Author Topic: Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong? (Read 1414 times)

Änσnymσus · « **on:** May 27, 2018, 06:52:08 AM »

Can a Pope Change Moral Truth?
Tuesday - May 22, 2018 at 3:04 am
http://buchanan.org/blog/can-a-pope-change-moral-truth-129353

This post was viewed 13,711 times.

Votes: 4.61 Stars!
Share Pat's Columns!
PrintFriendly Email Google Gmail Twitter Facebook1,214 Google+Reddit0 Tumblr StumbleUpon Share1,214
By Patrick J. Buchanan
That joking retort we heard as children, “Is the pope Catholic?” is starting to look like a serious question.
Asked five years ago about a “gαy lobby” in the Vatican, Pope Francis responded, “If a person is gαy and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge?”
As judgment was thought to be part of the papal job description, traditional Catholics were startled at what the new pope had volunteered.
Now the Holy Father has apparently fleshed out what he meant.
According to a childhood victim of a pedophile priest in Chile, Juan Carlos Cruz, a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ to whom the pope apologized, Francis said: “God made you like this and loves you like this and I don’t care. The pope does love you like this. You have to be happy with who you are.”
The Vatican has not denied what Cruz relates.
What makes this remarkable is that the catechism of the Catholic Church, based on the Old and New Testament and tradition, has always taught that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is a moral disorder, a proclivity toward sɛҳuąƖ relations that are unnatural and immoral.
The idea that God is responsible for ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ orientations, that the pope and the Catholic Church are fine with men being attracted to one another, and that those so oriented should be happy with it, appears, on its face, to be heresy.
It implies that what Catholics regarded for centuries as moral truth was wrong, or that moral truth has evolved and must be made to conform to modernity. This is moral relativism: Truth changes with the times.
And if what Cruz reports is accurate, the pope’s position is close to Hillary Clinton’s.
In 2016, at a New York fundraiser, Clinton recited her infamous litany of sins common to the “basket of deplorables” backing Donald Trump.
Said Hillary, they are “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic.”
A phobia is “an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.” Clinton was thus saying that those who have an aversion to ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity are morally or mentally sick.
Yet, up until December 1973, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity itself was listed as a mental disorder by the American Psychiatric Association.
The new morality we hear from the pope and Hillary reflects a historic change in the moral thinking of the West. For the belief that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is normal and natural, and not only acceptable but even praiseworthy, has carried the day.
Legislatures and courts have written this “truth” into law. It has been discovered by the Supreme Court to be lurking in that Constitution whose authors regarded and treated ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity as a grave crime.
And, yet, from this historic change, questions naturally arise:
On the issue of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity, have we ascended to a higher moral plateau? Or has America jettisoned the truths we believed and replaced them with the tenets of an ideology that may be politically and culturally ascendant but is rooted in nothing but baseless assertions and lies?
Consider the views of Cardinal Gerhard Muller, lately removed as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, as to what is behind the drive to have “homophobia” regarded as a mental disorder.
“Homophobia (is) an invention and an instrument of the totalitarian dominance over the thoughts of others. The homo-movement is lacking scientific arguments, which is why it created an ideology which wants to dominate by creating its own reality.”
In short, cultural Marxists and their progressive allies have taken an ideological assertion — ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is normal, natural and moral — without any historical, biological or scientific basis, and asserted it as truth, established it as law, and demanded that we accept and act upon this truth, or face the wrath of the regime.
Said Muller: “It is the Marxist pattern according to which reality does not create thinking, but thinking creates its own reality. He who does not accept this created reality is to be considered as being sick.
“It is as if one could influence an illness with the help of the police or with the help of courts. In the Soviet Union, Christians were put into psychiatric clinics. These are the methods of totalitarian regimes, of National Socialism and of Communism.”
As Russell Kirk wrote, ideology is political religion. And the dogmas of the political religion by which we are increasingly ruled have displaced the teachings of Christianity and tradition.
Since the Stonewall Riot of 1969, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ relationships have gone from being seen as indecent and immoral, to being tolerated, to being accepted, to being on the same plane as traditional marriage, to being a constitutional right.
And if you do not accept the new morality, you are a deplorable bigot. And if you act on your disbelief in the equality of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity, you will be ostracized and punished.
The truths being jettisoned built the greatest civilization known to man. Will the invented truths of our new egalitarianism survive the arrival of the new barbarians? It’s not looking all that good right now.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #1 on:** May 27, 2018, 07:32:39 AM »

Yes, it is mortal sin.

It seems the Pope is biased and promotes and protects pedophiles and homo clergy.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #2 on:** May 27, 2018, 10:05:02 AM »

The thread asks: Is it still wrong?

In the Catholic Church, yes, because the truths of the Catholic Church cannot change, because they come from God, who is Truth itself.

In the Conciliar Church, of which Francis I / Bergoglio is the head, apparently not. This is the same false church that Bp Fellay and the SSPX are desperate to join (and, in fact, have already joined to a large extent).

So, to be practical and not just hypothetical, maybe the question for us should now be: To which church do you belong or desire to belong? Make the decision, and then act on it. And be responsible for the decision.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #3 on:** May 27, 2018, 10:10:24 AM »

The thread title was rhetorical: Of course it is still wrong.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #4 on:** May 27, 2018, 08:39:11 PM »

And still, all the little minions will run around “but he’s still the Pope!!!” “Material heresy!!” “Not ex cathedral!!!!”

Nadir · « **Reply #5 on:** May 27, 2018, 10:12:45 PM »

Quote from: Anonymous on May 27, 2018, 10:05:02 AM

The thread asks: Is it still wrong?

In the Catholic Church, yes, because the truths of the Catholic Church cannot change, because they come from God, who is Truth itself.

In the Conciliar Church, of which Francis I / Bergoglio is the head, apparently not. This is the same false church that Bp Fellay and the SSPX are desperate to join (and, in fact, have already joined to a large extent).

So, to be practical and not just hypothetical, maybe the question for us should now be: To which church do you belong or desire to belong? Make the decision, and then act on it. And be responsible for the decision.

Whether you belong to the Catholic Church, the Conciliar Church, the Mormans, the Lutherans, etc., or no religion at all, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is wrong. Every ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ person in the world knows this in their heart. It's part of the natural law.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #6 on:** May 27, 2018, 11:59:59 PM »

Pat is an unusual character to say the least. He's so right on certain things such as the topic of the thread and so wrong on certain very big and obvious other things. If I ever met him I would like to look him straight in the eye and ask him why he has remained so silent (publicly anyway) on who really did 9-11. Maybe, I could ask him, "Is the cover-up of 9-11 still wrong?"

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #7 on:** May 28, 2018, 08:24:05 AM »

Quote

"Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong?"

Last I checked, yes.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #8 on:** May 28, 2018, 10:44:51 AM »

Quote from: Nadir on May 27, 2018, 10:12:45 PM

Whether you belong to the Catholic Church, the Conciliar Church, the Mormans, the Lutherans, etc., or no religion at all, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is wrong. Every ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ person in the world knows this in their heart. It's part of the natural law.

Wow! You must be someone extra special, to know what's in the hearts of millions of people across the world, none of whom you've ever met.

Either that, or your arrogance knows no bounds.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #9 on:** May 28, 2018, 02:17:41 PM »

Quote from: Anonymous on May 28, 2018, 10:44:51 AM

Wow! You must be someone extra special, to know what's in the hearts of millions of people across the world, none of whom you've ever met.

Either that, or your arrogance knows no bounds.

Anon, why are you even on this forum?

The argument follows from the natural law. A person is bound in conscience to abstain from acting on ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ inclinations.

Nadir · « **Reply #10 on:** May 28, 2018, 08:40:53 PM »

Quote from: Anonymous on May 28, 2018, 10:44:51 AM

Wow! You must be someone extra special, to know what's in the hearts of millions of people across the world, none of whom you've ever met.

Thank you for the compliment! Some folk agree I'm extra special.

But there's nothing special about knowing that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is not normal and is wrong, and ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ persons know that the bits don't fit! Natural law covers it! You don't need to be Catholic to know it.

Quote

Either that, or your arrogance knows no bounds.

It's "that".
By the way, why hide behind anonymous poster? Ashamed to reveal your identity?

poche · « **Reply #11 on:** May 29, 2018, 02:46:38 AM »

Living chastity according to your state in life is never wrong.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #12 on:** May 30, 2018, 07:11:01 PM »

Acceptance of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Grows, Even Among ‘Conservatives’
Three New Polls from Gallup & One Unfortunate Proposal

iStockphoto
1.9K33
By WILLIAM M BRIGGSMay 28, 2018 • 132 Comments
William M Briggs
Guy Benson is a conservative talk radio “personality” at Fox News and political editor of Townhall. He made headlines last week after he proposed the impossible to a man in a rowboat in France.
What makes the story interesting were the more than two thousand positive responses Benson garnered, many from prominent “conservatives.” Conservative bad boy columnist Kurt Schlichter tweeted a picture of clinking champagne glasses. Associate Editor at Commentary Noah Rothman said congratulations. As did Jonah Goldberg and the Iowa Hawk David Burge. Republican National Committee member Harmeet K. Dhillon wished happiness. War strategist talking head David Reaboi said Mazel Tov.
Dozens and dozens of Blue Cheka (Twitter verified users) journalists from the Wall Street Journal, Fox News, Washington Examiner, National Review, and so on gushed with enthusiasm.
And no less than Brett Baier said “Guy — congratulations! It takes guts to ask in a wobbly boat — all the best. Thanks for sharing the moment. Love is cool.”
Baier, who is Catholic, forgot that supporting the intrinsically disordered desire for sodomy is not love. Real love would have said, “Men, you are imperiling your immortal souls. Do not do this.”
Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »
Perhaps Twitter censored negative responses, because I was unable to discover any. Or perhaps those who understood that marriage between two men is metaphysically impossible, feared the mob, and so kept their mouths shut. Either way, given the enthusiasm for Benson’s folly from those ostensibly on the right, the results from Gallup’s new polls on (let us call it) non-traditional sɛҳuąƖity will come as no surprise.
First Poll
The first is “Two in Three Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage.” Two in three Americans, in other words, have forgotten the reality that matrimony can only exist between men and women.
Twenty years ago the proportion was just over one in four. Support has steadily grown. If the trend holds, in a decade we can expect something pushing 90%.
There are still some differences between Democrats as Republicans. Eighty-three percent of Democrats support fictional marriage — and not 100%, as might be expected. Republicans are closing in on 50%. If the responses to Benson are any guide, the rate among prominent Republicans is probably higher.
Gallup’s bottom line said it best:

Quote

With the third anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision nearing and no formidable opposition trying to undo gαy marriage’s legality, it’s likely that the percentage of married LGBT adults in the U.S. will continue to grow as new generations of same-sex couples enjoy their newfound rights.

[color][size][font]
Second Poll
Poll number two is “In U.S., Estimate of LGBT Population Rises to 4.5%.”
[/font][/size][/color]

Clearly this stats have nothing to do with biology. The high and increasing rate for Millennials points to the fashionable nature of irregular sex.

[color][size][font]
Gallup’s tracking for those identifying as LGBT didn’t start until 2012, when 5.8% of Millennials claimed to have non-biological “orientations.” That number soared to 8.2% in five short years.
Contrast that group with the numbers for Generation Xers (born 1965-1979), Baby boomers (born 1946-1964), and Traditionalists (born 1913-1945). Rates of non-biological orientation for these folks held fairly steady or were unchanged over the same period. It was 3.5% for Gen Xers, 2.4% for Boomers, and 1.4% for Traditionalists. Clearly these stats have nothing to do with biology. The high and increasing rate for Millennials points to the fashionable nature of irregular sex.
Gallup didn’t report on those born after 2000, probably because these folks are not yet adults. But evidence from the CDC indicates the rates for teens are about the same as for Millennials. The surveys are not equivalent, so there is some uncertainty in the numbers.
Third Poll
The last poll is “More Say ‘Nature’ Than ‘Nurture’ Explains sɛҳuąƖ Orientation.”
More than half of Americans now say that people are born desiring non-biological sex. Some 30% admit upbringing or the child’s environment cause people to develop unnatural desires. And about 10% say both nature and nurture play a role.
The trends in belief should be no surprise. In the late 1970s, only 14% said people were “born that way” (or perhaps “made by God” that way), and now as stated it’s just about 50%. All groups tracked by Gallup — from church goers to conservatives — saw large increases. If the trends continue, more than two-thirds will have convinced themselves people come equipped at birth with disordered sɛҳuąƖ inclinations.
Bottom Line
Gallup assays the politics correctly: “Americans who believe gαys and lesbians are born with their sɛҳuąƖ orientation are much more supportive of gαy rights than are those who say orientation is due to upbringing and environment.”
It’s also become clear that these more supportive people are becoming less tolerant of contrary judgments. The prediction that in one or two decades speaking of reality will be classed as “hate speech” becomes less outlandish each day.
[/font][/size][/color]

1.9K33
Comments (132 Comments)

Author Topic: Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong? (Read 1414 times)

Änσnymσus

Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong?

Änσnymσus

Re: Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong?

Änσnymσus

Re: Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong?

Änσnymσus

Re: Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong?

Änσnymσus

Re: Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong?

Nadir

Re: Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong?

Änσnymσus

Re: Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong?

Änσnymσus

Re: Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong?

Änσnymσus

Re: Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong?

Änσnymσus

Re: Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong?

Nadir

Re: Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong?

poche

Re: Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong?

Änσnymσus

Re: Is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity Still Wrong?