Posted on 03/11/2002 3:22:26 AM PST by Lance Romance
Homosexuality is true plague on priesthood
<!CAT-COLM!>
An old debating axiom holds that he who frames the question wins the issue, which is why militant homosexuals and their timorous allies in the politically correct movement are hell-bent on perpetuating the disingenuous notion that the crisis engulfing the Catholic Church has its roots in pedophilia. It does not. It has its roots in homosexuality, and to call it anything else is to insult the intelligence of anyone who's paying attention, especially anyone with access to a dictionary. Five days ago an anonymous priest, well-established in a thriving parish, shared here painful memories of the intimidation he experienced in seminary when he reported aggressive homosexuals to the administration. ``There's a subculture of gay priests and everyone knows it,'' he said. ``The media don't like talking about this because, by and large, they have come down on the side of gay rights, the advancement of the gay agenda.'' The torrent of invective unleashed by that column would be difficult to describe; suffice to say, it was a truth a lot of people did not want to hear. But that backlash was wonderfully balanced by the number of other priests who called to concur, including one who personally experienced such wrath when he challenged the gay agenda from his pulpit. ``Check the Merck Manual,'' he suggested. ``Every nurse and doctor is familiar with it; I have a copy. It defines pedophilia as repetitive sexual activity with pre-pubescent children and usually involves heterosexuals who've had psychological and emotional disorders from youth. ``Look at the ages of the victims we're reading about here, like those `waiters' who were brought to that camp in New Hampshire. They were 13, 14, so we're not talking pedophilia; that's intentionally misnaming it. ``Homosexual molestation is where you seek after kids who've reached puberty, and almost all of these victims we're reading about were adolescents or young teens, so how can you possibly call that pedophilia? Call it what it is.'' This priest, seasoned by assignments to several parishes, also recalls an encounter with a predatory seminarian. ``I was propositioned, too,'' he said, ``though my situation wasn't like the one described in your column. The fellow who came on to me was booted out, so it's not true that no attention was paid to these complaints. In fact, I know of two situations where faculty members were ejected because of this.'' He asked that their names be kept confidential ``because there's an obvious sensitivity to this and I'm not looking to destroy anyone. But a lot of us are angry because we feel our reputations are being destroyed by the unwillingness of the church and the media to correctly identify the problem.'' Indeed, condemning pedophiles requires no courage because it assumes no risk. There is, however, a price to be paid for resisting the gay agenda, which is why we barely heard a word of protest three weeks ago when the state Supreme Judicial Court ruled it's no longer anyone's business, police included, when rest stops, parking lots, public beaches, wooded sites, etc., turn into playgrounds and cruising areas for all the James Porters who pollute the secular world, too. That unconscionable capitulation, which will absolutely endanger kids the same age as the victims we're reading about now, didn't even furrow the brows of media critics misguidedly obsessed with identifying priestly pedophiles while priestly homosexuals run amok with no fear of condemnation, secure in the knowledge that no one dares criticize the love that once dared not speak its name. What's needed here is a little bit of honesty, though you can be sure it will be vehemently assailed as hatred. Isn't it ironic that those who clamor for tolerance have none for anyone else? ``There's a lot of anger among them,'' this priest agreed. ``Remember how they protested the church's teachings a few years ago by throwing condoms at newly ordained priests outside Holy Cross Cathedral? ``There's obviously a lot of immaturity there, too, but most of all it's an anger against authority. No one seems to want to say it, but the only answer to these problems is the Vatican's view that we've got to get this element out of the priesthood.''
by Joe Fitzgerald
Monday, March 11, 2002
<!ENDSUMM!>
If this is true, it is sad.
From all indications, not only is it true, but widespread. Any man who sticks his penis in another man's rectum has NO morals. Any man who does it with children is SICK. Any man who does this while under the veil of religion deserves only the worst of punishments we can think up.
Catholics should be first in line in weeding out these perverts. That's what they are people: PERVERTS.
|
To find all articles tagged or indexed using |
||||
| click here >>> |
SASU™ |
<<< click here | ||
|
Master Bump List |
||||
Something like a third of all active homosexuals have their first sexual experiences as teens or preteens with fully adult homosexuals. Someone posted a gay boast once, that breaking in a teenage boy, regardless of his nominal orientation, is the emotional apex of homosexuality. Yeah, well, we have punishments for that -- and that's what the "gay rights" campaign is all about.
Longitudinal studies on aversion therapy back in the 50's and 60's, before the gay Doberman pack got them shut down, showed that something like 20-25% of homosexual men accepting psychotherapy reported a change in their sexual activity -- if you want the actual numbers, I'll go look them up -- after the course of therapy was complete. That was using the available methods, insights, and resources of the day. There was a larger group that reported no change in their sexual attraction or activity. Which doesn't invalidate the experience of the individuals who changed their orientation.
It then remains to ask, of the 20% or so for whom conversion therapy had some effect, how many of them were really homosexual, and how many were young straight guys who were "broken in", viz., sexually educated, by gay men?
The problem here is that gay men being men, like their heterosexual counterparts, some of them who have big sex drives have the morals of an alley cat and all the restraint of a bitch in heat. Men like that just aren't good sexual pedagogues for either gender, when their principal concern is just to get sex; but you can bet the house they'll be the first ones to show up.
From Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan:
Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness. Chap xlvii. Of the Benefit that proceedeth from such Darkness...
[21] For from the time that the Bishop of Rome had gotten to be acknowledged for bishop universal, by pretense of successsion to St. Peter, their whole hiearchy (or kingdom of darkness) may be compared to the kingdom of fairies (that is, to the old wives' fables in England, concerning ghosts and spirits and the feats they play in the night). And if a man consider the original of this great ecclesiastical dominion, he will easily percieve that the Papacy is no other than the ghost of the deceased Roman empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof. For so did the Papacy start up on a sudden out of the ruins of that heathen empire.
[23] The fairies, in what nation soever they converse, have but one universal king, which some poets of ours call King Oberon; but the Scripture calls Beelzebub, prince of demons. The ecclesiastics likewise, in whose dominions soever they be found, acknowledge but one universal king, the Pope.
Isn't it ironic that the same people that want to ban guns to protect the children- have no qualms about exposing childern to homosexual pedophiles!
I really hope the Vatican is serious about this. Even leaving aside the horrible impact of these priests' sexual pursuit of boys and teenagers, having a church where the gay subculture is so clearly installed and in charge is very upsetting. I've gotten so tired of hearing the lisp from the altar, wherever I go.
Several weeks ago, there was a Spanish priest who announced in a gay magazine in Spain that he was gay, all the parishioners knew about it (they didn't, of course, until then), and that if the Church didn't like it, tough. His bishop did remove him, of course, and his whereabouts are a secret right now. However, the Spanish (liberal) press ran forward to coo over this guy and say what a wonderful, courageous little boy he was, and how awful of the big bad bishop to suspend him.
Cracking down on these gay clergy and trying to pry the Church out of their hands is long overdue, but the unfortunate thing is that it will probably get little support from the secular world.
That simply isn't the case. There are 2 issues at work here.
1. First, the classification of "hetero," "bi," and "homo" is absurd. The issue is same sex sexual activity. If it's a guy who has sex with other guys, or a woman who has sex with other women, then we've appropriately narrowed our focus as far as we need to. This is the classification used by the Centers for Disease Control. All this stuff about genetic/non-genetic, uncontrollable attraction, etc., is all insignificant. The behavior is the question. Do they or don't they have sex with members of the same sex?
2. Second, it is NOT true that most "pedophiles" are "heterosexuals." Every study I know of says that "men who have sex with men," based on their estimated 2-5% representation in the population, account for a VASTLY greater weighted percentage of pedophilia than do men who have sex exclusively with women. What this means is that if your neighbor is a male who has sex with males, he is 4 or 10 times more likely to hit on your young male child than your male with females only neighbor is likely to hit on your female child.
That is only half right. The homosexual problem in the church is but a symptom of the actual disease. Liberalism!
I believe this to be a true statement. But there is something that must be said about this that has been totally ignored. That is that a 14 or 15 year old has also attained the use of reason and in consenting to go along with this sinful behavior is also sinful. The teen-ager has a mind and will and can say "no." Just like with the use of drugs.
Craig Venter's opening statement contained the bombshell. Since last June, he said:
"[O]ur understanding of the human genome has changed in the most fundamental ways. The small number of genes -- some 30,000 -- supports the notion that we are not hard wired. We now know the notion that one gene leads to one protein, and perhaps one disease, is false.
"One gene leads to many different protein products that can change dramatically once they are produced. We know that some of the regions that are not genes may be some of the keys to the complexity that we see in ourselves. We now know that the environment acting on our biological steps may be as important in making us what we are as our genetic code."
I think they are horny as hell and to deny them the greatest fruits of gods creation (Women) is ridiculous.
I think you are missing the point of the article. Coercing a 14 year old boy into a sexual relationship is not pedophilia in the sense that pedophilia is defined as sex with pre-adolescent children. A 14 Y.O. is not pre-adolescent. In other words, it is pedophilia as legally defined, but not pedophilia as psychiatrically defined. The author is making the point that calling them pedophiles distorts the truth that they aren't pedophiles, but just garden variety homosexuals.
The distinction is important because it rouses anger against a false villain, pedophilia, to allow shielding the real villain, homosexuality.
His further point is that homosexuals are so embedded into the heirarchy of the church that to attack them as unfit to lead in a pastoral setting is to call down on oneself the wrath and censure of the organization as a whole. That is where the battle lies.
Fortunately, real obedience to the Word of God also endowes the follower with great inner courage. I hope that brave priests step forward to expose and purge this abomination. While I am not Catholic, I do have a great deal of respect for them and hope that they can clean out this den of vipers. "And by their works, ye shall know them"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.