Abbey-Roads2

and an exhibit in the Austrian Cardinal’s art gallery. 

When I was in 5th grade an unidentified fellow student drew an obscene picture on the back of a holy card Sr. Hiltrude distributed to the class.  We never found out who did the drawing, but I had my suspicions, as did my other classmates.  The drawing was crude, although it might be considered art today.  Especially by the curators of the Dommuseum of Vienna, the art gallery attached to the Cathedral of St. Stephen, and adjacent to the Archbishop’s palace of Christoph Cardinal Schonborn.

The Marxist artist, Alfred Hrdlicka (no, the last name is not a joke) is featured in a one man exhibition of his work, entitled, “Religion, Flesh, and Power”.  His heavy-handed, ‘Teutonic’ style  is decidely homo-erotic; compositions depicting Christ and the disciples engaged in homosexual sex acts.  (The ’art’ is similar to the gay grafitti a man might see in a public restroom.)   Gloria Television produced a short video of the works here.

“Dommuseum Director Bernhard Böhler said visitors asked “in a more or less emotional way” why the Apostles are depicted engaged in sex with one another.  According to the director, the artist responded, ‘There were no women around.’” - Religion and Spirituality.   

Arrogant response.

Photo: The artist, Hrdlicka.

Links:

LifesiteNews

“Sashay, sashay, sashay, sashay, sashay.” 

Rainbow Sashers  plan to greet the Pope when he visits next month with whistles and ashes instead of confetti.  It is in protest of how the sexual abuse crises was handled and ongoing discrimination against gay people by the Catholic Church.

That’s mature.

From PinkNews:

A group that works for the rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual and trans in the Roman Catholic church is planning a series of protests against Pope Benedict during his visit to the US next month.

The Rainbow Sash Movement said it is calling on “Catholics of good will” to take the Papal visit as an opportunity to shower the Pope mobile with ashes instead of confetti.

“Ashes are an ancient and appropriate greeting for a sinner who has caused the Church so much division and pain - we will also be greeting him with whistles,” RSM said in a statement.

“We will not enter any Churches but we will bring ashes to reign down on the Popes motorcade, and call on individuals to blow whistles at any public papal events such as outside of St. Patrick’s Cathedral, Ground Zero, St. Joseph’s Seminary, and Yankee Stadium as a sign of our disgust over the way the clergy abuse scandal has been handled under his leadership,” the group said in a statement. - PinkNews 

(Thanks to Paula for the story.)

When dad does tricks. 

I came across an interesting article about a woman who wrote a book describing her experiences growing up with a homosexual father.  We often hear stories from parents of homosexual children, and now it seems children of homosexuals are coming out to tell their side of the story.  The author of  Out From Under, Dawn Stephanowizc is quoted here:

“Children are impacted long-term in homosexual environments – not just while they’re growing up, but throughout their adulthood,” said the author. “Children [of homosexuals] who have been in touch with me, even into their fifties and sixties, still describe certain difficulties that they are facing long-term.” - Americans For Truth 

One should think legislators and society would take a more cautious approach to same sex marriage and adoption before giving blanket approval - especially after listening to the kids. 

Wearing down Catholic resistance to the “G” agenda.

I have given up blogging about “G” issues for Lent, so this post is not really about that.  It is about psychology - kind of, sort of.

Vox Nova has a post, The APA and “H” that includes an excerpt of a review by Sally Satel wherein there is an “interesting tidbit about the APA’s decision to eliminate homosexuality from its official list of mental disorders.”  I believe the reversal of diagnosis occurred sometime in the early 1970’s.  Millions of “G” people were no longer nuts.  Perverts no more!  Since then, many people in medicine and psychiatry felt the psychiatric industry had been coerced into taking homosexuality off the list of mental disorders by “G”  activists.  Hence the author of the entry posed the following question:

The APA changes its position on homosexuality after protest and harassment and people lose faith in the authority of its pronouncements? Go figure. It’s worth noting, though, that the conduct members of the APA were subjected to by those gay activists is just an extreme example of the social pressures scientists, academics, and other professionals are subjected to generally to conform their conclusions to the opinions of their social group. A researcher whose work tends towards some politically unpalatable conclusions is not likely to have people picketing his house, but he is likely to face a subtle ostracism from his friends and colleagues. - APA and “H”

I linked to the post and you can read it for yourself - the comments especially are rather interesting.  In fact, my main interest in the Vox Nova  piece centered upon the many comments it received.  I was impressed with how (some)  of the comments by defender of the Faith-style  Catholics,  paralleled similar positions taken by (some)  ”G” activists on their blogs when defending the “H” lifestyle.  The following two comments may help demonstrate my point.

“The misconceptions of many people”

 Gerald Augustinus Says:
February 18, 2008 at 1:00 am

Psychologists follow the same “manual” as psychiatrists. My wife’s a doctor of clinical psychology (which is why she can bear with me, coincidentally) and doesn’t think it’s an illness either, nor does she think that the orientation can be “cured”. She’s counseled HIV patients in the past, many of whom Catholic, unfortunately many a gay person took some serious damage from the way they were treated by (some) Catholics and resent the Church now. It seems nigh impossible to pull off the “hate the sin, love the sinner” act. In particular when people use the term “Sodomite”. (On this note - just how on earth was Lot any better than the men clamoring for the angels ? Hospitality > having virgin daughters gang-raped. Sweet…)

Common ground.

 Gerald Augustinus Says:
February 18, 2008 at 3:01 am

It is hard to tell the symptom from the cause in this matter. Certainly, it doesn’t help with psychosexual development to be widely stigmatized, in particular in the past. Regardless of what one thinks of Church rule on this subject, it must be horribly difficult to identify one’s desire for companionship, love, and, yes, sex with being ‘objectively disordered’. Suppression and sublimation certainly results in a secretive culture. The more open someone is, the less likely they are to engage in the more appalling elements of male gay culture. It’s the ‘closeted’ ones that tend to get caught in restrooms, park, and so forth. The sex abuse scandal in the Church largely happened because of sexually immature homosexuals who entered the priesthood as a ‘beard’ or in the hope to overcome their inclination. Such immaturity then resulted in abusing their emotional ‘equals’, teenage boys.

One could go on forever about the misconceptions of many people - like to claim that homosexuals ‘define’ themselves by their sexuality. For one, that which separates one from the majority sticks out like a sore thumb and by virtue of that becomes defining from both sides. In addition, to reduce homosexuality to a collection of sex acts is just as absurd as if one did that for heterosexuals.

Of course, due to the ‘deviant’ nature (de-viare, off the path) of homosexuality, there are problems caused by the fact that man and woman are made for each other (and even that isn’t all fun and games), and man and man, woman and woman, are not. Hyper-sexuality in the former, and hypo-sexuality in the latter, are quite common.

Lastly, while a gay person, in particular a man, is more likely to be more promiscuous, lead a more dangerous lifestyle (meth, in particular) etc, it ain’t necessarily so - there are many homosexuals who are quite ‘boring’ and ‘normal’.

I have a friend in Courage, I am not sure that ‘re-programming’ is part of that ?

P.S. “Sodomite” is as inappropriate a term as “onany”. The question in the story was the respect for guests, a big thing in the culture. That the women wouldn’t come clamor is self-explanatory. Neither seems ‘Lot’ to have deemed his fellow ‘Sodomites’ to be homosexual, but rather bi-, since he offered them his virgin daughters instead…(who later would go on to jump their drunken fathers and both managed to get pregnant, conveniently giving birth to ‘Ammon’ and ‘Moab’, thus paving the way for future genocide of the respective -ites.

The Catholic Church must conform! 

Contrast those comments with Michael Bayly’s  post (indeed, his website) regarding the APA’s decision, which also figures in well with his campaign for the Roman Catholic Church to discard Her own teaching on the subject:

Dr. Gonsiorek then proceeded to provide some insightful background information on the origins of NARTH – origins inseparable from the wider cultural debate on homosexuality and, specifically, the American Psychiatric Association’s 1973 decision to remove homosexuality from its official manual that lists mental and emotional disorders (followed two years later by the passage of a similar resolution of the American Psychological Association).

This change in the diagnosis of homosexuality was the result of the wealth of research data gathered since the early 1950s that showed no difference between homosexual and heterosexual populations in terms of “adjustment.”

In time, the psychoanalytical establishment also changed in its understanding of homosexuality; it now has the same sets of policies and principles about sexual orientation as the American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association. Yet there were “old guard” psychoanalysts who were disgruntled about being displaced and seeing their organization change its views on homosexuality. This disaffected group of psychoanalysts formed an alliance with conservatively- and religiously-oriented psychotherapists. It was from this alliance that NARTH was established. - Debunking NARTH

How queer is that?  Seems like that agenda thing may be working out after all.

Links:

http://www.powells.com/review/2008_02_14.html

I don’t know.

I’m not implying that the characters of the classic children’s book series are gay - I’m just using their image for fun.  Now Rowlings said Dumbledore is gay, but there is nothing in Harry Potter to indicate anything as to his sexual orientation.  Nevertheless, people are upset with her for saying the headmaster of Hogwarts is gay - due mostly to that gay agenda thing we all talk about.

Most, if not all of us know homosexuals.  They are in our families, amongst our friends and coworkers, they wait upon us in restaurants, we buy their art, we watch their movies, read their books, listen to them preach in Church - they are everywhere.

Hatred.

Many people insist they “hate the sin” but profess to “love the sinner”.  We constantly preach the teaching of scripture and the Church as a defense for our hatred of the sin.  I’m famous for insisting the “G” in “GLBT” means that every gay person embraces all the depraved stuff homosexual sex includes.  (Obviously they don’t.)  I’ve said that without understanding that many gay people resort to anonymous sex in less than desirable circumstances because of the intense societal rejection and subsequent shame they feel because of their homosexual orientation.  I’m not condoning what they do - simply stating a reality.

Is there a gay agenda?  

I think there is in various sectors of the culture.  But I do not believe every homosexual person is a part of it, and may not even condone it.  Certainly everyone deserves protection from discrimination, everyone deserves housing and fundamental human rights, gay people included.  Many gay people just want the issue to go away, to be able to live their lives, just as all of us do.  Yes, there are those who push the envelope, demanding same-sex unions, adoption of children, so on and so forth.  But not every gay person is so politicized as that.  (I am against SS marriage and gay people adopting children.  Of course others disagree with me on that.)

Gay-Catholics.

I’ve made a big deal about how gay-Catholics must drop the term gay because of its political implications and insisting it keeps people in the lifestyle.  Nevertheless, there are sincere individuals who honestly believe they were born homosexual and it is not a choice.  They identify their sexuality as gay.  Who am I to tell them their experience of themselves is incorrect?  I cannot live or understand their experience.  Their experience is the only truth they know of themselves.  I can’t say, “You just think you are gay.”

Perhaps for a very few, it was a choice, although most gay people insist they were born that way.   Perhaps for others, it was a choice not made in total freedom, but a series of conditions in their formative years which led them to certain concessions or accommodations, which necessitated an unconscious choice or decision that they must be gay.  (”Gee, I must be gay because I feel attracted to the same sex.”)   Perhaps this is what many describe as suddenly realizing they are gay.  Thus, acting upon this inclination, especially for a number of years, they may see themselves as constitutionally, or irreversibly homosexual.  The truth is, most gay people do not believe they can change their orientation.

The Catholic attitude.

Whatever the cause of homosexuality, the Roman Catholic Church does not demand that a person with homosexual inclination change his or her orientation.  (Neither does the Church pretend to know the reason people are gay.)  To experience homosexual orientation, or same sex attraction is not in itself sinful.  The Church simply teaches that to act upon homosexual desire, that is, homosexual acts, is sinful.  Unwilling to bind up heavy burdens men are unable to carry, the Church merely teaches that homosexuals are called to chastity.  All men and women are called to live chastely, even in heterosexual marriage, and the single are called to live chastely and celibately, either until heterosexual marriage or for life.  That is all.

Turn it down a few notches.

A reader sent me a post from Mark Shea  regarding the Dumbledore controversy.  Shea’s commenter had the following to write, which had the effect of convicting me in conscience.  He wrote:

“This is why I think it’s so important for Christians to have clearly in their minds the distinction between same sex attraction (which are not sinful) and homosexual acts (which are). Otherwise, it’s hard to see how people struggling with homosexual attraction will get any other message than “It’s not what you do, it’s what you are that’s the problem.”

Dumbledore, so far as we can tell, committed no sin in that department. Christians can acknowledge that. They can also point out (as I tried to do yesterday) that his SSA is, from a literary standpoint, the perfect image of the love of the Same that tempted him to Pureblood racism. It is notable that “love”, not sexual attraction, is the term Rowling uses to describe it.

So: can everybody turn it down a few notches? These are not the greatest books of all time. Rowling is neither a true or false prophet. Be aware that persons who are grappling with the Church’s teaching on homosexuality are getting a loud and clear message in the comboxes: It doesn’t matter whether you live chastely or not, if you are SSA then you are irredeemable. I doubt that’s the message anybody intends to send, but it’s being sent (and heard) nonetheless.” - Bleak But True

Yeah, I don’t know why anyone is gay - I don’t live their lives.  I apologize if it seems like I was trying to do so.  I apologize for not respecting your humanity.  Gay people know the teaching of the Church, they don’t need me pounding it home to them, Christ simply asks that I love them as he does, and pray for them.

[Thank you Susan for the Mark Shea link.) 

Gay agenda and propaganda. 

My friend Paula sent me the link to the video of Archbishop Niederauer giving Communion to the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence which took place last Sunday in San Francisco.  It appears he was set to deny Communion, but then one of the “Sisters” requested it, and the Archbishop obliged.  Ah!  “Reluctant compliance” again.

Anyway, I could not get the link to the video to work, but Cafeteria is Closed has it, along with a bit of commentary.  Off The Record  also has a very good post covering the event.  The entire debacle is extremely sad and a disgrace to the Archdiocese of San Francisco - expecially in light of the recent threats against the lives of high ranking members of the hierarchy for their opposition to the gay agenda.

Yet, even amongst staunch Catholic bloggers there is this odd concession to “Gay Catholics” dismissing the actions of a few radical queers as being non-representative of gay culture.  Bullshit!  If a sexually active gay Catholic, or anyone, sexually active or not, who applies the label “gay” to their Catholic identity, tells you they reject such behaviors, they are deluded.  In effect they are saying they reject all the GLBT rainbow crap they claim to support.  If you are pro GLBT you necessrily accept all the crap that goes with it.  When a gay person desires rights for themselves, they must respect the rights of others in the sub-culture - hence there is tacit approval.

“G” stands for Gay in GLBT.

Gerald writes:  ”To be sure, these nuts are not representative of gay Catholics. While being gay is not exactly a choice, running around like that is.”  I am not taking issue with Gerald in his statement, simply using it to demonstrate how many of us are taken in by gay propaganda on the road of tolerance and acceptance.

A Catholic man or woman may be same-sex attracted, experiencing their sexual orientation for persons of the same sex, but to call oneself “gay” and Catholic seems to me to be incompatable with Catholic teaching.  Gay is a poitical term, it is the “G” in GLBT.  To label oneself gay implies a person is either sexually active or accepts homosexual behavior as normative.  It implies an attachment to the homosexual sub-culture.  This goes for parents of homosexual children  who participate in organizations such as the Rainbow Sash movement.  (I’ve written about this before when I posted about “what homosexuals do“.)

Off The Record  author Diogenes makes the point so much clearer than I do:

A further point. If there existed in reality gays who were faithful Catholics — that is, if the expression “Gay Catholic” were not a contradiction in terms — it wouldn’t be the orthodox bloggers who were first and loudest to cry foul. Gays themselves — I mean the ostensibly responsible gays like James Alison and Sean Michael Winters — would pounce on Niederauer to demand he shut down MHR, banish its clergy, and toss out the twisted sisters with them. “Don’t you see,” they’d argue, “that this mock-jocular sacrilege and puerile exhibitionism plays right into the hands of our adversaries? That this is exactly the kind of sexually distorted rage that conservatives are always warning the Holy See about? That our claim to be mature, sober, and pious Catholics is blown out of the water by cross-dressing psychotics who can’t switch off their act long enough to take communion? Can’t you see that this harms our cause worse than anything the conservatives could say about us?” Well, the fact is that we haven’t heard such protests, and we won’t. And the reason is that the difference between the “presentable” gays and Sister Boom-Boom is one of tailoring rather than conviction. Skeptical? Find me a counter-example. - Diogenes 

A local “Gay Catholic” speaks out.

A rather prominent local gay activist who writes about the Catholic Church and gay issues, recently posted his thoughts on the Folsom Street Fair (see my post on that event)  and the denunciations by the Catholic League over the Miller Brewing Co.’s sponsorship of the event.  What is interesting in this man’s writings is that he often characterizes such events as aberrations in the gay sub-culture, as well as pointing to similar sexually deviant behavior amongst heterosexuals.  As if this makes it all okay.  Nevertheless, this is all part of the propaganda.  What follows is a snippet from his post, which I will not link to:

A diverse group of people - both straight and gay - participate in the Folsom Street Fair. What they share in common is a penchant for S&M. Regardless of what you may think of this type of sexual role play, the antics depicted by the Folsom Street Fair images are actually quite tame compared to what goes on at certain bars (gay and straight) every weekend around the country – not to mention other boozed-up and more public events like Spring Break on South Padre Island.

The bottom line is that gays don’t have a monopoly on certain types of behavior that objectify oneself and others. I mean, shows like Big Brother After Dark and Girls Gone Wild aren’t populated by gays. Yet what these forms of “entertainment” do have in common with events (such as the Folsom Street Fair) that do attract gays, is that they are sponsored by corporations. Is the Catholic League also going to go after these sponsors? Not likely. No, once again, it’s those “homosexuals” that are bringing about the decline of civilization as we know it. - Wild Reed

You see what I mean?  As sincere as this fellow may  be, there is a tendency to dismiss,  excuse or whitewash the aberrant behavior of some  homosexuals.  The “good ones” distance themselves from the “exaggerated” behaviors of the “few” in order to promote what is in effect  their common agenda.  As Diogenes stated, “it is a matter of tailoring, rather than conviction.”

The diabolical aspect of the underbelly of gay culture.

I have no proof for this assertion, except anecdotal testimony and that which is debased (and flaunted) in homosexual sexual practice and literature or media.

I bring this up because of the preceding post on the upcoming Folsom St. Fair, taking place this week in San Francisco.  A reader sent me an email because the photo I posted of two shirtless gay men in harnesses was too provocative for him, and he said he couldn’t visit my site because of it.  I took the photo down, not realizing how strong temptation can be to anyone struggling with sexual issues.

Fetishism

Fetishes are often used in pagan ritual and they are useful in deviant sexual practices as well, as pornography often illustrates.  The leather scene in gay culture is replete with sexual fetishes, otherwise known as role-play costumes and sex toys.  (Heterosexuals use fetishes too.)  The photo I posted of two male bare-backs sporting harnesses reminded me that many of the costumes gay people don to express their sexuality have an element of fetishism about them.  Which may be one reason why this man was aroused by the image.

Without doubt there has long been a cult aspect to the homosexual lifestyle; special terminology, symbolic dress and fetishism, sexual practices that include group sex or orgies that sometimes  appear to have a parallel with ancient pagan cult worship.  (Think bath-houses.)  I know- it sounds crazy - AND I know every “out” gay person does not engage in these practices.  (Don’t ask them about the pornography they view.)  Although anyone who supports GLBT issues, by association and implication, ultimately supports the rest.  (Yes Christian parents who support GLBT issues of your  gay children, you do.)

Idolatry.

“Put to death whatever in your nature is rooted in earth; forncation, uncleanness, passion, evil desires, and that lust which is idolatry.” - Colossians 3:5.  Curiously, the current translation used for the liturgy  reads, “that lust which is greed” - how did they come by that?

The element  of idolatry in homosexual culture is obvious.  For instance, the glorification and objectification of the male physique and genatalia is paramount in gay culture.  (Likewise, in contemporary culture in general, this idolatry of the  body is pervasive.)  Most homosexual publications exploit the sexualized male anatomy, as does homo-erotic art.  It is right there - in your face.

Exegetical lies.

Christian homosexuals  insist that St. Paul and Old Testament prohibitions against homosexual sex were really condemnations of pagan sexual practices involving idolatry and male temple prostitutes.  In claiming this, they insist that Paul would have been more tolerant of non-cultic homosexual relationships.  I think that is a huge leap.  Huge! 

I think many people are genuinely naive to the absolute pagan dimension in the homosexual movement within our culture and Church.  I doubt very much people understand the worldwide diabolic delusion that contemporary civilization is experiencing.

“Resist, solid in your faith”. - 1 Peter 5:9 

Anyone strugglng with same-sex temptation, along with all Christians who struggle against evil in their lives, must realize that the  struggle is a very serious spiritual combat.  In Ephesians, St. Paul exhorts us:

“Our battle is not against human forces but against the principalities and powers, the rulers of this world of darkness, the evil spirits in regions above.” - Ephesians 6:12

If I am wrong and there is not a pagan or diabolic dimension to gay culture, one surely cannot deny how deeply sexualized gay culture is, and how the fetishism involved in that culture affects those coming out of the lifestyle.

[Art: The Rape of Ganymede by Zeus.] 

The sin of Sodom.

Suddenly in the later half of the 20th century, according to a few Biblical exegetes, we have realized that the sin of Sodom was actually inhospitality.  This is contrary to over a millenia of Judeo-Christian tradition of course.  In answer to this modern interpretation, a  local priest once said that he would certainly consider being sodomized as an inhospitable act.

Sodom and Gomorrah

Los Angeles and San Francisco continue to emulate the ancient Cities of the Plain - or at least the inner city neighborhoods of West Hollywood and the Castro fill that bill.  (Although Folsom St. is not part of the Castro.)  On September 30 in San Francisco the annual leather event called the Folsom Street fair will take place.  It is already being advertised with a mock photo depicting the Last Supper, with leather queens portraying the disciples and Christ, along with sex-toys spread about on the table.  It doesn’t take a genius to recognize this as sacrilege and blasphemy, as well as a direct attack upon Christianity.

“The bread and wine representing Christ’s broken body and lifegiving blood are replaced with sadomasochistic sex toys in this twisted version of Da Vinci’s The Last Supper,” CWA said on its Web site.“‘Gay’ activists disingenuously call Christians ‘haters’ and ‘homophobes’ for honoring the Bible, but then lash out in this hateful manner toward the very people they accuse,” said said Matt Barber, CWA’s policy director for cultural issues. - CNSNews.com

Morality in the toilet.

The Folsom Street debauchery is a spectacle which provides no convincing power whatsoever that homosexual sex is anything but immoral and degrading.  Gay activists can say whatever they want, proclaim their Christian faith that same-sex relationships are good, that most gay people live clean, moral lives, yet this celebration along with many other gay pride events really contradicts all of their propaganda.

“The most unimaginable and vile acts of debauchery are commonplace during the fair,” said Matt Barber, Policy Director for Cultural Issues with Concerned Women for America (CWA).  “Senator Larry Craig was arrested and driven out of the Senate for allegedly soliciting public ‘gay’ sex, yet during this event the city of San Francisco suspends the law and allows ‘gay’ men and women to parade the streets fully nude, many having sex - even group orgies - in broad daylight, while taxpayer funded police officers look on and do absolutely nothing.” - LifeSiteNews

“Stop lying to one another.”- St. Paul, Colossians 3

Gay activists who claim that the gay lifestyle is clean and wholesome ought to make their voices heard  loud and very clear that they will not tolerate this crap in their culture.  Of course, if they do speak out it probably would not have much effect.   I’m fairly certain active homosexuals who are religious remain in the minority, while most homosexuals seem to have no time for religion, much less traditional morality.

If you are a Catholic reading this and you have actively gay friends, I suggest you tell them in no uncertain terms that you object to this type of indecent behavior.  I replaced the top photo with Bosch’s “Garden of Earthly Delights”.  My apologies for posting a photo that may have been an occasion of sin to others struggling with same-sex temptation.  I offered my hours at adoration today for all those with same-sex attraction issues.  

…Or teaching kids how to have sex.

When I was in the 6th grade - just a few years before the “sexual revolution” of the late 1960’s - Sr. Lillian, CSJ took it upon herself to instruct our class about sex.  Her first lessons sent us all to the dictionary to look up copulation, after she became concerned when we all laughed that, “Abraham saddled his ass” and when we read that Lot’s daughters slept with their dad.  (The “progressive”  Sr. Lillian was later ostracized from her community because she refused to give up the old habit and was a huge Fatima and Padre Pio devotee - which tells you something about just how liberal she really was.)

So anyway, when the sex education started, she supplied us with non-illustrated pamphlets on our bodies.  Blossoming pervert that I was, I took copious notes, writing out terms and definitions such as “gonads” and “testicles” and “penis”.  My friends and I would read the definitions to one another from these notes and booklets and the dictionary, laughing nervously, anxiously discussing when we would get our pubic hair.  My parents found my sex notes and accused me of things I didn’t even know the meaning of, which in turn, sent me to Confession, and more confusion about what “complete self-abuse” meant.  The thing is, all I learned about from Sister concerned our bodies, and that mine was different from a girl’s body.  (See - she really just didn’t want us laughing because “Abraham saddled his ass.”)  Yet for me - and my friends - this was too much information too soon - and I never figured out what ’self-abuse’ meant until 9th grade.

Do not awaken sex before its time.

I adapted that verse from the Song of Songs, “Do not awaken love before its time.”  In other words, in 6th, 7th, even 8th grade, I really didn’t have a clue about sexuality.  Sr. Lillian may have been instrumental in piquing our interest, but that was the extent of it.  I know things are different today, kids in 4th grade probably know as much about sex as I do now.  Sex is all over media - kids know it is not just kissing.

Rudimentary sex education in ‘health class’ does not seem inappropriate to me - especially if kids can discus these things with parents.  Nevertheless, I’m convinced that detailed sex education belongs to the parents first and foremost, and what children are taught in schools must  be monitored by parents.  Sr. Lillian never checked with the parents if it was okay to teach us about our bodies - and when I took my homework home, my parents freaked, thinking I was this little sex maniac in the making.

The “new” sex education - or indoctrination?

Today, the New York Times has a piece,  “Lesson on Homosexuality Move Into the Classroom” - here’s a snippet:

“After five years, one legal defeat and a challenge on the way, Montgomery County, Md., is at the frontier of sex education in the United States. This fall, barring last-minute court action, the county will offer lessons on homosexuality in its 8th- and 10th-grade health education courses.

To school officials, the lessons are a natural outgrowth of sex education and of teachings on tolerance and diversity. They consist of two heavily scripted, 45-minute lessons for each grade and a video demonstrating how to put on a condom. The lessons’ central message is respect and acceptance of the many permutations of sexual identity, both in others and in one’s self.” - New York Times 

Needless to say, I can’t think of anything more innapropriate.  No matter how much a kid knows about his/her body and sex, or how much they see it on TV or in the movies, they surely do not have to be trained that homosexuality is an option.  Especially at the age of sexual awakening, that time when there is a lot of confusion, and in many cases, experimentation. 

As sexually sophisticated as we believe contemporary kids are, they are still just kids.  If a kid “thinks” he’s gay because he has an innocent “boy/man crush” on someone - that doesn’t mean he is dyed in the wool gay.  If he isn’t yet interested in girls, or he happens to be fascinated with the adult male physique; again, it doesn’t necessarily follow that the kid is gay.  (My crazy mother thought my athletic brother was gay because he used to buy body-builder magazines - he just wanted to be Mr. Atlas!)  Adolescence is a time of great upheaval, emotionally, physically, psychologically, and to be sure - sexually.  Answer kid’s questions, but it is wrong to do the “TMI” (too much information) thing before they are ready.   

The Agenda

Sr. Lillian, God rest her soul, also told us that Communism would infiltrate our schools and universities, convents and rectories, every institution, sacred or civil.  She said that the aim would be to gradually, covertly indoctrinate people with socialist principles.  She said the first assault would occur in the breakdown of morality, that moral principles would be altered and confused, permitting the decline of good order.  (I thought she was nuts and wasn’t sure what the heck she was talking about.)

I’m not saying this is one big Communist plot, like Hilary Clinton does when she insists there is a massive ‘right wing conspiracy’ against she and her husband - but there are earmarks of an agenda perpetrated by some one or some organization.   It seems more than obvious to me that this type of sex education in our schools is not only an attempt to normalize the homosexual lifestyle, but also can become (intentionally or unitentionally)  a form of indoctrination into the lifestyle for the undecided.   Even when it is veiled under the title of Creating Safe Environments for LGBT students - A Catholic School Perspective, and in the establishment of LGBT clubs in our Catholic high schools, such as Cretin-Derham Hall in St. Paul, Minnesota has done.

I know - I’m going to get nailed for this one, but it seems to me it is just common sense.  To those who object to my views, I hope you can step away from your passions, your personal experiences, and your political agenda, and just look at this objectively.

That’s all. 

[Cartoon stolen from: Cosmos-Liturgy-Sex blog.]