Replace "homosexual" with "pedophile"

Why?? Homosexuals are consenting and sometimes loving adults. Pedophiles are predators in a relation that cannot be consensual.

In my view, homosexuality and pedophilia are both psychological disorders of unknown pathologies. The difference between the objects of disordered affections is mostly accidental (in the philosophical sense). Obviously, pedophilia is a much more serious problem because children cannot consent to sex with an adult. Look at it from the sufferer's standpoint, though. If the neurological manifestations and/or causes of pedophilia and homosexuality are similar (an empirically testable hypothesis), shouldn't they be treated similarly? Pedophiles and other sexual deviants are subject to arrest and conviction, but homosexuals are increasingly treated as just another expression of human diversity. I think there's a fundamental failure in logic in that disparity. I'm not advocating decriminalizing child abuse or criminalizing active homosexuality. However, I do not believe that we can just wave our hands and declare that homosexuality is "normal" simply because those affected by it can reciprocate each other's desires.

Kleptomania and criminal violence also wreak injury on others. That's what makes them crimes. I can't believe what a huge leap you're making.

You assume that homosexual activity does not wreak psychological and/or spiritual injury.

Do you have any gay family members or friends?

Nope.

there is the notion of oral law/tradition. Not all that is binding need be recorded explicitly in Scripture.

Then it could be anything enough of you wanted it to be.

Is that English?   You certainly aren't the first to suggest that belief in Sacred Tradition can lead to rationalization and justification of anything and everything. This might be true if it weren't for the fact that, at least in Catholicism/Orthodoxy, Tradition cannot contradict Scripture.

Do you believe I am a bigot?

I believe you have a visceral revulsion against homosexuality that you may be dressing up in religious clothing. Just the fact that you use the word "poisons" . . . A lot of people share that revulsion, but I wonder if it doesn't precede rather than issue from your devotion to your religion, and find welcome justification in the latter.

I won't deny finding homosexuality revolting. However, whether the revulsion came before the religious arguments is irrelevant. Revulsion or lack thereof on my, or anyone else's, part does not add or detract from the religious arguments against gay love. To say, "You find X's behavior revolting so your argument fails" is a logical fallacy.

"Bigot" is a name-calling word that doesn't have much meaning to me. A bigot to me would be someone who just reacts, doesn't think, and that's not you. (I think this is a matter of feeling, not thinking.)

I'm not sure I follow. Do you mean that my stance against homosexuality is due to some sort of affective immaturity? (Immaturity is a placeholder. I wrote and deleted a dozen words that failed to capture the impression I'm getting from you.)

Here's another interesting read: the series which begins here with this statement:

I'm going to argue that when sociomoral disgust/contamination structures the issue it is psychologically IMPOSSIBLE to both loathe the sin and love the sinner.

It's more thoughtful than polemical; I don't think you'll feel it is attacking or condemning your point of view. It might be worth blogging on.

I'll hopefully have time to read it soon.

From what you quote of Hogan and LeVoir, any nonprocreative act of love, including heterosexual, shades into sin.

Yes and no. A sexual act must, per se, be procreative. That is, it must be a procreative sort of act. Gay sex cannot be procreative. There is another factor, though. Sex is a marital act. The only suitable participants in a martial union are one man and one woman. The Church teaches that marriage, and therefore intercourse, must be unitive and procreative. Attention to either aspect should not be allowed to do violence to the other. For a much more thorough examination of human sexuality, I again suggest reading JPII's Love and Responsibility and Theology of the Body. Christopher West has written an excellent companion to the latter called Theology of the Body Explained.

Reproduction (creating in God's image) is the only thing that redeems sexual desire from the taint of sin. From one point of view that's a commendably stern and pure worldview — which is why it's been honored in the breach since time immemorial and bred long lines in front of the confessional . It certainly assures that all who believe it will feel forever guilty and sinful. There were times in the history of the church when that was good business practice as well as good theology.

The Church does not teach that sex is dirty and must be made clean through reproduction, at least not anymore. Far from being sinful, sex is sacred and must be treated appropriately. Sexuality is a holy gift from God and a manifestation of how we are made in His image and likeness. Contrary to popular belief, the Church, unlike many Protestant denominations (which border on Manichaeism or Jansenism in how they regard sexuality), has a very high view of sex. For an excellent summary of Catholic sexual ethics in layman's terms, I whole-heartedly recommend Christopher West's Good News About Sex and Marriage, chapter 8 of which answers questions regarding the Church's teachings on homosexuality.

On November 23, the Catholic League released the following to the press.

"According to news reports, the Vatican document says that while homosexuals must be respected, the Catholic Church 'cannot admit to seminaries and to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, who present deeply rooted homosexual tendencies or who support the so-called gay culture.'"

"There is little doubt that most practicing Catholics will welcome this decision. The Vatican is prudent not to have an absolute ban on admission of homosexuals to the priesthood: there are too many good men with homosexual tendencies who have served the Church with distinction. But there is a monumental difference between someone who is incidentally homosexual and someone for whom the gay subculture is central to his identity. Only those blinded by sexual politics will fail to make this distinction."

With this much I am in agreement.

"As I have said many times before, most homosexual priests are not molesters, but most of the molesters are gay. The John Jay Report made this clear: 81 percent of the victims are male and almost as many are postpubescent. This is not called pedophilia - it is called homosexuality."

OK, I've seen this mythical 81% floating around the net for quite some time now and it's been bugging me. If I understand correctly - please inform me if I'm wrong - most of the victims of sexual abuse at the hands of priests were altar servers. If that's the case, then it only makes sense that most of the victims were male. Though female altar servers have been permitted for a few decades, there are still far fewer of them than male servers. The fact that most of the victims were post-pubescent might be more indicative of a demographic shift in altar servers rather than a preference among perverts.

If I am right about most of the victims being altar servers, then this is clearly a probaballistic fallacy. The probability of a server being male is very high. The probability of a victim being a server is very high. Therefore, the probability that the victim is male is also very high.

I am less sure that most servers these days are post-pubescent, but let's assume they are. By the same logic, the probability that a random victim would be a post-pubescent male would be quite high.

Throwing around this 81% figure is misleading. Remember, "there are lies, damned lies, and statistics".

"The Catholic laity are justifiably angry with molesting priests and their enabling bishops, few in number though they have been. What this document does is to send a signal - those who cannot seriously commit to a celibate lifestyle have no legitimate role to play in the priesthood. This stricture should apply equally to heterosexuals."

If Mr. Donahue is right about what the document says, I totally agree with him. Some folks don't agree with his reading, though.

Poor Florida can’t stay out of the spotlight. They have persistent voting troubles, they got slammed by a vicious hurricane, and apparently they have a frightening number of sexual predators.

A new state law prohibits school bus stops from being within 1,000 yards of a pedophile on probation. That means that about 400 stops in Broward County may have to move to avoid the 1,100 registered sexual predators in the county! Move bus stops? I think I’d move my kids to another county. (Thanks, Fark)

As bloggers go, I’m still basically an infant. I haven’t been doing this very long and I don’t really associate with the blogging crowd outside of a few sites on my blogroll. In other words, I’m still learning a lot about this crazy little thing called blog.

For instance, I’m just now discovering just how important comments are. I don’t get many, so I suppose it’s understandable that I missed their full worth. Anyhow, it seems clear that a blog without a comments system is only half a blog.

There is, IMHO, a fascinating discussion going on at GetReligion about the impact, or lack thereof, of stories about the global priest scandal in the Dallas Morning News. There a few folks on my blogroll who I’d love to see weigh in on the issue, including (but not limited to) Narwen, Pontificator, Fr. Mike, and Jeff Miller,

The Catholic gun didn’t go off: Silence greets Dallas News series

Once there was a man who lived in a lighthouse on the foggy Atlantic.

That’s the start of a very, very old sermon illustration. I thought of it this past weekend as I read the first chunks of the sprawling Dallas Morning News reports on the globalization of the clergy sex-abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church.

Innocent by reason of tumor?

Frontal Lobe Tumor causes Pedophilia in a Man
Science raises questions for criminal justice system

Neurolgists at the University of Virginia reported that the removal of a frontal lobe tumor ended a male patient’s sexual behavior toward children. The patient had begun to have poor sexual impulse control several years eariler. The Tumor actually grew back once, with the sexual behaviors returning. The behaviors ceased again when the second tumor was removed.

Critics feel rebuffed by bishops
Earlier meeting in Dallas now seen as ‘an aberration’
By Caryle Murphy

"WASHINGTON, Nov. 13 - As scores of U.S. Catholic bishops left a downtown Washington hotel Monday evening to board buses for a Mass, a group of nearly 100 demonstrators - including several who had been sexually abused by priests years ago - offered candles to each of the prelates and asked for their prayers."

Scandal Is Stirring Lay Catholics to Push Church for More Power
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN and SAM DILLON

"INDIANAPOLIS - As the nation’s Roman Catholic bishops prepare to meet in Washington on Nov. 11 to complete their policy on sexual abuse by priests, they are confronting the most organized and widespread challenge to their power from the laity in the church’s modern history. "

Facts of priest sex abuse at odds with perception
Cathy Lynn Grossman and Anthony DeBarros

"When the nation’s Roman Catholic bishops meet today to decide how to deal with priests accused of sexually abusing children and teens, they’ll start with a handicap. Nearly a year into the scandal, the bishops have yet to compile a detailed accounting of the problem they face. They have collected no national data on how many priests have been accused, how many are serial offenders, how many are still in the church, or even how many are dead."

Editorial: Good guys vs. the bad guys

"Old-timers might recall the name of Paul Blanshard. In the late 1940s, Blanshard published a book called ‘American Freedom and Catholic Power.’ It was an anti-Catholic polemic that would become a runaway bestseller."

Rare sanction imposed on priest
Ties to priesthood severed by Vatican
By Ann Rodgers-Melnick, Post-Gazette Staff Writer

"Anthony Cipolla, the Catholic priest and accused child molester at the heart of a battle between Bishop Donald Wuerl and the Vatican 10 years ago, has been involuntarily laicized by Pope John Paul II, a rare sanction that strips him of all ties to the priesthood."

A Bishop’s Battle

"(CBS) For Catholic Bishop Donald Wuerl of Pittsburgh, the debate in Dallas over pedophilia and the Church is one he has faced before - and alone."

I think the most important line in this article is the following.

"Even if the figure were higher, it would still likely represent less than half of 1 percent of the 46,075 priests in the United States."

AP: 177 Priests Removed in 28 States

Here's a Washington Post article related to the previous post .

Catholics: Church in Midst of A 'Crisis'

"A growing majority of Catholics are sharply critical of the way the Roman Catholic Church has handled instances of child abuse by priests and believe the scandal has deeply tarnished the church's reputation, according to a national survey by The Washington Post, ABC News and Beliefnet.com. The survey suggests that weeks of media reports about priests who are sexual predators have led many devout Catholics to wrestle with long-held beliefs and assumptions about their church and its leaders."