Here's a news story about a Massachusetts man who claims he was fired for expressing his opinions about a colleague's lesbian 'marriage.' The story is interesting because the guy claims that he wasn't radical and aggressive in his disapproval of the impending lesbian marriage, but that his homosexual colleague (and superior in the workplace) kept mentioning it until he gave some sort of response. In other words, he kept silent until he was goaded into a response, and being an honest person he could not give a response that was approving. The response he did give was (according to him) gentle, apologetic and regretful. Was his lesbian superior sacked because she hounded him over his religious views? No. He was fired because of his discriminatory behavior.
Here is the situation we are now in. The homosexualists run well financed campaigns to twist the majority view on marriage. They actively campaign for homosexual positive sex education in our schools. They have increasingly high profile 'Pride Marches' many of which are offensive to public morals with nudity, lewd acts, profanity, blasphemy and hate crimes against Catholics. We are supposed to respond to these aggressive, provocative and increasingly violent attacks with Christian tolerance, forbearance, wisdom and grace.
In fact this is exactly what we should do. We should respond with well reasoned, tolerant and gentle reproof. However, should we lapse and respond with the tiniest bit of fight back we're 'obsessed, bigoted, intolerant, full of hate, homophobic' and every other nasty name you can imagine.
The fact of the matter is the homosexualists will not be satisfied with tolerance. Like this guy's lesbian boss, they will insist on approval. I am reminded of St Thomas More's response to the wickedness of Henry VIII. Thomas More chose the path of silence. Time and again his was the voice of reasoned tolerance and forbearance. Over and over again he repeated that he would not be able to sign the Act of Supremacy, but he did not judge the consciences of those who did. He tried repeatedly to retire in dignified silence. This was not sufficient. Henry demanded either his signature or his head.
Be prepared for the same. Tolerance is not what these people want. They will not be satisfied with that. They want your approval. They will not even be satisfied with 'equality under the law'. Once they have civil partnerships they will demand that all churches provide the facility for homosexual marriage as the Church of Sweden has now done.
Finally, I should clarify my terminology. I regularly use the term 'homosexualists'. I do so intentionally. With this term I am not referring to people with a homosexual orientation. I am not even referring to people who are engaged in homosexual activity. The genesis of the homosexual condition and the morality of homosexual actions is another discussion.
I am referring to those people for whom homosexuality has become the definition of their life, their goals, their ambitions and their agenda. In other words, I am writing about those who have turned a sexual orientation into an ideology.
My arguments against them, therefore are the same arguments I would use against anyone who forcibly promotes a false ideology of any kind. You will see what I mean if you go through the above post and substitute 'communism' or 'vegetarianism' or 'Nazism' or 'climate change-ism' or any other ideology for 'homosexualism'.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
Great stuff!
Spot on. Like this poor fellow I was asked the other day what I thought about same-sex 'marriage'. I gave my opinion and copped a barrage of abuse.
I have learned, in my workplace, to be very quiet about my personal opinion. It will not matter that I treat everyone with respect and dignity. If I actually were pushed to vocalizing my dissenting opinion, I would be pilloried.
I totally accept the Church's teaching on sin.
I have yet to hear a Homily on God's love of the homosexual. My point is, where does he or she go to be affirmed?
Who, as a Christian, stands up and proclaims God's Love to souls who, from my experience feel cursed by their sexuality at first, and then in order to survive, seek out people places and things who offer some sort of invite, albeit pseudo and not the freedom available for them, in Christ Jesus. We fail homosexuals. It's a fact. And then we judge them for moving towards behaviours that may harm their souls. Watching God's children sink, it's disgusting. Has each Christian reading this post asked the Holy Spirit to shine His light on their own soul regarding prejudice or hatred towards homosexuals?
Some of the most lonely people on earth,(at least from a Catholic perspective) that's my experience of the homosexual people I have met. When I try to tell them of God's love, they smile but don't believe me, seriously any Priest, Pastor or Vicar reading this, what's the good news you preach for homosexual people? Sorry to use your comment box for this statement Father, remove it if you wish. You have the power, after all.
Honestly I don't recall having ever heard any personal condemnation of homosexuals in a priest's homily. And after eleven years or so of being Catholic I've heard a number of priests' homilies. But then I try not to read more into what a person says then what he or she has said. I've heard plenty of condemnation of sin, but only exhortations of repentance for the sinner. Further I don't impute motives by others without actually knowing that person or the person saying something so blatant that a reasonable imputation is justified.
Shadowlands, have you never heard a priest say that God loves all of us except homosexuals or that God hates homosexuals? Have you heard a priest say that Jesus came only to save the heterosexuals? Now it is certainly true that some Christians believe that, but to say that all priests you've heard do is simply not credible. Frankly it resembles the same demand for preferential treatment frequently made by homosexuals. Generally homosexuals expect outreach by the Church to be no less than the Church compromising her teachings. Does any other of the many category of sinners expect as much? Do adulterers expect their affairs to be affirm by the Church?
HaroldC
'Have you heard a priest say that Jesus came only to save the heterosexuals? Now it is certainly true that some Christians believe that, but to say that all priests you've heard do is simply not credible. Frankly it resembles the same demand for preferential treatment frequently made by homosexuals'.
I didn't say I had only heard homilys of condemnation. I said I had never heard affirmative homilys. Priests steer clear of any affirming of the homosexual. Fact!
'Generally homosexuals expect outreach by the Church to be no less than the Church compromising her teachings'.
HaroldC, That is your experience is it? In my experience homosexuals expect nothing from the Catholic Church, except condemnation.How many homosexuals have you known deeply, as souls in need of affirming with the Good News of Christ? I don't mean articles you've read or attitudes you've adopted over the years.
I was given a bible with a scripture underlined by a man, a homosexual, non active,he took his own life after underlining the scripture. He was a Christian, a Plymouth Brethren I believe. I have a friend, a middle aged man who believes he was cursed by God before he was born. I also know of Catholic Priests who are homosexual,lots and lots, again adhering to Church teaching but remain silent because their ministry would be over if they openly admitted the struggle they face. We heterosexuals fail the sincerely struggling homosexual by ignoring his/her plight and then condemning their seeking out pseudo relief.
If we cannot love the homosexual in the stranger we meet day to day, perhaps Christ will challenge us a little closer to home.
My sixteen year old said to me the other day, 'Mom what would you do if one of your son's were to tell you they were gay'? I told him, I would spend the rest of my life trying to be an example of God's Love, because that is what I have found is the knowledge missing in a homosexuals soul.
Shadowlands:
One of the afflictions many homosexuals face is self pity.
Much of what you say about loneliness, struggle, etc., is true. But this is just as true for all sorts of people will all sorts of terrible afflictions.
People with addictions to all sorts of vices have to live with loneliness and shame. There is no special category of homosexuals that we have to worry about.
I think the whole categorization of people as "homosexuals" and "heterosexuals" is part of the problem.
But part of the solution is to start to learn to go out of yourself and spend less time brooding over your misfortune.
Sympathy which plays into the trap of self pity is not helpful.
Mmmmm......Jeff,
'One of the afflictions many homosexuals face is self pity'.
you know this do you, personally? Or is it an opinion you hold?
'People with addictions to all sorts of vices have to live with loneliness and shame. There is no special category of homosexuals that we have to worry about'.
Oh believe me Jeff, I read in scripture that we have to worry about the least of them, as if it is Christ Himself we are being/dealing with.
'Sympathy which plays into the trap of self pity is not helpful'.
Well Jeff, excuse me for taking the suicide of individual souls personally and letting it affect my perspective.
Father, you posted the link to the Fox News story. Thanks for giving all of us a chance to read it. Free speech is a wonderful value, though non-governmental entities (e.g., corporations) can and do routinely define the paremeters of free speech for their employees. (For instance, just try to say, "This store stinks!" while on the job and see whether any store wouldn't fire you fast.)
You'll argue, I imagine, that the topic of homosexuality was being openly discussed in the workplace, so why shouldn't Mr. Vidala feel an unlimited right to express his view about the morality of the manager's marriage? For that matter, why shouldn't a person who doesn't date or procreate have the right to say that she thinks it's "immoral" for a store manager to get married, have sex, and become a "breeder" (a judgmental terms that some zero-population-growth people use). The employee must, in your view, have a right to make such pronouncements without repurcussions, yes?
What if the subject were miscegenation, though? After all, some folks have said that interracial marriage, though legal, is immoral. Should an employee expect to be free to make pronouncements about a manager's interracial marriage being immoral without expecting that his remarks will be viewed as inappropriate? Sure, most people who reject same-sex marriage will say there's no comparison, but of course Bob Jones University, until fairly recently, taught that even interracial dating was against God's law. Want to defend the employee's right to denounce that marriage as immoral?
For what it's worth, I think the guy should have been talked to--but not fired. What I'm really challenging here, though, is your implication that the employee should be able to openly announce his judgments on his coworkers' morality without any consequences. Most workplaces don't function that way, even when the topic has nothing to do with homosexuality.
Steve, did you even read the news story or my post? I'm amazed that you can miss the point so completely.
According to this man's story he was not mouthing off in a negative or insulting way. In fact he chose to remain silent on the issue. In fact he was distressed at the harassment by his superior. He claims she goaded him into a response, and that even then his response was measured, gentle and apologetic.
What was the poor guy supposed to do--continue to remain silent or lie?
Shadowlands, how is homosexuality to be affirmed without changing the Church's teaching? People with a homosexual attraction face a heavy cross. Facing a life of not expressing affection physically and being alone in a profound manner is not something I'd wish on anyone. But people other than those with a homosexual attraction face a life of loneliness.
Don't get me wrong. All people who faithfully carry their crosses are to be praised including those with homosexual attraction. To my knowledge I don't currently know anyone who has a homosexual attraction. My impression of homosexual demands is based solely on the media and what homosexual organisations have expressed themselves. But my reasonable impression assures me that most homosexuals do not support the Church's call of lifelong celibacy by persons with homosexual attraction.
Therefore what do you wish the Church to affirm? Is it lifelong celibacy for persons with a homosexual attraction? That she already does and I don't think most homosexuals welcome it. You said you support the Church's teachings. So it can't mean that you support the Church supporting homosexual monogamous relationships, civil unions or the oxymoron homosexual 'marriage'. Carrying crosses isn't left solely to those with a homosexual attraction. We are all called to it.
Yes, Father, I did read both your post and the Fox News story. Yes, he says he was "goaded" into saying something. (No, he did not "choose to remain silent," as you say.) Exactly how was he "goaded" into announcing how immoral he thought the manager's marriage was? Did she ask him point blank whether he thought her marriage was moral? That would be goading indeed, but I don't recall that allegation in the article. For all we know, the manager might have referred a couple times to "my wife" and maybe she mentioned that she had just returned from her honeymoon. Do you honestly suspect that the manager was talking in any explicit way about her sex life? (That's all that a relationship between two gay partners is, in the eyes of some folks: sexual activity writ large. In the eyes of some who look down on gay people, if the manager were simply to refer to her wife, that would amount to "goading" the poor employee into denouncing the morality of her marriage.)
No, Father, no one forced that employee to declare whether he thought the marriage to be moral or immoral. He offered that opinion on his own, after having heard conversation in which the manager's recent marriage was referenced in some way. Neither of us knows any more about the case than that, really.
Again, I will ask you: If an employee thought a supervisor's interracial marriage was in violation of God's law, would that employee be justified in condemning it without any expectation of suffering some serious consequence?
Wisdom 2:
"Let us lie in wait for the righteous man,
because he is inconvenient to us and opposes our actions...
He became to us a reproof of our thoughts;
the very sight of him is a burden to us,
because his manner of life is unlike that of others,
and his ways are strange.
We are considered by him as something base,
and he avoids our ways as unclean;
he calls the last end of the righteous happy,
and boasts that God is his father....
Let us test him with insult and torture,
that we may find out how gentle he is,
and make trial of his forbearance."
this may sound un-christian but this is the sort of story which has be day-dreaming about the inquisition and a wishing for a couple of D5-Trident 1st strike ICBM's and a some W80 dial a yield tactical nukes
Steve, the man said he felt goaded by an aggressive lesbian superior officer. I guess we have to take his word for it.
He was just terminated like that? Whatever happened to "audiatur et altera pars"? Oh, right - if management had let him state his side of events, that would have been a discrimination against homosexuals ...
On quite another note, I'd like to tell you of a custom observed among the Jews in some parts of Eastern Europe until well into the 19th century. This custom was that nobody could be buried until at least someone had said something positive about the deceased. And it so happened that a robber-rapist-murderer-you-name-it-he's-done-it was publicly executed. Nobody, really, nobody had anything good to say about that felon. It was the custom to leave the corpse hanging on the gallows until it could be buried - and nobody would bury this one, which is a terrible thing to happen to a jew in a completely orthodox environment. Finally, the Rabbi went for a walk and passed the gallows where the remains of the poor wretch still were dangling; and he said to his companion "Oh, doesn't he look nice hanging there." (or the equivalent in Yiddish, which was at that time commonly spoken among the Jews). Custom satisfied, the corpse could be buried. Sometimes, I'm tempted to follow the Rabbi's example.
Post a Comment