gay relationship is anything but monogamous. At least all the studies would concur.
Although gay activists often argue that legalizing homosexual marriage would help make such relationships more permanent, the reality is that most gays desire variety in their sex partners, not the monogamy of traditional marriage. Numerous studies throughout North America and Europe show that the plea for legal homosexual marriage is less about marriage than the push for legitimacy. Most gays and lesbians are not in monogamous relationships, and in fact often live alone by preference.[6]
Homosexuality becomes a personal issue to me, as it should with the general public when it’s presented to young children as something normal and virtuous[7], or when it’s taken to the streets and displayed in a lewd and licentious manner.[8]
Recently, a Toronto school board backed off from a planned sex-ed course due to opposition from many of the parents who felt that subjects regarding masturbation, oral and anal sex were not appropriate for their children. I don’t think anyone could convince these parents that morality and ethics weren’t a major issue here.
In some Boston high schools, known sex-offenders have been giving classes to students not only in oral and anal sex, but in rimming and fisting.[9]
You don't need a PhD to see that indoctrination of this nature is unconscionable and has no place in the school system. Anyone who thinks otherwise would clearly be suffering from something far worse than a mere “phobia”.[10]
Again, I don’t hold the entire homosexual community responsible for extremist behaviour like this, but it casts a dark shadow over everyone involved in "gay liberation". As John McKellar states, the actions of “gay activists” is what’s responsible for the push for homosexual marriage.[11]
PART 3:
ReplyDeleteYou stated that “you are what you are” and that can’t be changed. The documented evidence paints a much different picture.[23][24][25][26][27][28]
It’s apparent there is a concerted effort by government, judiciary, the homosexual lobby, the media and the education system to promote and support the gay agenda. Anything contrary to this program of indoctrination is ridiculed, opposed or suppressed.29]
As Shakespeare astutely once noted, “the truth will out.”30]
“Heterosexual” is the state of sexual normalcy. It’s our God-given design. There remains no credible or replicated scientific evidence to the contrary.
Homosexual conduct is but one of many sexually deviancies, including Pedophilia, Pederasty, Incest, Sadomasochism, Exhibitionism, Transvestism, Voyeurism, Ephebophilia, Zoophilia and Necrophilia. The irrefutable evidence demonstrates they are abnormal and unhealthy behaviors that negatively impact all of society. Even Darwin’s theory of evolution, which imagines “survival of the fittest,” would seem to bolster this self-evident truth.
Clearly, the moral and ethical path to follow is one of biological correctness, not political correctness.
In closing, I would ask this… if Homophilia was in fact a normal, healthy and traditional form of sexuality, why would anyone have objections to it, and why would it have to be tolerated, or put up with, in order to be accepted?
An attraction to the opposite sex and an ability to procreate is what has historically been the normal and accepted lifestyle, and that universal law will never change, regardless of whatever someone else contends. Imagine where you'd be now if your parents held the same ideology that you do.
And if you want to debate dictionary definitions, it seems self-deprecating that anyone attempting to convince society their behavior was commonplace or worthy would choose to identify themselves with a term like “queer”. Demented, unnatural, unbalanced, freakish, psycho, deviant, phony, twisted and perverse hardly sound normal or something to aspire to.
PART 1:
ReplyDeleteTo a certain degree, you're correct in stating your mutually consenting gay relationship is nobody else’s business. I agree that the Catholic church is being hypocritical with its stance on homosexuality. The lesbian in question is likely being used as a martyr in an attempt to restore faith in a failing religion.
Though I consider myself a Christian, I believe for the most part that organized man-made religion is a sham. Jesus never had a church of his own, nor did he expect people to bow down to him or offer payment. He never asked what religious denomination someone was, or if they believed in the Holy Spirit. Jesus said "Those that worship me shall do so not in a building built with hands but in spirit and in truth". It's curious that the centre of Christianity is the Vatican in Rome, yet Jesus never set foot there.
I'm not biblically savvy but I know that Jesus often spoke in parables so at times scripture cannot be taken literally. “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits”. As you eluded to, God gives man free will and the choices we make largely determine our fate.[1]
When you state homosexuality is not a moral issue, I would have to disagree. If you consider that the lifestyle of a typical homosexual shortens a lifespan by 20 years[2], greatly increases the risk of STD's[3][4], and is responsible for an epidemic of AIDS[5] and other sexually transmitted diseases disproportionately, there should be no question about whether homosexuality is good or bad, righteous or unholy.
As with any monogamous relationship like yours, the odds for a long and healthy live greatly increase. What I think you’d admit though is that the average gay relationship is anything but monogamous. At least all the studies would concur.
Although gay activists often argue that legalizing homosexual marriage would help make such relationships more permanent, the reality is that most gays desire variety in their sex partners, not the monogamy of traditional marriage. Numerous studies throughout North America and Europe show that the plea for legal homosexual marriage is less about marriage than the push for legitimacy. Most gays and lesbians are not in monogamous relationships, and in fact often live alone by preference.[6]
Homosexuality becomes a personal issue to me, as it should with the general public when it’s presented to young children as something normal and virtuous[7], or when it’s taken to the streets and displayed in a lewd and licentious manner.[8]
Recently, a Toronto school board backed off from a planned sex-ed course due to opposition from many of the parents who felt that subjects regarding masturbation, oral and anal sex were not appropriate for their children. I don’t think anyone could convince these parents that morality and ethics weren’t a major issue here.
In some Boston high schools, known sex-offenders have been giving classes to students not only in oral and anal sex, but in rimming and fisting.[9]
You don't need a PhD to see that indoctrination of this nature is unconscionable and has no place in the school system. Anyone who thinks otherwise would clearly be suffering from something far worse than a mere “phobia”.[10]
Again, I don’t hold the entire homosexual community responsible for extremist behaviour like this, but it casts a dark shadow over everyone involved in "gay liberation". As John McKellar states, the actions of “gay activists” is what’s responsible for the push for homosexual marriage.[11]
PART 4:
ReplyDeleteReferences:
[1] “I have set before you life and death… therefore choose life.” - Deuteronomy 30:19
[2] "The median age of death is less than 50 years for those involved in homosexuality." - National Institute of Health.
[3] The San Francisco Public Health Department reports that syphilis among the city's gay and bisexual men was at epidemic levels. Men having sex with other men leads to greater health risks than men having sex with women not only because of promiscuity but also because of the nature of sex among men.
[4] A study in the Archives of Internal Medicine found that homosexuals and bisexuals contracted potentially fatal ailments such as AIDS, anal cancer, tuberculosis and hepatitis disproportionately.
[5] An epidemiological study from Canada of data for AIDS-related deaths reveals that male homosexual or bisexual practitioners lost up to 20 years of life expectancy.
[6] In Denmark, a form of homosexual marriage has been legal since 1989. Through 1995, less than 5% of Danish homosexuals had gotten married, and 28% of these marriages had already ended in divorce or death. The Danish experience provides no evidence that gay 'marriage' is beneficial. Men who married men were three times more apt to be widowers before the age of 55 than men who married women. Similarly, a woman who married a woman was three times more apt to be a widow than a woman who married a man. In 1990, only 12% of gays in Toronto, Canada said that they were in monogamous relationships.
[7] Horror stories in the schools
[8] Pride parade
[9] Fistgate
[10] It is alarming, disheartening, and medically unethical that this information (“The Little Black Book - Queer in the 21st Century”) be distributed to anyone. That it is distributed at taxpayer expense to vulnerable and confused youth should awaken every citizen and legislator to immediately de-fund this organization, and the attorney general to pursue prosecution for endangering minors on a grand scale. - John R. Diggs, Jr., MD, South Hadley, Mass.
[11] John McKeller, President of Homosexuals Opposed to Pride Extremism (HOPE) publicly states he staunchly opposes gay activism and the "marriage" of two men to be lawfully considered the same as the union of man and woman. Besides demonstrating that not all homosexuals want to abolish the sanctity of “marriage”, it also clearly indicates the term "homophobe" is erroneous, and that the gay rights movement is largely controlled by a minority of radical activists intent on subverting morality and sexuality.
[12] Homosexual serial killers
[13] Catholic aide says gay men commit most pedophilia
[14] AIDS Director to China Warns Gays on High-Risk Behavior
[15] Everyone Should Know these Statistics on Homosexuals
[16] A study by the Canadian government regarding homosexual couples states that "violence was twice as common among homosexual couples compared with heterosexual couples". - 2004 General Social Survey, Statistics Canada, Canada's National Statistical Agency, July 7, 2005
[17] According the American College of Pediatricians who cite several studies, violence among homosexual couples is two to three times more common than among married heterosexual couples. "Homosexual partnerships are significantly more prone to dissolution than heterosexual marriages with the average homosexual relationship lasting only two to three years."
PART 5:
ReplyDelete[18] In June of 2004, the journal, Nursing Clinics of North America reported the following regarding homosexual couples: "Domestic abuse is under-reported in the gay community, citing a number of cases of abuse and violence among intimate partners. - Nursing Clinics of North America North Am. 2004 Jun;39(2):403
[19] In 2000, the New York Times in an article entitled "Silence Ending About Abuse in Gay Relationships" cites this statement from Dave Shannon, co-ordinator of the violence recovery program at a gay and lesbian clinic in Boston. "For years, gay people have tried to keep quiet about the problem. Why should we air our dirty laundry when people feel so negatively about us already? The last thing we should do is contribute to negative stereotypes of us." - New York Times, 11/06/2000
[20] "Domestic violence is the third largest health problem facing the gay and lesbian community today and trails only behind AIDS and substance abuse in terms of sheer numbers and lethality." - Susan Holt, coordinator of the domestic violence unit of the L.A. Gay Lesbian Center
[21] Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays
[22] “Having receptive anal intercourse is a known risk factor for anal cancer.” - National Cancer Institute
[23] "Homosexuals have been known to change." - International Journal of Psychiatry.
[24] "The majority of homosexuals come from homes where the father figure was either absent or neglectful". - Dr. Lorraine Day, acclaimed surgeon from the University of California who has treated hundreds of homosexuals.
[25] "There is no DNA or medical test to determine if someone is homosexual. Sexual orientation is a matter of self-affirmation and public declaration. - Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX)
[26] Homosexuality and the Truth
[27] Living Proof that Homosexuals Can Change
[28] The National Association of Research & Therapy of Homosexuality, a branch of the American College of Pediatricians, offers effective psychological therapy for homosexual men and women who seek change.
[29] Gay Reversal Advocates Say School Libraries Banning Their 'Ex-Gay' Books
[30] The Three Stages of Truth
“We cannot deny that HIV is a gay disease. We have to own up to that and face up to that.” - National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Leader, Matt Foreman.
Many thanks, Anonymous, for leaving these comments on my post. I've read them through in detail (unfortunately, not all of them attached to this post but I received them via email), and, when I finish with a few home renovations, I plan to use what you wrote to write another post. I hope you look forward to reading that as much as I look forward to writing it.
ReplyDeleteAgain, my thanks.