• Subscribe to Crisis

  • Gay Panic Over New Russian Laws

    by Austin Ruse

    russian-olympics-boycott-rejected Lefteris Pitarakis AP

    A psychiatrist of the early 20th century coined “homosexual panic” to describe an overreaction by heterosexuals who have been hit on by a gay guy. Now it’s the gays turn to panic, in this case by any public criticism, imaginary or otherwise, or legal restriction on their proselytizing.

    Gay writer Jonathan Capehart published a short piece in the Washington Post this week in which he oh-so-bravely spoke truth to Gospel power. He attended his aunt’s funeral in North Carolina at which the preacher’s “guest eulogy gave way to a harsh sermon about who can and cannot get into the kingdom of heaven.”

    From what Capehart quotes, the preacher did not actually talk about who can get into heaven but rather who can “transform” their lives by washing themselves in the “blood of the Lamb.”

    “During his oration, I vowed I would not shake his hand.” But Capehart did shake the Reverend’s hand and then said to him, “Your sermon was offensive to me.” Taken aback the Preacher say, “What?” “Your sermon was offensive to me. I need you to know that. That is all I have to say.” Not waiting for or even wanting a response, Capehart stalked off.

    There’s a lot packed into this brief encounter. It is unclear whether the preacher even mentioned homosexuality. Capehart said the preacher quoted from a bible passage that mentions many sins including homosexuality but it appears that the preacher only highlighted a “pimp becoming a preacher” and a “prostitute becoming a prophet.” But that was enough to get Capehart going.

    What followed was the classic sneak attack, assertion of victimhood, name-calling, followed by a refusal to engage in any meaningful way. Called “jamming,” the purpose is not to debate the issue respectfully or otherwise, but to shame opponents into silence, castigate them, and cast them into outer societal darkness.

    “Jamming” comes from a book called After the Ball, a 1989 manifesto on how homosexuals could triumph over the culture. Capehart caught the preacher off guard, claimed he was a victim, implied the preacher is a hater and a bigot, and then walked off without giving the preacher a chance to talk, explain or even to apologize. Brave. Very brave, Jonathan and very textbook, too.

    Something similar is happening with the evolving situation in Russia. The Russian parliament recently passed a national law forbidding homosexual proselytizing to schoolchildren. The law also forbids public manifestations like parades. An additional law forbids homosexual adoption of children or foreign adoption into countries that allow for homosexual “marriage.”

    Opponents of the law are not content simply to shock their friends with what is really going on in Russia. After all, these new laws are enough to shock the sensibilities of westerners where homosexuality has largely triumphed over the culture.  But opponents of the Russian law must go further in gilding the lily.

    They tell us that it is now illegal to be homosexual in Russia. Gay writer Harvey Fierstein wrote a few weeks ago in the New York Times that parents who speak positively to their children about homosexuality could lose their children and get jail time. He wrote that people even suspected of gayness could be jailed.

    They tell us that athletes suspected of being gay will be arrested when they arrive in Russia for the winter Olympics next year. No less than Jay Leno on the Tonight Show said to President Obama that it has become “illegal” to be homosexual in Russia. He compared it to Germany under the Nazis, said it was like taking away the Jews. I would expect a firestorm after Jay Leno compared the gassing of 6 million Jews with the inability of homosexuals to tell their story to school children. You would think he might have been corrected by the President of the United States who was sitting right there, but he wasn’t.

    Now, there are some very nasty things going on in Russia with regard to gays. Some are being beaten by vigilante mobs. Some say the thugs are encouraged and protected by the police though I see no evidence of that. In fact, the New York Times ran a picture this week of a gay-beating thug being physically detained and arrested by Russian police.

    We cannot approve in any way the beating of people for the mere fact of being gay or even expressing it. But, I wonder if there is a bit of provocation going on. After all, pictures of gays with bloody noses are pure propaganda gold in the western press.

    You have to wonder, though, is life so hard for gays in Russia? Do they have to live underground constantly in fear of their lives?

    I was in Russia a few weeks ago and saw open transvestitism on the street not once but twice and both times within a stones through of the Kremlin and the Duma which is the Russian parliament that banned gay propaganda to school children.  And none of the dress-wearing men were being arrested, or beaten. In fact, they seemed to be having a good time.

    Just how gay is Moscow? You don’t have to walk down a dingy street in the dark of night and knock on an unmarked door to find what you’re looking for. Google “Gay Moscow” and you find clubs, cafes, bathhouses, and dance parties.

    Chubabar-BVP is “the best gay after party in Moscow. Trendy music. Trendy gays. Very friendly atmosphere.”

    You can go to “Propaganda Gay Night” at a place called Propaganda for “Sunday gay parties … only gays there.”

    Did you know that in Moscow there are two gay beaches? Silver Forest/Serebryanly Bor “is the most visited.”

    There’s a place called 12 Volt Club that boasts a “UN certificate for the best gay bar in Moscow.”

    What about St. Petersburg, you wonder? There is Club Central Station that is “located in the heart of the city … it features great looking dancers who you might wish to feed fruit.”

    Club Cabaret is “the best gay place in town.” Located in the former Soviet Palace of Culture it features a midnight transvestite show “but before and after the performing drag queens you can dance, dance, dance.” A travel writer said of Club Cabaret, “We did not enter the dark room, but we know from stories that it can be pretty thrilling there.”

    There’s a place called the Bunker “where you can meet people and watch gay videos, private rooms, showers, pleasant atmosphere.”

    One website steers their clientele to a regular bathhouse “not a gay sauna” where it is fun to go on Tuesdays “to see a couple of hundred naked 18-22 year old cadets from the Naval Academy.”

    Do gays in Russia live in the catacombs always fearful of their lives? You be the judge, and the next time a panic-stricken gay writer starts “jamming” that it is illegal to be gay in Russia, tell him about the Bunker.

    Editor’s note: The picture above depicts gay activists in London demanding a boycott of the 2014 winter Olympic games in Sochi, Russia. (Photo Credit: Lefteris Pitarakis / AP)

    The views expressed by the authors and editorial staff are not necessarily the views of
    Sophia Institute, Holy Spirit College, or the Thomas More College of Liberal Arts.

    Subscribe to Crisis

    (It's Free)

    Go to Crisis homepage

    • lifeknight

      It is almost surreal. It is a society of right is now wrong and wrong is right. How can we condone sodomy? I am just waiting for the Second Coming……..Please Lord, make it soon!

      • msmischief

        “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil, who change darkness to light, and light into darkness, who change bitter to sweet, and sweet into bitter!”

    • Steven Jonathan

      Good Article Mr. Ruse, a lot more truthful about the balance of assault.
      Russia is difficult to understand, the homosexualist agenda is not difficult to understand but it is obscured by the smoke of constant pathological propaganda, hyperbole and perversion.
      The public schools want to have “homosexual” couples go to Kindergarten classes to normalize it for small children, why we don’t rise together in disgust and condemnation against this moral crime to violently rob our sweet children of their innocence I will never understand.
      The homosexualists have managed to sufficiently blur the lines between being and doing-

      • Sygurd Jonfski

        “I would expect a firestorm after Jay Leno compared the gassing of 6 million Jews with the inability of homosexuals to tell their story to school children. You would think he might have been corrected by the President of the United States who was sitting right there, but he wasn’t.”
        What about the Jewish organizations, usually so sensitive to any comparisons with the Holocaust? (By the way, Jay Leno is a certified moron.)

    • Ford Oxaal

      It is almost amusing to see the curtain pulled back on “jamming”. The “take offense” card is getting stale, and one of these days, all the subversive tactics of the “because I like it” left will backfire.

    • Bob

      By turning his Aunt’s Christian funeral in to an occassion that the world revolves around him, Jonathan Capehart’s actions are classic narcissism and self centeredness of the gay community. Your burying your aunt Jonathan……and like a spoiled child you have to some how take offense to the sermon and attack the minister and turn it in to “all about you..” REALLY??!! The narcissism of the gay community has no bounds.

      • pay

        Bingo. Common and accurate.

      • Gail Finke

        A few years ago I went to a funeral at which the minister insulted almost everyone in attendance. It was quite clear that he didn’t think anyone there was a “real” Christian and he delivered some fire-and-brimstone stuff and exhorted all of us to look at a book about how to be a real Christian and not go to Hell. He did not mention homosexuality, as far as I remember, just the general sinfulness of everyone in every way. It never occurred to me to tell him that I found his sermon offensive or exceedingly strange to deliver at a funeral. Why would I bother? Why would this guy bother? The world is NOT about him.

        • Art Deco

          There is a reason it is irregular to have eulogies at funerals.

          That having been said, I cannot see your complaint being valid as a critique of an ordinary Sunday sermon. The chap sounds like a standard-issue Calvinist. The point is not to be inoffensive.

          • Gail Finke

            Nobody was talking about an ordinary Sunday sermon, or a eulogy at a funeral. The gay activist in question was offended by a sermon at a funeral. My point was that I have also been offended by a sermon at a funeral (for a different reason) and that I did not see any purpose to telling the minister — yes, he was a Calvinist type — that I was offended, because it was a funeral, not a personal indictment on me or anyone else (a lot of people were offended), and was obviously just what he did at funerals. Being offended has become a national pastime.

      • Tad Brown

        This stereotypes the gay community, which is what we Catholics should wish to avoid (it is “unjust discrimination”.) The pastor would probably have done better to eulogize the deceased rather than spout his own views. My own concern with this Russian law is that it appears heavy-handed and abusive. It gives police officers the right to arrest anyone they suspect of being GLBT and detaining them for up to two weeks. Now this is horrific to those of us raised in the US with our civil rights and freedoms. It appears a minority is being demonized and scapegoated for political gain. The law does not appear to have been passed within a purely religious context since Russia has extremely high rates of divorce and abortion, while premarital sex and single motherhood are common. You’d think the Russian Orthodox Church had bigger fish to fry. Worst of all, religion is being used as an instrument of violence against a scapegoated group as can be seen from this Catholic article: http://ncronline.org/blogs/grace-margins/orthodox-church-s-role-russia-s-anti-gay-laws

        • doctormom4

          NCRonline is NOT Catholic. As a matter of fact, it has been condemned several times. That article is full of propaganda that this article is refuting and many other articles have refuted as simply untrue.

          • Concerned Catholic

            I checked out the article linked by Tad Brown and it is indeed disturbing. It is accurate. I independently validated several of the claims it made. These new Russian laws, and there were three federal anti-gay laws signed into law by President Putin last June, are unquestionably violating and discriminatory. They are not just efforts to prevent same sex marriage or gay adoption. They are about abuse and harassment. The violence directed against gays at LGBT rallies is scary and the police let it happen. If this was about ethics Putin would as Tad Brown says above go after abortion, divorce, and single parenthood. It looks as though Putin is trying to find a way to placate the militant fascist thugs in Russia while hiding behind a fig leaf of religiosity. Granted Russia is nowhere near as extreme as some other autocratic states, but we all hoped Russia would become a first world democracy and a supporter of human rights.

            • Austin Ruse

              False. Police are arresting those who attack gays at parades. There was a picture of this in the NYT last week.

              • John

                I presume you mean this NYT article: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/12/world/europe/gays-in-russia-find-no-haven-despite-support-from-the-west.html?pagewanted=all
                While it shows two photos of the police protecting LGBT activists, there are many more counter examples showing the police looking the other way. From the article: “When some gay people protested the propaganda law by kissing outside the State Duma, the lower house of Parliament, police officers stood by and watched as the demonstrators were doused with water and beaten by antigay and religious supporters of the bill,” and “Russia remains a country where discrimination and even violence against gay people are widely tolerated.”

                • Theorist

                  They were being gay in public so that merits some punishment so I’m not disturbed by them getting beaten by an angry mob -technically they deserve to be killed by such a mob.

                  Also, there is nothing wrong with prejudice because there is nothing wrong with making contingent (possibly incorrect) judgments about particular people or things. After all, to say “gays are generally nice” is a prejudiced thing to say and it is also a contingent statement. As such it is possible that the next gay person I meet could be mean. Does this make it unethical to say something about a class of people? It would only be wrong if one were to make such judgments too rashly (e.g. if I stated that I knew each and every gay person was freaking evil).

                  It’s still true however, that if you don’t know much about a person, you should judge them to be good not as a matter of truth but as a matter of justice and politeness.

                  That being said, gays seem to relish being stereotyped as everything antithetical to Christianity and Christian males, so I have no problem thinking of them as they wish.

                  • Stephanie

                    Theorist writes, “I’m not disturbed by them getting beaten by an angry mob -technically they deserve to be killed by such a mob.”
                    This is one of the sickest, most disgusting, most unChristian comment I’ve read on this site yet. The reason these vaguely defined laws are so dangerous are because there are sick people with deep-seated and vicious hatreds like “Theorist” who think this way. According to the CCC, gays “must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity”, not with hatred and violence.

                    • theorist

                      A few decades ago, homosexuality was defined as deviant and sick. With a little work and time, I expect my ideas to become as acceptable and the pervert’s ideas to be less acceptable.

                      Plus, prove that they should not be killed, for it is self-evident why a Catholic would think that they should be (for crying out-loud, I have a whole mob agreeing with me on this one).

                      Pope St. Pius V for instance: “But lest the contagion of such a
                      scourge (homosexuality), from the hope of impunity which is the greatest lure of sinning, more confidently grows in power, We determine that clerics guilty of this execrable crime are to be quite gravely punished, so that whoever does not abhor the ruination of the soul, the avenging secular sword of civil laws will certainly deter.”

                      • Bono95

                        “Gravely punished” does not necessarily equal putting to death. I am Catholic and I believe that all homosexual acts are sinful and disordered, but I do not believe that people with SSA should be killed for it. That’s not what the Church teaches or advocates either. What it advocates is love, compassion, forgiveness, admonition, and counseling. Catholics are against sodomy and all sin not because we hate sinners, but because we love them and we want them to repent and be with God in eternal happiness.

                      • theorist

                        Fr. Z’s commentary says “The document of Pius stripped clerics of protection from certain
                        penalties which the STATE had for homosexual acts: in this case supplicium which could be the death penalty.” So it doesn’t always equal putting to death but it isn’t inconsistent with it nor does “secular sword” exactly sound like anything besides death. Now if a saint himself could say such a thing, then it is surely not likely that it would be un-Catholic to repeat it.

                      • enness

                        Saints are people who live holy lives, not people whose every word is infallible. You are on thin ice.

                      • theorist

                        True, but other saints were similarly known for their killing (anyone who made it to heaven after the Canaanite campaign for instance or St. Joan of Arc, or King St. Louis IX) and so it seems like a safe bet (if not infallible) that capital punishment for sodomy is okay.

                      • Stephanie

                        Contrast Pope St. Pius V with “who am I to judge?” Pope Francis and make a choice. You don’t even want to “pray away teh gay.” You want them killed. Don’t try to claim your position is Catholic.

                      • DN

                        *this* is why I’m not a catholic.

                    • enness

                      I agree, it is atrocious and I join you in unequivocally condemning it.
                      Not a one of us is worthy, we must remember that. Imagine if we all got what we “deserved.”

                  • Sean

                    “I’m not disturbed by them getting beaten by an angry mob -technically they deserve to be killed by such a mob.” (Theorist)
                    I try very hard to be tolerant of hatred, but you are aggravating the burden of tolerance. I understand that homophobic hatred can be strong and deep-seated, but you incur a debt of reciprocity if you want to be accepted. You need to keep the offending sentiments out of sight. I want my children to be comfortable being Catholics. I want them them to work and play and love and laugh like Catholics. But you lay a snare in their paths with your malice. I can extend to you my tolerance of your failed growth, but you would help me and others do so by keeping your serpents to yourself. Perhaps you are seeking approval by parading your malice so publicly, but it is an offense against tolerance. My children should not have to suffer, by suggestion or invitation or public example or enticement or moral sophistry, any complication along their way to becoming healthy, moral Catholics, able to love and respect others in a healthy way. So I ask you, in all tolerance, to keep silent. You are putting snares in their paths.

                    • theorist

                      If anyone doesn’t want to be offended, then they don’t need to be offended.

                      And what are you doing by letting them in on such a conversation? Except for the Westboro Baptists I’m probably the most extreme and least popular anti-homosexualist in the whole US with no sign of becoming more popular.

                  • Arthur

                    If the Russians dont want Homosexual so called pride marches thats there law-Good on the Russians-but no violence please.

              • enness

                A skeptic asks, how was that picture obtained?

        • Art Deco

          I doubt preventive detention is all that unusual in countries where the writ of habeas corpus would be a novelty.

          We need to take care in discussing specific provisions. There does not appear as yet to be an authoritative English translation.

          Your first sentence is incoherent.

        • Austin Ruse

          “It gives police officers the right to arrest anyone they suspect of being GLBT and detaining them for up to two weeks”

          This is completely false. Being gay us not a crime. Propagandizing gayness to children is. Big difference. You are spouting false talking points.

          • John

            Wrong. One of the new bills contains a specific provision that allows police to detain tourists for up to 14 days on suspicion of being “pro-gay”. The bills are ridiculous. Of course, in the midst of all this, Putin has announced he is getting divorced. Here are a couple of articles with more information:

            http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2013/08/14/russia-the-winter-olympics-and-laws-against-gay-propaganda

            http://skift.com/2013/07/03/a-warning-to-gay-tourists-in-russia/#/0

            • Austin Ruse

              This report us false. Tourists can fall afoul if they violate the law of not gay propagandizing children.

              • Stepahnie

                It’s happened already. Four Dutch tourists in Murmansk who were making a movie about gay rights in Russia were detained and questioned for eight hours. Article 6.21 is very vaguely defined with its references to “propaganda” and “non traditional sexual relations.” This could cover an athlete that posts a picture of himself wearing a rainbow headband on his public website. My guess is that the Russian government will keep their hands of the athletes for fear of a massive international backlash. I just hope Russian security will do its job against the thugs. No surprise that Putin is getting divorced.

                • Austin Ruse

                  Sounds like they were violating the law.

                  • Stephanie

                    The story is here: http://www.policymic.com/articles/56899/this-dutch-activist-was-arrested-for-even-talking-about-gay-rights-in-russia
                    The film director interviewed a girl for his movie that the police claimed was 17 years old. The Dutch people involved were treated shamefully. They were interviewed aggressively with shouting and yelling for over eight hours while denied food, water, and restroom use during this time. Finally the government’s prosecution failed. This is clearly discriminatory and abusive treatment. Call it anything you want except “Catholic.”

                    • Austin Ruse

                      He says he was followed by a russian agents in Amsterdam? Also did you notice in the story how much in the open gay activists are in Russia? Or how about he was so fearful that at one point in the questioning he burst out laughing?

                      There will be many provocations for the western press in the coming months. And each one will be dutifully and breathlessly reported.
                      And if you google “gay Moscow” or. “Gay st. Petersburg” you will find the locations and websites of dozens of gay bars, bathhouses and other delights. As I said in my piece, Russian gays live very much out in the open.

                      • Stephanie

                        You misread that. Kris said he was told by Russian people that the Secret Service had been following him looking for information, which has spooked him into wondering whether at times he is being followed or if someone is eavesdropping on his conversations. His laughter doesn’t indicate that he wasn’t feeling threatened. It was a response to the absurdity of the questions. I don’t think anyone would want to try to justify how he was treated.

                      • Austin Ruse

                        His and his friends’ egos out of control. Classic narcissism which is part and parcel of that way if life.
                        If I felt genuinely threatened, I couldn’t laugh. Sounds like a story telling flourish.

                      • Stephanie

                        Attributing narcissism to a natural orientation is bigoted.

                      • Bono95

                        If it’s so natural, why do so few people have it, despite constantly growing levels of tolerance, acceptance, and approval, why does it usually not show up until in the teen years or later, and why do some people who have not like it, make every effort to control or get rid if it, and not infrequently succeed in doing so?

                      • Pay

                        Nothing natural about pathology.

                      • Anonymous

                        Ain’t nothing “natural” in being a faggot. Same goes for those with other bizarre sexual orientations, like pedophiia, bestiality, etc. They are all forms of narcissism. And are a threat to society & to the individual

                      • enness

                        Like some people, I laugh at times when I am nervous. …You really, really are disappointing me here.

                      • Bono95

                        I think Mr. Ruse was talking about a fear greater than nervousness. I’d be more than nervous in that situation.

                • Austin Ruse

                  There will be many agent provocateurs in Russia next year. Many there now.

                • Arthur

                  Steph-would it not be better for the Dutch to make Homosexual flms in Holland. After all am sure no one would mind as you can get married to sheep and it is legal their .Remember -when in Rome do as the Romans-good on the Russians to boot them out . The B.B.C would welcome the Homosexuals with open arms and they could make a film over here as the B.B.C is full of Queers. While am on the subject could you tell me why one who wishes to be a Homosexual does not want to be called a Homosexual or is it some kind of -reverse physcology-pardon the pun.

            • theorist

              There is nothing rash here because the Russians only detain tourists “on
              the suspicion” of being pro-gay and not “on the judgment” that they ARE
              pro-gay. As such, this is not a miscarriage of justice since it is not
              justice, but safety which is the end of that ordinance. There is also,
              no human right to be outside of jail, only a right to be given one’s due
              and although the law may be badly applied, there is a right for peoples
              and states to protect themselves by a great many means.

              • enness

                Oh, on suspicion, that’s so much better! /sarc

        • Pay

          More gay propaganda.

        • enness

          “The pastor would probably have done better to eulogize the deceased rather than spout his own views.”

          Does there exist any transcript of what he actually said so that we may be our own judge of that? I wouldn’t trust the self-proclaimed offended party as an objective source for what I hope are obvious reasons.

        • Dominic

          Tad, you miss a very basic point. Why should the homily at a Christian funeral be a eulogy of the dead person? It should rather be an exposition of the Scriptures, and the Christian view of death and life after death: if you like, about death, judgment, heaven and hell – and purgatory for us Catholics. With the focus on the hope of resurrection, but not omitting the whole picture. Not just a whitewash job and fake canonization of someone’s life, to tickle the ears of the listeners. All right, you shouldn’t speak ill of the dead, but nor should they be lauded to the skies. We are all sinners in need of God’s mercy.

        • Arthur

          Teddy boy if i were you i would be more concerned about how your own Countryt,s morals are without like Obama geting mixed up in Russian morals. They are the only country in Europe standing against this immoral Homosexual tide .As for your president his like our own Camerons cred-is getting lower by the day .If it comes to me believing any leader give me Putin anyday .Not that we may have all that many days left as certain people want to get involved -again-in other peoples wars. Whats very interesting about Syria is how your great leader and ours has not came out and condemned the kilings of Hundreds of Christians by the same Rebels that they wish to back .Come on out Cameron and Obama and codemn these kilings.

    • AcceptingReality

      Good article but I don’t necessarily think you can automatically equate cross-dressing with being gay. The cross-dressers I have known iwere best classified as heterosexuals with a fetish.

      • Adam__Baum

        Jackie Gleason?

        • Billiamo

          I think you have Uncle Miltie in mind, Adam. I don’t believe Jackie Gleason ever did drag.

    • Art Deco

      The preacher should have responded, “Suck it up, kid.”

      • Bob

        And also responded “Repent,Jonathan and follow the Good News. Hell is a real place.” Some times we need the Truth right between the eyes…….

      • Patsy Koenig

        Yes, I hope that preacher was not intimidated into no longer speaking the truth.

    • Me

      Russia has a lot of problems with high abortion rates and divorce rates, and high levels of alcoholism and homophobia. In terms of homophobia, when a Russian TV anchor came out on air recently, he was almost immediately fired. Russia has a large number of very violent skinhead gangs that have a history of anti-gay, antisemitic, and anti-immigrant attacks. Deaths and injuries of their victims have been in decline since 2007, but numbers are still high. A new law against “gay propaganda” is so vaguely defined that it is unclear whether gay tourists and athletes at the winter Olympics will face discrimination, harassment, or legal action. Russia is not unique. Uganda has caused for the death penalty for homosexuality and penalties for homosexuality in certain Muslim countries defy belief. Many people are talking about boycotting the winter Olympics, but I think Russian homophobia will actually decrease as a result of foreign participation in the winter Olympics in Sochi. Modern first-world attitudes will permeate the Russian culture and views will start to change quickly, just as they have done everywhere else.

      • Bob

        The constant and repeated use of the word “homophobia” is a classic example of “jamming.” Do you understand that the actual translation and/ or meaning of the word “homophobia” is “fear of man” and therefore has nothing to do with people opposed to same sex attraction?

        • Michael Paterson-Seymour

          You are confusing Greek ὁμός (homos) meaning “same” with Latin homo, meaning “human being” The two words are accidental homophones.

      • Art Deco

        when a Russian TV anchor came out on air recently, he was almost immediately fired.

        Why does it surprise you that his supervisors might think it a performance issue to make a public point of your sexual problems? A news anchor is hired and well paid according to how he presents himself.

        • Jonathan

          This was unjust discrimination and contrary to Catholic teachings.

          • Austin Ruse

            A news anchor comes on TV and says he’s an inveterate masturbator and is fired. Just or unjust discrimination?

      • Art Deco

        A new law against “gay propaganda” is so vaguely defined that it is
        unclear whether gay tourists and athletes at the winter Olympics will
        face discrimination, harassment, or legal action. Russia is not unique.
        Uganda has caused for the death penalty for homosexuality and penalties
        for homosexuality in certain Muslim countries defy belief.

        1. Be honest: did you read the statute in translation, or is that a talking point from a portside website or a lavender one?

        2. Your comment about Uganda is self-discrediting. The proposal to include capital sentences was for a species of child molestation.

        • Me

          “Your comment about Uganda is self-discrediting. The proposal to include capital sentences was for a species of child molestation.”

          This comment is self-discrediting, since you obviously haven’t read the intended legislation, which proposed the death sentence for “aggravated homosexuality.” This is defined to include not only sex with same-sex partners under the age of 18, but also a number of other categories, including being a “serial offender”. You’ll be relieved to hear that for “non-aggravated” homosexual acts, “offenders” could merely be given life imprisonment. It is quite clear that the bill intended to criminalize and harshly punish “any form of sexual relations between persons of the same sex.” The bill is about far more than rape and child abuse. The full text is here: http://wthrockmorton.com/2009/12/ugandas-anti-homosexuality-bill-full-text-with-commentary/

          • Art Deco

            I have read the legislation.

            • Me

              Good. ‘Hope you got it this time.

          • Jonathan

            Hah! Too smart, Me:)

        • Paul McGuire

          It is a little hard to read the actual statute since it is in Russian but you can see a translation at this link:
          http://www.volokh.com/2013/06/13/russian-parliament-passes-bill-banning-propaganda-of-non-traditional-sexual-relationships-aimed-at-minors/

          The bill covers “the dissemination of information, aimed at forming
          among minors [1] nontraditional sexual orientations, [2] an attraction
          to nontraditional sexual relationships, [3] a distorted perception about
          the social equal value of traditional and nontraditional sexual
          relationships, or [4] the imposition of information about nontraditional
          sexual relationships, creating an interest in such relationships”

          So basically, any attempt to suggest to gay, lesbian, or bisexual minors that their sexual orientation is fine would be punishable under [3]. The clear implication in the text is that they believe you can somehow turn a minor gay by certain types of propaganda which I don’t believe is true.

          This is why so much attention is put to the issue of whether being gay is a choice. Because if it is an inborn characteristic then people can stop worrying about their children being turned gay. You either are born gay or you aren’t.

          • Art Deco

            Paul McGuire:

            1. Are there or are there not such things as school curricula? Do you object to the use of public agency to provide primary and secondary schooling? If you do not, do you object to elected officials prescribing curricula?

            2. Do random adults have an unrestricted franchise to communicate with minors – i.e. other people’s children? Can the law be structured around the assumption that in modern life parents cannot always monitor their young’s communications?

            3. Should it be permissible for merchants to vend pornography to minors? How about literature on … adult topics?

            4. There used to be ‘restricted’ collections at public libraries, as well as FCC regulations on the content of broadcasting. Were these just or unjust?

            5. A municipal council in one of London’s borough once offered youngsters free memberships in a ‘gay-and-lesbian’ community center it was funding. Was this appropriate?

            • Paul McGuire

              I don’t see how anything but 5 is on topic here. Those are also very broad questions of the right of parents which aren’t really at issue here. I don’t think the gay community’s backlash has anything to do with an inability to provide porn to minors. That is against the law in the US. Information on sexual orientation is not the same as information on safe sex though I think the two go hand in hand. In most states in the US, high school children are given basic sex education. I don’t see how adding a level explaining sexual orientation makes it more inappropriate for children to learn.

              As to number 5, do you know what goes on at most of these “gay and lesbian” community centers? Because I have visited my local one to provide support and the programs are primarily aimed at providing a welcoming atmosphere to LGBT youth who are not finding acceptance at home.

              • Art Deco

                They are at issue. That is why you are evading an answer M. Poulet.

              • Sygurd Jonfski

                In July of this year, in the Canadian province of Ontario, Ben Levin – a highly respected educator, university professor and member of an interim provincial government, has been arrested on multiple charges of producing child pornography. He was also a co-author of a sex education curriculum which was so drastic that the parental backlash put it back on the shelf. You may not know these facts because the mainstream media’s silence on this particular outrage has been deafening but here’s a good summary of the whole affair:
                http://www.theinterim.com/politics/promoting-perversity/

                Here’s something to think about in reference to sex ed programs – perhaps they are not as neutral and objective as they are made to look.

              • Adam Baum

                Information on “sexual orientation”, aka recruiting literature.

          • Art Deco

            So basically, any attempt to suggest to gay, lesbian, or bisexual minors
            that their sexual orientation is fine would be punishable under [3].

            Under what circumstance do you define a minor as ‘gay, lesbian, or bisexual’?

            • Paul McGuire

              The same way you define a transgender minor, self identification. A young boy does not need to have engaged in sex with anyone to notice that he is not attracted to girls like his classmates once everyone starts going through puberty. These days minors are coming out in middle school as gay, lesbian, or bisexual.

              • Art Deco

                I do not hold much by social apocrypha, or for failing to exercise critical intelligence in evaluating the words of adolescent will of the wisp

              • Adam Baum

                These days minors are coming out in middle school as gay, lesbian, or bisexual.

                Let’s give them the keys and suffrage as well, because middle school kids are so well informed and self directed.

                • Jonathan

                  I knew I was straight in middle school. Most kids have a pretty good idea of their sexual orientation by then.

          • Art Deco

            The phenomenon of discordant behavior among both male and female identical twin sets is well documented. Depending on which study you consult, discordant behavior among males is somewhere between just as common as concordant homosexuality to three times as common. One thing that researchers can be sure of is that homosexuality is not innate.

          • Steve Frank

            Why do you see a “clear implication” that the law is motivated by a fear that propaganda might “turn a minor gay”? The government may simply believe that it is not good to encourage those with same sex impulses to act upon them. The same way we would not want to encourage someone with pedophelic urges to act upon those. I’m not trying to equate pedophelia with homosexuality. I use pedophelia as an example because almost everyone would agree that pedophelia is a sexual disorder. So we all agree that there are some sexual orientations that should be discouraged, and we do that irrespective of whether we believe such orientations are changeable. Which sexual orientations should and should not be encouraged is another question. But I think it’s unreasonable to argue that all attempts to dissuade children from acting on homosexual impulses are motivated by some fear of turning straight children into gays.

          • Adam Baum

            It’s impossible to read the statute because you have no idea to construe according to Russian norms.

          • Austin Ruse

            There is no evidence that homosexuality is inborn. Twin studies bear that out. Homosexuality is a way of life. it may be caused by many things including relationship with father and mother and early childhood abuse.

            • Adam__Baum

              But there is every incentive to claim that it is inborn.

      • Steve Frank

        I am so tired of all disapproval of homosexuality being explained as “homophobia”. Catholics also disapprove of divorce, but I’ve never heard a Catholic get called a “divorcaphobe”. Catholics disapprove of heterosexual fornication, but I’ve never heard a Catholic get called a “fornicaphobe”. Phobia means irrational fear. I’ve never heard anyone argue that Christian disapproval of divorce and heterosexual fornication is based on an irrational fear of divorcees and fornicators. Even the Church’s harshest critics understand that the Christian objection to divorce and pre-marital sex is based on religious principle, even if they find those principles foolish. So why is homosexuality so “special” that all disapproval of it must be chalked up to irrational fear rather than principle? Now I must say that I don’t think most people who use the term “homophobia” really believe that all disapproval of homosexuality is based on fear. But they use the term anyway because it has become an emotionally charged term that now carries the same weight as the word “bigot”. Those who use this term do so in hopes of shutting down debate by classifying all objection to homosexuality as irrational. The truth is they are bearing false witness by presuming to know that every critic of the homosexual agenda is being motivated by fear. This is one of the chief reasons that homosexual activists have gained so much ground in recent years. They have captured the language of the debate.

        • Uuncle Max

          “They have captured the language of the debate.”

          Beautifully said

        • Me

          Homophobia is defined as “an extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people.” What is going on in Russia (and Uganda and certain Muslim countries) is unquestionably homophobic and contradicts Catholic teachings stating that gays should be treated with “respect, compassion, and sensitivity.” Don’t try to pretend that homophobia is the same thing as simply believing that homosexual acts are wrong. Violence and unjust discrimination against homosexuals (such as firing someone for coming out publicly) are by definition homophobic. Pope Francis may oppose homosexuality, but he is certainly not homophobic.

          • Steve Frank

            The fact that the word “fear” is missing from the definition you offered for “homophobia” completely underscores my point of how successful the homosexual rights movement has been about bastardizing our language and changing the meaning of words. The definition of the root word “phobia” is irrational fear. Yet many modern dictionaries will now define the word “homophobia” without any reference to fear. Merriam-Webster includes “discrimination against homosexuals” as a definition for homophobia. So what we are witnessing now is the official meaning of a word changing before our very eyes. A true phobia involves FEAR. What militant Muslim countries do to homosexuals is cruel and reprehensible. But it is not driven by fear. It is driven my religious zealotry that lacks mercy and compassion. It’s the same zealotry that results in adulteresses being executed. Do you think Muslim countries execute adulteresses because they are afraid of such women? No. It’s about the maintenance of a totalitarian state. Capital punishment happens in these countries for many offenses beyond homosexuality.

            • Paul McGuire

              Right, words change and meanings change. I don’t know why there is such an uproar over re-defining words. It happens all the time.

              • Steve Frank

                It’s the intellectual dishonesty behind the change in meaning that is the problem. The word homophobia has been intentionally misused for so long that it’s now become a shorthand way of describing all opposition to homosexuality. So the meaning of the word gets broadened, yet the root word “phobia” remains which gives the psychological impression that all opposition to homosexuality is irrational, similar to other “phobias” where people have irrational fears of things like spiders, flying, etc. Homosexual activists misused the term for propaganda purposes. The fact that most dictionaries now offer a broadened meaning to the term points to how successful they have been.

              • Bob

                Great…..language rules and wording are now relativistic and able to be changed due to the whims of secular society.

                If that’s the case, then I very much like and accept Adam_Baum’s definition of “Homophobia” in his posting above. I reject your definition of “homophobia”, and now adopt Adam Baum’s definition as the only true and correct one. I will be contacting Webster’s.

                And shouldn’t we correctly call men living the gay (gay……remember when it used to mean “happy, joyful?”) lifestyle “sodomites?” If same sex attracted males want their sexual tendencies to be their personhood, then sodomites is much more definitive.

              • Romulus

                Yes indeed. It’s called “lying.”

              • Adam Baum

                Like in 1930′s Germany.

          • pay

            Nothing unjust about having laws reflect the moral norm. One who has this disordered inclination is not to announce it as some good to be welcomed and enjoyed. It is to be viewed as it is… a cross. Something to be healed through the Church and perhaps through psychiatric care. The facile distinction between the disordered desire and the act is but one theological distinction it is not a license to endorse disordered ideologies as some sort of good when they are not.

            • Me

              “One who has this disordered inclination is not to announce it as some good to be welcomed and enjoyed. ”
              One can (and should) “announce” whatever one thinks is right and true, even if it is in opposition to what YOU happen to think. We live in a free and pluralistic society where we all have freedom of expression. Even hate speech is defended under our Constitution. What gives you the idea you can silence LGBTs and the ever-growing number of people who would protect them from unjust discrimination? Even Pope Francis is getting in on the act, saying that gays should not be marginalized and should be integrated into society.

              • Art Deco

                What gives you the idea you can silence LGBTs and the ever-growing
                number of people who would protect them from unjust discrimination?

                1. Is it permissible for elected officials to make decisions about school curricula?

                2. Is it permissible for the state to regulate the traffic in literature to the young? How about Hustler?

                ==

                Now personally, I think it is really creepy to be going about handing pamphlets to 13 year old boys extolling the wonders of sodomy. The question is under what circumstances that can and should be subject to legal sanction.

              • Pay

                I am responding to the false charge that these laws are contrary to the CCC. The Pope did not endorse your gay propaganda at all. He briefly remarked about sinners falling and going to confession not endorsing gay ideology as to be embraced by society. People with this affliction should not be marginalized BUT that does not mean they cannot be limited for disordered behavior it for polluting young minds with evil propaganda.

                • Me

                  Pope Francis said, “Who am I to judge?” AND also stated that he thought gays should not be marginalized and should be integrated. To me, that means no discrimination. I think you are misinterpreting Catholic teachings to fit your own agenda.

                  • Erika Tatsis

                    Pope Francis talked about homosexual orientation not activity. Crisis readers know the difference between what Pope Francis says and what the New York Times reports and you regurgitate as some kind of newfangled “Catholicism”. Homosexual activity must be confessed in earnest and ceased. Otherwise it is a continuation of willfully engaging in sinful acts.

                    • me

                      You might want to listen to your pope. He said, “Who am I to judge?”

                      • Erika Tatsis

                        About homosexual orientation not activity. And thanks for the advice on listening because I speak both of my Pope’s native languages. No confusion for me even though you insist on distorting what was merely his repetition of established Catholic catechism.

                      • pay

                        He was referring to those who repent and seek Christ. He is not judging their soul. Why intentionally mislead?

                      • Erika Tatsis

                        Because he is trying to teach you how to be an authentic Catholic – Right!!! If you did the same on homosexual websites you would be cut off and you would be accused of provoking them. Remember the Buddhist lesbian who lined up for Communion in DC? When Father Marcel Guarnizo denied her the Holy Eucharist she immediately went to the press to boohoo that the priest was threatening and intimidating. This is what these hateful people do. They set you up so they can run and cry discrimination.

                      • Sygurd Jonfski

                        And the first part of this sentence, which you are skipping on purpose, was… ?

                  • Austin Ruse

                    The church teaches no UNJUST discrimination.

                    • me

                      He insisted that gays should not be marginalized and should be integrated. He suggested gay priests should be allowed. Are you claiming to be more Catholic than the pope?

                      • Austin Ruse

                        He did not say gay priests should be allowed. Wishful thinking.

                      • Jonathan

                        He opened the door to having gay priests and to accepting gays in every walk of life.

                      • Austin Ruse

                        The Church already teaches that gays are not to be unjustly discriminated against, but if you think the pope now favors gay marriage, gay adoption, and out-gay priests, you are simply misguided.

                      • Erika Tatsis

                        Not if they promote homosexual activity much less engage in it and forget it if they never confessed for it. Reminder, confession is for sins. The Catholic Church also doesn’t marginalize imprisoned criminals, that is not the same as accepting their actions.

                      • Pay

                        No, that is your spin.

                      • John

                        That is correct. He said gays should be integrated into society. This non-Catholic cant about discrimination being acceptable is garbage. These people have not been properly catechized.

                      • Bob

                        Nope. You’re wrong. Mucho incorrecto! The liberal, atheistic mainstream media such as MSNBC, CBS, CNN twisted the Pope’s words to suggest gay priests should be allowed.

                  • Crisiseditor

                    Crisis Magazine (and multiple other Catholic sites) have correctly clarified what Pope Francis said and meant. He was not saying anything different than what the Catholic Church has always taught. Your willful ignorance is getting tiresome.

              • Austin Ruse

                He would also say they should not be allowed to be marries, to adopt, or be priests. You would call such a person homophobic, no?

                • me

                  You are misstating Pope Francis and putting your words in his mouth. He suggested that they should be allowed to be priests. You are misrepresenting Catholicism if you are suggesting that your own narrow understanding of homosexual behavior should be imposed on everyone else.

                  • Austin Ruse

                    Pope Francis did not change church teaching and practice during a plane ride press conference. If you think so then you know next to nothing about the Church.

                  • pay

                    You should read and grasp what the Church actually teaches.

              • theorist

                A free and pluralistic society is a contradiction in terms, a house divided against itself, and you defend this monstrosity? IMO, a man has as much rights as the good man thinks he should have.

          • Austin Ruse

            No one really cares what the definition of homophobia is.

            • Me

              Speak for yourself. It is important to many people who would like to distinguish between irrational bigotry and principled defense of certain beliefs. If one doesn’t care about that difference, maybe one needs to learn a little more about homophobia.

              • Austin Ruse

                Repeat. No one cares.

                Sent from my iPad

                • Me

                  Translation: I don’t care. I am everyone. Therefore those who do care are “no one.” And they’re saying here that gays are narcissistic? I think our pope would care about the meaning of that word very much.

                  • Austin Ruse

                    No one cares. It is the concern of a tiny sliver of a minority who use the term to silence and shame.

                    • me

                      You are seriously suggesting Paul being called a “PIMP” and otherwise abused isn’t really too bad, but the same time you claim the term homophobia, which I’ve defined here as discriminatory behavior, is oh-so-pejorative??? It would be thoroughly deceitful to try to hold both these positions. And you are wrong — it is not a “tiny sliver of a minority” that is concerned about homophobia in this country (I am writing from the US.) It is now a clear majority of our decent, fair-minded citizens — including Catholic citizens (54% of whom support marriage equality) — that want to see LGBTs treated with respect and compassion and to see all unjust signs of discrimination (i.e., manifestations of homophobia) against them removed. And THAT is the what our Church teaches. If you don’t like it, either leave or join the ranks of cafeteria Catholics.

                      • Austin Ruse

                        Where have I said homophobia is ohso perforate e. jeez. I’ve been called much worse. Man up, boys.
                        You simply do not know what the church teaches. Moreover, with two exceptions, whenever gay marriage is VOTED on , you lose, badly. Polls are meaningless precisely because of threats and bullying by your side.
                        Sent from my iPad

                      • me

                        You keep claiming — quite falsely — that “no one cares” about homophobia, but polls don’t matter when they don’t support what you want them to support? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever! And I guess name calling is now acceptable on this blog? I can safely follow your lead and that of the Crisis editor by saying that you are pimping for bigotry. I guess I could also call you nasty names in capital letters, since that is now also accepted on this blog, and if you don’t like it, I could tell you to “Man up.” I’ll remember that next time one of you contributors starts whining about poor, little homophobes being picked on by big, mean threatening bullies. Honestly, I am really disgusted and disappointed by what passes for Catholicism on this site. Much of it is unadulterated bigotry, nastiness, and hypocrisy that completely contradicts everything Pope Francis stands for.

                      • Austin Ruse

                        No one cares about the definition or the use of the term. You are like a scholastic arguing about angels on pinheads.
                        The term is a form of jamming meant to silence and punish. Anyone who opposes the agenda, including Francis, must be a homophobe. Silliness and name calling.
                        Again. You do not define Catholicism. You know nothing about it. The pope opposes samesex marriage, homosexual adoption and out-gay priests. Sorry, you cannot use him.

                        Sent from my iPad

                      • Jonathan

                        You are ignorant of Catholicism and Christianity. You think you can treat people like dirt and somehow claim the lower ground. Sorry, but you’ve put yourself in the same category as the Pharisees.

                      • Austin Ruse

                        More jamming. No need to respond to this type of thing. Just keep making the arguments you are making. You see what he is doing? Only calling names, only trying to shame and silence. Ignore him.

                      • Jonathan

                        And this twat is supporting unjust discrimination in Russia that is intended to shame and silence? Yeah, right.

                      • Austin Ruse

                        The purpose of the law in Russia is to protect children from propaganda. Homosexuals are free to express themselves about their way if life, just not to children.

                      • Pay

                        No one is treating anyone like dirt. That is a lie and an emotional appeal without merit. Try again.

                      • pay

                        If you authentically knew what the Pope teaches you would not be pushing your agitprop here. Please stop calumniating the Pope. He does not support the new ideology of evil that you keep pushing.

                      • Jonathan

                        Threats and bullying are coming from YOUR side. Are you blind?

                    • Jonathan

                      You are trying to silence and shame gays and those who want to protect them.

                  • Jonathan

                    Austin Ruse is narcissistic. He believes only his distorted and hate-filled rantings matter.

            • Jonathan

              Dumbest comment yet.

          • Jonathan

            I like this new guy, Francis. A lot of people could learn Christian charity from him.

        • pay

          The term is propaganda used as a cudgel.

        • Me

          There is a difference between disapproval of homosexuality and real homophobia. The litmus test for homophobia is whether a person is advocating for discrimination against LGBTs. What is happening in Russia — the neo-Nazi violence as well as suppression of free speech — is discriminatory and therefore homophobic. To decry defending LGBTs against bullying and discrimination is homophobic. There are some who defend the use of the word “sodomy” as technically accurate. They need also to accept the use of the word “homophobic” and “bigoted” when technically accurate. This habit of screaming “I’m being persecuted” every time someone attempts to point out that it is the screamer who is doing the persecuting is getting to be a bit of a bore.

          • Art Deco

            The litmus test for homophobia is whether a person is advocating for discrimination against LGBTs.

            Law of a regulatory character discriminates between one sort of behavior and another. Sorry to break it to you.

            • Me

              Some sort of behaviors hurt others. Homosexuality does not. Homophobia does, however. Should homophobia be regulated?

              • Pay

                Homosexuality defined as promoting this disordered inclination does harm society.

              • AngelWithAnAttitude

                “Some sort of behaviors hurt others. Homosexuality does not.”

                Oh another PIMP promoting the destruction of lives. Read and Learn PIMP:

                The anus lacks the natural lubrication the vagina has. Penetration can tear the tissue inside the anus, allowing bacteria and viruses to enter the bloodstream. This can result in the spread of sexually transmitted infections including HIV. Studies have suggested that anal exposure to HIV poses 30 times more risk for the receptive partner than vaginal exposure. Exposure to the human papillomavirus (HPV) may also lead to the development of anal warts and anal cancer. Using lubricants can help some, but doesn’t completely prevent tearing.-WebMD.com

                • Me

                  I hope the editor deals with this guy soon.

                  • AngelWithAnAttitude

                    No, but God will deal with you “Me”!

                    • Me

                      I suspect quite a few people are in for a surprise on the other side of the veil:-)

                • Crisiseditor

                  No need to copy and paste previous posts as if gay advocates care about the medical facts regarding the health risks of homosexuality. Besides, I will delete repetitive posts. And while “Me” is pimping for homosexuality, there is no need to address her as such. Let your arguments do the work. Just don’t expect to make any headway.

                  • me

                    It is thoroughly hypocritical to let this post stand while condemning posts referring to homophobia. When you exhibit this level of bias in the treatment of your commenters, how can you have any credibility whatsoever when it comes to dealing with Church teachings. It is quite obvious that you are pursuing your own agenda here, which is not necessarily congruent with that of the Church. You have shown a complete lack of integrity. While your activism may resonate with a few extremists, I have no doubt that it will disgust honest seekers who wander into this forum.

                    • Crisiseditor

                      I do not deleted all posts that make the false charge of “homophobia” but I have warned commentators against name calling like I warned “AngelWithAnAttitude.” I rarely intervene because readers can usually take the rough and tumble of debate. You are commenting on a site that opposes your position and you are surprised that there is pushback? You are clearly confused but I have let readers respond to your false statements and weak claims because the exchange contributes to a lively comments section. Yet, I don’t think you are here to learn anything but to advocate for homosexuality in ways that are diametrically opposed to the editorial views of this website. You have been allowed to distort the truth for months. However, at a certain point, there is no reason why this site should tolerate any longer the ingratitude you have shown for the opportunity extended to you.

              • leogirl87

                Homosexual behavior has been linked to suicide (highest rates are in the most tolerant countries, ironically enough), depression, lower life expectancies, certain kinds of cancers, high rates of STDs, etc. Gay relationships are usually unfaithful and lesbian relationships usually do not last more than 5-10 years. To pretend that homosexuality doesn’t hurt anyone is incredibly ignorant.

          • Art Deco

            the neo-Nazi violence as well as suppression of free speech — is discriminatory and therefore homophobic.

            Flag for Godwin’s Law.

            ===

            While we are at it, ME, just what did Ernst Roehm do with his spare time?

            • Me

              Godwin’s Law or not, I think we can all agree that neo-Nazi violence against gays is homophobic (as the word is correctly defined,) no? Your reference to Godwin’s Law is not valid here since specific and violent neo-Nazi conduct, as opposed to homophobia in general, was mentioned. The Ernst Roehm reference is irrelevant both within the context of neo-Nazi violence in Russia and the Nazi Party in general. Roehm was killed in 1934, the year after the Nazi Party came to power. Once the Nazis came to power, they began to aggressively implement an old German penal code, paragraph 175, which had been largely ignored for years and imposed penalties against homosexuals. Not only was 175 aggressively implemented under the Nazis, but it was extended. Concentration camp prisoners were forced to wear a pink triangle. Under the Nazis, gay men and women were persecuted in what has sometimes been called the Homocaust. So if your intention was to suggest that the Nazis were sympathetic to homosexuality because Ernst Roehm was gay, I would say you were completely wrong. ((And, no, this is not Godwin’s Law at work — this is a refutation of what you have been suggesting.)

              • Erika Tatsis

                Read The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party by Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams. It was first published in 1995 and there is a 5th edition available online:

                http://www.thepinkswastika.com/5201.html

                • Me

                  It’s written in the same vein as denial of the Holocaust, but I’ve no doubt that some of the Nazis who persecuted gays had plenty of issues relating to their own sexuality.

                  • Erika Tatsis

                    It was written by a Jew and recommended to the U.S. Holocaust Museum for inclusion as a resource by Dr. Nathaniel Lehrman, a retired psychiatrist. On May 5, 2000 Dr. Lehrman (not a conservative) wrote an editorial for the Intermountain Jewish news decrying homosexual events and influence at the Holocaust Museum. Pointing out homosexual inclinations by overcompensating and self-loathing Nazis is not in the same vein as Holocaust denial.

                    • me

                      Not having heard of Nathaniel Lehrman, I googled his name and learned that he has been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and had his license revoked in 1993 for both crimes and malpractice. Whoever he is, you might want to at least consider seeking other sources.

                      • Erika Tatsis

                        My oh my. As Catholics we are supposed to reach out to those in need and you mock and discredit Lehrman, an extensively published leftist, for “paranoid schizophrenia”. You BIGOT! And you are HATEFUL! Do you think he is disordered? I would be SHOCKED to think that you could think ill of anyone not like you! HAHAHAHA.

                      • John

                        C’mon, Erika. Knock off the name calling and mud flinging. Only a paranoid schizophrenic could possibly approve of anything Scott Lively wrote. Lively’s book is not history. It’s an anti-gay polemic, completely disingenuous, and pure hate mongering.

                  • Bob

                    Jamming……any reference trying to equate people opposed to the sin of sodomy to Nazism is “a flag on the play” and jamming. 15 yard penalty.

                    • Jonathan

                      Bob, me didn’t call homophobia Nazism. The person pointed out that Russia has a problem with neo Nazi violence against gays. Russia has the highest number of skinhead hoodlums in the world (between 50K and 70K.) They get their rocks off beating up on gays, Asians, and Africans. Russia even had to issue a warning to foreigners in the country on Hitler’s birthday a few years ago. If the cap fits, wear it.

                  • Art Deco

                    Um, no.

                    The book advances a thesis (derived from secondary literature) about the sources of the Nazi abuse of the homosexual population and the function of sodomy in the subculture formed by the Nazi leadership.

                    It is a contention of the book that the gay lobby has tried to make use of what happened to gain sympathy benefits when, in fact, what was suffered by German homosexuals was qualitatively different than that of others.

              • Art Deco

                Ernst Roehm was killed during the Night of the Long Knives about 17 months after Adolf Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany. He was not a random actor, but the single most consequential individual in the Nazi movement other than Hitler himself and the one who recruited Hitler as a member of the fledgling “German Workers’ Party” in 1919. The Nazi elite was comparatively thick with sexual perverts. (And please note Adolf Hitler had nothing in the way of a domestic life).

                I think the conventional enumeration of the number of homosexuals who died in work camps during the Nazi era is in the five digits (one figure I have seen is 15,000) The population of the homosexual underground in areas occupied by the Wehrmacht would be a matter of speculation, but the population of post-pubescent males in Germany and Austria alone would have been around 30 million at the time; another 90 million or so were in areas which spent between two and five years under German occupation. In terms of scale and probability of injury, the abuse of the homosexual population in continental Europe between 1933 and 1945 was easily an order of magnitude lower than than of the Gypsy population and two orders lower than that of the Jewish population. It qualitatively is not the same thing.

          • Steve Frank

            Homophobic is not “technically accurate” unless opposition is motivated by fear, regardless of how violent it is. It’s that simple. Words have meaning. At least they used to.

            p.s. I’m not defending any violence taking place in Russia. All I know is I’m tired of words being bastardized.

            • Me

              “Flammable” and “inflammable” should not mean the same thing, but they do. What’s important about word meanings is that they are universally understood. “Homophobia” is defined as I mentioned above.

              • Pay

                It is nothing but a contrived political word used to push an immoral agenda.

                • Me

                  Is pushing discrimination against gays an “immoral agenda”? The CCC suggests that it is.

                  • Erika Tatsis

                    Discriminating? And precisely what are you doing towards Catholics? Either Catholics turn their back on 2,000 years to quell your sensitivities or else?

                    • Me

                      I don’t think you understand Catholic teaching on the issue. Listen to Pope Francis and read CCC 2358. Believing homosexual acts to be morally wrong does not give one the right to police other peoples’ private behavior or public speech. Would you really want your own private life examined and judged?

                      • Pay

                        You are quite wrong. The Pope accepts all of Church teaching including Church documents that fully explain those sections in the CCC. Your misinterpretation does not conform to Catholic teaching at all.

                      • theorist

                        Of course we want our private lives to be judged and examined. We already expect God to be doing that and we examine our own selves in that light. Perhaps you would not want to have Christian Commissars but neither do we, we merely want the absolute freedom to set a good example to all people w/o simultaneously being forced to betray that example by marrying homo couples and assisting at their weddings and accepting them as practicing homos.

                        Pope Francis would understand this as much as he would understand traditional Christianity.

                  • Pay

                    See my post above regarding false claims of unjust discrimination.

                  • Austin Ruse

                    The CCC clearly approves JUST discrimination.

                  • theorist

                    Who keeps up-voting this tomfoolery? The CCC was never infallible (even Catholic Answers accepts this) and although one must accept that one should not treat gays badly, this is only as a corollary that one should not treat men badly. But to negatively discriminate against homosexuals is not always, by experience, an unjust thing.

              • Steve Frank

                The National Fire Protection Association urged use of the term flammable for safety reasons. Homosexual activists urged use of the term homophobia for propaganda purposes. Sorry but I refuse to participate in the bastardization of language for purposes of a political agenda.

                • Jonathan

                  We all know what homophobia means, what it looks like, and how unChristian it is. Stop playing word games to hide your hatred.

                  • Steve Frank

                    Nice try Jonathan but you are the one playing word games. Phobia means fear. Go look it up.

                    • Jonathan

                      No problem with that. Homophobes are some of the most frightened people on the planet. Fear and hatred go hand in hand.

                      • Steve Frank

                        I follow the teachings of Christ and disapprove of divorce too. Does that mean I’m afraid of divorcees?

                      • Straight Ally

                        If your side started pouring more of your energy into ways to make traditional marriage better, you might have a little more credibility. As someone else pointed out, you’re not getting bugs up your derrieres about other forms of “non-procreative sex.” If you weren’t homophobic you’d want the sex police after people using contraceptives or masturbating just as much as you’d want them going after GLBTs. Unless you’ve all got a dozen kids and you’ve never engaged in any form of auto eroticism, you have no right whatsoever to pick on gays.

                      • Steve Frank

                        You’re clearly arguing with a straw man. I’m not a Catholic. I’m an evangelical Protestant who respects the Catholic Church and will stand with it to defend Christian moral principles. In fact, in many areas I think the Catholic Church has done a better job defending Christian morality than evangelical Protestants have done. That is what attracted me to this forum. However, I’ve never said a word about what I think about masturbation and contraceptives so how could you know whether I’m being consistent in how I treat those things compared to homosexuality? Also, I’ve never condemned “non-procreative sex” per se. In fact I said very clearly that there is nothing unnatural about infertile heterosexual activity. All I’ve said is that homosexual sex is unnatural. The fact that it is non-procreative is only part of the argument of why it is unnatural. Also, when did I ever say I wanted the “sex police” going after anyone including gays? I jumped into this thread to express my concern about the abuse of the term “homophobia”, not to argue that anyone should be “policing” anyone’s sex life. The fact that you have accused me of all kinds of things I have never said certainly proves that you have some type of chip on your shoulder when it comes to Christians.

                      • Austin Ruse

                        Gays can root around any way they see fit. You just can’t marry, adopt, become priests, teach my child.

                      • Pay

                        Homomania is used in an attempt to quell their consciences. They know what is wrong and refuse to stop so they try and get others to adopt their views hoping it will make them feel better. It will not.

                      • Steve Frank

                        Exactly. The more homosexuals scream “hate” at Catholics or other conservative Christians who express disapproval of their lifestyle, the more obvious it is that the ultimate issue is not the supposed hate of Christians, but the homosexual’s own troubled conscience. Notice that you rarely if ever hear divorcees cry “hate” when the Church expresses it’s disapproval of divorce. You never hear heterosexual fornicators scream “hate” when the Church states it’s disapproval of premarital sex. Divorcees and fornicators don’t like it when the Church teaches against these things, and many of them end up leaving the Church because of it, but I never hear them scream “hate”. They may accuse the Church of being behind the times, or “repressed” about sex, or many other things. But we don’t have words like “divorcaphobe” in our vocabulary because most divorcees understand that the Church’s position on divorce comes from faithfulness to the teachings of Christ, not from hateful malice. They hear what the Church teaches about divorce and if they can’t live with it, they leave the Church and move on. Yet when it comes to homosexuals, everything is different. All disapproval must be chalked up to “hate”. Homosexuals can’t seem to tolerate the fact that anyone disapproves of their lifestyle. So they scream “hater” and “homophobe” and troll Christian websites so they can vent their pent up anger toward Christians. Clearly there is something going on with their conscience that would cause homosexuals to react with so much more anger toward the Church, things you just don’t see with other sexual sins like divorce, adultery and fornication.

                      • Art Deco

                        Jonathan, you realize that the way the term is commonly used today would encompass the majority of the population of the United States in our time, the overwhelming majority of those living in urban slums in our time, and all but a very modest minority of the population of the metropolitan center in which I grew up.

                        Now, do you really think the adult men I grew up with, about two-thirds of whom had military service in their past and not a few of whom were combat veterans were “some of the most frightened people on the planet”? How about those sticking it out in South Central L.A.?

                  • pay

                    Please stop the “gay” agitprop. Truth is hate to those who hate truth. Mangling words to push an evil ideology is wrong.

                  • Austin Ruse

                    It means anyone who is against gay ” marriage” even gays. Go figure that.

                • Erika Tatsis

                  Although because of the homosexual movement I can no longer bear to look at rainbows which I once loved.

                  • Jonathan

                    I hope every athlete at Sochi has the courage to wear one proudly.

                    • Erika Tatsis

                      I hope every athlete wears their crucifix with pride. Jesus suffered and died to save sinners like you and your ilk and this is how you repay him – by pretending to know your Catholicism better than Catholics. Classic.

                    • Graham

                      You know, that might happen, Jonathan. Most athletes are educated and principled and don’t want to stand for discrimination. Witness Andy Murray’s recent comments on the possibility of gay men in tennis and the widespread support for Jason Collins. Check out http://www.athleteally.org/ , an organization for athletes that support gay rights. Athlete Ally and the many athletes that support it aren’t going to let their gay buddies be mistreated in Russia. We’re going to see a lot of latter-day Jesse Owenses and Jesse Owens champions in Sochi. Better than boycotting, these people will go to Russia and leave it a better place after changing minds and hearts.

                      • Art Deco

                        Most athletes are educated and principled

                        You are trying to persuade people you have your head up your ass, I take it?

                      • Olivia

                        Jamming.

                      • Art Deco

                        It might help you understand this discourse better, Olivia, presuming you have any such aim, to get your mind around two things:

                        1. You generally cannot distinguish competing political factions by the shares of ‘educated’ and ‘principled’ people in them. Crisis is not the trade journal of the asphalt lobby.

                        2. That’s a bloody strange description of athletes. The hedonistic culture of professional athletics, the corruption of college sports, and the tenuous connection of athletic performance with brains or principles should discredit that remark right there.

                        ==

                        You should be unjammed by now.

                      • Olivia

                        Don’t be jealous of athletes just because they look good. I’ve been looking at Graham’s website. The athlete allies are “educated and principled” and above all NICE. They don’t want to see gays bullied. Not in Sochi. Not anywhere. I find them much more inspiring than the people here

                      • Jacob Suggs

                        Wow, what a twisted way of reading a comment. I mean, you should get an award. You ignore everything that the person says, somehow pull out some accusation of jealousy, then go right back to the mindless repeating of a meaningless mantra.

                        Yes, bullying gay people is bad. Duh. But equating not bullying gay people with saying that homosexual acts are good is silly and unjustified.

                      • Art Deco

                        Don’t be jealous of athletes just because they look good.

                        Non sequitur.

                        I’ve been looking at Graham’s website. The athlete allies are “educated
                        and principled” and above all NICE. They don’t want to see gays bullied.
                        Not in Sochi. Not anywhere.

                        Lots of people are ‘educated and principled’. Idiot political factionists fancy they have a monopoly on that. Being principled and educated is not a signature of athletes even though you can no doubt find athletes who are one the other or both.

                        Most of us live in world that is, Olivia, where nice is not enough. From Flannery O’Connor:

                        When you have a code of manners based on charity, then
                        when the charity fails—as it is going to do constantly—you’ve got those manners there to preserve each race from small intrusions on each other. (Mystery 233-4)

                        I do not think you can contrive “manners based on charity” from exhibitionism and obnoxious self-assertion.

                      • Sygurd Jonfski

                        Lookism, lokism…

                      • Erika Tatsis

                        Then why are you here?

                    • Austin Ruse

                      The IOC already said its not allowed.

            • TheComrade

              Technically, that is wrong. -phobic can mean against, repelled by, in opposition to. E.g. ‘hydrophobic’, a word describing a material that repels water.

              But I do agree the term ‘homophobe’ is supposed to sound nasty, a pejorative.

              • Steve Frank

                Ok, so then would you agree that it’s accurate to describe any homosexual who stands in “opposition” to Christianity as a “Christophobe”?

                • TheComrade

                  I dunno, you can try to coin that term if you wish. We already have a bunch of words that describe opposition to religion.. Atheist, agnostic, deist, heathen… If someone hates Christians, the term ‘bigot’ probably applies.

                  • Steve Frank

                    I didn’t use the phrase “hates” Christians, I said someone who “opposes” Christianity. I’m talking about someone who does not believe Christianity’s truth claims and even may even think that it has some dangerous beliefs (such as it’s supposed intolerant views on homosexuality). Can that person fairly be called a “Christophobe”? You told me that phobic means “oppose” in order to imply (I assume) that Christians who “oppose” homosexuality can fairly be called homophobes. I’m not asking for your permission to “coin the phrase” christophobe (it has already been coined although it’s not mainstream and I doubt it ever will be in the current political climate). I’m simply asking you whether it is linguistically fair for a homosexual who rejects Christianity and think’s it has some dangerous beliefs to be called a “Christophobe”? Why would you say “I dunno” if you just got through telling me that “phobic” can also mean “oppose”?

            • Michael Paterson-Seymour

              Words have meaning, but derivation is not necessarily meaning. The meaning of a word is its use.

              • Steve Frank

                Of course the meaning of words often evolve. But as I pointed out in another post, there
                is a difference between the natural evolution of a word and the intentional
                misuse of a word for propaganda purposes.
                Sure, in the end, how words end up being used is all that matters. The fact that dictionaries have updated their
                definition of homophobia is proof of that.
                But that doesn’t make it intellectually honest. It’s no different than the term “Christophobia”
                which some Christians have begun to use against all who oppose traditional
                Christian moral teaching, particularly in the area of sexuality. Now
                that word will probably never “catch on” within the mainstream like the word homophobia
                has (because the media will only repeat terms that help the liberal agenda). But if it ever did catch on, then “christophobia”
                would come to define all disagreement with Christian sexual morality. But would that make it intellectually
                honest? Would it be intellectually
                honest to use a word that juxtaposes root words for “Christ” with “fear” ,
                implying that all opposition to Christianity was based on irrational fear, even
                if that is how the general population started using the term? It would not be intellectually honest. I think It’s ridiculous to presume that all opposition
                to Christian moral teaching is driven by fear. Some might be, but I don’t know everyone’s motives for rejecting traditional Christianity. If conservative Christians ever somehow came to dominate the media, and
                every article you picked up referred to homosexual activists as “Christophobes”,
                please don’t tell me that homosexuals would not be protesting that the term was
                being misused, despite how “common” it’s use had become.

          • Cui Pertinebit

            So if I call for discrimination against pedophiles and horse rapists, am I a pedophileaphobe, or bestialophobe? Or am I a rational person, who thinks that grave moral evils should not be publicly tolerated? If people believe homosexuality is a grave, moral evil, then of course they would prefer to see its public expression outlawed under obscenity laws, and to see people publicly indulging it or advocating for it removed from their positions. If the president of Harvard University came out and said that he was in favor of allowing students to have sexual relations with kangaroos in their dorm rooms, and thought it was really beautiful when a man and a kangaroo love each other, and affirmed that not every loving family has to look like the speciest, heteronormative model imposed on us by past bigotries, I would expect him to be fired. Right? Wanting to see homosexuality treated as the moral evil it is, does not mean that I have an irrational “fear” of homosexuality, any more than I have an irrational “fear” of scintillating kangaroo action. I just think it’s perfectly rational to stigmatize those views and discriminate against them.

            • me

              You are apparently trying to claim moral equivalence between pedophilia (clearly a form of abuse) and homosexuality between consenting adults. Since the objection to homosexual acts is primarily that they are non-procreative, to be consistent you would need to believe that one should discriminate against people who use contraception, have sex when one partner is infertile, and even against people who masturbate. You are free to express disapproval, but stigmatization and discrimination are both un-Catholic and homophobic.

              • slainte

                Do you acknowledge moral equivalence between Pederasty and homosexuality?

                • Me

                  No. The FBI profile of a typical pedophile is that of a married man in a traditional marriage who appears to be highly respectable. One of two pedophiles I have had the misfortune to encounter, one who preyed primarily on little boys, was outwardly a devout Catholic man, a highly respectable and religious family man, married with three children, who never hesitated to condemn everybody else’s sexual behavior but had a strange predilection with finding excuses to undress around young boys. He fitted the FBI profile perfectly. The other was a random stranger who preyed on a little girl.

                  • Jonathan

                    Sanctimonious homophobes are creepy. They’re the last people you want around children.

                    • pay

                      No normal person wants a disordered individual around their children. The deviant ones need prayer, fasting, and psychiatric help. We want their conversion and entrance into heaven. We do not want their propaganda and evil ways.

                      • Jonathan

                        Creepy homophobes are big on propaganda and evil ways. I don’t want them either.

                      • Pay

                        No such thing as a homophobe. That is just a silly word deviants use to protect their evil ways. What is “creepy” is disordered desires proclaimed as good. Very sick.

                    • Sygurd Jonfski

                      And who is judgmental now? You are such an ignorant hypocrite.

                    • Austin Ruse

                      If we on,y knew what that meant!

              • Steve Frank

                Homosexual acts are unnatural irrespective of the fact that they are non-procreative. The vagina of an infertile woman still produces natural lubrication. There is nothing in the natural order of things that makes heterosexual intercourse “unnatural” for a person who is infertile. The same can not be said for homosexual sex. The anus does not produce lubrication, nor does it have the same elasticity as the vagina. In the natural order of things, the anus was not meant to be used as a sex organ. Also, I find it interesting that homosexual activists always love to compare homosexual sex to heterosexual sex where there is infertility. They seem to think it’s a real gotcha argument to draw a tight parallel between the two. But heterosexual infertility is a state of dysfunction. It is considered a medical disorder. So if such a tight parallel really exists, I guess that makes homosexuality a disorder too, right?

                • Jonathan

                  In Catholic thought, homosexuality, masturbation, and contraception are equivalent because they are non-procreative. Let he among you who is without sin throw the first stone.

                  • pay

                    You are quite wrong. They are all objectively evil but the gravity is not the same. Please read Aquinas and do not impose your Americanistic faux equality worship on the faith.

                  • Erika Tatsis

                    Gee, here’s another sensitive type quoting as though “he” is the true Catholic. Move on to one of the non-Catholic churches who embraces your lifestyle so you can feel good about yourself. The Episcopalians will even give you “Communion”.

                  • Steve Frank

                    “Let he among you who is without sin throw the first stone”

                    Do you even understand the context of the words you are quoting here? A woman was caught in adultery and the authorities wanted to execute her. Jesus then said to those authorities “Let he among you who is without sin throw the first stone”. Then he said to the woman “neither do I condemn, GO AND SIN NO MORE”. Jesus was not condemning the authorities for calling sin sin. He was condemning them for their eagerness to execute her. Jesus called adultery for what is was, a sin. And that is all that I am doing, calling homosexual sex what it is, sin. I have never argued that homosexuals should be executed or punished by civil authorities in any way. You would have us believe that calling homosexual sex sinful is an act of hate. You have every right to believe that, but please don’t hide behind the words of Jesus. He called adulterous acts sex sin, so obviously he didn’t think labeling illicit sex acts as sinful was an act of hate.

                    • Jonathan

                      Steve Frank, go and sin no more.

                      • Steve Frank

                        You need to stop throwing stones at people you deem to be too judgmental.

                  • Erika Tatsis

                    No one here denies sinning, but no one here other than you and your ilk excuse and promote sin. This is why Catholics confess, to ask for forgiveness when as humans they falter. NOT to distort the words of the Vicar of Christ in order to justify slandering anyone who disagrees with your rainbow-filled world.

                  • Austin Ruse

                    Yes Jonathan, each are evil. Do you agree?

                • leogirl87

                  It’s about complementarity, not fertility. Nobody is advocating that infertile persons or post-menopausal women should not marry.

              • Cui Pertinebit

                Do you suppose the pedophile chooses his feelings, or, like the homosexual, are they the result of a disordered sexuality that is experienced as something innate and inherent, not something deliberately chosen? In that case – speaking of the mere attraction – it is equally appropriate to stigmatize both pedophilia and homosexuality, as disorders. But, it would be inappropriate to stigmatize *individuals* who feel the attractions, if they are living chastely and not stooping to the level of their disorders.

                In terms of the behaviour, of course homosexuality should be less severely stigmatized than pedophilia, since pedophilia is, as you point out, a grievous abuse against a child who is physically and mentally unfit for such activity. I am not implying a moral “equivalence,” just a moral similarity – they are both abuses of the sexual faculty. You also seem not to understand the meaning of “stigmatized.” Something that is stigmatized, is something that is held in general disapproval. You mentioned that I was free to “disapprove,” but not to stigmatize. I think it is very Catholic to stigmatize (i.e., foment general disapproval) of inherently immoral behaviours. Again, the *behaviours,* not necessarily the people who experience unwanted temptations.

                I think homosexuality should be less stigmatized than pedophilia, but still stigmatized. I think contraception should be – believe it or not – more stigmatized than homosexuality, because here we are dealing with people who have no disorder in their capacity for attraction to the complimentary sex, but who deliberately render themselves barren as though they were sexually disordered. I think masturbation should also be stigmatized, obviously, as it is a vain, effeminate, selfish activity that abuses the sexual faculty. Infertile couples are not to be stigmatized, if they come together in prayerful hope of conceiving that miraculous child, as many infertile couples have done before (including my cousin).

              • Cui Pertinebit

                Also, just to be clear, I think the main objection to homosexual acts should be twofold: objectively, yes, they are non-procreative and that is an abuse of the sexual faculty. In the case of “incidental” homosexual acts – i.e., if two men who have basically sexually healthy orientations yet, for some incidental reason (like all the old jokes about prisoners and sailors) engage in homosexual acts – that is the beginning and end of the disapproval. The crime is more or less grave, depending upon the level of degrading behaviour to which the acts descend – does one of them actually play the woman to the other, or do they just mutually masturbate each other, etc.

                In the case of people who consider themselves “gay,” and experience perduring homosexual attractions, I think the objection to homosexuality of this type must also recognize that this behaviour is a psychological disorder normally rooted in childhood trauma, often in direct sexual abuse, but often in other forms of emotional abuse or trauma that alienates the child from an healthy identification with his own gender in a confident way. This is not to say that a gay boy identifies as a woman (though in extreme cases that may occur), but simply that he has not been able to put down deep roots in his own masculinity, and to understand masculinity in a complete and healthy way (and vice-versa for lesbians, obviously). So, the disapproval of this kind of homosexuality is not rooted in the mere fact that the activity is non-reproductive, but in the fact that it is a trauma-based failure to live fully in one’s self as he or she is. And that disapproval should not be expressed as blame for the person who finds him or herself in that situation, but as a recognition that the situation itself is lamentable and should be healed, if possible, or managed, at worst.

            • theorist

              That’s just it though, you should be afraid of bestiality and homosexuality just as you would be afraid of dishonor and death. The only reason why homophobia is a bad slur is because it captializes off of the strange need to avoid being seen as weak in anyway and therefore unmanly. Hence, your fear of being seen as fearful is the reason why you want to be seen as not afraid. What?

              • Cui Pertinebit

                I don’t know that a man should be “afraid” of dishonor and death, so much as he should despise them. A certain fear of death is a natural passion, but past that, it becomes an unnatural passion. A sober remembrance of death is in fact a virtue.

                But if you simply mean, he should be strongly averse to ever acting in ways that would incur such things, and should fly from such situations, then, yes. To that extent, I am “afraid” of dishonoring myself through sex with kangaroos. But, since I don’t really have any temptations in that direction, I’m not “afraid” of it as though it were a real possibility for me.

                And more what I was saying, was that I don’t have an irrational fear of the person who has engaged in homosexual or bestial acts. I have a rational fear – i.e., a certain mistrust and guarded posture, knowing that they are people who are damaged generally (i.e., the homosexuality is but one of many symptoms, including narcissism, sociopathy, etc.) and therefore liable to act in churlish or menacing ways. But I’m not afraid that I’m gonna “turn queer” or be hit on simply by being around them – you know, the kind of irrational and unthinking “fear” they like to flatter themselves as inspiring in others.

          • Romulus

            Sorry, no. The tag “phobia” implies a mental disorder. The intent is to stand reality on its head, insisting that it’s disgust with homosex that is disordered.

            • Me

              Not disgust — discrimination. Any form of unjust discrimination or abuse is homophobic.

              • Pay

                There is nothing unjust about regulating immoral behavior and depraved ideologies.

                • Jonathan

                  So should someone be regulating your hatred?

                  • pay

                    The only authentic hatred is expressed by those who want to spread an evil ideology and call it normal. Your position is nothing but moral relativism dipped in hedonism.

                    • Jonathan

                      Trying to silence free expression is spreading an evil ideology and calling it normal.

                      • Pay

                        Protecting children from evil ideologies is good and necessary.

                      • Sygurd Jonfski

                        Aren’t YOU trying to silence OUR free expression here?

          • Austin Ruse

            Most Russians, an overwhelming percentage of every day Russians support the ban. It is not just thugs which are a tiny minority. Everyone supports the ban.

            • Me

              Your statement, “Everyone suports the ban,” is obviously false as there have been several LGBT rallies and protests in Russia. Im any case, as I hardly need point out, majority support for a particular position does not make it moral, only legal. Russia has amongst the highest rates of divorce and abortion in the world, so presumable these practices are widely supported. Would you argue that makes them OK?

              • Austin Ruse

                It polls at 80 percent in favor.

                Sent from my iPad

                • me

                  I notice you studiously avoided my question.

          • Jonathan

            ” The litmus test for homophobia is whether a person is advocating for discrimination against LGBTs.”
            Well said. What I’m seeing here is mostly homophobic bigotry.

            • pay

              Truth is hate to those who hate truth.

            • Art Deco

              Deal with the issues, Jonathan. Mouthing incantations is a waste of time.

      • Sygurd Jonfski

        And yet, despite all this mess, the Russians can do something right once in a while – like this anti-homosexual propaganda law.

        • Deacon Ed Peitler

          I’m seriously considering moving to Russia.

          • Sygurd Jonfski

            I don’t think you would really like it there, Deacon. Besides, it is better to stay in your own country and fight against the forces trying to corrupt it.

            • Adam__Baum

              Trying? It’s almost done.

              • Sygurd Jonfski

                “Jeszcze Polska nie zginela poki MY zyjemy” – I hope I’ve guessed correctly and you can understand this…

          • Jonathan

            Try Uganda.

      • Adam__Baum

        Homophobia: A disparaging neologistic misnomer coined to disparage those who understand the difference between the reproductive and excretory organs, and find the misuse of both objectionable for biological, psychological and spiritual reasons.

        • Sygurd Jonfski

          … and as (in)accurate as the term “gay”. Its use as a verbal equivalent of a baseball bat also extends to the rational people who reject the idea of the sodomitic pseudogamy (a.k.a. “same-sex marriage”).

      • Cui Pertinebit

        That is somewhat laughable. Russia was an atheistic, “progressive” paradise for a century. All shame in sexual promiscuity, abortion, etc., was absent. Gay culture is already everywhere. The Russian people have been assiduously guarded against religious moralizing for many decades. If anything, it is precisely because left-wing ideas matured long ago and reached their logical conclusions in Russia, that Russians see the gay agenda for what it is.

      • Austin Ruse

        It’ is actually not that vague. You cannot propagandize children. Pretty clear.

      • Jonathan

        I hope the athletes at Sochi wear rainbow armbands as a symbol of support for the repressed in Russia.

        • pay

          The repressed are those who stand with Christ.

          • Jonathan

            And Christ stand with those who are oppressed. So does Pope Francis.

            • Erika Tatsis

              Stop using our Pope to justify your views.

            • Sygurd Jonfski

              Yes, you’re right for once – Christ and Pope Francis stand with the oppressed Catholics who are persecuted because of their opposition to sexual perversions.

    • Uuncle Max

      This being a predominantly Catholic website perhaps it is a good idea to state the Catholic position on homosexuality as I understand it. This is MY understanding of it.

      a) Being sexually attracted to a member of your own gender is NOT sinful
      b) Acting on that attraction IS sinful

      What to do if one is sexually attracted to a member of his/her gender and is tormented by it?

      Turn to Christ for help. That’s why He’s here. If you doubt me go to the nearest Catholic Church – He’s in there waiting for you. Sit quietly and be still, If you need to, cry.

      A quiet Church is best.

      • Deacon Ed Peitler

        Exactly! Stated another way, unless you are a man married to a woman or a woman married to a man, you are called to not to engage in sexual acts since God gave us our sexuality in order to participate in His creative act. And this includes masturbation.

      • Romulus

        Just to be clear, the Church teaches that ANY sexual activity outside of marriage is sinful. The sex (please don’t say “gender”) of the participants is irrelevant.

        But yes, simply experiencing a sexual attraction to someone — again, regardless of that person’s sex — is not intrinsically sinful.

        • Austin Ruse

          But it is intrinsically disordered…

          • Patsy Koenig

            I was looking for this reply! Homosexual attraction IS intrinsically disordered. The Scriptures tell us exactly HOW this disorder originates: “They knew God; but did not glofify Him…” Romans 1:20-28. Also, a heterosexual attraction MIGHT be sinful, depending on the circumstances..

            • Bono95

              Homosexual attraction, like all forms of temptation, is disordered, but, also like all other forms of temptation, it is not a sin in itself. Giving in to it is.

            • radiofreerome

              and I’ve waited for some snake juggling lunatic to write just that. The Bible says that God cursed the Egyptians with boils for enslaving the chosen people. Does that mean everyone who has ever had a boil is enslaving Jews to build a pyramid in their back yard?

      • Adam Baum

        Gender is language, sex is biology.

        • Ce Gzz

          wrong! My sex is FEMALE, and it goes beyond “just biology”. Spending too much time inside the “gender agenda”?

    • Paul McGuire

      I’m glad to see a condemnation of the violence that has been recently directed towards gay men in Russia. I do think that this ignores the difficulties this law creates for LGBT youth in Russia. They can’t seek therapy from a therapist who would tell them that it is OK to be gay because then the therapist is arguably promoting non-traditional sexual orientations to the youth. There are plenty of young people who realize anywhere between age 12 and 15 (if not sooner) that they are gay and this law would make it difficult for them to find accurate information about being gay.

      This whole law is based on the incorrect notion that the only reason someone turns out gay is because they are told it is OK when they are in the formative years of their lives. There is plenty of evidence that gay men and women know their orientation at a young age regardless of the messages they receive. Yet their lives during that time period are much more difficult when they can’t access external information about what it means to be gay. In a conservative household, the only place you will find accurate information about LGBT life is from outside but this law makes disseminating such information a crime.

      This law also supports the notion that you can change someone’s orientation and thus encourages parents to send their children who come out to therapy to turn them straight. Such therapy has already been proven ineffective and harmful.

      http://www.timeslive.co.za/scitech/2013/08/14/russia-s-gay-teens-seek-help-online-amid-rising-homophobia

      • Art Deco

        That’s nice Paul, but which minor consults a psychotherapist without parental notice and under what circumstances can a mental health tradesman properly act in opposition to a youngster’s parents.

        While we are at it, there is a move in legislative bodies here, there, and the next place, to legally proscribe counseling and psychotherapy predicated on the idea the ridding oneself of homosexual impulses is a good end? You approve?

        • Paul McGuire

          Yes I think it is proper to ban conversion therapy on minors. Such therapy is damaging and often not done because the minor wants it but because the parent thinks it is what the minor needs. If an adult wants to subject himself to such treatment then they are free to do so. The rights of a parent are not absolute. Subjecting a child to conversion therapy is child abuse.

          • Art Deco

            You mean you are superimposing your judgment over the parent and the weight of moral tradition. Why should I take that seriously?

            • John200

              Of course Paul McGuire is superimposing his judgment over the parent and moral tradition; he is a homo”sex”ual and he thinks that because he is a homo”sex”ual, he knows best. He has hot new arguments, you know, arguments for homo”sex”ual activity that we have not seen 24,554 times at CrisisMag.

              A distinction may help here: Paul intends a serious threat, but he is not a serious thinker. On the first hand, take him as a destructive homo”sex”ual who will pose a serious threat to your child if he can. On the other hand, do not mistake him for a serious thinker. In fact, his arguments routinely commit suicide. He has been doing this stuff at CrisisMag for awhile now.

              You could look it up.

          • pay

            It depends on the therapy and the therapist. Any parent who would endorse “gayness” as proper and healthy is guilty of abuse.

          • c matt

            So if a child has suicidal impulses, it would also be a good idea to ban therapy to rid himself of such impulses because it is not what the child wants? If the child already knows what is best for him, parenting and therapy are completely pointless.

          • Steve Frank

            So Catholic parents who sincerely believe the Church’s position that homosexual acts are a mortal sin have no right to discourage their children from acting upon their same sex impulses? You seem willing to steal their children in order to have the “correct” worldview imposed upon them. But if they lose their souls, who will be proven to be the true abuser? Your definition of abuse is preventing children from acting upon their sexual impulses. An orthodox Catholic’s definition of abuse is leading one’s child into mortal sin. Why should your definition of abuse be imposed upon someone else’s children?

            • Paul McGuire

              Well the states decide how they define abuse. California’s law that prohibits subjecting minors to therapy aimed at changing sexual orientation only prohibits such therapy when performed by licensed medical professionals because they can’t regulate the rights of a priest to try to dissuade a child from “acting on his impulses” as you say.

              The difference is there are therapists who actually advertise and claim that certain therapy can turn a child straight. This is completely different than attempting to educate the minor on what the Church says about the issue.

              • Art Deco

                To be precise about Joseph Nicolosi’s public claims, he states that his talk-therapies are useful toward the end of containing and diminishing problems people have with disordered sexual impulses. Effectiveness varies from client to client. Talk therapy, being talk therapy, usually is all one for the client. He has in the past been pretty plain about that.

                The mental health establishment is happy to tolerate all manner of time wasted as long as they get paid – some of it genuinely troublesome to third parties (ever hear of Children’s Institute International?). Their vendetta against Paul Cameron and Joseph Nicolosi (one a researcher and one a clinician) has diddly/squat to do with concern about public welfare.

                I have a strong suspicion that most people who had any personal experience with the purveyors of talk therapy, ca. 1985, can tell you the following:

                1. The therapist got paid.
                2. The therapist was unwilling to offer you any probabilities on the effectiveness of whatever they were peddling.

                3. If if proved to be of no use to you, it was your own damn fault.

                ==

                Read some of Scott Peck’s work, ca. 1980, if you want to see how a working office psychiatrist spoke of his craft and his understanding of human behavior in that era (then read Fuller Torrey and Thomas Szasz to get a critical assessment of same).

              • Art Deco

                You mean the California legislature has plenary discretion to define ‘abuse’ and the Russian State Duma has no such discretion? Call it the La La Land privilege.

              • Steve Frank

                “Well the states decide how they define abuse”.

                Sure, California defines abuse one way and Russia defines it the exact opposite. So what does looking to any state prove? I was commenting on your position when it comes to what constitutes abuse. And when the state prohibits parents from seeking reparative therapy for their children from “licensed professionals”, all in the name of “preventing child abuse”, I’m afraid that’s just one short step away from the state seizing custody of such children altogether (as has already happened with foster children in the UK).

              • Adam Baum

                Notice statism in action.

              • AngelWithAnAtitude

                Oh the pimp don’t like therapy! Yes kids must fulfilled their disordered base desires, because the STATE said so! Little pimp, before you promote the destruction of human lives why don’t you read the article below little PIMP.

                This story is about ABC newsman Don Ennis-
                “He thought he was a woman trapped in a man’s body — but it turns out he’s “just another boring straight guy.”

                http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/guy_again_eKq3Jw6LjgsjpBdmZklrtM

              • Austin Ruse

                It is horrible that you say that a child with unwanted same sex attraction can be prevented by law form getting help. And you support this? Stunning.

                • Paul McGuire

                  But if it is a choice as you say then shouldn’t they be able to simply decide to ignore it? Why should they need therapy?

                  • Austin Ruse

                    I didn’t say it is a choice. Neither did I say it’s inborn. It is a complex set of factors that are on a continuum from weak to strong. For some, it is merely a choice to walk away. For others there are psychological factors that needed dealing with.
                    Sent from my iPad

            • Me

              These children will need to figure out their own position, regardless of what either Paul or their parents think. Conversion “therapy”, however, has been shown to be very harmful to children. Parents can try to instill a belief in traditional sexual behavior without using an abusive, intrusive, and discredited process that will likely permanently scar their children. Their are gentler, more sensitive, and more respectful approaches.

              • Art Deco

                Conversion “therapy”, however, has been shown to be very harmful to children.

                Crikey. They go to an office and yack to a credentialed chap for 50 minutes a week. It is harmful to the wallet of whomever is paying the bills.

              • Steve Frank

                I don’t know much about conversion therapy or whether it has any success. Given the pro-homosexual groupthink that exists among the psychiatric community today, I don’t take much stalk in the “findings” of the “experts” in these matters. Having said that, I don’t have any opinion on whether these therapies are good or harmful. All I know is that I witness lots of things parents do that I think are harmful to their children. Some parents yell at their kids too much, some parents provide horrible diets to their children, others leave them far too unsupervised, I could go on and on. But with the exception of cases of extreme abuse, the state has no business stepping in. I’m afraid that trying to judge what is “harmful” to a child is very subjective. Sure there are some things that cross so far over the line that everyone would agree the state needs to step in to “rescue” a child (sexual abuse, serious physical injury to a child, etc.). Other than those extreme examples though, the state has no business interfering with the moral upbringing of anyone’s children, including whether parents want to seek professional reparative therapies for children with same sex attraction.

              • Cui Pertinebit

                Conversion therapy is not harmful at all, per se. It all depends on who is conducting the therapy and how. If some guy is beating a Bible and telling them to pray the gay away or live in fear of certain damnation, sure, that could be harmful… but even then, if it’s voluntary, it should be legal. All the more so, if a therapist is just sitting down with guys and talking about their lack of masculine confidence, or their alienation or disappointment in regards to their fathers, addressing narcissism and the ways in which sexual activity can be a poor attempt at self-medicating deeper issues, etc. In that case, no, it’s not harmful and has the potential to be very beneficial. It’s just two people participating in a voluntary conversation, with one guy being paid because his take on the issue is deemed valuable or desirable by the person paying. In fact, it could well be the advice that a priest, minister, rabbi or family friend would give a young man, for free. Should we prevent parents from letting their kid come into contact with anybody who is not gay-approved?

              • Austin Ruse

                actualy, what you say is false.

                • Jonathan

                  Duh. That’s convincing.

          • Adam Baum

            Who cares what you want (not think). They aren’t your kids.

          • AngelWithAnAttitude

            Paul McGuire,

            You are a disgusting little pimp, do you think it’s right to get kids started on the path of sexual addiction so they can contract HPV and AIDS?

            Hey PIMP why don’t you learn about some facts:

            The anus lacks the natural lubrication the vagina has. Penetration can tear the tissue inside the anus, allowing bacteria and viruses to enter the bloodstream. This can result in the spread of sexually transmitted infections including HIV. Studies have suggested that anal exposure to HIV poses 30 times more risk for the receptive partner than vaginal exposure. Exposure to the human papillomavirus (HPV) may also lead to the development of anal warts and anal cancer. Using lubricants can help some, but doesn’t completely prevent tearing.-WebMD.com

            • Austin Ruse

              Sadly, this person is calling names but he/she makes a valid point. the homosexual way of life is seriously harmful, even deadly. Dying from Aids is one of the worst deaths known to man.

              • AngelWithAnAttitude

                Hey, calling names is NOTHING compare to supporting the destructive “got aids yet -a.k.a- g.a.y” life styles. Calling names is NOTHING compare to promoting MORTAL SIN. Calling names is NOTHING compare to leading people to ETERNAL DAMNATION!
                Calling names is NOTHING compare to encouraging kids to contract illnesses!

                “He who persists in SIN, rebuke him in the presence of all.” – 1Timothy 5:20

                • Erika Tatsis

                  Hysterical much?

                  • AngelWithAnAttitude

                    No Erika, I take destructive lifestyles seriously. I care about people dying of AIDS which you don’t SEEM TO CARE. Unlike you who probably spend time watching “dancing with stars” instead of learning about the sacred scriptures and preparing to me your Maker!

                    • Crisiseditor

                      When you start attacking people who agree with you, it’s time to calm down. We can read. You don’t have to type in caps.

                      • me

                        Contrast this response to a truly horrible attack by this Angel, etc. person with the Crisis editor’s response to (iirc) Bill S. who called another poster “narrow-minded and homophobic” (a little less insulting than “disgusting little pimp”, etc.). Bill S. was sanctimoniously told that such words were used by “gay activists” to silence their opponents. So I guess “anti-gay activists” can use true hate speech to try to silence their opponents? I am very disappointed with what tries to pass itself off as a Catholic site. This is a strongly anti-Catholic hate site. Catholicism has nothing to do with hatred.

                      • Bono95

                        If this site is so awful, why do you visit it?

                      • AngelWithAnAttitude

                        Sorry for the caps, but using the word “pimp” is nothing compare to the destructive nature of the gay lifestyles. I don’t want to play nice sometime, I really want to wake people up. And I AM NOT attacking people who agree with me if you care to read. Mr. Ruse said that I was calling people names (e.g. pimp) which is mild compare to promoting death and destruction. THIS IS WHY WE ARE LOSING THE BATTLE, Church of Nice!
                        And continue to be nice, so that we can go to the catacombs!

                    • Bob

                      Good point though here.

                      If I was in a state of mortal sin, I’d pray and hope that my family and friends would duct tape me to a chair and throttle me about the head with a hardback copy of the Catechism until I came to my senses and stopped sinning. Better this, to try and save my eternal soul, than to toss around flowery language like “who am I to judge?” We’re on the edge of an incredible ugly spiritual battlefield.

                      “If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. If your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out!”

            • Me

              I hope to see this abusive, name-calling post removed. I thought this kind of vulgarity was not allowed on this blog.

              • Erika Tatsis

                Then maybe you shouldn’t be vulgar.

                • Me

                  If you think I have been vulgar while this guy hasn’t, I’m afraid your reality-processing is off-base.

                  • Erika Tatsis

                    No, I think you intentionally post pro-homosexual views on an authentic Catholic website to provoke readers and then become shrill when everyone doesn’t embrace your views. Seriously, how self destructive can you and Paul McGuire be to infiltrate yourselves into forums with those who believe sex is supposed to be between a married man and woman?

                    • me

                      I have no problem with that belief. I have a problem with discrimination against LGBTs based on such beliefs. You can live your life as you wish and express your views as your wish. We need to extend the same courtesy to homosexuals and Not. To. Judge. Them.

                      • Pay

                        No one is judging their soul. Their behavior and ideology must be judged. Only a sociopath would not judge evil for what it is.

                      • Art Deco

                        By you, the term ‘discrimination’ is oft invoked but yet to be defined.

                        Me, governments make policy and that policy has a disparate impact on identifiable subpopulations. There is no way around that in any sort of regulatory or allocative activity.

                        In a sane world, it would be considered pretty rum for you or ‘Jonathan’ or Paul McGuire to be invoking a libertarian principle (“free speech”) in defense of Kevin Jennings or SIECUS while denying freedom of contract to some private citizen who would prefer not to rent an apartment to someone whose object is to find a locus for buggery. The thing is, invoking an unqualified libertarian principle for dealings with youth ignores why there is such a notion as nonage in any and all societies. You really cannot confer rights on people too young to earn a living; you can only transfer supervision of such people from one authority to another.

                        ==

                        As for the actions of private individuals (who really are not in need of supervision in their mundane life), you can either allow them discretion over their property and their households and their businesses, or you can subject them to having to explain themselves to attorneys.

                        As for the actions of courts and other public agencies, they are going to be governed by a conception of what components of society have formal recognition and what components do not and who, in any dispute over franchises or property, takes priority. I have friends too, ‘me’. It matters not a whit to anyone in authority that I do. In our own time, we have a lobby that insists that the practice of sodomy sacralizes a friendship in some way and due to that it commands legal recognition. Some of us are just not on board with that sort of ‘discrimination’ against friendships which do not include a homogenital component.

                      • AngelWithAnAttitude

                        Then DON’T COME INTO TO THE CLASSROOM AND CORRUPT THE CHILDREN. Can the gay community handle that?
                        Can the gay community stop trying to change the definition of marriage? Can the “got aids yet” community handle that?

                  • Bob

                    Once more…..jamming……

              • AngelWithAnAttitude

                Oh my goodness, “Me” the PROMOTER of sexual immorality and diseases is offended with the word “PIMP.” But “Me” don’t you think TRAPPING people in a destructive lifestyle is disgusting?
                Don’t you think PIMPING HPV is EVIL. Maybe the poster name “ME” is the one who is VULGAR. Because it is all about ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME!

                • me

                  What you completely fail to grasp, at least one of the things, is that there is a difference between promoting immorality and defending religious and personal freedoms. Would you want your own sex life scrutinized and derided? Think how gays must feel. All it takes is a little empathy and a “Who am I to judge?” attitude.

                  • slainte

                    “…..a little empathy and a “Who am I to judge? attitude” is all it takes to cause any lost soul to embrace sin or immorality.
                    Yet all sin has eternal consequences for the individual who engages in acts that are contrary to the Divine Will and God’s Revealed Law.
                    You have said that you are a Catholic…don’t you care about the well being of the souls you lead astray? Our Lord has specifically said no to homosexual activity, but He has said an affirmative Yes to loving the person who experiences these urges.
                    What does this say about you?

                    • me

                      What does it say about our pope? And who was it who said, “Judge not that ye be not judged”?

                      • slainte

                        Judge the sin…recognize that partaking of it has eternal consequences….
                        Love with your whole heart and sould the person who is impacted by it and help him to find or to reconnect with Him who is the Better Part. Do not judge the person.
                        We are not our actions. I am not the lust I may experience. I am not the bad act that I may have committed against my neighbor yesterday. The person who experiences same sex attraction is not his sensory experiences….he is loved so deeply by Our Lord for the person he is.
                        He is confronted with a very tough earthly trial, but God likely put you in his path to help him navigate through the mine field. Help him to find God, ME. If necessary, go with him or her to Eucharistic Adoration and let the Holy Spirit refresh him and give him hope.
                        You too will stand before Our Lord Jesus Christ one day, let it be a day when you can tell God that you did everything and anything to help all those you encountered who were burdened to find the Light.
                        Apologies for my harsh words to you.

                      • Adam__Baum

                        The same Person that said “go and sin no more”.

                      • pay

                        The same one Who said if you cause another to sin you would be in danger of eternal suffering.

                      • AngelWithAnAttitude

                        “He who persists in SIN, REBUKE HIM in the presence of all.” – 1Timothy 5:20

                  • AngelWithAnAttitude

                    You are the one who is stupid, so I should empathize with gays who comes into the classrooms that read to the youngsters “Johnny has two daddies?”
                    So I should empathize to the sickies that promote a destructive lifestyles – HPV, AIDS, etc.?
                    “Me” you fail to grasp the seriousness of this sick lifestyles.

                • Jonathan

                  Typical hate-filled homophobe.

                  • Bono95

                    If he/she’s typical, why is no one else here whom you’ve called a homophobe equally aggressive?

              • Austin Ruse

                This is not a blog.

                • Adam__Baum

                  Accurate distinction isn’t “Me’s” strong point.

              • Adam__Baum

                There’s a difference between blunt and vulgar. Learn it.

          • Austin Ruse

            So, you hold that children should not receive therapy of any kind for any reason or just for your own way of life?

      • Me

        All good points, Paul. The Russian “anti-propaganda” law is an assault on freedom of expression. You can be jailed for expressing what you think. Even Nazi Germany waived its virulently anti-homosexual laws during the 1936 Berlin Olympics, at least in as far as they related to foreign visitors: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2395033/Really-Mr-Putin-HITLER-suspended-anti-gay-laws-1936-Olympics-Russia-wont-year.html

        • Art Deco

          I just read a news story about a man in Idaho given 30 years for trading in child pornography. Appropriate or no?

          • Me

            I’ve no idea about the details of the case and don’t see what it has to do with the issue at hand. Many pedophiles are ostensibly respectable men in traditional marriages.

            • Art Deco

              The point is that free speech is selectively subject to considerations of public policy and your dealings with children are as well. The question is what prudential judgment do you make in regulating these sorts of transactions.

              • Me

                Considerations of dealings with children need to take into account that many gay teens have committed suicide through negative stigmatization and harassment.

                • Austin Ruse

                  Actually, they are committing suicde for a whole host of reason including alcohol abuse, something that is rampant in the gay community.

                  • Me

                    Many of them are simply bullied and also rejected by their own families. One of my friend’s sons recently committed suicide. He had been “the model boy”, an eagle scout, an excellent athlete, someone who volunteered at homeless shelters, etc., had never shared his orientation, as far as I know, with anyone, until he wrote his suicide note. He did his best to suppress his homosexuality from his very Christian community, which is hostile to homosexuality, for 22 years. Has it ever occurred to you that some LGBTs resort to substance abuse for the same reasons they commit suicide? Because they are ostracized, humiliated, and not accepted?

                    • Austin Ruse

                      Has it ever occurred to you that many are 1) ashamed of what they do, 2) cannot find help to stop, 3) despair?
                      Sent from my iPad

                      • me

                        They wouldn’t feel any of these responses if they were treated more humanely and intelligently.

                      • Austin Ruse

                        These pathologies even exist in gay friendly environs.

                        Sent from my iPad

                      • me

                        There are few truly gay friendly environs. Perhaps Paul lives in such an “environ,” yet he has been subjected to hatred and abuse here (as seen in the name calling “pimp” comments — these show how common is a confused understanding of gays.) I doubt this is the first time this has happened to him; nor will it be the last. It saddens me to see this.

                      • Austin Ruse

                        Manhattan. San Francisco. Etc.

                        Poor Paul gets called a name! Tsk tsk. Google mt name and see what your pals call me. Don’t see me whining or claiming victim status.

                      • me

                        Actually, I’ve seen a lot of whining and claiming victim status about terms like homophobia, not to mention that one of the memes of anti-gay activists is to claim it is THEY who are bullied and persecuted. If the Crisis editor doesn’t pull those insults against Paul, he will have completely discredited himself and this site.

                      • slainte

                        Your words are threatening and vicious. You are the bully and persecutor. How dare you intimidate the people of this forum who have done nothing but listen and patiently respond to your self righteous rants!

                      • me

                        Calling someone a “PIMP” (in capital letters) is listening patiently???????????:-) On any self-respecting site, such vicious posts are removed and the perpetrator usually banned.

                      • slainte

                        Has your behavior been any better? The poster you reference has used ill advised words. Does this justiify your aggressive attacks?
                        My Catholicism requires me to turn the other cheek, not to punch the other in the face.
                        I do not recognize your form of Catholicism. Are you really a Catholic or are you a person that just wants to willfully hurt others? If it is the latter, you have succeeded.

                      • me

                        There is NOTHING Catholic about the discrimination and abuse going on in Russia. I have defended a marginalized group and in doing so have tried to follow the model of Pope Francis. I believe it is you who has although unintentionally, tried to hurt others.

                      • slainte

                        I bear no ill will against any person impacted by same sex attraction.
                        I tale exception to your assertion that you have defended a marginalized group. No…you have launched an offensive attack, not against the Russian government, but against a group of mostly Catholics who are earnestly attempting to understand what is happening in Russia in light of their faith, while trying to understand how to compassionately react to those impacted by same sex attraction.
                        You have belittled and condemned us for what you perceive a largely secular foreign state has allegedly elected to do. We do not deserve this abuse.

                        If you have an issue with Russia, protest at their embassy. A Catholic forum is just not the appropriate place to lauch attacks. We are not your enemy; we are not the enemy of persons experiencing same sex attraction.

                      • Jonathan

                        A Catholic forum is a VERY appropriate place to address hatred and discrimination.

                      • slainte

                        “hatred and discrimination”?
                        Your words are inflammatory and provocative with no basis in fact. If you are angry with Russia, then project your ire at that sovereign state and its policy decisions. The Catholics in this forum did not cause Russia to enact the legislation with which you take issue.
                        Notwithstanding your contempt for us, we accept and love you as a fellow human being. We are all sinners in this Forum but none of us are defined by our sins. Nor should you be. When we communicate with you, we recognize that you are a person of immense value, a person made in the Image of God.
                        Many have come to this forum to rage not at Catholics, but at Almighty God, for something we Catholics cannot change. They rage at the Word made Flesh.
                        If you are Catholic, please pray for acceptance and endurance of whatever trial God may have given you. His mercy is limitless and He will give you His love, peace, and strength.

                      • Jonathan

                        OK, I’ll call you a homophobic bigot. I’m glad I won’t see you whining about it.

                      • TheComrade

                        The entire Catholic Church claims victim status.

                      • Austin Ruse

                        All billion of us? Shazam!

                      • TheComrade

                        Am I wrong? If you do not believe you are being persecuted, then I stand corrected and apologize.

                      • Austin Ruse

                        In the US? No. Overseas? Abundantly.

                      • TheComrade

                        Let’s figure that out. Religious oppression is wrong wherever it occurs, of course, but let’s see if we can get get a handle on how many people who want to openly practice Catholicism are prevented from doing so.

                        NK by some estimates has anywhere from 2,000 to 40,000 Catholics. That’s kind of a wide range, but let’s err on the upper side and call it 30,000.

                        China seems to have around 12M that are in something of a gray area. They aren’t completely open, but not routinely arrested or executed. But let’s include them anyway.

                        I am not exactly sure where else Catholics face real persecution.. China is probably the largest example. So let’s double China’s numbers and call it 24M people, and let’s say that encompasses North Korea’s numbers too since it’s such a small percentage.

                        Assuming 1.2B Catholics (excluding Eastern rite) – 24M = 1.17B freely practicing Catholics = 98%, or 2% oppressed. Now again, 2% is also unacceptable, but I’m not sure that rises to the level of ‘abundant’. If we included Eastern, that number would drop even lower. Or included only people facing real arrest/prosecution for their religion.

                        Are the estimates way off, do you think?

                      • Austin Ruse

                        Convincing you on this point does not interest me.

                      • TheComrade

                        Mm, I see…

                      • Austin Ruse

                        I’m indifferent to what you see.

                      • Austin Ruse

                        When I write a column on religious persecution, I’ll respond.

                      • TheComrade

                        What you mean is that you are _now_ indifferent to discussing the issue, but were pleased to have your say earlier.

                      • Austin Ruse

                        On religious persecution?

                      • TheComrade

                        “All billion of us? Shazam!”

                        “In the US? No. Overseas? Abundantly.”

                        But ok, it’s fine with me that you don’t want to get into it in depth. Just a teaser, always leave them wanting more ;)

                      • Austin Ruse

                        I was responding to a question not intending g to get into a whole Megillah. Later certainly

            • Adam__Baum

              That there are many married men who are pedophiles is not the same thing as many pedophiles are married men.

          • Me

            I don’t know anything about the case, so I can’t comment except to say that pedophilia and homosexuality are two very different issues. Many pedophiles are ostensibly respectable men in traditional heterosexual marriages.

            • Austin Ruse

              Most pedophiles are heterosexual men for the reason that homosexuals account for only 2% of the population .

          • me

            Excuse the almost duplicate responses. One was slow to show up, so I more or less rewrote it. I looked up the case you referred to and assume it is this one: http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2013/07/child_pornography_investigatio_1.html
            It appears that the main problem is that this man was not only *trading* in child pornography, but he was producing it. In this case it meant that he had inappropriate sexual contact with two young children, including a 4yo girl. The crime in fact involved molestation, abuse, and exploitation of the little girl by this man. This obviously has absolutely nothing to do with the repression of free speech that is going on in Russia.

            • Art Deco

              A couple of my acquaintance had a son who spent five years in a federal prison after pleading guilty to possessing 11 images on his computer of children in sexual poses. I doubt either he or the prosecutor had any idea if they were actual photographs. He committed suicide in September 2012.

              The law can be quite severe about this sort of thing.

              What kind of a creep wants to give a thirteen year old boy a gift subscription to Out magazine? Under what circumstances can we sanction such a creep?

        • Austin Ruse

          Expression directed toward children is often regulated and in many cases banned outright.

          • Me

            We’re not talking about expression directed toward children. We’re talking about homosexual expression in general.

            • Austin Ruse

              Actually, the law is about children.

              Sent from my iPad

              • me

                It can only hurt children. Upholding discrimination always hurts children. If there is any doubt as to how gay children will be hurt within Russia, one need only watch this video, which reverses the usual straight-gay ratios and behaviors and shows the effect on a child: http://americablog.com/2013/04/what-if-the-entire-world-were-gay-and-everyone-hated-straight-people-video.html
                I hope every athlete to the 2014 Sochi Olympic games has the courage to wear a rainbow armband or bandana as a symbol against discrimination.

                • Austin Ruse

                  You should just lay off children. If you choose to fight on this hill, then all the better. You’ll make the same mistake as the proaborts who defend partial birth abortion.
                  Sent from my iPad

                  • me

                    I am advocating for “laying off” children. The child in that video is condemned by bigotry! And how is defending people from discrimination the same as defending partial birth abortion. That is just the most slithery argument.

                    • Austin Ruse

                      I didn’t watch your video

                      The analogy is this. Abortion advocates showed themselves as radicals and lost support over defending something most people find abhorrent. In the same way, most people think that homosexual proselytizing of school kids is abhorrent.

                      Stay away from kids!

                      • me

                        Of course you didn’t watch the video. I doubt many people find protecting already marginalized children from bullying and discrimination to be abhorrent. Perhaps it is you who should stay away from kids.

                    • Bob

                      Jamming……again….

                  • Jonathan

                    Homophobes should just lay off children. They drive gay kids to suicide and have more than their share of sexual problems.

                    • Art Deco

                      I am not driving anyone to suicide, Jonathan, and neither is anyone else here. Quit with the puerile libels.

                    • sajetreh

                      Jamming… The bottom line is that same sex attraction is a abnormal and disordered desire. Kids are being told this is normal and deep down they know it isn’t. This is what can be attributed as some of the reasoning behind their committing suicide.

      • Art Deco

        Such therapy has already been proven ineffective and harmful.

        Paul, if you think today’s pronouncements from the mental health establishment are

        1. Reliable; and
        2. Reflective of aught but the fashion among people employed in that trade,

        I have some Florida real estate to sell you.

        Paul McHugh, who was the chief of psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Hospital, has written about the constitutional problems psychiatry has as a discipline, and he did not even get in to such business as ‘clinical psychology’, ‘counseling’, or ‘clinical social work’. You have had periods as long as 40 years where intellectual fad pushing was the order of the day. That’s aside from the problem presented in calling something ‘harmful’. That is a normative question, and physicians and others are necessarily parasitic on other disciplines for those sorts of understandings.

      • Sygurd Jonfski

        “There is plenty of evidence that gay men and women know their orientation at a young age regardless of the messages they receive.”
        There is a big difference between “plenty of evidence” and a scientific proof. Homosexuality has not been proven genetic yet, please don’t attempt to obfuscate these obvious facts. Incidentally, there is plenty of evidence that the Sun goes around the Earth but it is not a scientific fact.

      • Adam Baum

        “In a conservative household, the only place you will find accurate information about LGBT life”

        We all know you mean “approving” not accurate.

        Such therapy has already been proven ineffective and harmful.

        Anything that challenges the whole concept of “gay” would be considered “ineffectual and harmful”.

        • John200

          Hi Adam,

          Nice to see you again. I would like to engage you on that last point. I think anything that challenges the whole concept of “gay” should be considered brilliant and effective and desirable and much better than a thing that supports homo”sex”ual activity.

          Especially therapy that might give the great benefit of normal life to a homo”sex”ual.

          • Adam Baum

            Likewise John. Point well taken.

      • Austin Ruse

        A lot of kids between 12 and 15 are confused. The last hting they need is someone telling them that their confusion is homosexuality. What they need is space and sound advice. It is quite common, by the way, for children to experiment and then right themselves. It is called BUG…bi-sexual until graduation.

      • Austin Ruse

        Children between 12 and 15 are often quite confused about a lot of things. The last thing they need is an older homosexual telling them that their confusion equates to being gay. Experimentation at that time is quite common but children grow up and grow out of that kind of behavior. BUG…bi-sexual until graduation it is called.

      • Austin Ruse

        And by the way, therapy for unwanted same sex attraction is quite common and often successful. The psychologist who led the way to take homosexuality out of the diagnostic manual has said he has treated thousands.

        • Me

          Your opinion is not in line with the expertise of the larger expert community.

          • Austin Ruse

            The man who led the effort to take homosexuality out of the diagnostic manual has treated thousands with unwanted same sex attraction.
            Sent from my iPad

            • me

              So he claims. His claims are not supported by clinical studies. Some of this conversion “therapy” has involved abusive, intrusive practices like monitoring sexual response via electrodes connected to the private parts and administering electric shocks when the person responds after being shown gay pornography. As I said above, there are kinder, gentler methods of trying to discuss sexual orientation with a young person. A truly Catholic response would propose rather than impose and would never be homophobic.

              • Austin Ruse

                Right. A gay activist/supporter who led the effort to take homosexuality out of the manual is lying. Right. Paul McHugh formerly head of psychiatry at Johns Hopkins says the same thing nhe has treated hundreds of patients with unwanted ssa. These highly credentialky doctors are lying. Right.
                Sent from my iPad

                • me

                  No, they’re not lying at all. You have misunderstood or failed to read the literature on the topic. Typically these “ex-gays”, if they were truly gay in the first place, go back to being who they truly are. Some of these people who are bisexual rather than truly gay can lead straight lives. The tragedy is that many of them, trying to please, may end up marrying your daughter and then end up having an epiphany about their true sexuality. Or perhaps they soldier on in a state of semi-denial making their wives and families miserable. You need to look at the full spectrum of scholarship — not just the narrow window thereof that supports your opinion.

                  • slainte

                    What are your qualifications to issue opinions on those impacted by same sex attraction?

                    • sajetreh

                      The only qualification you need is a scientific understanding of the human reproductive system. And you don’t need to go to school to understand the scientific, natural purpose of the human reproductive system. It comes natural to 100% of all humans. That is the frustration for those with this disorder. They know their desires are not normal to the human reproductive system.

                  • Austin Ruse

                    Paul McHugh, former head of psychiatry at Johns Hopkins and now emeritus professor there, or you. Hmmmmmmm. I choose McHugh.

                    You are full of talking points and spin and propaganda not real knowledge or understanding.

                  • Austin Ruse

                    By the way, the literature also says that homosexuality is remarkably flexible. It changes in individuals from year to year. Homosexuality is a way of life, nothing more.

                  • Bob

                    Read the link I posted above about the gay Catholic blogger who chooses to follow Christ and the teachings of the Church rather than participate in sodomy. He has chosen the path of Christ’s peace. Christ will shower him with many graces on his journey.

                  • sajetreh

                    Pot calling the kettle black.

              • slainte

                A Catholic response is not to sow division, but love. Your words are divisive and are not charitable.
                A Catholic response is to affirmatively lead one’s beloved brother away from sin and toward God’s Will which is Chastity for all who may experience same sex attraction, and for all who have not yet entered marriage for the purpose of bringing forth children to populate God’s earth.

                • Paul McGuire

                  But a Catholic response would also expect that if God wishes the child to move away from a gay life that it would be possible through prayer both of the parents and the child. I’ve read a number of stories of gay men who spent years attempting to pray for their attractions to disappear and they simply don’t.

                  Plus, if being gay is a choice like everyone here seems to think then why would it be necessary for them to seek therapy to cure it? Shouldn’t they be able to simply decide to live life as a straight person and call it a day?

                  • Art Deco

                    From labor and landlord-tenant law to theodicy, eh? You are a renaissance man.

                    Paul, a Catholic response would be that human sexuality is integrated into mundane life in a particular manner and expressed in a particular way. And only in that way.

                    Chesterton advises us to look for what people take for granted. Many years ago, I was employed by a university in my home town which had an agreeable perquisite for employees – you could ride the shuttle between its various campuses gratis. SInce the shuttle had a stop a half-block from my apartment, I often found myself traveling to and from work with a great mass of college students. There was one fellow who stood out. He had this lapel button attached to his belt which had a pink triangle with some barbed wire on it and a slogan: “LOVE is a Basic Human Right”. Really?

                    I never did ask him who he intended to sue if he did not get it. He was, however, unintentionally illustrative. You have masses of people in this world shlepping about thinking that they have some sort of entitlement to sexual expression and an appendix to same that they should have absolutely optimal sexual response.

                    Quite a mass of people confront abiding personal short-comings. They do not usually form pressure groups to co-opt fools in robes or make much of a public point of what ails them. The observation of Paul Hollander – that people tend not to claim the status of victim unless there are benefits appended to so doing – is salient here.

                    You play your cards as best you can and then you die. The true Catholic response is always Quo Vadis?

                    • TheComrade

                      “I never did ask him who he intended to sue if he did not get it.” Usually when enough people don’t get the rights they feel they should have, they don’t go to court, they go to the armory.

                      I’m curious what exactly you mean by ‘entitlement to sexual expression’. I’m assuming you don’t mean people thinking they have the right to copulate on the streets… So the alternative seems to mean the concept of people protesting, pride parades, or whatever, should be banned, but you could be talking about something else.

                      • Art Deco

                        Actually, I do not think that youngster would have been promising material for Nicholson’s Regiment.

                        No, I do not mean people thinking they have the right to copulate on the streets, but I do not intend to give the parade organizers any ideas.

                      • TheComrade

                        You never know.. Have you ever had someone get the wrong idea about you by looking at you?

                  • Sygurd Jonfski

                    “Shouldn’t they be able to simply decide to live life as a straight person and call it a day?”
                    You are obviously not familiar with the phenomenon called “addiction”…

                  • slainte

                    Perhaps Paul, God renders to each of us profound trials in our earthly lives for which we are called to live in accordance with His revealed Word for the purpose of preparing our souls for sainthood and eternal life. The prayer one offers God is not to remove the cross, but for the strength to endure and to resist those earthly temptations that would cause us to act contrary to God’s law. He gave us Free WIll so that we might voluntarily choose to abide in Him or to elevate our own human preferences in place of Him.

                    For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Matthew 16:26

                    He calls those who are not married, both heterosexual and homosexual, to Chastity. It is God’s law; it is His way.

              • Bob

                Jamming……

                • TheComrade

                  To paraphrase Tolkien… “That word flows too easily and too frequently from your mouth.”

                  Disagreeing with someone does not mean ‘jamming’. A statement is being presented and a discussion has been entered into. Your attitude reduces to “You are disagreeing with me, therefore you aren’t interested in a serious discussion”, which is nonsense.

                  • Art Deco

                    Disagreeing with someone does not mean ‘jamming’.

                    Is it that you have not read any of ‘Jonathan’s posts, or you think that is the proper way to argue the issue?

                    • TheComrade

                      Bob me
                      • 17 hours ago

                      Jamming……

                  • Bob

                    The consistent and constant use of a non-word in an argument such as “homophobic” is jamming. You’re late to the game, read the other posts (and for that matter, the article.)

          • sajetreh

            That’s what they told us when the majority of the experts said the world was flat.

          • Steve Frank

            Back in the 1920s, the larger “expert” community promoted eugenics. Scientists, sociologists, politicians, psychiatrists, and the rest of the elite community were all on board with it. Even the Supreme Court weighed in with it’s approval. The Catholic Church was the lone voice in the wilderness that stood in protest against that horrible and immoral movement, and for that she was ridiculed as anti-science, reactionary, being on the “wrong side of history”, blah blah blah. Then came Nazi Germany and the death camps. That was the end of the eugenics movement. In the end, the Catholic Church was shown to have been on the right side of history, while all the “experts” were shown to be on the wrong side, forever to their shame.

    • Pingback: FRIDAY AFTERNOON EDITION | Big Pulpit

    • Bob

      ““Jamming” comes from a book called After the Ball, a 1989 manifesto on how homosexuals could triumph over the culture. Capehart caught the preacher off guard, claimed he was a victim, implied the preacher is a hater and a bigot, and then walked off without giving the preacher a chance to talk, explain or even to apologize. Brave. Very brave, Jonathan and very textbook, too.”

      This quote from the article is spot on, and unfortunately the route the main stream media or pro gay agenda folks take when discussing issues such as gay marriage.

      Essentially, the gay community wants the rest (especially Catholics) to somehow justify/legitimatize their sexual behavior (sodomy, for example) is morally acceptable (GAY: “Good As You.”) It will never happen. Catholics don’t justify these acts as moral in heterosexual relationships. Homosexuals have to understand that we won’t accept disordered sexual acts in their world, either.

      Be clear…..it’s not the person with homosexual tendencies that is condemned. It’s the disordered homosexual acts being done by the person.

      • Me

        There are levels of not accepting homosexual behavior. You will always be free to express disapproval. You are no longer free to prevent same-sex marriage in many states. There is a difference between expressing disapproval and trying to assert control over the behavior of other people.

        • Bob

          In the same vein then polygamy, incest and bestiality need to be legally approved. As you say, “don’t try and assert control over the behavior of other peopl.”

          • TheComrade

            Basically. All these debates stem from a disagreement over what the country is supposed to about.

            You either believe that people should be, in a legal sense, free to live their lives as they choose, or you don’t.

            You are also free to condone or condemn any lifestyle choice that you wish to. Of course, others are also free to condone or condemn your views as well.

            If you want the laws of the land to reflect the belief system of the Roman Catholic Church, you should have the courage to say that what you really want is a theocracy, and let your fellow citizens decide if that’s what they want as well.

            It’s as simple as that.

            • Art Deco

              Dear Comrade:

              1. No one has advocated incorporating clerics into the formal institutional architecture of the state, so the mess about ‘theocracy’ is non sequitur. (Aside from the Papal States and a scatter of ecclesiastical principalities among the German states, it was not common during the medieval period, either.

              2. In case you had not noticed, the whole point of ‘gay rights’ laws is to compel various sorts of contractual and status relations which would not otherwise come to fruition: employer and employee, landlord and tenant; proprietor and customer. It has very little to do with liberty and a great deal with compelling various dissenting parties to conform to what is au courant among the professional-managerial bourgeoisie.

              3. As long as you have public schools, you have a public curriculum and a common set of disciplinary rules. Someone’s standards will, in fissured societies, likely be abraded.

              4. No one can claim their ‘liberty’ or ‘choice’ has been infringed by the refusal of public agencies (in deference to common sensibilities) to grant them the recognition they fancy they merit. Communal self-government is offended when discretion over these matters is appropriated by fools in robes.

              • TheComrade

                Hi there!

                1) You’d consider a country run by devout RCC laity to not be a theocracy? Ok, we can call it something else. Effect would be the same: Laws of the nation reflecting the religion.

                2) This is exactly why everyone should be libertarian. :) If you step back and think about it, is it not odd that the government and your employer gets to make all these decisions for you?

                Social pressures should have nothing to do with the laws of the land. If I’m a homophobe and I don’t want to hire gays, I should be legally permitted to do so. If I’m a homosexual who wants to ONLY hire gays, I should be legally permitted to do so.

                I get what you are saying, truly. But the only distinction between ‘the way things were’ and ‘the way things are going’ is that ‘the way things were’ has ‘we were here first’ as a selling point and kind of rides along on inertia. As a matter of personal liberty, much was wrong in the past, and much of the new order is also wrong for the same reasons.

                3) As a point of fact, I don’t think this is true. Witness controversy over certain states’ education policies on teaching of evolution as an example. Personally, I would love to see more private education and less public education.

                4) I basically agree, and it ties into 2)- The root issue is that these organizations are doling out favors, at all, to anyone. If I get married and put my spouse on my insurance, my employer ends up paying more into the pot for this. In what sort of universe does that make any kind of sense whatsoever? People are debating what size the trees should be when the whole forest is poisoned.

                • Art Deco

                  If I get married and put my spouse on my insurance, my employer ends up
                  paying more into the pot for this. In what sort of universe does that
                  make any kind of sense whatsoever?

                  In the one in which we live.

                  • TheComrade

                    Exactly. It’s a crazy world. :) Pls fix.

                • Pay

                  Libertarianism is basically a form of relativism. It seeks rugged individualism as a type of god.

                  • TheComrade

                    It’s fine and dandy to claim “any belief system which is not mine is a pretender to the truth” but the fact on the ground is that we live in a world with multiple competing societies. To me the concept of personal liberty has more to do with how to manage everyone sharing the same world without eventually killing each other.

                    • pay

                      That is vague. It is not about an belief system.

                  • theorist

                    But Catholics will have to learn to be rugged individualists before the culture wars are over since we cannot afford to depend on anyone besides ourselves. Indeed, I would love for traditional Catholics to be able to live our own lives w/o interference since gays don’t like us and we don’t like them. Things would be much more violent if such opposing groups were made to share the same state.

                    • Stephanie

                      A lot of Catholics are gay.

                      • Bono95

                        Last I looked, SSA only affects about 2% of the world’s population, and the whole world isn’t Catholic. MAYBE (BIG “maybe” here) more than 2% of Catholics have SSA, but remember that that;s in proportion to the size of the group of Catholics worldwide (we make up less than 1/6 of the total global population), and that that includes people with SSA who live chastely, are against homosexual marriage and adoption, completely agree with the Church’s teachings in this regard, and do not like having SSA.

                      • theorist

                        That doesn’t disprove that separating perverted Catholics from normal Catholics would not ensure greater peace for both of them.

                      • Stephanie

                        “That doesn’t disprove that separating perverted Catholics from normal Catholics would not ensure greater peace for both of them. ” So why is Pope Francis saying “”The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains this very well. It says they should not be marginalized because of this (orientation) but that they must be integrated into society.”

                      • theorist

                        The Catechism is not an infallible guide to practice and policy. Just ask Catholic Answers or a priest. Plus Gays are no more marginalized by living apart from normals(they already mostly seem to live apart from straights no?) than normals are marginalized living apart from them or that the Chinese are marginalized by living in China.

                      • Steve Frank

                        It depends on your definition of “Catholic” and “gay”. If you mean that a lot of people who call themselves Catholic practice homosexuality, you’re probably correct. But any “Catholic” who knows the Church’s position on homosexuality and rejects it is not a Catholic. They are a Protestant (a liberal Protestant I should add). Anyone who stands in “protest” of any of the Church’s teaching, is a Protestant, That’s why the root word in Protestant is ‘protest’. It seems to me that there are a lot of “Catholics” out there who are really Episcopalians at heart who are either too lazy or find it too inconvenient to switch religions. I’m a Protestant myself (a conservative one), but I think I understand more than many “Catholics” that one of the key dividing lines between Catholics and Protestants is the issue of authority. Catholics look to the Pope and the Magisterium as the final arbiter of Christian truth. Protestants look to their private interpretation of the Bible. The difference between conservative and liberal Protestants is how they view the Bible. Conservative Protestants see the Bible as the very word of God, Liberals see it is the words of men about God. The result being that conservative Protestants end up lining up much closer to faithful Catholics on moral issues then they do with liberal Protestants. In any case, anyone who rejects the traditional Christian teaching on homosexuality is a liberal Protestant at heart, regardless of what they call themself.

                    • pay

                      That type of individualism is contrary to the faith. Catholics understand the State has an interest in the common good. The false premise that states anything goes as long as it does not “harm” is not a Catholic understanding.

                      • theorist

                        Should a State rule through coercion and force or should it rule by authority and trust, using force only as a servant to help the people and gain yet greater public trust? Should a state impose itself upon the people or should a state rather defend the people from impositions? If you believe the latter then you must be a libertarian no matter what else you believe.

                  • Carl Albert

                    disagree. libertarianism is the peaceful pursuit of man’s individual freedoms. I am a Catholic libertarian. I believe government should exist to preserve our basic freedoms, and that man(kind) is capable of using values and morals to order community. the Church’s social teachings guide us to interactions and charity which preserve and grow our faith. I wish more Catholics saw the unique opportunity we possess in America, via the Constitution and BOR, to live our lives in peace and be witnesses to our faith. as a political ideology, libertarianism can be very friendly to the lives we seek.

                    • pay

                      I do not want to go down this rabbit hole but I will say that libertarianism, as mostly defined these days, is not consistent with the faith. It is mostly relativism.

                      • Carl Albert

                        do you believe all men (mankind) are born free, pay?

                • enness

                  Comrade, you might have a point if I were trying to get a bill passed making Marian devotion mandatory — but my views on marriage are hardly exclusive to any religion, just as I would argue that the killing of defenseless innocents is not a legitimate exercise of freedom. I will never join the Libertarian Party as long as they continue to cop out on that latter point, by the way.

                  “Social pressures should have nothing to do with the laws of the land.
                  If I’m a homophobe and I don’t want to hire gays, I should be legally
                  permitted to do so. If I’m a homosexual who wants to ONLY hire gays, I
                  should be legally permitted to do so.”

                  How nice that sounds. If only we didn’t have florists getting sued and adoption agencies shut down.

                  • TheComrade

                    FWIW I am not a member of the LP.

                    I also think you will find many libertarians are pretty pro-life (as I am). Ron Paul in particular comes to mind. The logic is easy: If you believe the developing fetus is a person, it has the right to not be killed. That is totally consistent with so-called libertarian principles.

                    By all means, you should have the right to get out in the park and agitate for making Marian devotion mandatory. It would be a pretty scary situation if you _didn’t_ have that right.

                    Adoption agencies were not ordered to close by the government. Agree with you about florists, though.

            • Pay

              That is a simple-minded and primitive understanding of what the common good is. Using your relativistic standard anything goes.

              • TheComrade

                I am not sure what your post is in response to…

                • pay

                  The reductionist understanding as harm being some discrete physical danger is not what the Church teaches in regards to these matters. What you, and others, seem to be proposing is a post modern relativistic and Americanist view that mis-defines liberty as license.

                  • TheComrade

                    It sounds like we are saying the same thing. I don’t think that just because an activity is legal it follows that it is moral. I don’t think that if I believe something is immoral, the justice system _must_ be involved.

                    • Pay

                      Not every vice must be illegal, but certain vices ought to be because they impact society so greatly. The basic element of society is the family. Once that is destroyed nothing else matters.

              • TheComrade

                It feels like you aren’t getting the difference between what we should tolerate legally versus what we should tolerate morally. A lot of people make the mistake of thinking, “I disagree with X, therefore there should be a law against X.” That is one of the reasons our legal code is in such a ridiculous state.

                So sure, ‘anything should go’ as far as legal/government is concerned, provided allowing that behavior doesn’t harm someone else. (murder = should be illegal. doing perverted things in the privacy of your home = should be legal.). In a moral sense, of course you are free to condone or condemn anything you wish.

                • enness

                  Harm is debatable.

                • pay

                  That is not a Catholic understanding of a rightly ordered society. It is not about imposing sectarian beliefs but about the common good and the natural moral law. The false premise of “anything goes as long as it does not harm” is not Catholic at all.

                  • TheComrade

                    That may very well be true.. I am not exceptionally well versed in Catholic dogma. My point is that the reality on the ground is that we live in a pluralistic society and there are a variety of takes on what a ‘rightly ordered society’ looks like. We all get to speak, we all get to vote, and we should all have faith it will work itself out.

                    • Pay

                      It will not work out well if people of conscience are not voting, legislating, and participating as they should.

        • Jonathan

          Agreed, Me. I don’t think some of these anti-gay people would be very comfortable if their own private sex lives came under scrutiny or was placed under the control of someone else.

          • Bob

            Jam, jam, jamming……

            • pay

              It is their usual propaganda. Childish and narcissistic.

          • pay

            “Sex lives” are not a license to do whatever you want.

          • theorist

            I don’t think private sex lives are in danger. If I were a Russian, I wouldn’t persecute perverts who did their thing in private with other perverts. Just keep that out of public/political life. If you are worried that the state would become that intrusive, then perhaps you ought to just make that point, instead of bringing up the whole topic of sexuality.

        • sajetreh

          Liar!! Even if people only express disapproval, they are labeled as homophobic, haters, bigots. Their stores protested, etc… That’s why I stick to science. The human reproductive system. What we are being told is to accept a desire and behavior that has already lead to following lunacy.

          Your somehow born gay and there is nothing you can do about it. But, your not born male or female, you can change that.

          This is what happens when you accept something that is not based on scientific truth. Those who practice or desire this abnormal sexual desire are trying to force the rest of us to accept this as a natural occurrence and completely normal to human sexuality.

          Bob is absolutely correct about Jamming. It is a well known tactic of the left. The only way to engage this tactic is to stick to the scientific truth of the human reproductive system.

          We shouldn’t focus our arguments on the religious aspect, other than the first amendment issue, because they differ and are faith based. Even though I believe Christianity probably has the ultimate answer to this disorder, which is love thy neighbor and show compassion to the afflicted. It’s possible Islam may have the most attractive solution to the disorder. Americans may have to make a choice. Do they want to live under Sharia law or homomafia law. I hope it doesn’t come to that, but America better wake up. The constitution and our freedoms are under attack on many fronts, abroad and at home.

        • Bono95

          So it’s not OK for you or me to assert control of the behavior of other people by speaking out about the evils of sodomy, but it’s totally OK for the homosexual lobby and the corrupted state to assert control over our behavior by forcing us to be complacent and approving of these same evils?

    • Pingback: Gay panic over new Russian laws... - Christian Forums

    • Bob

      Here’s a link to a homosexual Catholic blogger that has chosen to be celibate and follow the teaching of the Catholic Church. His love of Jesus Christ and His Church is far more important to him than his disordered, sexual lusts. Christ will give him peace:

      http://www.stevegershom.com/2013/08/yoiks-and-away/

    • Erika Tatsis

      Here is a recent article by Paul McGuire on Gay San Diego:

      http://www.gay-sd.com/learn-about-marriage-laws-before-tying-the-knot/

      • Erika Tatsis

        He is an avid commentator on Mr. Ruse’s article.

      • Art Deco

        http://www.linkedin.com/in/pauldmcguire

        Doing his bit to make the legal profession what it is today.

      • Paul McGuire

        I don’t hide my views. Thanks for sharing a link to my article.

        • Erika Tatsis

          No, you don’t which is why it’s all the more telling that you insert yourself on this website.

        • Bob

          I do respect Paul, that you do not hide your views, even though I don’t agree with them.

          Look at my postings above on harsh Islamic teaching on homosexuality and why you never see gays airing their views on those websites. why not? You spend a considerable amount of time on this orthodox Catholic site, do you (or why don’t you) post your views on Islamic sites?

          I do believe there is a “fear factor” in gays posting on Islamic sites and that Catholics are a softer target because we are commanded to love all people, and hate sin.

          • Paul McGuire

            I have no reason to post on Islamic sites. If I did, I’d have to do a lot of learning about the faith before doing so. Part of why I post here is because I was raised Catholic and I think there are a lot of positive things about the Church that keep me from leaving completely. I do find that the Church’s teachings on homosexuality are contrary to many of the other teachings.

            Yes I realize the traditional rules that I hear in the comments (including the quotes from the catechism) but I have learned that life is about questioning why rules exist instead of blindly following them. I don’t find that the reasons I have seen provide enough support for a position that would essentially push LGBT individuals away from God rather than welcoming them.

            You could say I take a Jesuit approach to faith, which often leads me to question whether certain church teachings are realistic and/or logical.

            • Pay

              Your position rips the faith apart. You no longer have the Church of Christ but the Church if McGuire. The moral teachings cannot be separated from the rest of the faith.
              And is it really that the truth makes no sense or is it that many want to keep doing what they ought not do and demand everyone bow to their desires ?

            • Bob

              Coincidently, I too take a Jesuit approach to Church teaching and faith. And that Approach has led me to the Church’s authority and teaching on homosexual acts is correct.

            • Bob

              But one must also be wary of what and why you are questioning a teaching in the Church. Are you questioning and denying it for your own self interest? Are you changing the teaching of Christ to fit your desired lifestyle, or are you changing your lifestyle to fit the teaching of Christ? We might not always understand the Church’s teachings, but we accept them on faith and the knowledge that The Holy Spirit is guiding and protecting the Church, and it has been given the authority from Jesus to “bind and loose.”

              • enness

                Yes, indeed, it matters *whose* teaching it is. I know they say in the field of journalism, “If your mother says she loves you, check it out,” but I have trouble believing children actually do this. If we don’t believe Jesus keeps his promises, then what?

            • enness

              “I was raised Catholic”

              Uh-huh. So was I. We never talked about any of this stuff. I wish I could say that the statement “I was raised Catholic” means a solid orthodox catechesis. Unfortunately that cannot be taken for granted — in fact, all too often it’s the opposite case.

              “life is about questioning why rules exist instead of blindly following them”

              LIFE? Really? That is what life itself is all about? Wow, my bad! I thought something else. :) Look, humor aside, I do not think anyone here is advocating for blindness, but neither is questioning a virtue in and of itself.

              The teaching of the Church on homosexuality is one I find to be consistent both with its whole teaching on human sexuality and with the gospel (specifically Matt. 19). When you are questioning, you would do better in my humble opinion to ask not whether it is logical or realistic, but whether it is true, and go from there, friend.

    • roxwyfe

      I seriously wish EVERYONE would stop using the word “gay” to describe homosexuals!! Unless you mean “got AIDS yet” it has no place in the dialog. Homomafia is a much better term. They want to steamroll over anyone and anything that stands in the way of their incredibly selfish lifestyles. It’s all about ME and if you don’t like it then you must be a bigot or a hatemonger. It will soon be illegal to openly profess our faith. It’s already dangerous to even mention anything untoward about these perverts, let alone stand in opposition to them. I applaud the Russians in their effort to preserve their culture. Too bad so many here have already caved to the pressure of the homomafia!!

      • sajetreh

        Another great post. I tell my children the word gay is someone who is happy and carefree. Not someone who has abnormal sexual desires. We need to reassert what words really mean. Let’s call this desire what it truly is, a sexual disorder. The natural order of human sexuality is to reproduce. Any act that doesn’t lead to this outcome is a perversion.

        • enness

          You have no idea the harm you do to the unhappily infertile when you say this — and no, I’m not suggesting it is the same thing as homosexuality. You would do well to take greater care in the wording you choose.

      • radiofreerome

        Die and burn in Hell.

    • Marianne V. Clarke

      “Jamming” is another word for bullying although as long as someone sees themselves as a victim they will see anyone who does not agree with them as the victimizer!

    • Austin Ruse

      To all people of good will. I am very proud of all of you who jump in to defend the truth about human sexuality, marriage and family. Do not give up. Do not despair. I urge you to do what theother side does. Go to their websites and engage the debate. Do not let them get away with anything!

      Best,

      Austin Ruse

      • Bob

        This is why we’re the Church Militant. Through Christ’s love and cross, we must accept white martyrdom by standing tall for His truths.

        • Austin Ruse

          We need not face martyrdom. We are the majority, in this country but most especially around the world. Do not buy into their propaganda…. Remember that…

          • Bob

            Agreed….their propaganda is “diabolical ventriloquy”, as C.S. Lewis might describe it.

            • Austin Ruse

              Everyone, just ignore such silly provocations. This is jamming. He wants to shut down debate, to embarrass, to stifle. It is a form of totalitarianism. Ignore him.

          • Jonathan

            You are spreading hatred and propaganda in a singularly un-Catholic manner. You are an embarrassment to the Faith.

            • pay

              You are spreading hatred and propaganda and are an embarrassment to faith.

            • Bob

              Classic jamming….

            • Art Deco

              Do you have any non-adolescent remarks?

            • Jacob Suggs

              Wait, wait. I think I can respond on your level: “Your mom’s spreading hatred and propaganda in a singularly un-Catholic manner.”

              How’d that work? No, no, contains too much substance. Too much actual addressing of what’s been said. Sorry, I’ll try again if I can come up something better, something more adolescent.

          • Paul

            You are wrong, man! The majority wants homo marriage legal. We are DUMED, dude, DUMED! Hellfire, all these homos are now thinking they are actual PEOPLE, man, like they can exist or something. And it gets worse all the time. They’re coming out of the closet faster than we can taze them back in there. Hellfire. The APOCALYPSE is nigh! BLOOD is raining from the sky in SHEETS!

            • Austin Ruse

              More jamming from this guy Paul. Not serious. Just mockery. Won’t work, Paul.

            • Uuncle Max

              Disagree.

              The majority does NOT want gay marriage legalized, but the gay community have succeeded in creating an atmosphere in which to express opposition to same sex marriage or any other gay agenda issue is to risk being ostracized and called any number of names, so most people just keep quiet about it.

              But –

              1) there is a time limit to living under the many-colored cloak of victimhood, and there are always many applicants for positions- more applicants than there is room.

              2) More and more people who have legitimate and deepfelt objections to the homosexual lifestyle are getting really tired of being called really awful names just for speaking up.

          • Sygurd Jonfski

            And stop voting for the politicians who support homosexual propaganda, even if it means to stop voting at all.

      • Bono95

        Thank you, Mr. Ruse. God bless you and continue to strengthen you in this fight.

        • Austin Ruse

          Thank you Bono95. But everyone has to fight, even in comment boxes!

          • Bono95

            You are welcome, and I might add that we have to fight ESPECIALLY in comment boxes. Nearly all my fighting so far has been done in these. When the time comes for me to have to carry it on elsewhere, pray that God, Our Lady, St. Lucy (my patron saint), St. Thomas More (my favorite saint), my guardian angel, St. Therese of the Child Jesus (patron saint of AIDS patients and caregivers), and St. Charles Lwanga and his companions (who were martyred for resisting their king’s homosexual advances), will give me the strength and that I both so badly need and so badly lack to speak the truth with charity and courage. Thank you. :-)

    • Bob

      I don’t understand why the pro gay agenda people spends so much time posting on Catholic websites. Why don’t they go bother the Muslims and post on an Islamist extremist website, they really hate sodomy and homosexual lifestyles. While your at it, take a shot at the prophet the same way the Catholic Church is attacked here and see how that works out for ya. Bring up sodomy and gay marriage as being morally OK to a Sunni and watch blood come shooting out of his eyeballs.

      So go take your pro gay thoughts and agenda to a Muslim website. Good luck!

      • sajetreh

        Right on!!! Bob. They attack Christians because they know that Christians are taught tolerance and turning the other check. What I’m waiting for is the first homosexual who is punished by death under Sharia law in this country. It will be swept under the rug by the press and the politicians because they don’t want to offend.

        I want someone to ask Keith Ellison what he thinks about homosexual desires.

        • TheComrade

          You can’t be serious. A homosexual can’t get punched in the face without it being national news.

      • James

        Oh, yeah. Islamophobia and homophobia out of the same mouth. This is a HATE site. Don’t call it Catholic!

        • Art Deco

          Bob said this:

          I don’t understand why the pro gay agenda people spends so much time
          posting on Catholic websites. Why don’t they go bother the Muslims and
          post on an Islamist extremist website, they really hate sodomy and
          homosexual lifestyles. While your at it, take a shot at the prophet the
          same way the Catholic Church is attacked here and see how that works out
          for ya. Bring up sodomy and gay marriage as being morally OK to a Sunni
          and watch blood come shooting out of his eyeballs.

          This includes the following contentions and assumptions:

          1. That there are such things as ‘Islamist extremist websites”
          2. That the moderators of such sites “hate sodomy and homosexual lifestyles”
          3. That if you insult the Prophet Muhammed in a way that might be familiar to the sort of insults fielded by partisans of the Church, you will get an antagonistic reaction.
          4. That if you contend to a Sunni Moslem that sodomy and ‘gay’ ‘marriage’ are morally licit, he will have a severely antagonistic reaction.

          Can you explain to me which of these contentions is wrong and which I have to refrain from making so my remarks are not categorized as ‘hate’???

          • Bob

            Start googling, there are many Islamic websites condemning homosexuality, and the penalty for being caught in homosexual acts is stoning, burning, having a wall dropped on you, etc. this is from “Wikiislam”:

            The following are excerpts on homosexuality, taken from the Saudi Ministry of Education Textbooks for Islamic Studies:

            “Homosexuality is one of the most disgusting sins and greatest crimes…. It is a vile perversion that goes against sound nature, and is one of the most corrupting and hideous sins…. The punishment for homosexuality is death. Both the active and passive participants are to be killed whether or not they have previously had sexual intercourse in the context of a legal marriage…. Some of the companions of the Prophet stated that [the perpetrator] is to be burned with fire. It has also been said that he should be stoned, or thrown from a high place.”
            Saudi Ministry of Education Textbooks for Islamic Studies: 2007-2008 Academic Year

            Burning homosexuals at the stake, huh Art Deco? I haven’t seen one Catholic condone that. All I see is Catholics extolling “love the sinner, and hate the sin.” Compare the above quote to what’s in the Catechism concerning homosexual tendencies

            So if your so passionate about your pro gay views, why aren’t you attacking Muslims on their websites over their anti gay views? What spend so much time here attacking the Catholic Church?

            • Bob

              Sorry, Art Deco, I meant my reply to be for James, not you! Apologies!

        • Austin Ruse

          Actually, James, homosexuality is a death sentence in many Muslim countries. Sajeyreh was simply pointing out that you would not be so brave on other sights or in Muslim countries.

        • Bob

          Very good example of jamming. Not a very good example of reading someone’s posting correctly!

        • Bob

          Another good website clearly discussing Islam’s strong teaching on homosexuality as “vile, disgusting sin”, see link below.

          So once again I have to ask: why are gay proponents spending so much time attacking the Church on crisismagazine.com and not spending hours on missionislam.com “jamming?”

          http://www.missionislam.com/knowledge/homosexuality.htm

        • Bob

          A quote from mission Islam below. Interestingly, one never hears of pro gay protests in front of the Iranian embassy in DC. But during New York City’s gay pride parade homosexuals throw condoms at the front door of blessed Mother Theresa’s Missionaries of Charity house as they parade by. The interesting and ironic thing as the gay paraders fling condoms at the MC’s door, the holy nuns behind that door are taking care of dieing, homeless HIV/AIDS patients, many of them homosexual.

          “The Sha’fi school of thought (also seen in the Arab world) requires a minimum of 4 adult male witnesses before a person can be found guilty of a homosexual act. Al-Fatiha estimates that 4,000 homosexuals have been executed in Iran since their revolution in 1979. 10 public executions of homosexuals have been performed in Afghanistan by the Taliban army.”

          • TheComrade

            Equally true is that the RCC, being against the death penalty in general, is also not protesting in front of the Iranian Embassy in DC, insisting they cease executions., but will gladly get indignant about condoms being tossed into doorways.

            • Bob

              Diversionary jamming…….

              • TheComrade

                False. Let me draw the lines explicitly for you: The reason homosexual advocates aren’t protesting in front of the Iranian Embassy is the same reason the RCC isn’t protesting in front of the Iranian Embassy: It has little bearing on the political situation in the United States.

                Not jamming. That is a direct answer to your question.

                • Bob

                  But homosexuals protest the Church often over gay rights, why wouldn’t they protest the Iranian embassy over actually killing homosexuals?

                  • TheComrade

                    Because the RCC is a player in the issue of gay rights in the US and there is no pressure that could force Iran to stop executing homosexuals.

                    If you are suggesting that if you are going to protest something, you should target the most extreme example first, then this whole discussion about gay rights or opposition to gay rights should barely register on the radar. You guys should be out in droves and causing an uproar if you get wind of an execution of a homosexual in Iran even moreso than secularists if someone’s being executed for political reasons (or whatever) because you believe that person is in mortal peril and is about to be consigned to hell for all eternity. But I don’t see anyone ripping their clothing and screaming bloody murder for the execution to stop.

                    • Bob

                      Makes no sense……if Catholics were being execute at the rate of 200 per year for being Catholic in Iran, there’d be much protest. Homosexuals are beimg executed at that rate and nothing from the homosexual community??

                      • TheComrade

                        At least according to wikipedia: “there are records of at least 107 executions with charges related to homosexuality between 1979 and 1990.”

                        So, it’s not a frequent occurrence, as far as we can tell. However, there was a lot of outcry over the Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Bill, I recall.

                        But back to your main question… I suppose the answer is that the RCC has more of an effect on peoples’ lives close to home, rather than in Uganda or Iran where there’s no obvious way to get them to stop killing homosexuals.

                      • Bob

                        Not common?

                        “The Sha’fi school of thought (also seen in the Arab world) requires a minimum of 4 adult male witnesses before a person can be found guilty of a homosexual act. Al-Fatiha estimates that 4,000 homosexuals have been executed in Iran since their revolution in 1979. 10 public executions of homosexuals have been performed in Afghanistan by the Taliban army.”

                    • Bob

                      A bishop says sodomy is a sin and the next day youve got 50 gays trying to throw urine on him, but 200 homosexuals are executedand the iranian ambassador gets a free pass? Really??

                      • TheComrade

                        Is this like, a common event? How many bishops have been subject to urine attack? :) There’s always a crazy fringe in any kind of social group. Best to ignore them.

                        Clearly throwing urine on a bishop or an ambassador isn’t going to produce the desired changes.

      • TheComrade

        Is Islam a major factor in the debate going on about homosexual rights in the United States?

        Meditate on this question and you will have your answer.

    • Pay

      Rubbish. The CCC mentions unjust discrimination. The Vatican had issues documents clarifying exactly what that means. In no way does the faith affirm faux rights of those with seriously disordered desires to foist that evil on others. Take your propaganda some other place. It is not Catholic.

      • http://www.picsofcelebrities.net/blog/2012/05/08/voice-season-finale Cromulent

        And that’s the point isn’t it? The Church is clear on what precisely is objectively disordered.

    • Ed

      Thank you Austin – very useful to know this phenomenon is called jamming and to know its origins.

    • Erika Tatsis

      More twisted lifestyle choices. The floodgates have been opened. Third gender now an option on German birth certificates: http://now.msn.com/third-gender-now-an-option-on-german-birth-certificates

    • Straight guy

      Very good advertising for homosexual hot spots in Russia. Also nothing else of any value.

    • Jay

      How sad that we still look at an addiction as a culture rather than a cult (sin). By religious definition it is a sin. What is so difficult for you to understand? Maybe it is because you think you are a God…….

    • Erika Tatsis

      Father Rutler? Are you out there? Please, please, please enlighten those who abuse Pope Francis’ words to suit their lifestyles and their “open-mindedness”.

    • Bono95

      With freaky signs like those the activists are holding in the picture, I’d rather boycott the boycott. Really, those images ain’t doing the homosexual movement no favors, at least not when it comes to converting us “homo-heathens”.

    • theInformer

      Strangely, oddly enough, when a “gay” male “hits on” another gay male it is often with grotesque and vile sexual offers. Imagine the response to a normal male from a normal female if he were to throw down a vile physical offer, and expect a normal relationship to grow from that first encounter. If I “hit on” an attractive woman, I usually start with light conversation or the offer to get a cup of coffee etc…..like normal people do!
      Please do NOT conflate gay relationships with normal heterosexual ones.

      • Uuncle Max

        Good post up until the word ‘conflate’.

        ?

    • schmenz

      Dear Mr Ruse:

      If I were a sexual pervert I would delight in your article which shows me all the “hot spots” to go in Moscow to engage in my perversion. Whether you intended it or not you have just given us a four-color advertisement to the poof scene in Russia. Which presumably will now encourage more of these sad sexual miscreants to travel to Russia safe in the knowledge that they will not be bothered.

      Mr Ruse, I have always respected your views and have always been impressed by your solid defense of sound moral issues. In this sphere, however, you make several grave mistakes. Allow me, in charity, to mention them.

      First: never, not ever, use the perfectly innocent word “gay” to describe this hideous lifestyle. If you use that word you have raised one important white flag in this awful battle. Never allow the Church’s enemies to define the terms. I say “the Church’s enemies” because in case you haven’t noticed this is the club that is going to be used for the real persecution of Catholics. It’s not coming; it’s here, right now. Call them anything you like but don’t call them by the word they have chosen. Ever.

      Second, homosexuals should be marginalized. They should be in their closets. They should be shunned – in the sense of never allowing them to be looked upon as normal while at the same time trying to help these people stop committing these terrible mortal sins – sins which, we know, cry to Heaven for vengeance. And sodomy should be re-criminalized. Those who commit buggery should not have parades, or festivals or public gatherings of any kind whatsoever. I realize that in a world drowning in pro-homosexual propaganda such word sound harsh. Well, of course they are harsh. You don’t treat cancer by tolerating it.

      Sodomy has in the past and will in the future destroy nations, Mr Ruse. Let us all think about that for a few moments. If we do we might stop thinking such nonsense as homosexuals are “born that way” (are adulterers, too, “born that way”?). You want to be charitable and kind to them? So do I. But we do that by trying to help them to give up their sin so that they are not condemned to eternal damnation. That is charity, not being nice and tolerant of their offences against God.

      The time to start facing the terrible reality that is sexual perversion is now, not some future time. If we don’t do it now we will soon be in gulags and/or destitute after being financially detsroyed by them.

      • Bob

        We have to remember that there is an invisible spiritual war going on around us right now for our eternal souls. It is an incredibly ugly battle, one that if we even had a 5 second keyhole peak at it we’d be screaming in absolute horror for weeks. Our guardian angels are not chasing satan’s minions around with feather dusters. Our actions and decisions in this life determine our place in eternity.

        Schmenz is quite simply, correct. Sodomy is an affront to God’s will. It is a sin “that cries to heaven” because it makes a mockery of the sacredness of the sexual act that brings life that is in the image and likeness of the Creator. Think about it: anal sex is satan’s way of laughing at the bonding and procreative cooperation the married male/female couple has with God in the sexual embrace.

        Christ warned us about being lukewarm about Him. Schmenz is correct.

      • TheComrade

        You know, this whole Catholic persecution complex issue is out of control.

        You guys are members of one of the most influential organizations in all of human history. Your organization has over a billion members, and is one of the wealthiest institutions on the entire planet.

        Yet, when any of your viewpoints face criticism, you react as if you are a hair’s breadth away from being rounded up and executed by militant secularists.

        Persecution does not mean disagreement. Persecution does not mean criticism.

        The Westboro Bapitist Church is still allowed to operate in this country. The great thing about this nation is that even churches that are offensive to 99%+ of the population are legally protected and allowed to operate. That being the case, you guys are a long, long away from being persecuted if the word means anything at all.

        • Bob

          But Schmenz is right, by the US giving justification to sodomy, it has started it’s slide in to oblivion. And sodomy is perversion. Sodomy, pornography, abortion, rising out of wedlock births……all this tears at the moral and cultural threads of society leading to ruin. Ask Caligula and Ancient Rome how a society flooded with greed, sloth, lust, perversion worked for them.

          And I always like the “wealthiest institutions on the entire planet” comments about the Catholic Church. You obviously really don’t know much about the Catholic Church, do you?

          • TheComrade

            … And that’s why we don’t have any Italians anymore.

            Empires fall for all sorts of reasons. Did the Soviet Union collapse because they were having too much anal sex? How about the Ottoman Empire? How about economic mismanagement and overextension of the military? Rome didn’t fall because everyone was laying around eating grapes and having orgies and abortions and therefore couldn’t be bothered to repel invaders.

            Or is Pat Robertson right? 9/11 happened because homosexuals were not facing quite as much open hostility as they used to?

            Just in land itself, the RCC owns around 280,000 square miles of property, tax-free at least in the USA. By comparison, the largest landowner in the USA is this guy John Malone who owns 2.2M acres, which is about 3,400 square miles (1.2% of RCC land), and that’s in woodland in fairly unpopulated areas.

            So yeah, I think I’ll stand by the ‘one of the wealthiest institutions’ view.

            • Bob

              But I’ve concluded you’re not hear on a Catholic website to possibly learn more about the teachings of the Catholic Church, but only to ignorantly attack the Church. From your postings it is easy to conclude you have absolutely no knowledge or understanding of Catholic doctrine, discipline or dogma, let alone scripture, authority or tradition. And obviously you have no desire to learn of these Truths, but are hear to represent those that are ignorant of the Church, but feel they must bigottly attack it.

              Therefore it’s not worth the effort at typing to volley with you on Catholic issues on this site. You’re not here for knowledge and Truths, but to simply attack.

              • TheComrade

                In other words, if I don’t want to accept what I’m told without question, I should just shut up.

                • Pay

                  No, IOW you ought to learn what the Chuch actually teaches before attacking your straw man.

                  • TheComrade

                    I don’t get how that fits into this thread. The RCC teaches that immoral sexual behavior destroys countries? Well, that’s what we are talking about… What is the straw man you are referring to?

          • TheComrade

            RCC owns 280,000 sq. mi. worldwide, to be clear.

        • pay

          The soft persecution has begun. When can people start to be concerned? After it is too late?

          • TheComrade

            Still think you need to take a really liberal view of the term ‘persecution’ for that to be true. It’s kind of like me saying that I’m in a debate with my friend, he thinks I’m doing something wrong, therefore I’m being ‘persecuted’ by my friend.

            In fact you guys get _special treatment_ under the law. I can’t refuse to hire you because you are Catholic. You don’t pay property taxes on your land. Etc. Get back to me when you are driven into the slums and can’t get anything but manual labor employment, etc. Then I will buy into the persecution angle.

            • Pay

              If you refuse to bake a cake for a couple you can be prosecuted. That is persecution plain and simply. One is forced to act against their conscience. That is but one example.

    • Anders13

      There is a minor fact that needs mentioning here. Why the law?
      Russia had a population about the same as Pakistan, about 143 million.
      Russia’s population growth rate is now practically in freefall. In a few more decades
      there won’t be anymore Russia. They are aborting and homosexualizing themselves
      out of existence. Don’t be surprised if enforcement gradually reaches draconian levels.

      • Art Deco

        Russia’s population growth rate is now practically in freefall. In a few more decades there won’t be anymore Russia.

        Russia’s population was at its peak in 1992 at 148.7 million. It has declined at a mean rate of 0.2% a year since then and in recent years at a rate of 0.1% per year. Russia will take a while to disappear. Russian fertility rates fell below replacement levels only in 1989 and the country had to cope with a severe economic depression in years subsequent to that. Total fertility rates increased from 1.17 in 1999 to 1.54 in 2011, so a recovery to fertility at replacement levels is within the realm of possibility over the next twenty years. Both France and Britain have seen a recovery in total fertility rates in the last 18 years and are now near replacement levels.

        • Anders13

          Thankyou

    • enness

      “I wonder if there is a bit of provocation going on.”

      Without proof it is mere speculation. I am disappointed.

    • bonaventure

      After 70+ years of communist engineering, the Russian understand that evil is evil and needs to be called by its name.

    • enness

      “Trust me. It’s not like I was a KGB officer for 16 years” – V. Putin

    • Lee K. Howe

      If anyone thinks they can ‘bully’ Putin into changing Russia’s traditional values, they are in for a shock. He won’t cave, not like many countries have.

    • Anonymous

      “We cannot approve in any way the beating of people for the mere fact of being gay or even expressing it.”

      The law of Russia states “No promotion of homosexual propaganda” . The law doesn’t state being a homosexual is a crime. If you had actually read the law you would know that.

      BTW I cannot approve of homosexuality, no matter how much want to see as ‘normal’. It’s the creator of AIDS & many STDs. Call me “homophobic” all you want. I really don’t care.

    • Pingback: El neocolonialismo progre contra Rusia | Vida inteligente

    • Gilbert Jacobi

      @Paul McGuire
      There are several weaknesses in your defense of telling “gay, lesbian, or bisexual minors that their sexual orientation is fine”. One is the invasion of privacy that will be necessary to ascertain just who is GLBT; what parent wants homosexuals going around asking about his child’s sexual feelings? Another is the obvious potential for abuse of a vulnerable child who has just admitted intimate details to a stranger. Then there is the power of curiosity; it is very likely that some number of bored, or adventurous youths will be provoked to try homosexual activity who other wise would not have. You are also quite wrong in your claim that information on homosexuality is unavailable in conservative households. Many of us conservatives have actually ventured outside our churches and experienced the world. That is one reason we are conervative.

    • Pingback: El neocolonialismo progre contra Rusia | Tribulaciones Metapolíticas

    • The7Sticks

      You do realize the homophobia in Russia is rooted in the old communist Soviet Union, don’t you?
      http://www.troymedia.com/2013/08/18/the-communist-roots-of-russian-homophobia/