• Subscribe to Crisis

  • Homosexuality & Diabetes: An Unspoken Likeness

    by Joseph Schaeffer

    Mr. Creosote The Meaning of Life 1983

    As someone who tries to live a healthy, organic lifestyle, I have noticed more and more that in our culture today one is allowed to say things about people’s eating and fitness habits that you would never get away with saying when it comes to their sexual habits.

    Take diabetes, for example. Diabetes is a too-common affliction in America today. But even if you disagree with what the following people say, what is interesting is that they are saying these things with no scolding from the usual suspects: mainstream media powers, grandstanding politicians and airheaded celebrities, et al. Nobody is calling these people bigots or haters or anything of the sort. And, in fact, there is a lot of truth in what they have to say.

    To start off, there are people who say they are born with a genetic predisposition to diabetes but that is being rejected as a main cause by the burgeoning natural health movement in this country today:

    The incidence of diabetes has skyrocketed in the past couple of decades, but it takes centuries for genetic drift to occur in a population. This means that the increase of diabetes in Americans is not due to changes in the genes. Instead genes are being turned on and off all the time by the environment around them. The food we eat has the greatest impact on what is turned on and off and research is showing that exercise, toxins, and stress also have strong influence.

    How amazing!  We are no longer doomed to have the same diseases as our families!  But here is the catch… many families pass down their lifestyle which will in turn impact susceptible genes. So if your parents are overweight, sugar-loving, couch potatoes who have ripe gene environments for diabetes and you also love sitting around eating doughnuts and Coke, then those genes will be turned on in you too. The nurture is more important than the nature.

    In other words, your genes may make you more susceptible to fall prey to diabetes but your own actions are far more meaningful.

    Even trendy organic grocer Whole Foods agrees that it is human behavior that is the culprit here:

    Instead of combating plagues, we are combating a mindset of complacency about health. Many people haven’t been properly educated about their health, while others still chalk up their diabetes to: “it runs in the family.” However, research shows that while people may inherit a susceptibility to diabetes, they do not inherit the disease itself—making healthy choices and prevention more important than ever.

    Thus we have a large and growing group of American citizens issuing dire warnings about a serious health condition that may or may not have a genetic predisposition but is mostly caused by correctable human behavior that a leading natural health doctor says is known to increase one’s chances for an early death:

    Not only does type 2 diabetes increase your overall risk of heart disease, the condition can also bring on fatal and non-fatal heart attacks, strokes and other cardiovascular events an average of 15 years earlier than in those without diabetes.

    From the above we can conclude that making poor choices with one’s food appetite has dire consequences. Changes in behavior are strongly encouraged.

    Note: I am not talking about overeating per se; it is the unnatural diet itself that is seen as the main problem. The decision to go against nature in one’s food choices is the crucial error. This encompasses more than mere overindulgence. Overeating is but one negative symptom of a deeper-rooted issue. Eating processed, denatured, toxic, industrialized food will have negative consequences. Overeating is seen as a result of the body not getting the nutrients it needs, thus the urge to eat and eat while never being satisfied. We have seen the fruits of a diet based around denatured food: psychosisdisease and early death. This is an argument that is very much accepted in the natural food movement.

    We can say a similar thing about homosexuality. It is the unnatural sex acts themselves that are the main problem, which is why the Church calls them intrinsic evils. Like denatured food, unnatural sex acts will never fulfill a person, as they do not provide the true spiritual and unitive-physical nutrients that come with natural, heterosexual marriage. So the unfulfilled homosexual opens the door to the compulsion to overindulge as he desperately searches for the satisfaction it is impossible to find in abnormal sexual behavior. We have seen the fruits of a sexuality based around unnatural practices: psychosis, disease and early death. This is an argument one is not allowed to make in our culture today.

    But imagine if there was a growing movement in this country that applied the natural food mode of thought to those who make poor choices with their sexual appetites.

    These three details that we have shown are considered to be unacceptable when it comes to diabetics are never seen as a problem when it comes to homosexuals today:

    1. Homosexuals claim they are indeed “born this way” and thus powerless to change “who they are.”

    2. Homosexuals choose to ignore the health consequences of their actions.

    3. Homosexuals are statistically more likely to die earlier than those who engage in natural sexual behavior.

    Is anyone out there going to seriously attempt to argue that the sexual urge is stronger than the urge to eat?

    No?

    Then it is a matter of overcoming distorted appetites.

    Compulsion is not “orientation.” It is weakness that needs to be overcome.

    God did not intend for us to engage in homosexual acts any more than he intended us to eat toxin-laced, heavily-processed artificial “food.”

    You can do both. You can have a powerful urge to do both. But that does not make it natural or right.

    I have a friend who had what can only be called an addiction to Diet Coke. His compulsion was so strong he would drink a 12-pack a day. Does that mean he was born to drink Diet Coke and any attempt to overcome this unhealthy habit kept him from “being himself”?

    Of course not. That’s ridiculous.

    His appetite was distorted.

    My friend struggled with his compulsion, made many changes in personal behavior and eventually managed to stop drinking Diet Coke (it wasn’t easy). He is a healthier person for it today. I congratulate him.

    In a similar albeit admittedly more difficult vein, encouraging homosexuals to overcome unnatural compulsions that only warp and enslave them in a world of misery does not keep them from “being themselves.” Quite the opposite.

    Their sexual appetites are distorted.

    We are created by God to overcome obstacles, not to give into them and embrace them.

    Our modern culture rejects this. It not only embraces obstacles but self-identifies with them in a truly sick way. Homosexuality, which is a form of unnatural sexual behavior, is celebrated as a lifestyle.

    So it should be no surprise that diabetes, which is caused by unnatural eating behavior, is also being pushed as a lifestyle. It has its own magazine and you can even go to the American Diabetes Association website for “Dating with Diabetes” tips.

    That last bit is eerily reminiscent of those “Dating with HIV” campaigns in the early days of AIDS.

    Our culture today gives more attention to managing the negative consequences of unnatural behavior than we do to encouraging people to avoid the actions that led to the negative consequences in the first place.

    This is a mindset that is corrosive to the health and well-being of all Americans and it has been brought about in a substantial way by the logic that accepts and promotes homosexuality.

    Self-improvement is the hallmark of a healthy society. Working to become a stronger and better person mentally, physically and spiritually is the essence of what makes a productive citizen.

    Our culture has chosen the weaker way. It puts a priority on empathy because it is easy and totally disavows self-improvement because it is hard.

    It is a recipe for our destruction.

    Editor’s note: The image above pictures Mr. Creosote from the Monty Python film “The Meaning of Life” (1983). This article, which is reprinted with permission, originally appeared on Mr. Schaeffer’s blog “White Male Punching Bag.”

    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

      Good luck with the analogy, Mr. Schaeffer. It is logical, but methinks you will be eaten alive as a homophobe and a diabetic-o-phobe. However, reality and health do not matter in our sex saturated society. Truly, the new (old) mantra of “if it feels good–do it” is the new reality.

      • http://www.facebook.com/grizterhaar Ronald Terhaar

        No good luck to all the homos and their life style they need to take a good look at where they want to be in the next 30yrs if they live that long.

        • Frank Lozera

          Oh, give me a a break, Ronald. I am 69 and going strong. My partner, soon to be my husband, is 58 and in excellent health. Neither of us has any diseases whatsoever. Would you just stop the stereotypes?

          • Adam__Baum

            Other than hypergraphia?

      • Frank Lozera

        No Lifeknight, Mr. Schaeffer’s analogy is not logical. It is not sound. Homosexuality is not a disease and it is not a disorder.

        • Kathy

          We know, we know, the World Health Organization blah, blah, blah…. you sound like a broken record.

          • Frank Lozera

            My hope is that it will sink in sooner or later. Maybe you’ll have an “Aha!” moment one morning as you’re cooking your breakfast. I’m not going to hold my breath, however.

            • Kathy

              And I hope the same for you.

              • Frank Lozera

                Don’t hold your breath. Only a fool trades happiness for misery.

                • A Catholic

                  And hell is fool of foolish people – the ones that trade eternity for a quick pleasure on Earth.

                  • A Catholic

                    Sorry, “FULL” instead of “FOOL”.

                    • Frank Lozera

                      So, I’m going to hell, am I? What’s going to happen to me there? Are you going to be looking down from heaven and watching my suffering for all eternity? Will you weep hot tears for me? Or will you say, “Too bad, but I TOLD him so!”

                      Or will you be lobotomized so that you have no awareness of my suffering?

                      • A Catholic

                        I will have no awareness of your suffering. Once in heaven the souls only care to be with God. Salvation is an individual task, not a collective one.

                      • Frank Lozera

                        AC, how do you know these things about heaven? Where in the Bible does it say that you will have “no awareness” of my suffering? Are you just making this up as you go?

                        And what is this indifference to my suffering? You’re just going to go up there and be totally oblivious of everything else going on in the universe? Will this be your choice? Or will God lobotomize you?

                        Anyway, I don’t need saving. I’m not lost.

                        Again, I just TG I’m not a Catholic! What a ghoulish theology!

                      • Nvalid

                        The idea that true happiness can only be achieved through numbness is rather depressing, as is the idea that sexuality is the height to be attained in life.
                        Your fixation on choice is interesting. In the end, you either choose to serve yourself or you choose to serve God. Serving yourself is empty and fruitless. Serving God is joyful and light.
                        Our understanding of numbness is based upon time. God is outside of time. We cannot truly know heaven, as heaven is being with One who is beyond understanding, being with Truth Itself.
                        Your insistence of not needing saving is only proof that you do. All the saints thought that they were among the worst of sinners through their humility, knowledge of the truth of themselves. May we all pray that our hearts be opened to this grace.
                        Finally, I don’t quite follow this ghoulishness of Catholicism. Is the belief in punishment really so heinous, or in transcendence so impossible?

                      • Nvalid

                        But you’ve heard this all. You’ve heard this all so many times. Forgive my haughtiness, if it came out like that. I need some humility myself.
                        But I would love to get to the core of the argument.
                        First of all, you believe we can choose to some degree. Do our choices matter? Is there a right or wrong, good or evil action?

                      • Frank Lozera

                        Of COURSE there are right and wrong actions, Nvalid. If an action produces harm, it is wrong. Homosexuality, in and of itself, does not produce harm any more than heterosexuality does. What does produce harm is unsafe sex and spousal abuse. So let’s concentrate on behaviors, not orientations.

                      • Nvalid

                        The distinction between orientation and behavior is exactly what the church focuses on. We use the same terms, but with different understandings.
                        There is no sin in temptation or orientation, only in acting upon it. (Jesus was sinless, but he was tempted as all people are.) We are all oriented toward sin to some extent, but we can overcome this natural inclination with God’s help. We all have different crosses to bear. This ‘inequality’ is unavoidable.
                        Orientation goes into determining the direct fault of the person. For a sin to be mortal (worth going to hell over), the person must know the action is wrong, must be free in making the decision, and the action must be serious. Orientation puts the issue of freedom into question, as does our understanding of hormones, etc. But the action is still wrong and should not be performed, certainly not promoted.
                        But I digress. You said that if an action produces harm, it is wrong. To some degree, this is correct. (We obviously disagree on the no-harm of homosexual relationships, but that’s being discussed elsewhere) Now, what makes an action right?

                      • Frank Lozera

                        NValid, what makes you think that I am just “serving myself?” I have a fiancé, I have a family, I have a community, and I have a country. Furthermore, I am a member of the human race and feel connected to everything and everyone on this planet.

                        This is yet another calumny: Gays serve themselves. Can you stop these slanders?

                        My insistence on not needing saving is only proof that I do? Maybe your insistence that you’re not gay is only proof that you are! Maybe your insistence that you have no animus against gays is only proof that you do!

                        What an absurd line of thinking!

                        Ghoulishness of Catholicism: What could be more ghoulish than your scenario of eternal hellfire for untold billions of people whose only “sin” was that they did not accept God’s son as their savior? I can’t think of anything more ghoulish than that. It’s positively barbaric, and your church cannot survive for long unless it re-examines this doctrine. People in this day and age simply are NOT buying it. Young people are leaving the Church in droves, and the Churches throughout Europe are empty.

                        The medieval worldview may be an object of antiquarian interest, but it is not taken seriously by educated people.

                      • Nvalid

                        A perversion of the sexual act is serving one’s own desires instead of God’s. A misuse of one of the most powerful gifts is wrong and at its core will not work. Yes, that includes masturbation as well as acts outside of marriage or ones that artificially close off the chance of procreation. Gays are not alone in their fruitless pursuit, but share in this chase that society seems to promote. Please don’t confuse this as a personal attack, as the struggle against it is universal.
                        As for the ‘billions in hell’, the numbers are impossible to say. So long as honest repentance is given before life’s end, God will have mercy. He is the only judge. But he is just. He has given us ways to decipher right from wrong, so that even those before Jesus were able to follow His commandments to some extent. There were evil people who committed genocide and unjust war, and there were honest people who did their best to do the right thing. What was right and wrong was not necessarily taught to them, they knew to help those less fortunate and to wish for the best in others’ health.
                        I really do hope to reach some sort of understanding eventually :). Thank you for your patience.

                      • John200

                        “Frankly,” you are serving yourself; up to Satan; on a silver platter; very well done. A track of 50-odd comments on this thread reveals an unpersuasive stream of pretended facts and demented arguments. Let’s review…

                        - You have a man you are destroying; you call him a fiancé,
                        - You say have a family; Maybe, maybe not. Does it occur to them that your conduct makes them sick?
                        - You are a self-destructive member of the human race and a source of risk to everyone who contacts you.
                        - You claim anyone who tries to do something for you is calumniating and/or slandering you. They are telling you the facts that will break through that sad wall between you and truth.

                        Just so you know, we are under orders to tell you the truth, although we do not have to persist through 50-odd of your comments per thread. In fact, you have received better treatment here than you have earned.

                        – You inform that Catholicism is ghoulish and barbaric: to be “Frank,” this makes you the ignoramus of the day. Homo”sex”ual activity is more ghoulish than the Catholicism which you so readily slander and calumniate. When that point penetrates the thick wall that separates you from the truth, you will know you are getting somewhere.

                        – Your insistence on not needing saving is pathetic. The denial of your basic condition and the concomitant disintegration of your arguments form an embarrassing display.

                        – You courteously tell us how the Church might prolong its life. “Frankly,” I think you are rather insincere on this point. I also observe that the Church is 2000+ years old. It is incomparably superior to your faith, which I take to be libertinism. Catholicism contains and teaches the truth; it improves its members and perfects human nature, while libertinism has been repeatedly found wanting.

                        – The medieval worldview is taken seriously by highly educated people. Not so seriously by those confined to materialism, positivism, rationalism, or relativism. In fact, contemporary people who want to know the origins of their Big Ideas can trace them back to the medieval period or beyond. There are VERY few Big Ideas around here that were not here in medieval times. I’ll try one on you: Did you know that the free enterprise system was in essentially full operation in the 9th century A. D.?

                        If you are really near a university and have not caused them to forcibly eject you from the premises, take a good course or 3 on Aquinas, Duns Scotus, Albertus Magnus, Hugh of St. Victor, et al. These four alone will keep you busy, and they will fill in gaps in your knowledge of what a man is supposed to be. If you can face yourself and get off the pity party, you might make rapid progress.

                        But you will never know any-of-the-above if you keep on your self-destructive way.

                        Best to you on your journey.

                      • Frank Lozera

                        John200, my “steady stream of pretended facts” are supported by evidence. How supremely ironic that you provide no evidence whatsoever for your four confabulations about my life. And then how breathtakingly ironic that you slander me in the first three of them, and in the fourth you deny that you ARE slandering me.

                        Do you understand what slander is? It is making false and damaging statements about someone. Your catechism devotes a couple thousand words to the subject of false witness. It is a grave sin. Don’t you take the Catechism seriously?

                        What are your confabulations if not slanders? Without even knowing me, my fiancé, or my family, you assert that I am “destroying” my fiancé and that my “conduct makes my family sick.” You claim that I am self-destructive and a “source of risk” to everyone around me.

                        What evidence do you have that any of this is true? My partner is the happiest that he’s ever been. We’re giddy with delight at getting married. Approximately 50 family members will be at the ceremony, and I can assure you they mostly have sex lives of their own and don’t have time to obsess about ours. All our friends and family are happy to see us getting hitched.

                        Did you never read “The Sleeping Beauty?” Don’t you remember the bad fairy who showed up at the birth of the princess and placed a curse on her?

                        Your own conduct and your language are absolutely medieval. Shame on you!

                        And the only blogger objecting to your slanders is a non-Catholic!

                      • John200

                        “Frankly,”
                        Fraternal correction is not slander. It is better for a Catholic to tell you the truth than watch you self-immolate. You are receiving better treatment here than you have earned.

                        I feel pity for you. Here are a few additional holes in your Swiss cheese of a worldview. I merely point them out. I don’t need to exploit them:
                        1. You are basting yourself for the coming high temperature experience. Its duration will be eternal. You really ought to stop.
                        2. Too bad you don’t know what a man is supposed to be.
                        3. Too bad you don’t know what “medieval” means and won’t learn about it.
                        4. Too bad you don’t know what Catholic faith is and won’t learn about it.
                        5. Too bad you can’t face yourself.
                        6. Too bad you found a definition of slander and still do not know what it is.
                        7. Too bad you can’t get off the pity party; you might have made progress.

                        To close, keep coming to CrisisMag for correction. It will do you good, although I find it hard to watching a human being conduct himself this way.

                        Best wishes to you and the man you are destroying.

                      • cestusdei

                        But the mosques are full. Some of those young are intrigued by Islam. You will enjoy living under sharia law.

                      • Bono95

                        All sinners serve themselves whether they’re homosexual adulterers, heterosexual adulterers, liars, thieves, murderers, slanderers, blasphemers, disobedient children, or what have you. But all sinners can change their ways and start to serve God more and more.

                      • NHILLM

                        Most educated people tend to use less redundancy with their adjectives- unless you were inteding to use it as a literary device- which I see little evidence to suggest. Enough already with “ghoulish.” I’ll provide some synonyms to help broaden and deepen your vocabulary: cruel, demonic, devilish, diabolical, eerie, fiendish, frightening, ghastly, grim, grisly, gruesome, horrible, macabre, monstrous, morbid, revolting, spine-chilling, spooky, terrifying.

                        As to your point of the young people leaving the Church in droves, who cares? This argument has been used for years by baby boomers to try and justify their own angst against the Church. We all want to be accepted and have our own views and values validated. This does not validate yours. The Church started with 12 and could go back down to 12. Numbers are irrelevant. The Church of today is not the Church of your youth. Just with any cyclical movement, you will see those with your midset die off and those with a new midset grow and renew. As for those within the Church that see it’s daily movements, there is a completely different picture emerging- in stark contrast to the picture that those against the Church have been depicting. As for one quick example from thousands, check out FOCUS: http://www.focus.org/blog/posts/girls-gone-wild-trojan-condoms-spring-break.html.

                        When’s the last time you saw youth in the Church reaching youth in the Church? Most likely 50 years ago when with a mass exodus leaving the Church. Within the next 50 don’t be suprised to see a mass exodus entering the Church.

                      • A Catholic

                        I will have no awareness of your suffering. Once in heaven the souls only care to be with God. Salvation is an individual task, not a collective one.

                • Kathy

                  I don’t intend to hold my breath. I hope you find TRUE happiness in the future.

                • NHILLM

                  I’ve found that only a fool trades pleasure for joy.

    • jpct50

      Truth is beautiful and will set you free. Thanks!

    • Alecto

      What an interesting analogy! Perhaps we have omitted the importance of the struggle against urges, proclivities and compulsions from the public discourse? Whether it’s speeding, drinking, eating a diet of junk food, or aberrant sexual behavior, we seem to live in a topsy-turvy society with no discipline. Our mantra is, “If it feels good, do it!” We pretend there are no negative consequences to these behaviors, whether physical or spiritual. The Catholic concept of prayer, sacrifice and grace, especially when we struggle with these negative, sinful behaviors should command more respect than it does because it works! Yet, our society mocks prayer, sacrifice and grace, unless, of course, it’s some paranormal, occultism. What a strange world it is.

      • Frank Lozera

        Alecto, homosexuality is not “aberrant.” As I know you’ve been told several times before, all the major health and social care organizations in this country, as well as the World Health Organization, have stated clearly and unequivocally that homosexuality is not a disorder. So what you call an “interesting analogy” between diabetes and homosexuality is a badly flawed one. Furthermore, it is hateful to persist in making this kind of analogy even after it has been shown to be false.

        • Nvalid

          I don’t think he ever called homosexuality a disease. The comparison is meant to be between the defense of diabetes as a ‘lifestyle’ and the promotion of homosexuality. It may be true that those who have the tendency are not themselves responsible for having them, but they shouldn’t try to defend an unhealthy urge as healthy. There is a ‘natural inclination’ to overindulge in artificial sweeteners in today’s society, not through the fault or choice of the individual, but as a result of what they’ve been fed. Just because it is ‘natural’ does not mean it should be promoted as the healthy norm.

          • Frank Lozera

            Nvalid: You don’t think Schaeffer ever called homosexuality a disease? Look again. He wrote: “We have seen the fruits of a sexuality based around unnatural practices: psychosis, disease and early death.” That’s close enough.

            What you call an “unhealthy urge” is in fact a healthy expression of sexuality. This is what all the major health and social care associations have been trying to get through our thick heads for years. The World Health Organization stated it in the simplest terms possible: “Homosexuality is not a disease.”

            • cestusdei

              It is a mental illness and an objective moral disorder.

              • Frank Lozera

                No, in fact, it is not. No reputable psychiatrist or psychologist will tell you that homosexuality is a mental illness. If you cannot find support for your claim in the consensus of medical professionals, then you have no right to make that claim. It is baseless and defamatory. Your own church’s Catechism tells you not to bear false witness against others. This is a very serious sin.

                • Guy Est

                  We know that the consensus of mental-health professionals was politically manipulated in 1973. Prior to that, homosexuality was a universally recognized mental disorder.

                  • Frank Lozera

                    So you believe that the consensus of mental-health professionals was politically manipulated in 1973? Well, I guess that’s the only thing you CAN believe, isn’t it. There’s no other possible explanation. So, a mere 2% of the members of the two APAs and the AMA manipulated the other 98%? How on earth did they do that?

                    Do you also believe in BigFoot?

                    • Guy Est

                      The politicization of the modern mental-health treatment of homosexuality is not a belief. It’s a historical fact:

                      http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/204/transcript

                      • Frank Lozera

                        Guy, Thank you, thank you so much for posting that story. It is wonderful. I love it. I don’t understand why you thought it supported your case, but I would recommend everyone read it. I think it supports mine!

                    • Alecto

                      Medical professionals once mocked a man who presented evidence that ulcers were caused by a virus. That’s the funny thing about the current state of scientific inquiry…there’s little objectivity especially in the soft science of psychology. But the only way science can reach understanding about the world around us is to remain objective. But let’s assume your APA and AMA are not influenced by politics. In this country, all possess a right to worship and believe as they choose. You attack constitutionally guaranteed rights where it suits your purpose, Frank, and you should be careful. After all, it wasn’t Catholics in Nazi Germany shipping homosexuals to concentration camps. It was the SS with the all powerful government. That should scare you, not Catholicism. What scares me about people like you is your all too willing attitude to coerce belief. Catholics understand that can never happen.

                      • Frank Lozera

                        Alecto, you write, “It wasn’t Catholics in Nazi Germany shipping homosexuals to concentration camps.” That’s correct. The Church didn’t have trains. But it did have geneological records in every parish all over Germany and indeed Europe. Virtually every one of these parishes made those records available to the Nazis so that people with Jewish blood could be identified. This was of course required under the Reichskonkordat that Pius XII signed with Hitler in 1933.

                        Alecto, it’s bizarre to hear a fundamentalist Catholic lecturing medical professionals about “remaining objective.” If you have so little trust in them, where do you get health care?

                        Catholics understand that belief can never be coerced? So I suppose the early Jesuits were not Catholics? Do you know nothing about the history of Catholicism in Spain and the new world? Have you never heard of the “conversos?” Do you not know that the Church persecuted Jews for over a thousand years not only because of the so-called “blood libel” but because they refused to convert?

                        Speaking of objectivity, do you really think the Church is an objective source of information about its own history?

                      • Bono95

                        The Church did not persecute conversos. Individual Catholics who didn’t trust the conversos were the trouble makers. Sometimes this lead to mob violence and the injuring or killing of innocent and honest converts from Judaism. That’s why the Spanish Inquisition was established. It was there to stop the violence and make sure that innocent people weren’t harmed. And the Inquisition did not attack openly professing Jews. It was there to deal with false Catholics who said they were loyal to Rome but were really Jewish, Muslim, or Protestant.

                        To be tried by the Inquisitors, a person had to be brought in by at least 2 witnesses. The first thing he had to do was make a list of his enemies. If a witness’s name appeared on that list, his testimony was discarded. All people brought in were questioned thoroughly. Anyone found innocent was immediately released. Guilty people were dealt with according to their crime and cooperation. Those who committed only minor offenses and were repentant were given light sentences such as jail time, a fine, or a penance such as a pilgrimage to a holy shrine.

                        Torture was only used on obstinate people who were deemed able to withstand it by a physician. Sessions were never longer than 15 minutes, a priest and doctor were always on hand, and the session was stopped if the person confessed or something went wrong.

                        Because most guilty people confessed before being subjected to torture or after only a little of it, the standard punishments were exile or life imprisonment, not death. Death was the fate of only those who absolutely would not repent, or those who (claimed to) be sorry but broke the law again, and these were so few in number that the number of people burned by the Inquisition makes up less than 2% of the total number of people tried by it.

                        The Spanish Inquisition kept Jews and Jewish Converts safe, strengthened Spain, greatly reduced violence and crime, and prevented any significant Protestant penetration. It was Protestants and unrepentant fugitives who spread the lies about the Inquisition we hear so often today. And really, Protestants have a much bloodier history than Catholics do. Luther called for his followers to “wash their hands in the blood of Catholics”, and did his followers ever oblige him! Lutherans sacked Rome, destroyed homes and churches, slaughtered any Catholics they could find, violated women and girls, and tortured children before their family’s eyes. Henry VIII, Edward VI, and Elizabeth I imprisoned, tortured, and killed Catholics in England, Wales, and Ireland, and Puritan colonists conducted the infamous Salem witch trials.

                      • Alecto

                        First, were all homosexuals Jews? I did not realize that a genealogical record indicated one’s sexual proclivities in 1933? It strains credulity to think that a parish priest would keep records on people of different faiths. Are you proposing some long-buried Catholic conspiracy hundreds of years before Hitler to collect data so that Jews could later be shipped to camps? It’s revisionist history at its most paranoid. I wonder how you would describe Stalin’s or Mao’s genocide of their own people? I wonder how would you then explain Fr. Kolbe, a Catholic priest and martyr, or the other millions of non-Jews, many of whom were Poles sent to camps by Nazis?

                        That’s the crux of this problem, though, Frank. There are different kinds of illness in the world, and there is an entire field of medicine built on the integration of physical, mental, and spiritual healing. My own belief is that spiritual illness can only be treated by the Divine Physician, Jesus Christ. I would suggest that there can be no physical “cure” for illnesses related to spiritual causes. That’s where I would seek help from a healer of a different kind, eminently more qualified to treat these, a priest in a confessional.

                        There is no such thing as a “fundamentalist” Catholic. There is one faith, one doctrine, same sacraments for all Catholics. I am not a fan of the Jesuit order, as my many, many posts here relate, but I certainly don’t rely on you to accurately depict the Jesuits or any other order. There is a difference between the human frailty of failing to live up to Christ’s call to be spiritually perfect as the Father is perfect, and your absurd premise that the Catholic Church represents anything but the path to salvation and a light in a world filled with darkness, pain and suffering. It’s an extremely difficult religion to live by, as even Thomas More noted, which is why I believe it has the ability to shepherd us into eternity with God. With a billion plus followers in every corner of the globe, Frank, as well as people like you, so hostile to it, it would impossible to be anything other than forthright or objective about our own history.

                      • bintalshamsa

                        ” It was there to stop the violence and make sure that innocent people weren’t harmed.”

                        It was there to stop the violence by perpetrating more violence? How does that work exactly? Do you stop homosexuality by engaging in limited acts of homosexuality?

                        “The first thing he had to do was make a list of his enemies.”

                        So, if a person was a very forgiving Catholic and did not see anyone as his enemy, this was used against him. That certainly sounds Christ-like. Not!

                        ” All people brought in were questioned thoroughly. Anyone found innocent was immediately released.”

                        Were those who questioned them infallible? Not according to the Roman Catholic church. So, these judges were just as susceptible to bribery, coveting, envy, jealousy, malice, and all of the other sins that could lead them to keep an innocent person from going free.

                        “Guilty people were dealt with according to their crime and cooperation.”

                        So, if an innocent person was being accused and they knew that the judges were corrupt, they were punished for not cooperating with the corruption. If a person wanted to be tried by someone else, because they feared corruption, then they could be deemed uncooperative by those corrupt judges and then treated even more harshly.

                        “Torture was only used on obstinate people who were deemed able to withstand it by a physician.”

                        Jesus never tortured anyone nor did He ever condone torture, so the fact that this was used AT ALL shows that the Inquisition was inherently evil and un-Christian and an abomination (given that they invoked God in excusing their evil acts).

                        ” Sessions were never longer than 15 minutes, a priest and doctor were always on hand”

                        And who was paying these doctors? If a doctor constantly accused the torturers of harming accused people, do you think they’d keep hiring him? Would you like to go through 15 minutes of torture? Better yet, would you be willing to allow your child to be put through 15 minutes of torture just in case they might have done something wrong?

                        “the session was stopped if the person confessed or something went wrong”

                        It’s already been proved that even innocent people will “confess” if tortured sufficiently. That’s just human nature for people to say anything that will stop another person from torturing them. As far as something going wrong, the torture itself was an abomination, so allowing it to occur at all qualifies as something that “went wrong”.

                        “Death was the fate of only those who absolutely would not repent”

                        How could someone repent if they never committed the sin in the first place? If a person was innocent and they refused to lie and say that they had, then they were punished with death. Even if their accusers were later found to have been lying, the innocent victim would already have been tortured and then slaughtered. There’s no way that Christ would have condoned or even allowed that to happen. Never once did he allow people to kill others in his presence, even when they were clearly guilty of what were considered capital offenses.

                        “the number of people burned by the Inquisition makes up less than 2% of the total number of people tried by it”

                        Well, that’s nice…unless you were one of those people tortured and then slaughtered by being burned to death. What if we lined up a hundred Catholics and only burned two of them at the stake? Would that be okay with you? After all, it’s just two percent and those folks are probably guilty of some sort of sin or another.

                        “The Spanish Inquisition kept Jews and Jewish Converts safe”

                        You’ve already admitted that the inquisitors tortured and burned people at the stake. That’s not what most folks consider safe. Would you agree to be “kept safe” by allowing your mother or father or sisters or children to be tortured and burned at the stake? Would you actually feel safe if you knew that was happening all around you?

                        “greatly reduced violence and crime”

                        You’ve already admitted that they perpetrated many acts of violence, so that means they didn’t reduce it. They added to it. You’ve already admitted that they tortured people and burned them at the stake, even though this is something that Christ never participated in or condoned. This was sin, pure and simple. Is the commission of sin better than the commission of crime?

                        “Protestants have a much bloodier history than Catholics do”

                        This is the equivalent of saying that killing someone is okay because someone else killed two people. That’s just not how Christianity works. What you’re doing is minimizing and trivializing the unjust torture and slaughter of human beings. That’s not Christian.

                      • Adam__Baum

                        Why are you here? Wouldn’t you be happier at a site dedicated to global statism or charientocracy. We get it. You hate and mistrust the Church, because it won’t sanctify sodomy.

                      • NHILLM

                        Would you really call the “conversos” conversion? If you believe that then your words are really just a bunch of resounding gongs and clanging cymbals.

                      • bintalshamsa

                        Considering what the Catholic church did to my people, you’re in no position to criticize what the US government did at its behest. The Church has certainly been the victor in that conflict. They helped to commit the genocide against Native Americans that wiped out almost the entire population of a continent. So, why should anyone, especially those of us who are the descendants of those slaughtered by the Church believe that the Church is going to be objective about ANYTHING?

                      • JediWonk

                        Close. Two Australians won the 2005 Nobel Prize in medicine for their work two decades earlier that identified the cause of most peptic ulcers being a bacterium, *helicobacter pylori*. Were it a virus, the condition would not be treatable with antibiotics.

                        Your example does point out how neglected infectious agents are in disease causation. For more see:

                        http://www.isteve.com/infectious_causation_of_disease.pdf

                        By the way, it is looking like our epidemic of severe asthma, especially in our inner cities, is a “polio”. That is, it is from *not* being exposed to *helicobacter pylori* young enough. (Polio took off when urban sanitation got good enough to delay exposure to the polio virus past infancy.)

                      • bintalshamsa

                        That’s simply not true. Look at how many famed scientists were motivated by their Catholic faith. They certainly weren’t objective. Yet they helped us reach new understandings about the world. So, you see, we needn’t pretend as if anyone is truly objective, especially since science has shown that everyone has biases. Expecting everyone to be objective means that you’d have to treat other religion’s claims with the same authority as you give the Roman Catholic church. Is that really what you think we all should do?

                  • bintalshamsa

                    Nope. Most of the world has never viewed it as a mental disorder. I’m sorry, but you’re quite misinformed.

                • cestusdei

                  It was only removed from the DSM for political, not scientific, reasons. PC trumps the truth in your mind.

                • Independentview

                  What scientific discovery showed that homosexuality was not a disease ? What scientist or group of them made the discovery. What methods were used and where did they publish this.
                  Don’t bother looking because there never was and isn’t one. It was deemed not a disease because of politics only

                • JediWonk

                  This is one of those “whom are you going to believe, the medical profession? Or your own lying eyes?” issues. A condition as reproductively disabling as male homosexuality *not* be a “disease”? Really?

                  Do you know any gays who have children? Ask them if they were hoping their kids would turn out to be gay. No, they want grandchildren just as much as the rest of us. If there was a vaccine that prevented male homosexuality, I doubt there anyone would voice opposition to it being administered as universally as, say, DTAP.

                  Male homosexuality is a condition for which medical science has no treatment, so the polite thing to do is not stigmatize it. But a fNMRI scan of a brain can tell you if it belongs to a male or female, and, if male, whether gay or straight. (All human females test out on fNMRI as bisexual, which is why the top-selling men’s and women’s magazines have in common that they feature pictures of beautiful women. To the limits of the resolution of the studies done to date, male bisexuality must be very, very rare, because no such brain has ever been found on fNMRI.)

                • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jambe-dArgent/100003865893919 Jambe d’Argent

                  What’s sane about a man’s desire to put his penis into another man’s anus? Please explain.

                  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jambe-dArgent/100003865893919 Jambe d’Argent

                    So, Frank, still no answer, eh?

                  • Crisiseditor

                    Mr. Lozera is no longer allowed on Crisis magazine. It was determined that no benefit could be gained from homosexual advocacy repeated ad nauseam. This happens only rarely but appropriate when no benefit (and possible harm) is likely from the endless exchange. His comments will remain on the site for visitors to read and analyze if they so desire.

                    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jambe-dArgent/100003865893919 Jambe d’Argent

                      Thank you – this is a right decision.

            • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jambe-dArgent/100003865893919 Jambe d’Argent

              What’s healthy in a man’s desire to put his penis into another man’s anus? Please explain.

            • Facile1

              The “World Health Organization”? The same organization that advocates the tax-payer funding of contraceptives and abortion because pregnancy is ……………………what?

            • A Psycholigist

              I guess 25% of a population contracting and transmitting deadly and debilitating diseases is the definition of a healthy sexual expression.

        • musicacre

          Interesting how fast things change. In the super -modern times of the 1980′s, I was taught ( in psychiatric nursing) by teacher and textbook that homosexual behaviors were “deviant”. Exact word that was used and understood.

          • patricia m.

            The gay lobby is very powerful indeed.

            • Frank Lozera

              Oh weh! They’re a-comin’ to get us.

          • Frank Lozera

            Could it be … Could it just be ….? Have you considered the remote possibility that the scientific understanding of homosexuality has progressed in the last 30-40 years? If it hadn’t, it would be a truly exceptional case, because the trend is toward more understanding, not less.

            • cestusdei

              The gay lobby doesn’t permit real science about homosexuality. They are afraid of what it might reveal.

              • patricia m.

                It’s going to reveal that a gene or some genes are turned on and off in the woman’s uterus and the scientists will find a way to avert that.

              • Victress Jenkins

                You’re so right!! It is aberrant and has been since biblical times!! Although Sodom & Gomorrah wasn’t just about homosexuality, it was the cause d’etre!

            • Adam__Baum

              Could you consider that it could have regressed?

        • Alecto

          Those who disagree with you are not motivated by hate. Your transparent dismissal of all who would adhere to timeless morality, or objective truth casts doubt on your premise that homosexuality is just another “choice”. I understand you would like it to be so, but it isn’t so. And a handful of radical organizations (e.g., news of WHO instituting “Clitoris Awareness”) is evidence to many that such group have no interest in objective truth or scientific inquiry. I view SSA the same way I view other disorders: deserving of our compassion and help but not of our rejecting the nature of the disorder or redefining truth or societal standards to appease those suffering from the disorder. The most hateful people in the United States are aggressive homosexualists. Just ask Prof. Regnerus.

          • Frank Lozera

            Alecto, I dispute your claim that you “adhere to timeless morality and objective truth.” Misrepresenting the facts and slandering entire groups of people has never been considered “moral.”

            WHO is a radical organization? Whoo-a! Maybe you should consult your doctor about that.

            The more I hear of this kind of talk, the clearer it becomes to me that your Church is dying. It is in an anti-social bubble floating farther and farther away from the real world.

            Alecto, I don’t know if you’re familiar with the 1864 Encyclical “Quanta Cura,” issued under Pope Pius IX. In it, the Church made a fatal turn. It formally rejected liberalism, democracy, and capitalism. It rejected modernity itself. It explicitly rejected the notion that “the Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with, progress, liberalism, and modern civilization.”

            So there you have it, and we’re seeing the fruits of this backward drift now. I see it everywhere on this blog. Conservative Catholics are citing scientific studies (as you did Regnerus) only when those studies appear to confirm their biases. The rest of the time, science is highly suspect, and organizations or entities that go against the grain of Church teaching (CDC, WHO, APA, AMA, SPLC, FBI, etc.) are roundly denounced.

            This is no way to enter the 21st century. Catholicism will either reform or it will die. This bunker mentality that I see everywhere on this blog is a clear sign of disease. And, yes, of disorder.

            • musicacre

              Catholicism is God’s expression,and vehicle to give people a choice from sin and to choose freely, TRUTH. It, and 1 billion people aren’t going to disappear for your own satisfaction, sorry. And by the same token, we know there will always be people that will not choose a path of Grace. Sin is on this earth. We are each given a lifetime to think about it and work it out for ourselves. Many different times in our lives, people are put on our path that could help us. However those moments will also come to an end eventually. You want everyone on this conversation to look up info on what ever it is you’re saying..but I don’t think you are willing to read Scott Hahn and and many other wonderful Catholic writers, to at least investigate before you discard. By the way, quit using science as a club. Most of us know that some of the first and most brilliant scientists, were Catholic, (devout) if you care t o research it.

            • Alecto

              Frank, you seem determined to confuse everything and everyone. I cited Regnerus to demonstrate that regardless of his study, or his conclusions homosexualists are aggressive and hateful towards anyone who disagrees with them. It is a political tactic to silence all who would disagree. That’s not very “objective”, now is it?

              That you fail to see most of these UN-funded organizations have agendas is naive, Frank. The UN is highly leftist and political. Politics, after all, is the art of the possible, not the truth. I think that rejection of modernity showed prescience and brilliance. Look where modernism has led? Abortion, divorce, suicide, lonliness and misery. The only bunker I see here exists because you build walls. After all, the more you protest, the more you destroy, defame and offend, the more we know we’re onto the truth. Catholicism will endure long after we are both dust.

            • John200

              “Frankly,” you do not understand Quanta Cura (or the Syllabus of Errors or Jamdudum Cernimus, the source of your quote), the Regnerus study (we discussed in another thread; I remember, believe me), disorder (you are living it), etc. You seem unable to extract an author’s plain meaning.

              Your understanding of your own

              But after your nonsense above, I leave you to your version of reality.

              Best to you in your journey.

        • Adam__Baum

          “all the major health and social care organizations in this country, as well as the World Health Organization”.

          Can you possibly imagine that some people view the edicts of bureaucrats as something less than inerrant?

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jambe-dArgent/100003865893919 Jambe d’Argent

          “…all the major health and social care organizations in this country, as well as the World Health Organization, have stated clearly and
          unequivocally that homosexuality is not a disorder.” This only demonstrates the intellectual and moral corruption of these organizations. Wasn’t eugenics enthusiastically supported by similar public bodies in the 1930s? This is a spurious “argumentum ad auctoritatem” and should be treated with the deserved ridicule.

    • Kevin McCormick

      A solid argument. Well said. I am surprised that more of the argument surrounding same-sex activity is not focused on the very obvious fact that sodomy does not fit the nature and design of the human body. It’s Biology 101. However in your article you might want to clarify that you are referring only to type 2 diabetes and not type 1. As far as I understand it the latter is a congenital defect that is not caused by diet.

      • Frank Lozera

        Kevin, what you’ve written doesn’t make sense. Sodomy, in the broad sense of the term (which includes masturbation) is practiced by nearly all heterosexuals. In the narrow sense of the term, it is practiced by many heterosexuals but not by all homosexuals. Equating sodomy with homosexuality is simply wrong. If you persist in doing it, it is simply a defamatory lie.

        Shaeffer’s argument is not, as you claim, “solid.” On the contrary, it is premised on a myth propagated by two of the organizations that Shaeffer links to: the Family Research Council and the Family Research Institute. Both are certified by the Southern Poverty Law Center as hate groups because they repeatedly spread calumnies about gays. One of these is that gays are diseased, and another is that gays have shorter life spans. These calumnies are similar in many ways to those disseminated against Jews by the Catholic Church in the centuries before World War II.

        The Catechism of the Catholic Church says that lying is a grave sin. Being mistaken about these matters is one thing, but continuing to spread falsehoods about them is a much more serious matter, and it is what got these two organizations in trouble with the SPLC and the FBI.

        • Lars

          Excellent response, Frank! It is bigoted and hateful to compare homosexuality to a disease. The vast majority of those who exhibit this hatred are hardly moral paragons themselves. I have gay friends, and I know that it causes them great hurt to be slandered in this way. It is a wonder that they do as well as they do. Shame on you, Crisis magazine, for exhibiting this ugly discriminatory behavior.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Leticia-Velasquez/1653352466 Leticia Velasquez

            We merely want your gay friends to enjoy the eternal happiness of heaven, which our Church teaches is not possible for those mired in sexual sins. To ignore homosexual sin is to allow gay people to die in mortal sin and suffer eternal punishment. We love you too much to lie to you.

            • Frank Lozera

              Leticia, if we do not enjoy “the eternal happiness of heaven,” then what do you think is our fate? What is this “eternal punishment” that you’re referring to? Can you be more specific?

              • cestusdei

                Sure, eternal separation from God who is the only one who can give joy.

                • Frank Lozera

                  So, Cestusdei, I don’t believe in God. So I am already separated from Him, wouldn’t you say?

                  So, is that all? Or is there more to it than that? Please be completely frank with me. What does it mean to be “separated from God?” I hope you’re not squeamish about the “H” word?

                  • A Catholic

                    Well well, unless you repent honestly in the very last minute of your existence, dear Frank, I am afraid you are going to hell. But there’s still time to repent, you are still 69 and I hope in good health, you still have to time to repent and embrace the true religion and love of God. We are praying for your conversion.

                    • Frank Lozera

                      Good. I was hoping someone would have the guts to just come out with it. I’m going to roast in hell for eternity because I love another man.

                      Visualize all the grains of sand on all the beaches and in all the oceans of the world. Multiply those by 50 billion, and then square the result. Each grain represents a year. You’re not even close to eternity yet.

                      And your God, whom you worship, is going to do that to me? And you are praying for me and you address me as “dear Frank?” Your compassion overwhelms me.

                      What insanity! TG I am not a Catholic! I hope this is not the true face of Catholicism, but I fear that it is.

                      • A Catholic

                        This is for your comment on eternity:

                        Matthew 24:
                        35. Heaven and earth shall pass, but my words shall not pass.
                        36. But of that day and hour no one knoweth, not the angels of heaven, but the Father alone.

                        43. But know this ye, that if the goodman of the house knew at what hour the thief would come, he would certainly watch, and would not suffer his house to be broken open.
                        44. Wherefore be you also ready, because at what hour you know not the Son of man will come.

                        I don’t know what you mean by true face of Catholicism, but as you’re fond of citing the Catechism, perhaps you should read it all and find there (and in the Bible) that sodomy is a sin. And people who die in sin go to hell.

                      • Frank Lozera

                        Je tremble.

                      • musicacre

                        What is TG? Just asking.

                      • Frank Lozera

                        “TG!” means “Thank Gmot!” Gmot is the Norse god of the moon. It also means “Thank Gunderson!” Gunderson is my neighbor down the street.

                      • cestusdei

                        All of Christianity teaches that unrepented sin leads to hell. Other religions say the same. You would “roast” because you disobey God’s moral law and choose lust over love. Love wills the good for the other. You cannot do that if your actions lead to sin in the other and yourself. You don’t “love” another man.

                      • NHILLM

                        What would you like Catholicism to be?

                        Chesterton communicated the modernist, assumingly progressivist mindset well:
                        “We do not really want a religion that is right where we are right. What we want is a religion that is right where we are wrong. In these current fashions it is not really a question of the religion allowing us liberty; but (at the best) of the liberty allowing us a religion. These people merely take the modern mood, with much in it that is amiable and much that is anarchical and much that is merely dull and obvious, and then require any creed to be cut down to fit that mood. But the mood would exist even without the creed. They say they want a religion to be social, when they would be social without any religion. They say they want a religion to be practical, when they would be practical without any religion. They say they want a religion acceptable to science, when they would accept the science even if they did not accept the religion. They say they want a religion like this because they are like this already. They say they want it, when they mean that they could do without it.”

                    • Frank Lozera

                      I feel like I in a loony bin.

                  • Bono95

                    The difference between separation from God on earth and separation from him in hell is that on earth, you still have the chance to repent and come back to God. In hell, that chance is lost forever. God never forces anyone to choose him, but he desperately wants everyone to be saved, so on earth he will give all kinds of hints and helps to those who are separated from him. Some hints are small, so small that they can easily be missed. Others are much bigger, and still others are anywhere in between. But again, God doesn’t force anyone to take a hint. You still have to choose him freely. In hell, there are no hints because choosing God is no longer possible.

                    A common misconception is that God sends certain people to hell. This is not true. God does not send anyone anywhere. He respects our free will, even when we horribly abuse it. If a person chooses God and sticks to that choice to the end of his life, he will be with God in heaven forever. If that same person does not choose God and dies without ever choosing him, he goes to hell because his final decision was to be separated from God forever.

                    For right now and for the rest of your earthly life, Mr. Lozera, you can still choose God, and he will welcome you with open arms. He doesn’t want you to go to hell. He wants you to come home to heaven. That journey home will not be easy. It is never easy, but God, his angels, and his saints will most gladly help you if only you let them.

                    One final note, choosing God or rejecting him is not a one-time choice. This means that even the most hardened of sinners can repent, and it also means that even the most righteous of people can slip or lose their faith. In almost everything we do everyday, we must at least implicitly choose for God or against him. Everyone makes choices against God from time to time, but everyone can choose him again as long as they live. And the more often they choose him, the easier it gets.

                    • Frank Lozera

                      Bono95, nothing you’ve said is unfamiliar to me. I’ve heard it a thousand times, and yet I am flabbergasted every time I hear it again. It is ghoulish and ghastly. I keep thinking, “No! People don’t really believe these horrible things any more.” But then I am reminded that many people still do. MG, when is the European Enlightenment going to finally catch up with us?

                      So you actually WORSHIP a God who allows an eternity of suffering for untold billions of people in the universe over which he presumably presides, and yet you accuse ME of moral dereliction? I think you’ve got things radically backwards.

                      • A Catholic

                        If you want to know how hell looks like, read Saint Pio of Pietrelcina’s books. Then, I’m sure, you will tremble.

                      • Bono95

                        If it’s hate speech for me to tell a person that unrepented sin will send him to hell, is it also hate speech for me to someone who’s about to rob a bank that he’ll go to jail, or someone who’s abusing substances that he’ll have to go to the hospital or rehab?

                      • Facile1

                        There is nothing ghoulish or ghastly about hell, Mr. Lozera. The only thing we know for sure about hell is that God is NOT in hell. Because TRUTH cannot exist outside of GOD, some saints have even postulated that maybe hell does NOT exist at all (which means those who choose hell TO heaven merely wish for their own non-existence.) But what is real and exists for sure is our FREE WILL. We are certainly free to choose always to LOVE GOD (or not).

                        Our sexuality is God’s gift to us, Mr. Lozera. BUT all sin is idolatry and it is idolatry when we choose to love the gift and NOT the Giver.

                        Gifts turn into blessings only when we can accept them for what they are and REPENT all the ingratitude of the past.

                        So rejoice in God’s LOVE always and go in PEACE.

                  • cestusdei

                    Yes, you have separated yourself from him. If you die in that state it will become eternal. You will cut yourself off from real joy. As the eons wear on you will become more and more angry, unhappy, and bitter. Your hate will focus on God and you will blame him. This will drive you further away and down. That is what hell is. Turned in on yourself for all eternity, hopeless, alone, and it is your choice. I think that is a pretty frank answer. The good news is that it doesn’t have to be that way. You can make a different choice.

                    • Frank Lozera

                      Uhn.

                      • cestusdei

                        A profound response.

        • Kevin McCormick

          Frank,

          Sodomy may be practiced by anyone, however there aren’t any individuals pushing for the acceptance of purveyors of masturbation as a group which should receive special privileges and protections offered by law (not yet anyway—who knows what’s around the corner).

          The natural law argument is sound and there really isn’t much to refute it. Sex is a biological act and as such it is possible to violate the natural design which governs it. The body has a design and when that design is flouted it invariably leads to problems, not least of which is illness and even death.

          If such violations are enshrined into law the results will be catastrophic. The Church warned of the dangers of such violations many years ago when contraception was being pushed and when abortion was being legalized. The statistics and the current state of our culture bear out that the Church was right on all counts. Same-sex marriage presents a further threat since it demands that parties who would disagree with the redefinition of marriage must by law consider a non-union to be a union. So much for freedom of conscience in the West.

          The fact that your post concludes with a thinly-veiled threat is a perfect example of how the SSM lobby wishes to change nature by bullying and legal fiat. It’s a disaster in the making.

          • Frank Lozera

            Kevin, you wrote that “sodomy does not fit the design of the human body,” and you seemed to infer that same-sex activity is therefore not natural.

            My intention was to point out that sodomy, particularly in its broader sense, is extremely common among humans. I might add that it is also extremely common among animal species. So it is hardly unnatural. Nor is it limited to either of the two major sexual orientations. It is practiced by both.

            So, the sodomy argument against same-sex marriage doesn’t hold up. If prevalence of sodomy among heterosexuals doesn’t disqualify them from marrying, then neither should it disqualify homosexuals from marrying. And, in fact, it does not in 11 states and a dozen countries.

            Remember, too, that many homosexuals do not practice sodomy (in the narrow sense). This is one more reason why the sodomy argument doesn’t work.

            Two final reasons why it doesn’t work are that (1) marriage is not just about sex, and (2) sexual practices within marriage are private. I realize the Catholic Church has a habit of prying into people’s sexual lives, but most people find that extremely offensive.

            The natural law argument can be easily refuted. For one thing, there is no unified or codified system of natural law. Furthermore, proponents of natural law disagree about what constitutes it and who has best expressed it. Finally, natural law is inconsistent over time. Leading up to the Holocaust, natural law was used by Catholic writers to justify antisemitism. Earlier, it had been used to justify slavery. Natural law has shown itself to be remarkably malleable.

            Regarding my allusions to the SPLC and the FBI: We do live in a country governed by law, and I think most responsible individuals will appreciate that these organizations track hate groups. When a pressure-cooker bomb explodes on a crowded street, we expect the FBI to do its job.

            Please Google “hate groups list” and find the Wikipedia entry. Take a look at the list of hundreds of groups in this country. Are there any that you think should not be listed? And why?

            Are you defending only the two hate groups that this author has linked to, or would you defend any of the others?

            • cestusdei

              It is not natural, even if dogs do it. We are human and it is sinful.

            • Guy Est

              (1) Sodomy has several meaning. The most relevant one is as a synonym for homosexual practice. It is in fact the oldest such term in the English language.

              (2) Natural also has several meanings. In this case, it does not mean “occurring in nature.” Rather it means “the end or purpose” of an action or state of being. Sodomy is, therefore, unnatural because it distorts human sexuality by frustrating its purposes.

              • Frank Lozera

                Sodomy is a synonym for homosexual practice? So if two gay men kiss each other, that is sodomy? Maybe that definition is a little broad.

                As for your teleological argument, evolutionary theory has shown us that organs don’t have “purposes” at all. They have functions. The same can be said of human sexuality in general. One of the functions of sexuality is to produce offspring. Another is to provide pleasure. Yet another is to facilitate bonding through intimacy.

                • Bono95

                  If gay men kiss each other on the lips with the intention or being amorous, then, yes, that is sodomy. If they kiss on the cheek in a manner of courtesy or non-sexual friendship, like they used to in several European countries in the Middle Ages, then that is not sodomy.

                  And I’m rather skeptical about evolutionary functions. Evolution has yet to explain the yawning mechanism or the function of the appendix.

                  • Frank Lozera

                    Yes, Bono95, I expected you would be “rather skeptical” about evolutionary theory. You are probably also rather skeptical about the Southern Poverty Law Center and the entire medical establishment of this country and the World Health Organization. Are you also a Young-Earth Creationist?

                    • Bono95

                      No, I believe that the universe is about 14 billion years old, like most scientists estimate it to be. And this does not contradict the book of Genesis’ 7 Days of Creation because there could be no 24 hour days until the sun, moon, and earth were created, and that didn’t happen until the 4th “day”. And science agrees with Genesis on the order of creation. Light and energy, sky/space and stars, land and water, the sun and moon, plants and animals, then man. I even believe that God could very well have started creation with the Big Bang (that theory, by the way, was first formulated by a Catholic priest from Belgium). God may not have done it that way, but he certainly could have for nothing is impossible with him.

                      And can you or any evolutionist tell me what the purposes of yawning and the appendix are?

        • Guy Est

          (1) The CDC reports that homosexual men, while just a tiny fraction of the U.S. population, are overwhelming responsible for new cases of HIV infection:

          http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/surveillance/incidence/index.html

          (2) The SPLC is a fraud and an enabler of domestic terrorists. It literally provided a road map for domestic homosexual-rights terrorist Floyd Corkins to attack and attempt mass murder on the FRC’s staffers.

          So, please, stop the homosexualist propaganda and lies.

          • Frank Lozera

            Guy, I am so glad that you cited the CDC, because I’m going to do so as well.

            Yes, approximately 19% of MSM (men who have sex with men) are HIV-positive. (And approximately 81% are not.) And white MSM have a worse record than black MSM.

            But consider this: Black heterosexuals have a worse record than white heterosexuals. Does this mean that black heterosexuals should not be allowed to marry? Or that they should be labelled with epithets like “diseased,” “degenerate,” and “disordered?”

            Sub-Saharan Africa has an epidemic of HIV/AIDS, but there it is transmitted overwhelmingly through heterosexual contact. Should Sub-Saharan heterosexual Africans not be allowed to marry? Should they be called “disordered” and “diseased?”

            Now here’s where I bring in my quote from the CDC. It’s from their page on prevention strategies:

            “Homophobia, stigma, and discrimination can put MSM at risk for multiple physical and mental health problems and affect whether MSM seek and are able to obtain high-quality health services. Negative attitudes about homosexuality can lead to rejection by friends and family, discriminatory acts, and bullying and violence. These dynamics may make it difficult for some MSM to be open about same-sex behaviors with others, which can increase stress, limit social support, and negatively affect health.”

          • Frank Lozera

            Guy, your claim that SPLC is an “enabler of domestic terrorists” is absurd. They collaborate closely with the FBI.

            By your criteria, the Catholic Church is a serial enabler of domestic terrorists.

            This kind of talk is just nonsense.

            • Guy Est

              The FBI’s most recent collaboration with the SPLC was taking the confession of Floyd Corkins who stated that he used the SPLC’s listing of FRC to target FRC for attack.

              • Frank Lozera

                So, if Floyd Corkins had used the FBI’s own list of hate groups, would the FBI have been an “enabler of domestic terrorists?” What about the Catholic Church’s affiliation with and support for pro-life groups? What happens when someone in these groups shoots up an abortion clinic? Is the Church an “enabler of domestic terrorists?” Guy, use the noggin that your Creator gave you. Think this through.

      • JediWonk

        If anal sex is so unnatural, why do so many *women* insist on receiving it?

        • msmischief

          As if women were free from original sin.

        • msmischief

          As if women were free from original sin.

      • JediWonk

        By the way, the root cause of type-1 diabetes has to be a pathogen. REF: “Infectious Disease: An Evolutionary Perspective” by Greg Cochran and Paul Ewald.

        Interestingly, their theory also applies to male homosexuality.

    • Da Truth Hurtz

      It is long overdue that someone should expose the truth
      about the “distorted appetites” of homosexuals. Images of charming, buff &
      successful gay couples trolling the isles of a Pottery Barn Store while holding
      hands is missing the point. The falsity of the gay “death style” as it is being
      trumpeted on HGTV & the Ellen Degenerate show is nauseating to the extreme.
      Mr. Schaeffer touches the heart of this myth by reminding us of the sheer
      volume & depravity of the disease inviting “trysts” perpetrated by homosexuals.
      Gay men, on a typical weekend get-together will have, within the context of the
      oxymoron known as “gay marriage”, scores of anonymous encounters. The type of
      contact is too vile for description, at least on my post, but the sheer numbers
      of encounters in a lifetime is most often in the mid hundreds to many thousands
      if the fellows have many acquaintances. And now we add adopted children to the
      mix. NO! It’s time we awaken our sense of prudence and look at the part they
      want us to miss. Several gay leaning books have been written on how to win the
      affections of the American Sheeple for acceptance of the homosexual agenda. The
      main theme is always to keep our collective eyes off of their crude, unhealthy
      practices and focus them on the falsely idyllic portrayals that ooze from the
      mass media. Wake up people, it IS our business what people do in private when
      the existence of the family is being redefined! God bless Joseph Schaeffer for
      having the fortitude to say what is needed even if it upsets those who are to
      blame.

      • Frank Lozera

        “Da Truth Hurtz,” you wouldn’t know the truth if it bit you on the nose. Furthermore, what you have written about homosexuals is structurally identical to the antisemitic diatribes of the 30s and 40s in Germany. Wake up! Attempt, at least, within the frail framework of your limited capacities, to understand what bigotry is and how it works.

    • http://www.facebook.com/jruder39 Joe Ruder

      Your statement have an interesting symmetry and are appealing — only if you accept the premise that homosexual sec acts are unnatural and/or cannot lead to true fulfillment. My experience and repeated witnessing of many healthy, happy, spiritually fulfilled gay men and women leads me to rejects that premise with absolute certainty. How do you prese to know others are unfulfilled despite their apparent peace, happiness, and health? Reality does not change because of your clever arguments. Nice try, though.

      • patricia m.

        Gay love is not complete in itself. Let me try to explain: gay men feel attraction to men, but real men fall in love with women. So, while men and women complete each other, gay love is not complete, because real men will not fall for gay men. So gay men have to resort to other gay men and their love is not complete.

        • Frank Lozera

          Patricia, no. No. Don’t embarrass yourself with such simplistic and slanderous comments. “Real men fall in love with women?” According to whom? You’re equating “real” with heterosexual, which implies homosexuals are somehow “unreal,” or “false.” Because I don’t believe in disparaging others with such epithets, I won’t respond in kind.

      • Alecto

        What you describe is a subjective experience. Can you offer any objective evidence for the position that these people are healthy, happy, spiritually fulfilled because they are homosexuals? Ultimately, this debate isn’t about clever arguments, it’s about analysis and evaluation of a lifestyle on an objective basis.

        • Frank Lozera

          Alecto, the usual presumption is that we’re innocent until proven guilty. So why should I, a homosexual, have to prove that I am healthy and happy? Since you’re the one making accusations, why don’t you prove that I am not?

          Referring to us as “these people” is a quintessential act of othering, the kind that is associated with bigotry. Don’t you think it’s time to learn what bigotry is and how it manifests itself? Or don’t you care?

          • Alecto

            That wasn’t my question, but you didn’t intend to answer it in the first place, now, did you? You really need to take the chip off the shoulder, Lorenzo, and make some effort to grasp simple English grammar. “These” people is a valid choice of words, no negative implication intended. You imputed the derogatory meaning all by yourself and therefore inferred an invisible slight.

            • Frank Lozera

              Alecto, I imputed the derogatory meaning of your words because I have been reading your comments for many months and I know how you think.

              • Alecto

                What a gift! Too bad you don’t make better use of it!

      • http://twitter.com/anthonymarks5 anthony marks

        Come on now, Joe, those “healthy, happy, spiritually fulfilled gay men and women” of your experience are actually TV and movie characters. In my experience, every homosexual I’ve met has been a miserable, unhappy person often suffering from avoidable diseases. You look like an adult in the picture that accompanies your name, picture in your mind the conduct of two male homosexuals. I know this is a disgusting exercise, but that’s the point, the act by which these poor souls identify themselves is disgusting. How can this possibly be considered normal or “spiritually fulfilling”? Never, in the history of mankind, have these acts been considered normal. Is our age so much more enlightened that we know better than every religion and every civilization that has ever existed?

        • Frank Lozera

          Anthony, you say every homosexual you’ve ever met has been “a miserable person often suffering from avoidable diseases.”

          You and I must hang out in different circles. Maybe you live in an inner-city ghetto? I hang out at a large state university. The homosexuals I know (including my partner) are happy, healthy, and prosperous. Most of them are in committed relationships, including marriages. Some of them are raising children. All of them are employed, they pay their taxes, and they are good citizens.

          Maybe you should consider hanging out with a better class of people.

          • http://twitter.com/anthonymarks5 anthony marks

            So, unlike the vast majority of human beings, “All of them are employed, pay their taxes, and are good citizens”. All of them? This is incredible, I guess AIDS, gonorrhea, syphilis, herpes and all other STDs, which are rampant in the homosexual community, don’t exist in your Utopia.I guess there are no holes drilled into the bathroom stall walls, either. No circuit parties, no suicides, no alcohol or drug abuse. Really? Do they ride magic unicorns to work and sleep on clouds of gold dust, too?
            In the 1980′s and 1990′s, I worked in several AIDS hospices. I saw the real result of the homosexual lifestyle, and although the devil’s propaganda machine is strong, the truth is always stronger.

            • Frank Lozera

              Anthony, read carefully what I said. I was talking about the homosexuals that I know. And yes, ALL of them are healthy and happy. I am perfectly aware that not all homosexuals are healthy and happy, but neither are all heterosexuals. I am trying to call your attention to a mechanism of bigotry that you are employing when you generalize from the behavior of some individuals to the characteristics of the entire group to which they belong. If 99% of homosexuals were diseased and promiscuous, you would still not be justified in making these fraudulent generalizations about us.

              • http://twitter.com/anthonymarks5 anthony marks

                Mr. Lozera,
                You are advocating for a “lifestyle” which every study has shown is both physically and spiritually corrupting. It’s possible that, in your heart, you are unaware of the horrible results of this “lifestyle” choice.I would suggest you read some of the many studies that have been done relating to homosexuals in order to understand the dangers of what you are doing. Apart from that, I would suggest you read the New Testament and spend some time praying. I don’t know you, but I can assure you that God loves you and doesn’t want you to degrade yourself in this manner. Jesus Christ is the answer, not sensuality.

                • Frank Lozera

                  Anthony, when you say that “every study has shown” that the homosexual “lifestyle” is “both physically and spiritually corrupting, you are simply talking through your hat. You are bluffing. Your claim has no basis in fact. The World Health Organization has stated unequivocally that homosexuality is NOT a disorder.

                  Look, Anthony. I am a 69-year-old homosexual. I am not physically or spiritually corrupted. I am healthy, and I resent being calumnied in this way. Have you no decency?

                  I think you owe me an apology. If you are Catholic, I should remind you that your own Catechism forbids slander and requires moral repair if it occurs.

                  • Kay

                    According to the CDC, homosexuals, whether sexually active or not, are more likely to be depressed than heterosexuals, even in communities that accept and support the lifestyle. Lesbians are more likely to smoke than heterosexual women, and homosexual men are more likely to be alcoholic, in addition to the fact that homosexual persons are on average less likely to form a long-term relationship with a partner.

                    Furthermore, studies are being done on homosexual males, which are pointing towards it being in part caused by a genetic defense of the mother. When a woman is pregnant with a male, her body will be more likely to recognize the fetus as foreign, and will begin developing antibodies. The more male children the woman has, the more likely each one is to have homosexual tendencies. While not a disorder in the sense of psychology, it isn’t a normal occurrence either.

                    Also, I’d like to point out the fact that only about 2% of the population in America is composed of people who identify themselves as homosexual or bisexual. That’s about the same percent of the population that’s diagnosed with some form of insanity (not saying that homosexuals are insane) which would qualify it as being a relatively abnormal behavior (whether healthy or not) which is in part the probable cause of why so many people are against it. Finally, in states that have legalized gay marriage, only a small fraction of homosexuals actually choose to marry their partners, in comparison to the heterosexual counterparts, where about half choose to marry their partners.

                    • Frank Lozera

                      Kay, when you stop slandering us and start helping to eliminate anti-gay bullying in the schools, THEN maybe you can complain that some of us succumb to depression, substance abuse, and high-risk behavior. Again, here is what the CDC has to say about homophobia:

                      “Homophobia, stigma, and discrimination can put MSM at risk for multiple physical and mental health problems and affect whether MSM seek and are able to obtain high-quality health services. Negative attitudes about homosexuality can lead to rejection by friends and family, discriminatory acts, and bullying and violence. These dynamics may make it difficult for some MSM to be open about same-sex behaviors with others, which can increase stress, limit social support, and negatively affect health.”

                      I realize you probably trust your priest far more than you trust the CDC on this. That is really unfortunate.

                  • cestusdei

                    The catechism also says that homosexuality is an objective moral disorder. Didn’t you read that part?

                    • Frank Lozera

                      Cestusdei, I guess you didn’t get the memo. I am not a Catholic, and I believe that the Catechism’s teaching about homosexuality is wrong and destructive, and that it is not supported by modern science. However, I don’t reject everything in the Catechism. Its teachings about bearing false witness are splendid.

                      • cestusdei

                        Don’t quote it if you don’t believe it. It’s teachings on human sexuality are splendid.

            • musicacre

              Years ago, an older friend of mine, (who introduced me to my future husband…it was cute. she said “you’re both Catholic..” as though that was the only thing. However…30 years years later…) had a very active homosexual son in his early 20′s. Same age as me at the time. I heard bits and pieces of the craziness of his activity in the gay bars in town, and he was bragging about getting “hits” of acid, etc. He also belonged to some kind of inventory company and they ALL were actively homosexual, changing partners,etc.
              They would go on the road together and do stores in the middle of the night. I hate to think of what was going on in those stores that were temporarily converted to party places. The sad ending, I heard some years after my husband and I were married and busy having babies, that he had committed suicide; complete with a note to his Mom and used her vacuum cleaner hose in a truck to do it. Very sad.. We couldn’t get through to him. He never wanted to talk to us and just called us names like, “square!”

              • Frank Lozera

                Musicacre, to suggest that this boy’s problems stemmed from his homosexuality is not just ridiculous but cruel. No reputable mental health professional would accept that idea for an instant.

                But think for a moment about all the things that MIGHT have led to such behavior. The CDC has identified school bullying, homophobia, and social stigmatization as major factors contributing to the higher incidence of suicide, substance abuse, and high-risk sexual behavior among young gay men.

                I honestly believe that, if I had read what is in this blog when I was a teenager, I might have felt like shooting myself.

                Think about your own responsibility for this youth’s death every time you calumny homosexuals. I am well aware of these tragedies and I understand their causes. That is why I am here talking to YOU.

                This is PRECISELY why the SPLC tracks hate groups, and it is why hate groups are harmful. These groups are of course free to spout all the hate they want to, but in doing so, they do real damage to people’s lives.

                Instead of judging this poor unfortunate boy, could you try imagining the grief that his parents must have felt, and their love for him?

                • musicacre

                  You are incredibly extreme; you don’t know this story! I have NEVER commented on homosexuality to this person, Or for that matter anything personal, or to his mother. That is a wild, unfounded and very careless statement you made. He flaunted it in our faces and called US names, because we were a heterosexual couple. That really seemed to bother him, that we were even going out together. I don’t know where you get the idea that gay sexual orientation makes a saint of of someone….HE actually bullied us. I never got past “hello” because he was gleefully leaving for the street whenever we saw him.
                  You cannot call every single person you don’t agree with, a “hate” group; that’s just psychotic.

                  • Frank Lozera

                    Musicacre, you may not have communicated your views to this child or his mother, but neither did you say anything to alleviate his self-doubts, because, frankly, you thought they were justified.

                    You’re also communicating your homophobic views here, and some of these bloggers may have children. The kind of talk that’s going on here is terribly, terribly unhealthy, and it spreads like a virus. When you lend your tacit support to these slanders, you share in responsibility for the consequences. And make no mistake: there are consequences yet to come. Slanders ripple out like waves and land on distant shores.

                    Do you not recognize that you are still blaming the victim and claiming victim status for yourself? “He flaunted it in our faces,” you write. And for that he deserved to die?

                    You accuse him of “bullying” you and another person he perceived as heterosexual. Did he hit you? Did he slam your head against a locker door? He called you names? What? “Breeder!” Did that hurt your feelings because you’ve been made to feel ashamed of being a breeder?

                    Musicacre, this young man committed suicide. He thought he deserved to die. He despised himself because that was what he had been taught to do. And the Catholic Church was his instructor.

                    What could you have done to prevent his death? You seem intent on establishing his guilt for his own death. But could you ever have told him, “We love you just as you are, without reservation. No matter what you do, we will always love you and hope for your happiness.”

                    Could you just have told him that without adding, “But we hate your sin!!”

                    • musicacre

                      You have quite a game here. You just made up a lot of things I never said , just to grandstand. Where did you get the word “breeder”? This is just weird.

                • Justsaying

                  Hi Frank, you seem like the only ‘gay’ person on this website. i believe in Jesus, however i believe that everyone should be treated with love just they Jesus treated people. i love people; gay or straight, but before you defebd your every decision that being gay is okay, i’d like you to know that if you stop for a while and think to yourself and ask yourself why am i really gay, your answer won’t be ‘i was born that way’ because to tell you the truth, i was not born straight. i agree, being gay is like being left-handed, it may come natural, but it can be trained. being gay is like eating junk food, you really like doing it, You see nothing wrong with it, but you can change. you don’t have to attracted to a woman to be in a healthy relationship with her. being attracted to men or thinking he looks handsome does not contribute to being gay. what are the reasons you love your partner? all those reasons can be found in the opposite sex. Frank, your body and your partner’s body was designed the same way, you may not have the same personality, but you have the same components that make you botha man. and what happens when two pieces of the puzzle are the same? they don’t fit. you can try to glue it together all you want, but it will always be less than perfect. Nature has made man to complement woman in everyway including sexuality. am i telling you that being attracted to women should be easy? no. am i telling you that you must quickly opt out of your relationship” no. i am telling you to think about it. why? because when something just doesn’t make sense, even if you want it to be right, it cannot. you were not designed to be with men. if you were, you would see it. proof will be there. being gay is not a disease, it’s not a choice, its something that happened to you that you just naturally acted on. i am attracted to men, it doesn’t mean i should go around sleeping with them. you’re attracted to men or women, it doesn’t eman you should go around sleeping with them. with all that being said, Frank, you are not going to hell. God is an understanding God. You’re not compelled or you don’t accept, i can’t blame you nor do i want to judge you. i widsh the best for you and your partner and can only encourage you to do good, treat others with respect and cause no harm to anyone. i agree with you, many christians are hateful, but God is not. God sees the heart. when you are ready, jsut form a relationship with God himself. seek to know him for you. and even if you dont believe in God, ask him to prove himself to you. he hasn’t let me down, he wont let you down. Afterall you were created by someone; a Creator and only him knows the the plans he has for you.

              • Frank Lozera

                Musicacre, to suggest that this boy’s problems stemmed from his homosexuality is not just ridiculous but cruel. No reputable mental health professional would accept that idea for an instant.

                But think for a moment about all the things that MIGHT have led to such behavior. The CDC has identified school bullying, homophobia, and social stigmatization as major factors contributing to the higher incidence of suicide, substance abuse, and high-risk sexual behavior among young gay men.

                I honestly believe that, if I had read what is in this blog when I was a teenager, I might have felt like shooting myself.

                Think about your own responsibility for this youth’s death every time you calumny homosexuals. I am well aware of these tragedies and I understand their causes. That is why I am here talking to YOU.

                This is PRECISELY why the SPLC tracks hate groups, and it is why hate groups are harmful. These groups are of course free to spout all the hate they want to, but in doing so, they do real damage to people’s lives.

                Instead of judging this poor unfortunate boy, could you try imagining the grief that his parents must have felt, and their love for him?

          • Kathy

            Oh, be careful, Mr. Lozera, an “inner-city ghetto?” The SPLC will be investigating you as a hater!

            • Frank Lozera

              What? Inner-city ghettos do not exist?

              • Kathy

                Oh, and especially when you refer to “hanging out with a better class of people.” You are skating on thin ice. The thought police found at SPLC will be ringin your doorbell!!!

                • Guy Est

                  Yes, he’s well on his way to being in trouble with the SPLC and the FBI.

              • Guy Est
                • Frank Lozera

                  Guy, we both know that HIV/AIDS is a big problem in the gay community. However, 81% of men who have sex with men are NOT HIV-positive, and the CDC reports that there have been NO reported cases of HIV infection among women who have sex with women. Also, many homosexual men do NOT have sex with men. So the total proportion of homosexuals who are HIV-positive, though still much too high, is probably considerably lower than 10%.

                  So let’s stop equating homosexuality with disease. Let’s focus on helping all persons who have HIV/AIDS, whether they are gay or straight, and let’s cooperate to discourage high-risk behaviors. And let’s stop demonizing homosexuals. Can we agree to that?

          • cestusdei

            No, they can put a good face on it…for awhile. Sin never makes you joyful. It can give you temporary pleasure, but eventually it catches up with you.

      • Frank Lozera

        Thank you, Joe. At last, a voice of sanity in this hate-fest. I, too, reject the author’s premise with absolute certainty. I am gay, and I have many wonderful friends who are gay. The things that are being said about us on this blog are simply libelous. If the Church had any remaining conscience, it would put a stop to these slanders and begin a program of education. But we won’t see any such measures until virtually every other religious group, except perhaps the Southern Baptist Convention, has abandoned these anti-gay campaigns.

        • A Catholic

          I’m pretty sure you and your group would love to censor us, wouldn’t you? Unfortunately for you, there is STILL freedom of speech in this country. As for the Catholic Church, I’m pretty sure you know nothing of it: it says HATE THE SIN, but LOVE THE SINNERS. We love you Frank, but we have to tell you in all honesty, whatever you are doing is very wrong.

          • Frank Lozera

            Praise the Lord! And blessed be His name! I can just FEEL the love pouring over me!

            One of your fellow Catholics (Letitia), just finished telling me that I faced eternal punishment. Presumably burning forever in Hell.

            If that’s love, I’d prefer hate, please.

            • cestusdei

              I am sure you do prefer hate. You show it a lot for us. Your hatred comes across very clearly.

              • patricia m.

                It’s a sado/maso thing, he hates us and he wants us to hate him as well. He’s trying to provoke us into saying “Frank, I hate you because you’re gay”. He hasn’t heard that yet in this forum, that’s why he’s so angry and try on and on to say bad things about us and our religion.

                • cestusdei

                  The Left is always looking for hate, even as they hate others.

            • msmischief

              In which case you probably want to avoid the Church entirely. It was, after all, founded by a guy who was always talking about Hell and how it would have wailing and gnashing of teeth.

              And those He targeted the most were those who insisted that they knew that they were good people.

      • http://twitter.com/pdmcguirelaw Paul McGuire

        Thank You. As with anything, there are unfulfilled people who are engaging in frequent sex with multiple partners both gay and straight. There are also people who find the right partner of the same sex who they can commit to and be monogamous with. In my case, I feel very fulfilled with my boyfriend as opposed to other empty sexual experiences and I believe truly that God meant for us to be together.

    • http://www.facebook.com/sennis1 Suzanne Ennis

      Yes, and the death of the soul should always be an even greater imperative than physical health or even death, as Our Lord showed in His Great Sacrifice for our salvation.

      • Frank Lozera

        A bloody human sacrifice? Yuk! I hear the Aztecs did that too.

        • cestusdei

          They had a parody of sacrifice where they murdered others. Jesus sacrificed himself, a noble act. You can’t tell the difference because you can’t tell the difference between love and lust.

          • bintalshamsa

            Actually, you’re wrong. It’s been shown that many of those sacrificed went willingly. Does that make it okay or even honorable or noble?

    • Frank Lozera

      Careful, Mr. Schaeffer. Your links show that you have premised your entire article on information from two organizations that the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has classified as “hate groups.” One of them is the Family Research Institute (FRI), and the other is the Family Research Council (FRC).

      The SPLC has identified 10 anti-gay myths that organizations like the FRI propagate. One of them is that “LGBT people don’t live nearly as long as heterosexuals.” This myth can be traced back to the discredited research of Paul Cameron, who headed the FRI. Cameron was kicked out of the APA for falsifying data. Even the conservative American Enterprise Institute called Cameron’s methods “just ridiculous.”

      The Southern Poverty Law Center defines hate groups as those that “… have beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people, typically for their immutable characteristics.” If you look at the title of the FRC article that you linked to, you’ll see why FRC has been classified as a hate group.

      You should probably withdraw this article, because it could implicate Crisis Magazine.

      • BlueMoonOdom

        Anyone using the SPLC as an authority immediately discredits his/her claim. Mr. Schaeffer makes a bold argument and the likes of Frank Lozero can only resort to inchoate name calling. The allegiance to the SPLC suggests more about Frank Lozero’s agenda than any alleged inappropriate attributions in the article.

        • Frank Lozera

          BMO, for your information, the FBI works closely with SPLC to monitor hate groups. The kinds of activities that the Family Research Council and the Family Research Institute engage in are properly described as “hate-mongering” because they intentionally slander entire groups of people, just as the Church used to slander Jews.

          Here is what your Catholic Catechism says about falsehood and slander:

          “2464 The eighth commandment forbids misrepresenting the truth in our relations with others. This moral prescription flows from the vocation of the holy people to bear witness to their God who is the truth and wills the truth. Offenses against the truth express by word or deed a refusal to commit oneself to moral uprightness: they are fundamental infidelities to God and, in this sense, they undermine the foundations of the covenant.”

          I want to impress upon you that the two organizations Mr. Schaeffer has linked to, and from which he took information for the very premises of his article, know full well that they are slandering homosexuals with these falsehoods, and they have done nothing to repair the moral damage. Your Catechism also states:

          “The calumniator must try, not only to repair the harm done to another’s good name, but also to make up for any foreseen temporal loss that resulted from the calumny, for example, loss of employment or customers.”

          • BlueMoonOdom

            Mr. Lozera, the SPLC is notorious for it’s witch hunts. SPLC’s agenda is to silence groups and individuals who exercise free speech rights in ways that don’t line up with it’s own leftist ideology. Your affinity for this fraudulent organization categorically discredits your point. I’m quite familiar with the Family Research Council and knew it’s deceased founder well. This is an honorable group which was founded to counter the leftist ideology you hold so dear. Stop slandering them.

            Also, since you apparently don’t consider the Catholic Catechism to be “your” own what exactly is your purpose for participating in this forum?

            • Frank Lozera

              BMO, I’m sure that those organizations listed as “hate groups” by the SPLC would like you and everyone else to believe they have been victimized. The SPLC respects free speech, but hate speech sometimes has a tendency to tip over into violent action, and so the FBI watches it, as they should.

              I am not slandering the FRC. I am speaking the truth. Both the FRC and the FRI are in the business of lying about gays.

              My purpose in participating in this forum is to remind you of your moral duty, because apparently your Church’s leaders are not doing so. I may not agree with the Catechism about everything, but I believe it is very eloquent and justified in its teachings about spreading falsehoods.

              • msmischief

                Physician, heal yourself. Stop defending a group that has incited violence and terrorism and stop attacking a group that has not done so, and indeed, was the victim of the SPLC-inspired violence.

                Until you stop that, calling on other people to stop spreading lies is ludicrous.

                • Frank Lozera

                  Aptly named “msmischief,” do tell me how the SPLC has “incited violence and terrorism.” Do you actually think that anything that you think and say is true just because you think and say it?

                  • Kathy

                    And do you, too, Frank?

                    • Frank Lozera

                      No, Kathy, and that is why there are objective standards of truth. When you make a claim, at least make some effort to support it with evidence. This blog is in an evidence-free zone. What evidence do you have for the claims that you endorse?

                      • Kathy

                        I can tell you with certainty that it isn’t the World Health Organization and the SPLC. I used to contribute money to the SPLC when they first got started years ago. Life has helped me come to my senses.

                  • Guy Est

                    Doesn’t the name of homosexual and attempted mass murderer Floyd Corkins mean anything to you? The SPLC enabled and incited him to attack the FRC. It was only the diligence of FRC’s armed security guard who prevented a Sandy Hook-style massacre.

              • BlueMoonOdom

                Frank Lozera, It’s very courteous of you to “remind” me of my moral duty. However, I suggest you take the splinter out of your own eye before trying to take any out of mine. You appear to have acknowledged here somewhere that you are living an active homosexual lifestyle. As such your life is severely disordered. Sodomy and other related homosexual behaviors are grave sins and you are likely to die painfully and prematurely. Go to confession and change your life. Your soul is at stake. With prayer, sacrifice, and God’s grace anyone can overcome his/her faults and transgressions. Start today.

                • Frank Lozera

                  BMO, I think I’ll go with the American Psychological Association on whether or not I’m disordered. And the American Medical Association. And the World Health Organization.

                  You don’t ask Muslims to approve of your “lifestyle,” and I don’t ask Catholics to approve of mine.

                  Just imagine your reaction if a Muslim said to you anything like what you just said to me.

                  TG I’m not a Catholic.

                  • BlueMoonOdom

                    Homosexual acts lead to:

                    depression

                    suicide

                    immune system breakdown

                    diabetes

                    gay bowel syndrome

                    • Frank Lozera

                      BMO, homophobia leads to:

                      Bullying

                      Depression

                      Suicide

                      High-risk behavior

                      Low self-esteem

                      Stigmatization

                      Scapegoating

                      Bearing False Witness

                      The disgrace of institutions that propagate it.

                      • BlueMoonOdom

                        Frank Lozera, I forgot that homosexuals ALWAYS blame others for their problems. My bad. This is a website that self identifies as orthodox Catholic. This means that the the Deposit of Faith, resting upon the twin immutable pillars of Scripture and Tradition, reflects the perfect mind and will of God. The traditional teaching of the Church has always been to love the sinner and hate the sin. In the eyes of the Church sodomy is a sin to be hated while the homosexual is a damaged person to be loved. Thus, chastity is absolute for homosexuals (not to mention all of us depending upon our state in life). If you don’t like it too bad. That’s what it means to be a homosexual in the Catholic Church. Stop living a self loathing high risk lifestyle. God loves you and will give you the strength you need……….if you ask Him..

                      • Frank Lozera

                        BMO, you and your Church ARE to blame for much of the suffering of homosexuals. There can be no doubt about that. Homosexuals are still, in spite of all the progress that we’ve made, severely stigmatized in this country, and this very blog is proof of that. The vitriol here stinks to the heavens. The CDC, which several of you have quoted to bolster your own arguments, lays the blame for many of the endemic problems of the homosexual community, including youth suicides, squarely at the door of those who stigmatize gays and lesbians.

                        You are not absolved from blame until first you stop slandering homosexuals, and then you repent for having done so. Slander is against Catholic teaching.

                        Claiming, as you do, that homosexuals are “damaged” only serves to damage young gays—and the not-so-young. I would only hope that no gay youth would ever read the words you have written. The formula, “Love the sinner, hate the sin,” is toxic and corrosive to anyone who has experienced the wonders of love and knows that it is not “sin.” You are teaching young people to despise everything that is best about them—their ability to love and to form intimate attachments, and it would be better if you had a millstone hung around your neck.

                      • BlueMoonOdom

                        Frank Lozera, Stop doing disgusting things. Actions always have consequences. Which of the following have you acquired yet?

                        AIDS
                        gay bowel syndrome
                        gonorrhea

                      • Frank Lozera

                        BMO. When did you stop beating your wife?

                        I am, and always have been, disease-free. What will it take to uncouple the idea of homosexuality from the idea of disease in your mind? According to the CDC, 81% of men who have sex with men are HIV-negative. I am in that 81%, and so is my partner. The CDC has found NO reported cases of HIV transmission among women who have sex with women.

                        Will that do it?

                      • BlueMoonOdom

                        Frank Lozera, I forgot that homosexuals ALWAYS blame others for their problems. My bad. This is a website that self identifies as orthodox Catholic. This means that the the Deposit of Faith, resting upon the twin immutable pillars of Scripture and Tradition, reflects the perfect mind and will of God. The traditional teaching of the Church has always been to love the sinner and hate the sin. In the eyes of the Church sodomy is a sin to be hated while the homosexual is a damaged person to be loved. Thus, chastity is absolute for homosexuals (not to mention all of us depending upon our state in life). If you don’t like it too bad. That’s what it means to be a homosexual in the Catholic Church. Stop living a self loathing high risk lifestyle. God loves you and will give you the strength you need……….if you ask Him..

                      • cestusdei

                        There is no such thing as “homophobia.” It is made up to silence others. Silence=death you know. Gays bully Christians all the time.

                      • Frank Lozera

                        Oh yeah, right, Cestusdei. The SPLC lists about 40 or 50 anti-gay hate groups, about half of which have “Christian” in their names. There are no—I repeat “no”—anti-Christian hate groups on their lists, and there are no LGBT organizations classified as hate groups.

                        So, rather than accept that piece of evidence, you will simply claim that the SPLC has sold out to the gay lobby. Yeah. I’ve heard that a few times.

                      • cestusdei

                        The SPLC targeted Focus on the Family. A homosexual just was sentenced for a terrorist act against Focus on the Family. Didn’t hear much in the news about that did you?

                  • msmischief

                    Frank, please try to be at least consistent. Your comments here have been nothing but the demand that Catholics approve of your “lifestyle.”

                    • patricia m.

                      Like they are demanding now that the Boy Scouts change the rules to approve of their “lifestyle”. It’s amazing how pervasive they want to be, how they want to change our children’s minds and hearts to their cause.

                      • Frank Lozera

                        Patricia, we want to protect gay children from social stigmatization, which the CDC has identified as one of the causes of high-risk behaviors, low self-esteem, and suicide among gay youth. We want to ensure that all children feel loved and accepted for who they are, and that they are full members of the society they were born into. Anything less is inhumane and callous.

                      • patricia m.

                        No, you want gay troop leaders preaching your lifestyle to our children. That’s the real thing behind it.

                      • Frank Lozera

                        Patricia, we want you to stop equating homosexuality with pedophilia. We want you to stop assuming that every homosexual wants to molest your children. These assumptions are harmful not just to the gay parents of scouts (parents who want to be scout leaders), but to all the scouts themselves, for it legitimizes discrimination and sends a message to gay youth that there is something wrong with them.

                      • cestusdei

                        Gay men taking young boys camping? What could go wrong?

                      • Bono95

                        Not all homosexuals are pedophiles, but it’s better to be safe than to be sorry.

                      • msmischief

                        Note that this is a bait-and-switch: interest in the Cub Scouts would be pedophilia, but interest in Boy Scouts is overwhelmingly not because they are post-pubscent

                      • patricia m.

                        No, you want gay troop leaders preaching your lifestyle to our children. That’s the real thing behind it.

                    • Frank Lozera

                      Msmischief. You misunderstand me. I am not asking for your approval. I wouldn’t debase myself that way. In fact, I’m not “asking” for anything. My only purpose here is to draw you out and expose you, to be a sounding-board so that your ugly, bigoted, and hateful remarks will reverberate back to you.

                      And I am here to do something that your Church is manifestly failing to do. That is to make you aware of your moral failure in wrongly judging homosexuals as you do. I probably won’t succeed, but at least there will be a record. We are creating a historical document, in case you hadn’t noticed.

                      • msmischief

                        Please try to keep your comments within the bounds of sanity. Yes, you are asking for my approval. Over and over and over and over and over again.

                        Your Pharisical certainty that other people are the sinners is not helping your case.

                  • Bono95

                    I’m guessing that TG stands for “Thank God” here, and while it’s taking God’s name in vain (a violation of the 2nd Commandment), it also implies that, contrary to what you said elsewhere, you DO believe in him. You cannot thank or take in vain the name of someone who doesn’t exist.

                    • Frank Lozera

                      Wrong, Bono95. This is typical of the kinds of unwarranted assumptions you often make. See my earlier comment about “TG.”

                      • Bono95

                        Your earlier comment wasn’t there when I posted. If you don’t want me or other people assuming you meant God, you should have clarified who you really meant at the beginning and not abbreviated. And why Gmot? Why not Gaia, or Geb, or Ganymede, or Gangha? Are you a viking? Or why your neighbor?

          • cestusdei

            Soon enough Christians will be hauled to court for “hate speech” and imprisoned. You will cheer. It has happened before.

            • Frank Lozera

              No, Cestusdei.

              • cestusdei

                Yes, Frank. It has already happened. In Canada and Europe. Just today a boy in Texas made a religious gesture after his track team won an event. They were immediately banned from the state finals. Homosexuals look for Christian businesses, such as florists, and try to hire them to do their “weddings.” They do this in order to sue them or put them out of business. You are the persecutors.

      • msmischief

        The SPLC is a hate group whose designation of “hate groups” was used by a violent extremist as a guide to his murderous attack. You should not have cited it. Your praise could implicate you.

        • Frank Lozera

          The SPLC is a hate group? According to whom?

        • Frank Lozera

          So the SPLC is a hate group because they designate other groups as hate groups? Then maybe you represent a hate group because you have called the SPLC a hate group. Now, if I call you hateful, that will make me hateful, huh? Is that how it works? And if you call SPLC hateful, then that makes you hateful.

          There’s something wrong here somewhere.

          • msmischief

            Point to the violent extremist who used my words to inspire a violent attack on SPLC.

            • Frank Lozera

              But what if someone DOES get overwrought about the SPLC because of something that YOU’VE written. And suppose that person flies to Georgia and sprays the SPLC offices with bullets. Does that make you an “enabler of domestic terrorists?”

      • Guy Est

        SPLC is an enabler of domestic terrorism. They provided the road map for attempted mass murderer Floyd Corkins to attack the FRC. Anyone who supports the SPLC is inciting murder.

        • Frank Lozera

          Yes, and the Catholic Church is also an enabler of domestic terrorism. Its support of pro-life groups has led directly to abortion-clinic murders.

          Let’s get real, Guy. The SPLC is NOT an enabler of domestic terrorism. They work with the FBI. They identify hate groups. They do not enable the crazies who take matters into their own hands.

          • msmischief

            Really? One has admitted to using information from the Catholic Church to select his victims?

    • Leavened bread

      As a type 1 diabetic who had no responsibility whatsoever for his disease I am deeply offended as though I and other type 1′s are some sort of moral weaklings whose gluttonous behavior caused the disease. Nothing could be further from the truth and before you write an article of the sort you should know what you are talking about and clearly distinguish between type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

    • cestusdei

      I have type 2 diabetes. While I disagree that it is caused by eating processed food there are some risk factors that are associated with lifestyle. The big ones are being overweight and insufficient exercise. This is common sense. I was overweight, although not by too much, didn’t exercise frequently, and am older. Also my family does have a history of the disease. I have now lost weight, changed my diet, and I exercise. I am a healthy diabetic and will avoid most of the problems if I say that way. I do share some of the responsibility for becoming a diabetic, but not all of it. I accepted that and made the necessary changes.

      From the Mayo Clinic:

      Researchers don’t fully understand why some people develop type 2
      diabetes and others don’t. It’s clear, however, that certain factors
      increase the risk, including:

      Weight. Being overweight is a primary risk factor
      for type 2 diabetes. The more fatty tissue you have, the more resistant
      your cells become to insulin.

      Fat distribution. If your body stores fat primarily
      in your abdomen, your risk of type 2 diabetes is greater than if your
      body stores fat elsewhere, such as your hips and thighs.

      Inactivity. The less active you are, the greater
      your risk of type 2 diabetes. Physical activity helps you control your
      weight, uses up glucose as energy and makes your cells more sensitive to
      insulin.

      Family history. The risk of type 2 diabetes increases if your parent or sibling has type 2 diabetes.

      Race. Although it’s unclear why, people of certain
      races — including blacks, Hispanics, American Indians and
      Asian-Americans — are more likely to develop type 2 diabetes than whites
      are.

      Age. The risk of type 2 diabetes increases as you
      get older, especially after age 45. That’s probably because people tend
      to exercise less, lose muscle mass and gain weight as they age. But type
      2 diabetes is also increasing dramatically among children, adolescents
      and younger adults.

    • lifeknight

      Well, this article certainly generated discussion! I suppose we should be aware of the opposing voices regarding the unnatural activities of the practicing homosexual. On various conservative blogs there has been an increase in those presenting the “gay” view of just about every topic, but marriage and family are at the top.

      Crisis has obviously been targeted by the agenda-driven homosexual movement. Perhaps instead of our exchange of the “choir” on Crisis, we should ramp up our online responses on the websites/blogs that are promoted as gay friendly? How about hearing from sincerely afflicted Catholics who understand their crosses in the homosexual world and who are fighting the unnatural temptations every day?

      Posting as a prolife woman who has not had the experience of abortion, I recognize the credibility of those who can speak from experience. Perhaps the validity of this evil temptation can be verified by those fighting it and give others the courage to do the same.

      • Frank Lozera

        LifeKnight, I would strongly encourage you to visit gay-friendly sites. Discussion is healthy.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Leticia-Velasquez/1653352466 Leticia Velasquez

      I get it! As a type two diabetic, I am making a concerted effort this summer to eat well, exercise and overcome my disease. I will offer up my efforts on behalf of homosexuals who feel trapped by genetics but are merely, like me, captive to their own bad habits.

      • cestusdei

        That is what I have done and I feel great. I can’t change my genetics, but I can change my behaviors.

      • Joe Schaeffer

        I am the author and I’m grateful for all the comments. This is an especially fantastic response. Thank you Leticia. I was inspired to write the article based on my own battle to overcome poor personal choices with food and lack of exercise. As much as I may have thought I enjoyed eating garbage and leading a sedentary lifestyle, I learned to my eventual dismay that my actions have consequences. It is a challenge to change long-standing bad habits and I still have a long way to go but we are called by God to accept and overcome challenges, not to self-identify with and wallow in the misery that may come with them.

        I tell my (grown adult) friends who regularly eat off the McDonald’s Dollar Menu and the like that they are “food homosexuals.” It’s a bit of a joke but the point is sincere: They are taking something natural and good – food – and perverting it for the sake of convenience, cost and a shallow temporary sensory pleasure. And some of them are quite flamboyant about it!

        Those who oppose unnatural eating habits should be consistent and also oppose unnatural sexual habits. Similarly, those who oppose unnatural sexual habits need to be consistent in their own lives as well and oppose unnatural eating habits.

        The negative consequences of both these false paths are abundantly clear in our broken society today.

    • JediWonk

      This column is an embarrassment. There *is* an apt analogy between male homosexuality and diabetes, but it’s with *type-I* diabetes. As with type-I diabetes, multiple sclerosis, and schizophrenia, male homosexuality is a “big” (more than 1 in 1,000), “old” (been known for millennia), highly reproductive-fitness-impairing condition. There is no way it could be genetic in root causality–it would have selected out of the gene pool long ago. Also, if it were genetic, there would be 100% identical twin concordance, and it’s not even 50%.

      With a genetic cause ruled out, by far the most likely other option is a pathogen.

      REF: http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2013/05/mind-altering-parasites.html

      The larger reference is http://www.isteve.com/infectious_causation_of_disease.pdf

      I am curious if the author recalls choosing to be attracted to females rather than males. I sure don’t. As Lady Gaga sings, I was just “Born That Way”. Born that way and then not altered by some parasite like *toxoplasma gondii*, of course.

      • msmischief

        Actually, most homosexuals are capable of doing their duty in the reproductive arena, if compelled. Witness the casual mention in The Symposium that the men must be forced by law to marry and beget children. (That the women would be forced by their families to marry and bear children no doubt went without saying.)

        Their liberation has mostly consisted of breaking down the cultural evolution that constrained them to reproduce. It will indeed be rooted out, like many other evolutionary dead ends that are modern pathologies.

        • patricia m.

          If scientists don’t find first which gene(s) is(are) turned on/off when the baby is in the mother’s uterus and then find something to correct this.

          • Frank Lozera

            Yes, and by the way, Patricia, I don’t much like left-handed people. Maybe we could find the gene for that, too, and just switch it off.

            Oh, and I have a little list of other features I don’t like:

            Never cared much for green eyes. We’ll eliminate those.

            Stubby fingers. Got to go.

            Pre-mature baldness. Who needs it?

            People with IQs below 100. Yes, let’s get rid of them! So easy!

            Thin lips. Very unattractive. We’ll find the gene for that.

            You know, I think you’re onto something big. We could ALL look like Barbie Dolls if we could just get in there and fiddle with those genes!

            • Alecto

              OK that was funny. But seriously, you have to admit if this elusive gene is ever found, the entire homosexual community is going to become ardently pro-life overnight.

              • cestusdei

                Imagine how many parents would have the test and if the child was going to be gay they would abort him.

                • Frank Lozera

                  Yeah, cestusdei, just imagine how many Catholic parents would start having abortions! That would be such a hoot! And soon there would be almost no priests to say the mass!

                  • Bono95

                    None of the priests at my church are homosexual or pedophiles.

                  • cestusdei

                    Most priests aren’t gay, we have had enough trouble from them and now prohibit homosexuals from being ordained. We want healthy normal men to be priests.

                • Frank Lozera

                  BTW, does no one notice the Crisis article advertised at the bottom of this page? It is called “The Return of Eugenics,” by Tony Esolen. Wouldn’t it be a supreme irony if Catholics started tinkering with their genetic code to eliminate any possibility of a homosexual baby? You could lead the way in the “return of eugenics.”

                  BTW, your fantasies of aborting gay children and of eradicating genes are a smoking gun. You’ve all been saying that you “love the sinner but hate the sin.” It looks like that wasn’t true after all.

                  • cestusdei

                    It wouldn’t be Catholics doing the aborting, but your straight liberal friends (who would never tell you about it).

                • Bono95

                  Only if they’re weak in their faith (small “if”) and only if a gay gene is ever found (HUGE “IF”)

                • patricia m.

                  I beg to differ. Homosexuality is not in the genes, but it’s epigenetic as recent studies have found. Something during pregnancy turns some genes on/off, and then the baby is born gay. But s/he wasn’t *conceived* gay. So, perhaps there will be no need of abortion, even for pro-choice people: maybe there will be a medicine, or something like the RH factor negative vaccine that the pregnant women take.

                  Supposing (just supposing) the only way to avert that is to abort the child then of course I am strongly against it.

              • Frank Lozera

                Won’t that be funny, Alecto! Catholics will become pro-choice, too! And the ranks of the priesthood will drop precipitously.

            • cestusdei

              So if pedophilia is genetic you don’t think it is wrong?

              • Frank Lozera

                Cestusdei, homosexuality is not wrong for any reason. Some sexual acts practiced by both heterosexuals and homosexuals are wrong. Let’s focus on behaviors and not on orientations.

                • cestusdei

                  But if they are born that way…is your argument. Yet, now it is not? Switch and bait. Homosexuals often claim their orientation is genetic and should therefore be accepted as normal. Suddenly you shift focus! But we both know the connection between the two “orientations.” Right now homosexuals deny it in order to win the propaganda war, but we see that they are the ones who want to lower the age of consent once they have the power to do so.

                • Bono95

                  Just what sexual acts are wrong, and why are they wrong?

          • msmischief

            Evolution in super-speed.

        • Frank Lozera

          Msmischief, let me get this straight. You actually believe that humans are just baby-making machines and that they should be “compelled” to have sex and beget children? But surely you are advocating forcible rape!

          This is appalling beyond words. Will ANY Catholic reading your words voice an objection? Mr. Schaeffer! What do you think of this? Bono95! What do you think about forcible rape? And Musicacre! Alecto! Cestusdei!

          • msmischief

            Frank, if you can’t handle facts, you should go lie down until you feel better. That most cultures have forced homosexuals, as a duty, to have children is a fact. That your acts to break this process down will root it out is also a fact, obvious to anyone with the most casual knowledge of evolution.

        • Frank Lozera

          Msmischief, let me get this straight. You actually believe that humans are just baby-making machines and that they should be “compelled” to have sex and beget children? But surely you are advocating forcible rape!

          This is appalling beyond words. Will ANY Catholic reading your words voice an objection? Mr. Schaeffer! What do you think of this? Bono95! What do you think about forcible rape? And Musicacre! Alecto! Cestusdei!

        • JediWonk

          Yes, I have spoken to a number of gays who have been waylaid by females and they were uniformly *stunned* by how much more libidinous females can be than any male can conceive of being himself. From their descriptions of those experiences, it’s obvious that they got the job done for those ladies. Having been caught in random avalanches of female lust myself, I could relate. However, very unlike myself, my gay associates took pains not to let those ladies have a second shot at them.

          Note that you are making my point, not disputing it. If homosexual males must be *forced* to have heterosexual relations, that is more than enough of a reproductive impediment to push any genetic cause out of the gene pool in the time since Plato wrote THE SYMPOSIUM (380 B.C. or so). Consider the selection pressure it takes to keep sickle-cell trait in the sub-Saharan African gene pool (falciparum malaria).

          I agree that male homosexuality will be rooted out, but it will be by the same medical science that roots out type-I diabetes, multiple sclerosis, atherosclerosis, and even Alzheimer’s. Meanwhile, 2,000 I.U.s of vitamin D per day from infancy cut Finland’s rate of type-I diabetes by 88%. I wish the Finns would study their rate of male homosexuality…

    • MMC

      Oops, forgot something:+) I remember reading the countless stats by the CDC on MSM or “men having sex with men”. It was horrifying. Psychology and sociology back that up too with their studies…but you never hear a word about it. A young man with SSA (same sex attraction) has a 30% of either HIV or death by the time he is 30 years old if he begins acting out at age 18. Men who profess to be in stable “relationships” have a zero percent faithfulness rating after five years. All can be found in published studies. Numbers do not lie.

      To read more Google Rick Fitzgibbons and same sex attraction. All sources for the studies are found there.

      God love all people. Love is not a feeling or sexual attraction. Love is found in the will. Love wills the good of the other per St Thomas Aquinas. The good is defined as living according to one’s nature. And natural law and thus goodness states that we are meant to procreate. Yes, it is sad when a husband and wife are infertile. It is a tragedy and not the norm. But it is God’s way of making sure those children who need adoption find a mom and dad.

      This country has lost the true meaning of love. Love protects. Love is based on truth. Love is sacrificial. Love wills the good for the beloved. Love is patient and kind. Love alone endures. May all those who suffer with SSA know the true definition of love. Seek chastity. Seek healing. Seek the true love of your life: Christ. And find out the amazing life He has planned for you before the foundation of the world.

      God bless and love to you all~

    • Pingback: Fri. Update on Marriage & Same-Sex Attraction | Big Pulpit

    • Noelle

      Could you please specify that this is type 2 diabetes you’re talking about? The whole dating with diabetes reference is really hurtful to those of us whose loved ones are type 1 and carry that burden. Especially because it’s genetically passed.

      • Noelle

        I just read through the Dating with Diabetes article you linked to… you realized this is aimed primarily at type 1s? That’s actually extremely ignorant (completely against your point) and hurtful.

    • BlueMoonOdom

      There are clearly trolls here whose only objective is to promote the homosexual agenda. These people have no regard for honest discourse nor do they have any honor or regard for the Mystical Body of Christ. Editors of this site should seriously consider blocking these trolls.

      • Crisiseditor

        I agree. Mr. Lozera has had his say and is now repeating himself. I think Catholics should have an opportunity to develop their debating skills with opponents who can raise the kind of objections they will encounter in daily life. We can’t effectively transform the culture if we are unprepared. There does come a point, however, when the disadvantages outweigh the benefits. Furthermore, Mr. Lozera is not a Christian. If there is to be any benefit to dialogue on this issue (beyond debate training), there needs to be some common ground. There does not seem to be any in this case.

    • http://twitter.com/pdmcguirelaw Paul McGuire

      The “dangers of homosexuality” exist but not as inherently as the author would have you believe. All those sexually transmitted diseases listed can be transferred through any sexual contact without proper protection whether with someone of the same sex or the opposite sex. All sexually active people who have more than one partner should frequently get tested so that they know when they get something.

      Gay men who engage in sex with multiple partners but use proper protection through condoms and lube are not likely to get any of those. Many gay men use protection until they find a partner they can commit to and then once both are tested and free from those diseases, they can engage in unprotected sexual activity without any higher risk than any straight married couple who doesn’t use condoms. If someone chooses to be risky and not use protection, the risk is not caused by the sex in itself but the absence of proper protection.

      The majority of these are caused by bacteria or viruses that have to be transmitted from someone else. If two men are monogamous and committed to each other, these don’t just appear out of thin air. Sure some gay men don’t practice safe sex and many aren’t monogamous but that doesn’t mean that gay sex is inherently dangerous in all cases.

      • BlueMoonOdom

        Paul McGuire, Even “monogomous” homosexual relationships involve significantly higher risk for disease than the general population is prone to. Unnatural acts lead to the body responding with a breakdown. The author of this article cites an article which includes the following excerpt:

        In Male and Female Homosexuality, M. Saghir and E. Robins found that the average male homosexual live-in relationship lasts between two and three years.[14]

        Unhealthy Aspects of “Monogamous” Homosexual Relationships. Even those homosexual relationships that are loosely termed “monogamous” do not necessarily result in healthier behavior.

        The journal AIDS
        reported that men involved in relationships engaged in anal intercourse
        and oral-anal intercourse with greater frequency than those without a
        steady partner.[15] Anal intercourse has been linked to a host of bacterial and parasitical sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS.

        The exclusivity of the
        relationship did not diminish the incidence of unhealthy sexual acts,
        which are commonplace among homosexuals. An English study published in
        the same issue of the journal AIDS concurred, finding that most “unsafe” sex acts among homosexuals occur in steady relationships.[16]

        • http://twitter.com/pdmcguirelaw Paul McGuire

          Again, how do those diseases come about if neither has it when they begin the relationship? Specifically, if neither man has HIV/AIDS (or any of the other diseases) then how does it occur in them anyway? Consider for example two young gay men who pair off before either one has engaged in large amounts of promiscuous sex. Neither catches anything before they start dating and then they stay together long term. In that case, how would they get those diseases? I thought basic biology says that you can not transmit to someone that which is not present in you to start with.

          • BlueMoonOdom

            So, you believe most homosexual relationships are typically marked by each partner’s virginity? Um, okay! Also, how likely is it that homosexuals stay monogomous? Sodomy, besides the high likelihood of passing on communicable diseases, leads to immune breakdown, gay bowel syndrome, depression, suicide, etc.. It’s an unnatural, unhealthy lifestyle.

            • http://twitter.com/pdmcguirelaw Paul McGuire

              My point is that a lot of the serial hookups we read about are caused more by insecurities that come about when someone is told for their entire life that their sexual attractions are unnatural. You might stop to think about how many of those risks are caused more by religious groups constantly saying how unnatural gay men are as opposed to inherent risks in the activity itself. My boyfriend and I are both more mature and comfortable with ourselves so we recognize the importance of monogamy over casual hookups. I think over time you will see more monogamy and less hookups.

              • BlueMoonOdom

                My point is that if homosexual relationships are dependent upon politically correct acceptance as you suggest then they fail the legitimacy smell test. IOW just because your lifestyle has appeared to gain popularity and political/legal viability that doesn’t in and of itself legitimize it. In China it;s “legal” to kill female babies–doesn’t make it right.

                There is much research which indicates that homosexual males failed to form an adequate bond with their father during a critical period during their adolescent formation. They turn to other males to fill that void.

    • Nvalid

      To balance out the trolling, it would be best to restate what has been said by many others.
      Thank you for re-posting this article, Mr. Schaeffer. The connection between these two ailments, struggles, or what-have-you is extremely interesting and restates much of Catholic teaching on the importance of self-control and self-care.
      It is a fine piece of writing, and, while some may wish that you emphasized the comparison between lifestyles a bit more, it presents a unique connection in our culture few would try to voice.
      Thank you again! May the lord bless you and keep you!

    • MMC

      Just an FYI about what the CDC says about MSM (men having sex with men):

      CDC Facts and Statistics

      Gay and bisexual adolescent males and men — are referred to in CDC surveillance systems as Men who have Sex with Men (MSM)2.

      MSM accounted for 71% of all HIV infections among male adults and adolescents in 20051.

      MSM is the only risk group in the U.S. in which new HIV infections are increasing.
      While new infections have declined among both heterosexuals and
      injection drug users, the annual number of new HIV infections among MSM
      has been steadily increasing since the early 1990s2.

      MSM account for more than half of all new HIV infections in the U.S. each year (53%, or an estimated 28,700 infections2)

      7.2%of young (aged 15-22 years) MSM had HIV/AIDS3.

      21% of White and 46% African American MSM had HIV/AIDS1.

      The rate of new HIV diagnoses among MSM in the U.S. is more than 44 times that of other men (range: 522–989 per 100,000 MSM vs. 12 per 100,000 other men)4. The CDC estimates that MSM account for just 2 percent of the U.S. population aged 13 and older4.

      …..“While the heavy toll of HIV and syphilis among gay and bisexual men has been long recognized, this analysis shows just how stark the health disparities are between this and other populations,” said Kevin Fenton, M.D., director of CDC’s National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention4.”

      March 2010 – CDC Analysis Provides New Look at Disproportionate Impact of HIV and Syphilis Among U.S. Gay and Bisexual Men.

      July 2012 – The U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) issued a fact sheet showing
      that the only group in the U.S. in which HIV infection rates are
      dramatically rising is in the population of men who have sex with men,
      even though homosexual sex is legal in the U.S. and is increasingly
      being “destigmatized.”

      And all of this is preventable with chastity. Objective truth is that each and every one of us is designed for procreation…for each man has sperm…each woman a womb and ovaries. Biology, reality, natural law, objective truth, numbers/stats and almighty God do not lie. People with SSA are not “other” they are broken…just like the rest of us…in their own way. The answer is in self mastery, wholeness, true freedom, and transforming into who God created us to be…not in who we think we are.

      The love of our life is not another man or woman…the love of our life is the God of love Himself: Jesus Christ. Only He can fill that endless hole of love we have. There is nothing shameful about having SSA…like all brokeness in this world, what counts is what you do with it. It’s God’s way of making us seek and rely and fall in love with Him. The gem found in all brokeness.

      If you have SSA, don’t believe the lies told you that “it’ll get better”. It won’t. PPH only leads to disorder, disease and death. It is not “who you are”. For who you are is made in the image and likeness of God…an immortal spirit within a material body…a person who God wants as His own child. You are loved. Authentically loved…for true love abides in truth. Here is some help if you need it:

      http://dsm.us.churchinsight.com/Groups/1000040169/Desert_Stream_Ministries/Who_We_Are/Introduction/Introduction.aspx

      God bless you always~

    • Adam__Baum

      First, it’s opprobrium, then an oddity, then an option, and some things proceed to another status in society, obligation. That is how contraception was propagated. The next time you see a family with four or more kids in tow, pay attention to everybody else, you’ll see plenty of openly snide expressions-even if the economic pressure doesn’t get you, the social pressure will.

      Homosexual behavior is now an option. Based upon some recent events, especially where grade school girls were pressured into kissing, it may propagate through obligation.

    • Lenoxus

      Another group that today’s PC world will be all over you for critisizing is the left-handers. They are capable of using their right hands but selfishly choose otherwise, because they only care about their own gratification. Using the left hand to hold pencils or telephones results in much suffering for reasons I’m sure I don’t have to specify, and so won’t.

      • Bono95

        I’m a left-hander, but I’ve never beat up any righties over that and nobody’s yelled at me either. The only thing I do with my right hand is use a computer mouse. I could probably print write with my right hand, but it would be hard and would look like my left-hand writing did in kindergarten. The only real suffering I’ve ever experienced from my left-handedness is getting ink or graphite all over my hand when writing or drawing and rubbing over what I just wrote or drew. Spiral notebooks are a pain too, but nothing unbearable. But don’t worry, Lenoxus. If any PC-er gives you a hard time about you being “leftophobic” I will personally sock them (with my left hand, if course).

    • Joe Schaeffer

      I’ve read several of the comments posted by Frank Lozera and friends and feel the need to inform these folks that they’ve got the wrong complaint department. They insist that the sky is pink and inveigh against those who refuse to go along with their view. What they really should do is take a walk outside, shake a fist in the air and lash out at the sky for being in fact blue.

    • Putas

      Eres sendo roto de culo

    • Matt L

      I can appreciate the argument you’re making here, and I nearly even support it! But the central flaw is that sexual desire and appetite for food are utterly different. We can survive wholly without sex, but just try doing that with food! If we wanted to bring it into closer alignment, we would have to offer homosexuals something to eat, so to speak, to prevent them from starving. Assumedly, this side, “healthy” course would be heterosexual sex (within the confines of a sacred marriage, naturally).

      The problem here is that there’s an assumption that homosexuals, along with these desires that even the Catechism admits many of them did not choose, also have an appetite for “regular” food. And that’s where everything falls apart. Look, I’ve witnessed very devout individuals with homosexual tendencies who thus far are “fighting the good fight” and remaining celibate–but it’s not as though they also have on the other side this great option of just entering a relationship with someone of the opposite sex and eventually becoming married. To be clear, the two people I have in mind, whether through genes, life, or both, simply don’t have this attraction to the opposite sex that so many people below believe is codified in (and supports) natural law.

      Like I said, sex isn’t mandatory. They don’t have to eat. But these individuals, devout folks whom I very much respect (I have a feeling it sounds as though I’m making them up–I assure you I am not but obviously I’m not going to list their names here) believe it would violate their fundamental nature, much more deeply than lying, to enter into a relationship with a woman. I’m still struggling, but based on their lives I’m inclined to believe that nature is not the same for each of us. Just as every man named Bob is not destined to be a construction worker, I believe that not every man is destined to be with a woman. But along identical reasoning, surely not every man who lacks sexual interest in women is designed to be celibate. Why would that make sense? Why would God burden individuals in this way with sexual urges that, insofar as they can understand the world and themselves, seem to have occurred naturally (it’s not as though they desired to be this way as children)–but which are deemed objectively disordered? (On that note, I would advise the author caution in taking liberties with the Catechism–it calls only rape an “objective evil” and calls masturbation and homosexual activity objectively disordered–the article lumps these together entirely misleadingly).

      This has been long-winded. But I do want to engage on this with folks because I’ve tried to understand this for a while and it seems this might be a good place for it, even if my somewhat liberal viewpoint on this is out of place. I’m here to reasonably dialogue; I promise.

    • Jake

      So very true James.

      ‘Homosexuality, which is a form of unnatural sexual behavior, is celebrated as a lifestyle’
      … a pleasant untruth that is accepted uncritically
      You would be hounded by the usual suspects for committing the secular sin of speaking the truth.
      J

    • Orangeman

      Could it be homosexuality is brought on by industrialization and toxic foods? This is my cross to bear. Born with it? Possibly–some of my earliest dreams were of being molested by some sort of demon. Born with it? I’m middle aged and I grew up uphill and downhill (NM and West TX) from the world’s first atom bomb blast. Are addictions birthed in infancy?

    • Razvan

      I just came here feeling a bit dizzy, then I found up my blood gaycose was a bit up, so I’d have to stop kissing men if I wanted not to go blind or have some “nerve” damage. Good healthy advice.