The Gay Agenda: Pushing Homosexuality On The Front Page Of The New York Times Web Page On Palm Sunday

The New York Times prominently featured an article about a seventh grade boy "coming out" to his family (and his entire school) on their web page on this Palm Sunday. The article was the most prominent article on the page. It was featured "above the fold" with the picture on the top.

Here's the story (free web subscription may be required) Parenting: Accepting Gay Identity, and Gaining Strength

Here are some quotes:

One month before Zach O’Connor, a seventh grader at Brown Middle School here, came out about being gay, he was in such turmoil that he stood up in homeroom and, in a voice everyone could hear, asked a girl out on a date. It was Valentine’s Day 2003, and Zach was 13.

“I was doing this to survive,” he says. “This is what other guys were doing, getting girlfriends. I should get one, too.”

...

Cindy and Dan O’Connor were very worried about Zach. Though bright, he was doing poorly at school. At home, he would pick fights, slam doors, explode for no reason. They wondered how their two children could be so different; Matt, a year and a half younger, was easygoing and happy. Zach was miserable.

The O’Connors had hunches. Mr. O’Connor is a director of business development for American Express, Ms. O’Connor a senior vice president of a bank, and they have had gay colleagues, gay bosses, classmates who came out after college. From the time Zach was little, they knew he was not a run-of-the-mill boy. His friends were girls or timid boys.

“Zach had no interest in throwing a football,” Mr. O’Connor says. But their real worry was his anger, his unhappiness, his low self-esteem. “He’d say: ‘I’m not smart. I’m not like other kids,’ ” says Ms. O’Connor. The middle-school psychologist started seeing him daily.

The misery Zach caused was minor compared with the misery he felt. He says he knew he was different by kindergarten, but he had no name for it, so he would stay to himself. He tried sports, but, he says, “It didn’t work out well.” He couldn’t remember the rules. In fifth grade, when boys at recess were talking about girls they had crushes on, Zach did not have someone to name.

By sixth grade, he knew what “gay” meant, but didn’t associate it with himself. That year, he says: “I had a crush on one particular eighth-grade boy, a very straight jock. I knew whatever I was feeling I shouldn’t talk about it.” He considered himself a broken version of a human being. “I did think about suicide,” he says.

Then, for reasons he can’t wholly explain beyond pure desperation, a month after his Valentine “date” — “We never actually went out, just walked around school together” — in the midst of math class, he told a female friend. By day’s end it was all over school. The psychologist called him in. “I burst into tears,” he recalls. “I said, ‘Yes, it’s true.’ Every piece of depression came pouring out. It was such a mess.”

That night, when his mother got home from work, she stuck her head in his room to say hi. “I said, ‘Ma, I need to talk to you about something, I’m gay.’ She said, ‘O.K., anything else?’ ‘No, but I just told you I’m gay.’ ‘O.K., that’s fine, we still love you.’ I said, ‘That’s it?’ I was preparing for this really dramatic moment.”

Ms. O’Connor recalls, “He said, ‘Mom, aren’t you going to freak out?’ I said: ‘It’s up to you to decide who to love. I have your father, and you have to figure out what’s best for you.’ He said, ‘Don’t tell Dad.’ ”

“Of course I told him,” Ms. O’Connor says.

“With all our faults,” Mr. O’Connor says, “we’re in this together.”

Having a son come out so young was a lot of work for the parents. They found him a therapist who is gay 20 miles away in New Haven. The therapist helped them find a gay youth group, OutSpoken, a 50-minute drive away in Norwalk.

Dan Woog, a writer and longtime soccer coach at Staples High in Westport, helped found OutSpoken in 1993. He says for the first 10 years, the typical member was 17 to 22 years old. “They’d come in saying: ‘I’m gay. My life is over,’ ” Mr. Woog says. “One literally hyperventilated walking through the door.”

But in recent years, he says, the kids are 14 to 17 and more confident. “They say: ‘Hi, I’m gay. How do I meet people?’ ”

...

For the first 10 years, Mr. Woog never saw a parent; meetings were from 4 to 6 p.m. Sunday, so members could get out of the house without arousing suspicion. Now, he says, parents often bring the child to the first meeting.

Still, seventh grade was not easy. “We heard kids across the street yelling ‘homo’ as he waited for the school bus,” Mr. O’Connor says. Zach says classmates tossed pencils at him and constantly mocked him. “One kid followed me class to class calling me ‘faggot,’ ” he says. “After a month I turned and punched him in the face. He got quiet and walked away. I said, ‘You got beat up by a faggot.’ ”

...

His father took him to a gay-lesbian conference at Central Connecticut State in New Britain, and Zach was thrilled to see so many gay people in one place. His therapist took him to a Gay Bingo Night at St. Paul’s Church on the Green in Norwalk that raises money for AIDS care. Zach became a regular and within a few months was named Miss Congeniality.

“They crowned me with a tiara and sash, and I walked around the room waving,” he recalls. “I was still this shy 14-year-old in braces. I hadn’t reached my socialness yet, and everyone was cheering.

“I was the future. Most of the men were middle-aged or older, and to see this 14-year-old out, they loved it. They were so happy.”

Now, as a 17-year-old 11th grader, Zach has passed through phases that many gay men of previous generations didn’t get to until their 20s, 30s, even 40s. “Eighth grade was kind of his militant time,” Mr. O’Connor says.

“Everything was a rainbow,” says Ms. O’Connor.

These days, Zach is so busy, he rarely has time for the gay-straight club. He’s in several singing and drama groups and is taking an SAT prep course.

“I’ve been out so long, I don’t really need the club as a resource,” he says. “I’m not going to say I’m popular, but I’m friendly with nearly everybody. Sophomore year, my social life skyrocketed.”

In music groups he made male friends for the first time. “They weren’t afraid of me,” he says. “They like me.”

His brother, Matt, says sometimes kids come up to him and ask what it’s like to have a gay brother. “I say it’s normal to me, I don’t think of it anymore.”

As for his parents, they’re happy that Zach’s happy.

“Coming out was the best thing for him,” Ms. O’Connor says. “We ask him, ‘Why didn’t you come out in fifth grade?’ ”

The article featured an mp3 you can listen to here: Zach O'Connor on Coming Out Gay

Not only does this article prove (to me) that the New York Times is cramming an agenda down people's throats, it also indicates (to me) that they aren't as serious as they pretend to be in their opposition to the Iraq war and the policies of the Bush Administration, because if they really cared about that stuff, they wouldn't do puff pieces like this promoting the "normalcy" and need for absolute societal acceptance of anal and/or oral sex between two or more men while the nation is supposedly crumbling because of George W. Bush.

What are people thinking doing this big story about this young kid telling his parents he's "gay"? Why is his sexual confusion at an age too young to declare anything definite about himself headline news? What if he changes his mind about himself later? It seems to me he's locked himself in now, with the help of his parents.

What type of parent runs out and finds a therapist who is "gay" right away when their seventh grader announces he's "gay"? Don't people realize that "gay" therapist is invested in spreading the idea that homosexual tendencies and activity are good?

Homosexuals and those who sympathize with homosexuality will likely accuse me of "homophobia".

My response is that I am not afraid of people with homosexual tendencies, and I certainly don't hate them. Actually, I'm more worried for them than those who have decided that enabling them is the best policy.

The Church teaches that homosexuality is an intrinsically disordered orientation towards a serious and intrinsic moral evil. It is a tendency, more or less strong, depending on the individual, to be physically attracted in a sexual way to persons of the same gender. It is a tendency towards a moral evil, not a gift. It is a temptation, a conflict between desire and duty. One never hears of other intrinsically disordered orientations such as alcoholism, anorexia nervosa, bulimia, or kleptomania, celebrated as gifts; they are rightly understood as harmful disorders. Pro-anorexia websites supporting the right to live an anorexic lifestyle are correctly viewed as profoundly dangerous, even in secular society. However, homosexual activism has made such tremendous strides within the culture that any criticism of the homosexual lifestyle is vilified as hate speech. What a difference! Sadly, this politically correct mindset, under the mantle of buzzwords such as tolerance and diversity, has crept into Catholic circles, with the collusion of homosexually-oriented priests and religious (male and female) and has paved the way for preparing rank and file Catholics to tolerate the homosexual lifestyle as a sign of God’s diverse creation, and ultimately, a gift. A correct understanding of Catholic teaching shows that, as with any other aberrant drive or appetite, homosexuality can only be called a gift in the sense that it is a cross to bear. In living as the Church teaches, utilizing prayer and the sacraments, homosexually-oriented persons can overcome their homosexual temptations and merit abundant graces.

As a lifestyle, homosexuality is statistically unhealthy. As Catholic Answers’ special report on “Gay Marriage” relates:

In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its list of diagnostic disorders. In retrospect, this decision appears to have been inspired by political pressure rather than medical evidence.

Homosexuals of both sexes remain fourteen times more likely to attempt suicide than heterosexuals and 3.5 times more likely to commit suicide successfully. Thirty years ago, this propensity toward suicide was attributed to social rejection, but the numbers have remained largely stable since then despite far greater public acceptance than existed in 1973. Study after study shows that male and female homosexuals have much higher rates of interpersonal maladjustment, depression, conduct disorder, childhood abuse (both sexual and violent), domestic violence, alcohol or drug abuse, anxiety, and dependency on psychiatric care than heterosexuals. Life expectancy of homosexual men was only forty-eight years before the AIDS virus came on the scene, and it is now down to thirty-eight. Only 2 percent of homosexual men live past age sixty-five.

Male homosexuals are prone to cancer (especially anal cancer, which is almost unheard-of in male heterosexuals) and various sexually transmitted diseases, including urethritis, laryngitis, prostatitis, hepatitis A and B, syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, herpes, and genital warts (which are caused by the human papilloma virus, which also causes genital cancers). Lesbians are at lower risk for STDs but at high risk for breast cancer. Homosexuals of both sexes have high rates of drug abuse, including cocaine, marijuana, LSD and other psychedelics, barbiturates, and amyl nitrate.

Male homosexuals are particularly prone to develop sexually transmitted diseases, in part because of the high degree of promiscuity displayed by male homosexuals. One study in San Francisco showed that 43 percent of male homosexuals had had more than 500 sexual partners. Seventy-nine percent of their sexual partners were strangers. Only 3 percent had had fewer than ten sexual partners. The nature of sodomy contributes to the problem among male homosexuals. The rectum is not designed for sex. It is very fragile. Indeed, its fragility and tendency to tear and bleed is one factor making anal sex such an efficient means of transmitting the AIDS and hepatitis viruses.

Lesbians, in contrast, are less promiscuous than male homosexuals but more promiscuous than heterosexual women: One large study found that 42 percent of lesbians had more than ten sexual partners. A substantial percentage of them were strangers. Lesbians share male homosexuals’ propensity for drug abuse, psychiatric disorder, and suicide.

In the face of such evidence, it becomes clear that any pronouncements of tolerance for the homosexual lifestyle or the "gifts" that flow from a homosexual orientation run contrary, not only to Church teaching, but also authentic charity. Homosexuality hurts people. It’s a serious disorder, not a gift. Telling people otherwise isn’t Christian and loving. It’s ignorant, cowardly, and irresponsible. Imagine embracing an alcoholic, drug addict, anorexic, or bulimic and telling them that you accept, respect, and support their lifestyle choice! Imagine telling someone diagnosed with the beginning stages of cancer that you support their decision to continue smoking and continuing their other unhealthy lifestyle choices. Yet this is what progressives ask of Christians in regard to the homosexual lifestyle, ignoring evidence that homosexuality is bodily harmful, and becoming outraged at Christian concern for the immortal souls of persons who actively engage in this spiritually deadly "lifestyle".

If you will not believe me, here is what homosexuals admit about themselves: 'The Gay Report'

I encourage you to read this article: The Truth About the Homosexual Rights Movement. A homosexual man wrote it and he is very honest about what homosexuality actually involves. It isn't graphic or disgusting in its detail. It is an honest, heartfelt life story and it is extremely eye-opening.

Authentic Catholic teaching on these matters is not discrimination against persons with homosexual tendencies. All deliberate sexual acts (whether they are actions done alone or with others) outside of the context of marriage, or which are deliberately closed to the creation of new life (within marriage) are objectively serious matter and to engage in such acts with sufficient reflection and full consent is a mortal sin.

Any sexual act that does not comply with Church teaching is not an act of love. It is an act of masturbation, whether alone, or through the use of another person's body.

This teaching is a struggle for everyone, not just homosexuals, because of our fallen nature and the war of our passions against right reason. We can all pray for deliverance from such temptations, but nobody can reasonably expect that they will forever remain free from any temptation in this area, regardless of the specific nature of the temptation. We are simply called to pray and struggle. Through our struggle we are constantly reminded of our frailty and therefore our total dependence upon God. Such temptations, understood properly, are a means of keeping us close to God, even though they are a cross.

Any thoughts?

Comments

[Winston7000]

God bless you, Ron. But you seem to be protesting too much about your wonderful relationship, and just how awful those of your married male and female friends are in comparison to your wonderful relationship. Oops repeating myself, Ron. But the world does seem to be revolving around you, Ron, and your wonderful 22 year-old realtionship.

No matter how wonderful your relationship appears to be, Ron, if it is not within a blessed marriage with a woman, it is nothing more than cheap, tawdry fornication of the worst kind--that fit for a sewer hole that is substituted for the sanctity and holiness of a man and woman's marriage.

And if you live a life based on that attraction to fleshy sewerage systems and called it a relationship, it is a lie.

The truth, Ron, is that you know it is a lie and so does the guy with you, and so do most persons afflicted with homosexual disorders or gender confusions. And that is why you are angry, power-hungry, deceitful, artificial, and in great need of our love, our prayers, and our patience. Not to mention God's forgiving grace which is with you immediately when you turn to Him.

Do it now. And forgive my bluntness, but sometimes it may save a soul.

[EdmundS]

Sorry Winston, but your post really is just sanctimonious nonsense.

It's one thing to have moral objections to homosexual relationships. It's quite another for you to set yourself up a judging another human being and spotting the mote in his eye. In fact, we are specifically enjoined not to do that.

Forgive my bluntness, but sometimes it may save a soul.

[Winston7000]

It's not so much his eye that I was referring to, Edmund, nor it seems probably yours. I hope that the small jolt of anger my post produced in you has a salubrious effect in that you begin to think of just how degrading homosexual acts are. In the of case Ron, I assume that he is able to reply for himself and doesn't need you.

God bless you, Sir.

[EdmundS]

It's still God's business to judge other people not ours.

By the way, not every reaction need bring with it the hope of sexual thoughts, degrading or otherwise.

[Thomistic]

God will judge souls, but we must judge external actions. We cannot and should not say that another person is definitely in the state of mortal sin or definitely "going to hell", but at the same time, we must never deny that certain actions are objectively serious sins and as an act of charity we must not look the other way when we see others putting themselves in grave danger by their attachment to objectively serious sin (whatever sort of sin that may be).

Pax,

Thomistic

[Winston7000]

"By the way, not every reaction need bring with it the hope of sexual thoughts, degrading or otherwise."

True, but in this case, the discussion is focused on homosexuality (note the third syllable) not agriculture or classical music. If we condemn theft, we condemn the very acts of thieves. It's rather hard to separate the two.

That said, in the case of compulsion, there is a lot in common between sexual addictions and kleptomania--both are profoundly wrong and extremely stubborn--but they can be cured.

If Zach was a kid caught stealing and his parents took him to a permissive theft counselor and then to a den of thieves, I don't think that we would be hailing them as sensitive and caring human beings. In this actual case, it's much, much worse. Homosexual acts are utterly and completely degrading--just like pornography--all are caught up in filth--and are highly contagious.

[EdmundS]

We must judge the external actions of others? Really? What does the invocation not to judge mean? I guess we need to parse that to fit our preconceptions of what it should mean.

I appreciate this is a thread about homosexulity, but that doesn't mean that every thought has to link gatuitiously to sex, unless you're obsessed with sex.

While diapproving homosexual acts, the Church teaches that gays "..must be accepted with respect, compasssion and sensitivity".

Everyone is well aware that the Church disapproves of homosexual acts. But the Church doesn't teach that Catholics hould repeatedly harp on about degregation, filth and contagion and there's no excuse for that kind of self-indulgence other than self-indulgence.

No one is going to be helped with or dissuaded from gay sex by some fanatic going on about how degrading, etc. it is.

Homosexuals "...are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.....Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection."

Inflammatory language is not more appropriate to the condemnation of gay sex than it is for adultery or other sins and is a disserve to people trying to conform with the Church's teachings.

[James]

"No one is going to be helped with or dissuaded from gay sex by some fanatic going on about how degrading, etc. it is."

---

Every homosexual I know knows how degrading it is to be fooling around with the waste and waste chute of other men, or to be taking men's sexual organs down their throats. It is a true thought they seek to avoid thinking about all their lives, but they are, of course, constantly drawn to thinking about such. They know most non-homosexuals think the same (for such is just obvious truth - not, EdmundS, fanaticism), and it bothers them to soul death. Their way of dealing with it is to force society to never tell them the truth. They scream at others, they call them horrible names, they seek laws to silence the truth. They are offended by what God says, and by what they know themselves to be true.

As Ernest Hemingway said many years ago (paraphrasing) - they are so unhappy about their own degradation and compulsion that many turn to the bottle, or to drugs to numb themselves to what they do...

Telling the truth about the degradation of what they do is part and parcel of loving any homosexual. The truth is always an essential component of love; hiding the truth is unlove.

What the vast majority of homosexuals want is not true love (either from God or the other), but [Satanic] affirmation in their degradation, and never having to hear the truth.

James

[James]

Oh, and by the way, EdmundS - we are to condemn all sinful actions and thoughts. That is not the same as judging [or condemning] another's soul (which Christ can and will do).

All Catholics are to be completely condemning of sin - in themselves, and with regard to others. That's what love is - calling people away from unlove and toward the true Christian transformation.

James

[David1]

Jn 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him.

A few things are clear. 1) There is objective sin that has consequences in this life and the life after. 2) Jesus himself didn’t come to condemn, but to invite us to a new way of living “through him, with him and in him.”

With that in mind, we come to the oft told statement of condemning sin but not the sinner. But oh, what a thin line. Jesus said, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her" (Jn 8: 7). I suggest that the dialogue between James and Edmund is not one that God would be delighted with. It seems there were many stones flying all over the place. It was not a healthy dialogue between Christian brothers.

My only purpose in this post is to remind all of us to look deep inside ourselves for the motivation before we hurl stones. All of us have inner motivations that are of ego that are the real enemy. And let us be very, very careful in using the statement “hate sin, love the sinner” as a hidden justification to condemn the sinner for their sin.

[James]

Naming things for what they are is part of true love, David1. We ARE to condemn sin and repent of it. The entire New Testament, written by those who were with Christ or with people who were with Christ or to whom Christ revealed himself (Paul), is FULL of condemnations of sin.

Jesus repeatedly condemned sin. (like: sexual immorality, etc. etc. 'defiles' you!)

Jesus' first command to us is: Repent!

John the Baptist repeatedly condemned sin.

The prophets repeatedly condemend sin.

God flooded the Earth, so depraved humans became.

God blasted away Sodom and Gomorrah, so depraved its men became.

God threw Adam and Eve out of the garden and punished mankind for its pride and untrust.

I have no intention of literally throwing a rock at anyone - which is the situation you bring up (which involved Old Testament wordly punishment for grave sin).

But condemning sin of any sort (and naming it for what it is) is part of what any Catholic or Christian is callled to do.

If we can get someone to repent and come to God by some others means, or in confluence with some others means, great! EdmundS has no apparent intention to call any homosexual away from sin - and does not appear to understand why it is sinful. Now perhaps he does.

But seriously, if you do not believe that we are to condemn sin, we can do Bible quotes at ten paces.

James

[James]

If my son came home one day and told me:

"Gee, Dad, I'm involved in activities involving intimate contact with men's rectums and fecal waste..."

it wouldn't make any difference if such were sexually motivated, or motivated for any other reason.

The first loving thing out of my mouth would be: Stop! That's degraded and filthy and really, really bad for you. We love you, and will help you with whatever is causing you to think such is OK, but you need to stop defiling yourself that way right now.

That's what loving parents do ALL the time when their children become involved in: drugs, alcohol, cutting, Goth, sexual depravity, etc. etc.

Then we could get on to why he was involved and so forth.

Take a look at the Ten Commandments. They say: NO! Don't steal; don't murder; don't covet!!! They don't seek to do a psychoanalysis of why people want to do such. The start out with the condemnation of sin! and they say: NO!

Today, when dealing with homosexuals, people want to deny the degradation of what's going on (unlove), and find some way to 'affirm' homosexuals' doing what they do.

That's Satanic - the complete opposite of God's revelation to us - which is chock full of NOs.

James

[David1]

I was in no way saying that we should stop identifying and fighting sin. Since none of us are yet perfect as the Father is perfect, then all of us have complex motivations for our words and actions. My post was only a call to be aware of our complex motivations.

Our purpose on earth to grow ourselves to perfect sanctification as well as to build up the kingdom of God. If we can discern the hidden actions of ego, then we can progress more rapidly to sanctification.

[Winston7000]

"And let us be very, very careful in using the statement “hate sin, love the sinner” as a hidden justification to condemn the sinner for their sin."

That is fine when it comes to judging the souls and persons of others, whether one or more.

But when a humanly degrading and repulsive sin itself becomes a movement that glorifies its very despicable acts and raises sodomy to near sacramental level, and has apologists on Catholic blogs. and seeks government protection and approval for corrupting children and youth, then I think David, that you, too, are blowing smoke.

I will not judge a person who commits a homosexually sinful act. That is a simple sin or series of sins and belongs between him or her, their confessor and God.

I will, however, condemn that person if she or he makes that act a very virtue and demands that God is blessing their very evil, and requires us all to genuflect before this demon-god that was around for a long time. That, as Christ would say, requires a millstone. And that is exactly what the New York Times and the whole "Zach" story are all about as well as New Ways Ministry in the Church.

As I say James, "Quod erat demonstradum".

You're either trolling or your head is full of anti-gay garbage or both. The makes what you say easy to dismiss or ignore.

The harder and truer battle is to deal with gay issues, not as a wingnut obsessed with anal sex, but in the way the Church actually teaches.

[James]

"The makes what you say easy to dismiss or ignore."

---

Easy, you say, Edmund, but which you seem completely unable to do.

James

[EdmundS]

Sorry I thought I was dismissing you James. Ignoring comes next. LOL.

[Winston7000]

"The harder and truer battle is to deal with gay issues, not as a wingnut obsessed with anal sex, but in the way the Church actually teaches."

And exactly what might those issues be and why would the Church be concerned and teach? No one is arguing against the chaste relationship between two men or two women. It is, dear anonymous person, only when certain largely genital-anal organs of the human body come into play that it becomes an issue. Got it? Or are you still in massive denial about having to give it up? Do so, and you will feel much better.

[EdmundS]

The Church's teaching is summarized in the Catechism:

While disapproving gay parenting or gay sexual activity, the Church also teaches that

...[gays] "...must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided."

Also that "...Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection."

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm

It's one thing to point out the Church's view that gay acts are "acts of grave depravity" and "intrinsically disordered".

But repeated references to degradation, filth and contagion and even sexual organs are not respectful, compassionate and sensitive.

If you are Catholic teen with gay feelings or, for that matter, any person with gay feelings, you are not going to be helped by absurdist language or notions that homosexual acts involve only genital-anal activity, which seems a pet obsesson on this board. A sexually motivated same sex kiss or hand holding is a homosexual act.

So IMHO wise up. Either stick with what the Church teaches or identify what you're saying as purely your own views.

[James]

The majority of male homosexuals engage in rectal sodomy, a great many of them ingest fecal matter during deviant sexual activities, and almost all of them fellate each other and ingest penile discharges.

The truth is the truth, whether you like it or not, Edmund.

Such ARE acts of grave depravity - just like the Church says.

Telling anyone that they're involved in any form of degradation and depravity (and why such is degrading and depraved), and calling them away from it - is love.

James

P.S. We are ALWAYS to speak the truth of anything.

[EdmundS]

"And exactly what might those issues be and why would the Church be concerned and teach?"

Issues like:

- At what point does a non-sexual same sex relationship become a sexual relationship or a potenially sexual relationship?;

- Are there ways of avoiding that?;

- How does a homosexual channel his sexual desires appropriately; does chastity only mean celibacy, etc.?;

- Is it possible for a homosexual to have an authentic heterosexual relationships?;

- What's the basis for the Church's prohibition of homosexual acts and is this like to change.

If you really think that "...only when certain largely genital-anal organs of the human body come into play that it becomes an issue...", you're being naive and/or you must have stayed at the English College in Rome at some point (just kidding).

[James]

Oh good grief, Edmund.

The Church has taught for centuries the answers to questions like:

When does a non-sexual relationship become sexual? (Answer: When ones thoughts turn to lust...)

Are there ways of avoiding that? (Answer: Don't lust. Don't think lustful thoughts.)

How does a homosexual (or anyone) channel his sexual desires appropriately? (Give them up to God. Learn to ignore them.)

Hey - Any serious Catholic/Christian has spent a good portion of his/her life living chastely. It's not rocket science.

James

[EdmundS]

"The majority of male homosexuals engage in rectal sodomy, a great many of them ingest fecal matter during deviant sexual activities, and almost all of them fellate each other and ingest penile discharges."

What's your source for that assertion? I have no idea whether it's true or not and neither do you.

But, even if it is true, it's just like saying that the majority of male heterosexuals engage in vaginal intercourse and/or rectal sodomy with women and a great many of them ingest vaginal discharges or fecal matter during sexual activity and many of them enjoy being fellated by their spouses or female partners, who injest penile discharges.

Really what does any of this tell anyone other than that homosexual sex can be as messy as heterosexual sex absent good sexual hygiene?

It's just an excuse for you to tittilate yourself, but tells us nothing of any value.

[James]

From the Center for Disease Control, Edmund, and studies they have commissioned. And from many other surveys, which document the same behavior (many conducted by homosexual organizations themselves).

And that knowledge is greatly of value - for it helps loving people to help people who have fallen into such degradation.

65% of AIDs cases, for instance, are related to male-on-male sexual deviancy, which involve only about 2% of the male population.

James

[Paul K.]

WELL, fellows...

My God, do I love the Church. (Most of) your comments are thought provoking. I fervently pray that the Church keeps the Holy Spirit as her guide in such matters, and not cultural sensibilities, which seem to be guiding most of our Protestant sister churches, and which will ever be suspect.

I hope I do not offend (well maybe I do just a little) with my weird sense of humor: to you, my brothers in Christ, let me exhort you to "make love, not war!"

Blessings - Paul K.