2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfil 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.
2359 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.
This text is from The Catechism of the Catholic Church, (Revised edition, London, 1999), pages 504-505.
2357 - اللواط يعني العلائق بين رجال او نساء يحسّون إنجذابًا جنسيًّا، حصريًّا أو غالبًا، إلى أشخاص من الجنس نفسه؛ وله أشكالُ متنوّعة جدًّا على مدى العصور والثقافات. تكوينه النفسي لا يزال في معظمه غير واضح، والتقليد، إستنادًا إلى الكتاب المقدّس[1] الذي يعتبره بمثابة فساد خطير، أعلن دائمًا أن "الأفعال اللواطيّة هي منحرفةُ في حدّ ذاتها"[2]. إنّها تتعارض والشريعة الطبيعية. إنّها تُغلق الفعل الجنسي على عطاء الحياة. فهي لا تتأتى من تكامل حقيقي في الحبّ والجنس، ولا يمكن الموافقة عليها في أيِّ حالٍ من الأحوال.
2358 – هناك عدد لا يُستهان به من الرجال والنساء الذين عندهم ميولٌ لواطيّة عميقة. هذه النزعة المنحرفة موضوعيًّا، هي بالنسبةِ إلى معظمهم محنة، فيجب تقبُّلهم باحترامٍ وشفقةٍ ولطف. ويجب تحاشي كل علامة من علامات التمييز الظالم بالنسبة إليهم. هؤلاء الاشخاص
مدعوّون إلى تحقيق مشيئة الله في حياتهم، وإذا كانوا مسيحيين، أن يضمّوا إلى ذبيحة صليب الربّ المصاعبَ التي قد يلاقونها بسبب وضعهم.
2359 – الأشخاص اللواطيّون مدعوّون إلى الطهارة، وهم قادرون على التقرّب تدريجًا وبعزم إلى الكمال المسيحي، ومُلزَمون بذلك، مُستَعينين بفضائل السيطرة على الذات التي تُربّي على الحريّة الداخلية، وأحيانًا بمساعدة صداقةٍ نزيهة، وبالصلاة والنعمة الأسراريّة.
(هذا النص مأخوذ من كتاب: التعليم المسيحي للكنيسة الكاثوليكية، الترجمة العربية، المطبعة البولسية، جونية، 1999، صفحة 666.)
[1] راجع تكوين 19: 1-29؛ رومة 1: 24-27؛ 1قورنتس 6: 9-10؛ 1طيموتاوس 1: 10.
[2] م ع إ، إعلان "الشخص البشري"، 8.
Interview with Father Jean-Baptiste Edart
ROME, MARCH 15, 2007 www.zenit.org - The Bible clearly teaches that homosexual practices are wrong, says an exegete from the John Paul II Institute in Rome.
Father Jean-Baptiste Edart, is co-author of "Clarifications sur l'Homosexualité dans la Bible" (Clarifications on Homosexuality in the Bible), published by Editions du Cerf.
ZENIT interviewed the authors in February. In this follow-up interview, Father Edart of the Emmanuel Community, discusses more in-depth the biblical teachings on homosexuality.
Q: What are the references to homosexuality in the Bible?
Father Edart: This subject is given very little coverage in the Bible. This is linked to the absence of the visibility of this phenomenon, and that is a logical consequence of the prohibition of this behaviour.
The biblical texts which address the question of homosexuality directly or indirectly are: In the Old Testament
Genesis 19:7-8: "I beg you, my brothers, not to do this wicked thing. I have two daughters who have never had intercourse with men. Let me bring them out to you, and you may do to them as you please. But don't do anything to these men."
Judges 19:23-24: "No, my brothers; do not be so wicked. Since this man is my guest, do not commit this crime. Rather let me bring out my maiden daughter or his concubine. Ravish them, or do whatever you want with them; but against the man you must not commit this wanton crime."
Leviticus 18:22: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination."
In the New Testament
1 Corinthians 6:9: "Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor homosexuals nor sodomites ... will inherit the kingdom of God."
1 Timothy 1:10: "... law is meant not for a righteous person but for the lawless and unruly ... the unchaste, practicing homosexuals, kidnapers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching."
Romans 1:26-27: "Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity."
Q: You quoted 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10. How should these texts be understood?
Father Edart: These two texts contain a list of vices presented as unacceptable for access to the kingdom of God.
In 1 Corinthians, two Greek words make reference to homosexuality: "malakos," translated here as "homosexuals," and "arsenokoites," translated as "sodomites."
These terms are very rare: "Malakos" appears only here in St. Paul, as for "arsenokoites," it is the first recurrence in the whole of Greek literature.
"Malakos" means, literally, "gentle, silky, delicate." In a homosexual relationship, it designates the passive partner, but it can also refer to homosexual prostitutes or very effeminate men.
The study of the meaning of "arsenokoites” and the clearly sexual context of the list of prohibitions invalidate these last two marginal interpretations.
"Arsenokoites" means literally "to lie with a man." Formed by the association of two words present in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, it quite probably appeared in the Judeo-Hellenistic context. Rabbis used the Hebrew expression "lie with a man," taken from the Hebrew text of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, to express the homosexual relationship.
They did not limit it to pederasty. All these elements seem sufficient to us to affirm that the most plausible theory is that this term refers to men having the active role in relations of a homosexual nature. The meaning of "arsenokoites" allows one to limit the meaning of "malakos" to the passive partner in a homosexual relationship.
Homosexual acts, therefore, are considered extremely grave, directly offending the divine Law. This teaching is perfectly consistent with Judaism of that time.
No distinction is related to a question of sexual orientation, or of circumstances of the act, nor is it indicated. It is the act itself which is condemned.
Q: And Romans 1:18-32?
Father Edart: St. Paul presents acts of a homosexual nature in men as well as women as a consequence of God's wrath. Research was substantiated around the precise nature of this homosexuality and of the interpretation which that passage should be given.
The Apostle wished to illustrate the nature of the ungodliness. He used homosexuality for that, vice characteristic of pagans in the Jewish tradition.
Based on the creation account in Genesis 1 and in Deuteronomy 4, he established the link between homosexuality and idolatry. In idolatry, man is dominated by the creature he adores, thus not rendering that corresponds only to the Creator.
What takes place is an inversion of the initial, manifested divine plan, among other things, in the sexual difference. In the act of a homosexual nature, this differentiation is not taken into consideration. This is why it constitutes for Paul the best illustration possible of ungodliness.
Another difficulty of interpretation of this text is the meaning of "against nature." In Roman culture, the adjective "natural" characterized acts in accord with social conventions.
Thus in Greco-Roman culture, beyond the feminine-masculine structure -- masculine is the dominant relationship -- it governed who established the moral norm in a loving relationship.
The allusion to Genesis 1 in Romans 1:19-23 invites us to see in "nature" the order willed by God and identifiable in creation. That is translated, among other things, by the man-woman sexual difference, fundamental structure willed by God as expression of his being of communion.
God willed the sexual union of man and woman, and this divine will, or divine Law, inscribed in nature is perceptible by reason. Man can observe this through all the elements that characterize sexual identity, genitalia being one of these signs.
If we wish to take into consideration the Roman meaning of this term, we could say that the act against nature does not respect the social convention established by God in creation.
The reference to Genesis 1 allows one to understand that this prohibition in no way is invalidated by questions of "tendencies" or orientation. It is every homosexual act in its materiality which is contrary to the divine will manifested in the beginning, whether imposed or consented.
Attention to the literal sense of the New Testament texts shows clearly therefore that homosexual acts are considered as gravely contrary to the divine Law. It is important to understand that this negative moral qualification is the logical consequence of a more positive side.
God willed to create man to be in alliance with him. This was manifested in the beginning in the sexual difference. The communion between man and woman is the first revelation of the love of God for man.
The difference allows for the expression of a complementarity, thus making possible the gift of persons. The sexed body manifests this. The teaching of the Church is in perfect continuity with what Scripture says on this subject.
Christians Obliged to Approve Homosexuality
By Father John Flynn, LC. ROME, OCT. 29, 2007 (Zenit.org) - State laws on homosexuality are increasingly creating conflicts for Christians who wish to follow their conscience. In recent days, news came from England of a Christian couple who face being forced to give up their role as foster parents because they were not prepared to promote homosexuality, reported the Telegraph newspaper Oct. 24.
Vincent Matherick and his wife Pauline are registered as foster parents in Somerset County. They are also ministers at the non-conformist South Chard Christian Church. They were recently informed by authorities that they must obey laws that require them to treat homosexuality as equal to heterosexuality.
The couple told the Telegraph that they would neither condemn nor condone homosexuality, and that they could not actively promote it because of their religious beliefs. They have 3 children of their own, and have cared for no less than 28 children.
"We feel we are being discriminated against as Christians, and many others are finding themselves in our position," said Pauline Matherick.
An article published the same day by the Daily Mail newspaper added that the new laws are part of the Equality Act 2006, which make discrimination on the grounds of sexuality illegal. The change comes at a time when the Daily Mail said there is a critical shortage of foster parents, with an additional 8,000 needed.
Freedom of religion
Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor strongly criticized the ideology inspiring such laws shortly after their approval, during a lecture given March 28 at Westminster Cathedral Hall. In his address titled "The Kingdom of God and This World: the Church in Public Life," he maintained that, "freedom of religion is much more than the freedom to worship; it is the freedom to act according to that belief in the service of others."
He also warned against a model of a secular state that seeks to totally exclude religious principles. "The choice of the state to side with the secular is said to be neutrality; and it is usually justified by an appeal to equality," Cardinal Murphy O'Connor explained.
"But this is in itself ideology, divorcing religion from the public realm on the pretext that religion is divisive," he continued.
"If equality can only be promoted at the expense of the freedom to manifest our religion, we have reason to question the nature of that equality," the cardinal observed. "It is not, surely, an equality which adequately recognizes the common dignity of all."
One of the consequences of the new laws is to force Catholic adoption agencies to place children in the care of homosexual couples. Recently Catholic Care, one of these agencies, announced it is ending its adoption service as a result of the law, reported the Daily Mail newspaper July 27.
According to the article, Catholic Care, which is run by the Diocese of Leeds, is one of seven Catholic agencies that may be forced to stop adoption services. The law gave the agencies until December 2008 to adapt to the new regulations on sexual discrimination.
The Daily Mail also warned that the new law will have widespread consequences. For example, a Christian printer will not be able to refuse producing material promoting homosexuality, and churches will not be allowed to refuse to rent out conference centres or parish halls to homosexual groups.
On July 30, the Telegraph newspaper published an article reporting on a warning by Meg Munn, a junior government minister, that Muslim or Christian guesthouse owners cannot refuse to accept homosexual couples unless they impose a ban on all couples from sleeping together.
Judge excluded
Just before the Matherick's case came to light, an employment appeal tribunal heard the claim of a Christian magistrate forced to resign because he refused to place children for adoption with homosexual couples, reported the Times newspaper Oct 23.
Andrew McClintock was forced to stand down from the family panel in Sheffield after he was refused exemption from adoption hearings involving same-sex couples. He continues to act as a magistrate for non-family cases. McClintock lost a claim for discrimination at a hearing in March.
During the hearing, Paul Diamond, representing McClintock, explained that his client's objections were based on the conviction that placing children with homosexual couples was an experiment in social science.
The Church of England has also run into problems with anti-discrimination laws. A tribunal ruled in favour of John Reaney, a homosexual who was refused a job by the bishop of Hereford, Anthony Priddis, reported the Telegraph newspaper July 19.
An employment tribunal found that Reaney had been discriminated against on the grounds of sexual orientation when he was refused the post of a youth worker in the diocese.
Bishop Priddis said that in his evidence he had made it clear to Reaney that a person in a sexual relationship outside marriage, whatever their sexual orientation would be turned down for the post, according to the Telegraph. In addition the bishop said that Reaney's behaviour was contrary to Church teaching and had "the potential to impact on the spiritual, moral and ethical leadership within the diocese."
Marriage ceremony pressure
England is far from being the only country where Christians are feeling the pressure of anti-discrimination laws.
In the United States, an Ocean Grove church group is suing the state of New Jersey, reported the New York Times, Aug. 14. The group complained that authorities are pressuring them to allow a civil ceremony for a lesbian couple at a pavilion they own on the oceanfront.
The Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association originally denied a request in June by Harriet Bernstein and Luisa Paster to hold the ceremony on Sept. 30. The couple then lodged a discrimination complaint with the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights. In reaction, the group filed a suit with the United States District Court to defend their religious rights.
Then there was the case earlier this year in New Zealand, where a homosexual Iranian won asylum while another Iranian, a Christian, was denied the same status. According to a Feb. 9 report by the New Zealand Herald, the Refugee Status Appeals Authority allowed Ahmad Tahooni to stay, even though in his original appeal he had claimed asylum on political and not sexual grounds.
Meanwhile, Thomas Yadegary, also Iranian, converted to Catholicism after arriving in New Zealand in 1994. He was arrested in November 2004 and his application for refugee status was rejected. Yadegary argued that Muslims who convert to Christianity face a potential death penalty in Iran.
"What kind of hypocritical double standard is in place, among this country's immigration officials," asked Auckland Catholic priest, Father Peter Murnane, in a Feb. 7 press release by the New Zealand Catholic Communications office.
Ideological campaigns
The promotion of homosexuality is not only affecting religious liberty, but is also taking on the tones of an ideological campaign of promotion. On Oct. 24, the Italian daily newspaper Corriere della Sera reported on a campaign being launched by the Italian region of Tuscany against anti-homosexual discrimination.
The photo depicts a newborn baby with a hospital bracelet on its arm, bearing the word "homosexual." Plans call for thousands of copies of the photo to be distributed in the form of brochures and posters.
According to Alessio De Giori, president of the Tuscan branch of a pro-homosexual lobby group, ArciGay, is to convince people that homosexuality is not a choice but is something immutable and genetically determined.
The photo was immediately criticized by the Pope's secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, reported the Italian news agency ANSA that same day, who said that the organizers had gone too far in their campaign. Increasingly, a tolerance for differences is a concept homosexual advocates have removed from their vocabulary.
The Bishop of Montreal in Clash with stars over gay lobby comments
James Hastings reports in The Catholic Tomes, Sunday, August 17, 2008, page 1.
The bishop of Montreal Joseph Devine has hit back after two of Britain’s most prominent actors accused him of homophobia.
The bishop claimed his remarks in recent years opposing Labour’s pro-gay legislation was not an attack on homosexuals but simply a defence of 2000 years of Christian teaching.
Sir Ian Mckellen and Simon Callow launched their attack this week on Bishop Devine from the pulpit. They singled out a speech he made earlier this year at St. Aloysius’s Church in Glasgow, in which the bishop mentioned an honour from the Queen for Sir Ian. During the speech Bishop Devine said: “In this new year’s honours list, actor Ian McKellen was honoured for his work on behalf of homosexuals. A century ago Oscar Wilde was locked up and put in jail.” He also accused homosexuals of aligning themselves with minority groups to present themselves as people under persecution, citing their attendance at Holocaust memorials.
However, Bishop Devine denied he had ever made a homophobic statement but had only used McKellen’s honour to illustrate the “power and the strength of the homosexual lobby”. I was certainly not saying that homosexuality is a crime which is requires prison, nothing of the kind,” he said. “The focus was on the progress made by homosexuals rather than the suggestion that there should be any draconian laws. It is all very well people in the gay lobby demanding rights, but they are riding roughshod over the rights of others in the process. What I am saying is not superior, it is just sticking up for 2000 years of Christian values.”
The bishop of Montreal Joseph Devine has hit back after two of
The bishop claimed his remarks in recent years opposing Labour’s pro-gay legislation was not an attack on homosexuals but simply a defence of 2000 years of Christian teaching.
Sir Ian Mckellen and Simon Callow launched their attack this week on Bishop Devine from the pulpit. They singled out a speech he made earlier this year at
However, Bishop Devine denied he had ever made a homophobic statement but had only used McKellen’s honour to illustrate the “power and the strength of the homosexual lobby”. I was certainly not saying that homosexuality is a crime which is requires prison, nothing of the kind,” he said. “The focus was on the progress made by homosexuals rather than the suggestion that there should be any draconian laws. It is all very well people in the gay lobby demanding rights, but they are riding roughshod over the rights of others in the process. What I am saying is not superior, it is just sticking up for 2000 years of Christian values.”
God’s law speaks directly to the abomination of same-gender sex:
“Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.” (Leviticus 18: 22)
“If a man lies with a man as one with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable.” (Leviticus 20: 13)
In the New Testament, the Apostle Paul spoke of both men and women who had discovered this law:
“Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.” (Romans 1: 26-27)
Before 1987, all human HIV infections in Taiwan were passed through homosexual contacts.[1] This pattern has been repeated in every country where the routes of HIV transmissions have been studied.
What about those news reports that tell us that some researchers have decided homosexuality is inherited, or at least connected in some way to a person’s genetic makeup? The Atlantic Monthly featured a long article written by a professing homosexual. After reviewing many such claims, the author concluded that no good evidence substantiated a genetic cause for homosexuality.[2] I often wonder, “Would a loving Creator design such a trait?”
The genetic link really does not make sense to me because natural selection teaches that the “trait” would be lost quickly because no off-spring are produced to pass it on to succeeding generations. Also, this “trait” rapidly increases the death rate.
Dr. William Johnson, a secular sexual researcher of Masters and Johnson fame, reported a 70 percent reversal of the homosexual lifestyle when counselling therapy was used.[3] This was done without any gene therapy (i.e., changing a person’s genetic makeup). The homosexual lifestyle is a confusing and real problem, but I believe the genetic origin of homosexuality theory has little credibility.
Safe Sex (???) and Condoms:
As you know, many of the “AIDS awareness” campaigns emphasize “safe sex”, usually meaning the use of condoms when engaging in extramarital or same-sex activity. Let’s look at the following facts:
1- In promiscuous sex, even with condoms, the infection rate is 100 percent with the human papilloma virus (HPV).[4] Some experts believe that HPV virus may cause infections, warts and eventually cancer of the cervix and pennies.[5] In 1991, 46 percent of
2- Even with condoms, studies have shown a 30 percent infection rate in women whose spouse had HIV.[7] The condom apparently irritates the vagina, amking it more susceptible to the infection. The infection rate of HIV from husbands to wives is only 3 percent when condoms are not used.[8] The male who has HIV is more likely to pass the disease to the female during her period. Conversely, the female who has HIV is more likely to pass the disease during the female’s menstrual flow.[9] (See also in the Bible, Leviticus 18: 19).
3- Pregnancy occurs in 12 percent of couples who use a condom for protection.[10]
4- According to a review of the HIV virus by Dr. Lorraine Day, the virus is present in all the body fluids of an infected person. It can be cultured from sneezes that are up to 20 inches away. It stays alive in air, water and dry surfaces. It is not necessarily killed by antiseptic solutions such as alcohol.[11]
The Judgment of AIDS:
Does God judge people who violate His normal laws by giving them AIDS? Or are such diseases simply the consequence of breaking His laws – similar to disobeying God’s law gravity?
Some confused Christians might claim that God singles out homosexuals for His special wrath, but I disagree. I think it is clear from the Scriptures that a kind of judgement for disobeying God’s laws is built into Creation – for anyone who is disobedient (regardless of sexual orientation).
This is no more the work of a vengeful God than when a child is struck when walking into the path of an oncoming car. It is a part of the way a fallen world works.
St. Paul spoke of this in the same way immediately after denouncing homosexuality: “Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.” (Romans 1: 27)
God is not trying to limit sexual pleasure, but to enhance it. More than 26 highly contagious diseases are passed through homosexual activity. Once again, a loving Creator cared for us enough to reveal His law against this behaviour, and warned that it would have tragic results.
The Mechanism Explained:
Bear with me here so I can explain at least part why God forbids homosexual activity.
Sperm are designed to swim and penetrate. The lining of the vagina is very tough, and is designed to withstand the severe trauma during childbirth. Neither viruses, bacteria nor sperm can penetrate the lining of the vagina, and it is difficult for viruses to penetrate the vaginal wall. Healthy sperm, however, can easily swim through the birth canal and into the uterus or oviduct to penetrate an ovum, starting a new life.
In contrast, the lining of the rectum us very fragile. Sperm placed in the rectum easily penetrate the mucosa and temporarily shut down the immune system, making the victim susceptible to infections. Thus, having a compromised immune system, any infection or latent cancer cells are poorly controlled. The consequences are often fatal.
Defilement and a Loving/ Judging God:
The Bible discusses sexual practices such a homosexuality in the context of “defilement” (e.g. Leviticus 20). Laws against defilement were not issued from an angry God who wants to limit our pleasure, but from a Designer who loves us and knows that lifestyle are best for us. This does not mean, however, that God is a pushover when people deliberately disobey Him…
AIDS Map:
In looking at a map of the world distribution of AIDS, it is essentially nonexistent in certain areas. In
Dr. G.T. Stewart, emeritus professor of public health at the
Education and God’s discipline:
Wise parents, concerned about their child’s safety, teach the child about the dangers of playing in traffic. Parents who also discipline the child who rebels and runs out into a busy street are demonstrating love, not cruelty. Playing with lifestyles that are against God’s loving rules is also dangerous, and we cannot fairly charge God with cruelty when He disciplines us for disobeying laws that were given for our health.
[1] C.Y. Chuang, “AIDS in the Republic of
[2] C. Bun, “Homosexuality in Biology”, Atlantic Monthly, 271: 3 (March, 1993), pp. 47-65.
[3] Virginia H. Masters & William Johnson, Homosexuality in Perspective, (Boston, MA, Little Brown and Company, 1979).
[4] Joe McIlhaney, Jr., M.D., ed., “Condoms Ineffective Against Human Papilloma Virus”, Sexual Health Update, 2:2 (April, 1994), pp. 1-2.
[5] “Condoms Won’t Prevent Transmission of Human Papillomavirus”, Family Planning News, 22: 1 (June, 1992), p. 1
[6] H.M. Bauer, “Genital Human Papillomavirus Infection in
[7] Susan Weller, “A Metal-Analysis of Codom Effectiveness in Reducing Sexually Transmitted HIV”, Social Science and Medicine, 36: 12 (June, 1993), pp. 1635-1644.
[8] J.P. Zhang, “An Epidemiology Study on HIV Infection in
[9] “Heterosexual Spread”, Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Report, 34 (September 20, 1985), pp. 561-563.
[10] Susan Weller, “A Metal-Analysis of Codom Effectiveness in Reducing Sexually Transmitted HIV”, Social Science and Medicine, 36: 12 (June, 1993), pp. 1635-1644.
[11]
[12] N. Wang, “First Reported Case of AIDS in
[13] G.T. Stewart, “Life-style Plus HIV Equal Death”, Genetica, 95: 1-3 (1995), pp. 173-193.
Extracted from www.conservapedia.com
In respect to homosexuality and AIDS, the original spread of AIDS is generally attributed to the promiscuity of homosexual men. Originally the syndrome was called the "gay disease" because the overwhelming majority of patients were homosexual men.
Of newly diagnosed HIV infections in the United States during the year 2003, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) estimated that about 63% were among men who were infected through sexual contact with other men.
As of 1998, fifty-four percent of all AIDS cases in the United States were homosexual men, and the CDC stated that nearly ninety percent of these men acquired HIV through sexual activity with other men.
There is considerable controversy around the causes of AIDs transmission in
Male homosexual acts account for a large proportion of AIDs transmission in the
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) from 1994 to 1997 the proportion of homosexual men stating they had anal sex increased from 57.6 percent to 61.2 percent. Studies report that anal sex may be an important risk factor for the relay of many diseases. For example in 2004, Jeffrey D. Klausner, Robert Kohn, and Charlotte Kent reported in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases that proctitis significantly increases the likelihood of HIV infection.
On March 15, 2004 Medscape published an article entitled New Look at "Gay Bowel Syndrome" in which they linked HIV infection with gay bowel syndrome.
In 2004, the prominent medical website, WebMD, stated the following: "Men who have sex with men and women are a "significant bridge for HIV to women," the CDC's new data suggest."
In 2006, the number of cases of HIV in children who had been sexually molested by homosexual men, reached a record high.
Parental warning: The following "My View" contains graphic medical terminology about sexual activities that may not be suitable for younger readers.
In her May 12 "My View," Mina Yindra makes many errors, but I would like to correct her statements regarding AIDS and "bigotry."
However, AIDS is by far most common among the homosexual population in the
Public health records demonstrate that homosexuals, representing 2 percent of America's population, suffer vastly disproportionate percentages of several of America's most serious STDs, with incidences among homosexuals of diseases like gonorrhea, syphilis, hepatitis A and B, cytomegalovirus, shigellosis, giardiasis, amoebic bowel disease and herpes far exceeding their presence in the general population. These are due to common homosexual practices that include fellatio, anilingus, digital stimulation of the rectum and ingestion of urine and feces.
An exhaustive study in The New England Journal of Medicine, medical literature's only study reporting on homosexuals who kept sexual "diaries," indicated the average homosexual ingests the fecal material of 23 different men each year. The same study indicated the number of annual sexual partners averaged nearly 100. Homosexuals averaged, per year, fellating 106 different men and swallowing 50 of their seminal ejaculations, and 72 penile penetrations of the anus. (Corey, L, and Holmes, K.K., "Sexual Transmission of Hepatitis A in Homosexual Men," New England Journal of Medicine, 1980, vol 302: 435-438; as quoted in "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).
A study by McKusick, et al., of 655 San Francisco homosexuals reported that only 24 percent of the sample claimed to have been "monogamous" during the past year, and of this 24 percent, 5 percent drank urine, 7 percent engag-ed in sex involving insertion of a fist in their rectums, 33 percent ingested feces, 53 percent swallowed semen and 59 percent received semen in their rectums in the month just previous to the survey ("AIDS and Sexual Behavior Reported by Homosexual Men in San Francisco," American Journal of Public Health, December 1985, 75: 493-496; quoted in "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).
Lesbians show similar patterns of high venereal disease incidence relative to the general population. They are 19 times more likely to have had syphilis, twice as likely to have had genital warts, four times as likely to have had scabies, seven times more likely to have had infection from vaginal contact, 29 times more likely to have had oral infection from vaginal contact and 12 times more likely to have had an oral infection from penile contact ("Medical Aspects of Homosexuality," Institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sexuality, 1985, Jaffe and Keewhan, et al.; quoted in "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).
AIDS research by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control reported that the typical homosexual interviewed claimed to have had more than 500 different sexual partners in a lifetime. Considered by themselves, the AIDS victims in this study averaged more than 1,100 lifetime sexual partners. Some reported as many as 20,000. Studies reported by A-P.
To the present time, 75 to 85 percent of AIDS cases reported are related to homosexual activity, promiscuous heterosexual sex and IV drug abuse. AIDS stubbornly refuses to spread into the population in general, even 20 years after its discovery, despite dire warnings to the contrary.
These diseases are acquired directly through the sexual behavior homosexual activists are asking Americans to legally endorse and protect. Yet, as professor Jerome Lejeune of Descartes University, Paris, says of AIDS: "Only God can truly pardon the one who violates His laws; man pardons at times; Nature never pardons at all: She is not a person." The brutal consequences of attempting to break the natural law are not bigoted or hateful, nor are those, like Dr. Laura, Cal Thomas or Gary Morella, who try to point out the dangers and simple truths.
We are seeing the natural consequences of violating nature's laws now. They are also a warning to prevent the ultimate eternal consequences. How many will ignore that warning and continue to call the messenger a bigot and continue to shake their fist at God? How many will heed that warning of a loving Father, ready to forgive and reconcile His prodigal children?
9/3/2009
Catholic Online
May this 'New Ecumenism' for Marriage and Family signal the beginning of a new movement.
WASHINGTON, D.C. (Catholic Online) - On June 3, 2003, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the faith issued “Considerations regarding Proposals to Give Legal recognition To Unions Between Homosexual persons.” The Cardinal is now Pope Benedict XVI. The document restated the unbroken tradition of the Catholic Church: “The present Considerations do not contain new doctrinal elements; they seek rather to reiterate the essential points on this question and provide arguments drawn from reason which could be used by Bishops in preparing more specific interventions, appropriate to the different situations throughout the world, aimed at protecting and promoting the dignity of marriage, the foundation of the family, and the stability of society, of which this institution is a constitutive element. The present Considerations are also intended to give direction to Catholic politicians by indicating the approaches to proposed legislation in this area which would be consistent with Christian conscience”
There is a social revolutionary movement led by some on the fringes of the homosexual activist community who seek to force legal recognition of homosexual unions and equivalency between those unions and marriage. Such a movement threatens the civil order of society and does not serve the common good. We have serious confusion in some circles of the Christian community concerning this. Purporting to promote some “new way”, some Christian voices, (some confused or misinformed, others deluded or disingenuous, and some rebellious) undermine the Church, do violence to the truth, cause scandal, injure the common good and put their own souls in jeopardy. Numbered among them are some unfaithful Catholic politicians who have hidden behind their “public/private” duplicity concerning their duty to defend life. Now they are doing the same by failing to defend marriage.
The document was clear: “If it is true that all Catholics are obliged to oppose the legal recognition of homosexual unions, Catholic politicians are obliged to do so in a particular way, in keeping with their responsibility as politicians. Faced with legislative proposals in favor of homosexual unions, Catholic politicians are to take account of the following ethical indications. When legislation in favor of the recognition of homosexual unions is proposed for the first time in a legislative assembly, the Catholic law-maker has a moral duty to express his opposition clearly and publicly and to vote against it. To vote in favor of a law so harmful to the common good is gravely immoral.”
The document was not only addressed to Catholics, other Christians or even just people of faith, it was addressed to all people. That is because the truth about marriage is meant for all men and women: “Since this question relates to the natural moral law, the arguments that follow are addressed not only to those who believe in Christ, but to all persons committed to promoting and defending the common good of society.” It presented a powerful defense of the truth about marriage and family. Yes, it presented that truth from biblical revelation, but also from the order of right reason, the natural law, the biological and anthropological order, the social order and the legal order. That is because truth is truth. All who are concerned about being able to defend the institution of marriage should imitate the manner of presentation in this document. It lays out a necessary framework for our work in a culture which is sliding toward a rejection of any objective truth by which to guide our behavior in what Pope Benedict warned of as a “dictatorship of relativism”.
The document presents a unity of the truth in the natural law which is confirmed by revelation. It thus provides a framework for the work ahead. Also, while it affirms that there should be no unjust discrimination against any persons, including persons with homosexual “orientation”, it rejects the notion that homosexual unions are in any way analogous to marriage, insisting that legislation attempting to give legal status to these unions would be unjust and evil: “The Church's teaching on marriage and on the complementarity of the sexes reiterates a truth that is evident to right reason and recognized as such by all the major cultures of the world. Marriage is not just any relationship between human beings. It was established by the Creator with its own nature, essential properties and purpose. No ideology can erase from the human spirit the certainty that marriage exists solely between a man and a woman, who by mutual personal gift, proper and exclusive to themselves, tend toward the communion of their persons. In this way, they mutually perfect each other, in order to cooperate with God in the procreation and upbringing of new human lives.”
The document concluded with this summary: “The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions. The common good requires that laws recognize, promote and protect marriage as the basis of the family, the primary unit of society. Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean not only the approval of deviant behavior, with the consequence of making it a model in present-day society, but would also obscure basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity. The Church cannot fail to defend these values, for the good of men and women and for the good of society itself.”
The Good News is that in the Archdiocese of Washington, DC, the Church has risen to the challenge! Joining with other Christians, it has taken a strong stand in defense of marriage. On September 1, 2009 the following letter was sent in support of a ballot initiative which will define marriage in the District of Columbia as the union between one man and one woman:
*****
“Mr. Errol R. Arthur Chairman, District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics
441 4th Street, N.W., Suite 250 North Washington, D.C. 20001
Dear Chairman Arthur:
On behalf of the Archdiocese of Washington, I write to express support for the initiative that is being filed with the Board of Elections and Ethics today. This initiative would allow voters a voice in the process to ensure that marriage in the District of Columbia continues to be legally defined as it always has been: between a man and a woman.
The Archdiocese of Washington includes 580,000 Catholics living in Washington, DC and neighboring Maryland counties. Catholic parishes, schools and ministries have been serving the needs of this area since before the District of Columbia was formed. It is out of our religious teaching and our long-standing commitment to serving the common good that we are compelled to write in support of this initiative to uphold marriage in the District of Columbia.
Originating in God's creative plan, marriage is rooted in natural law, which forms the foundation not only for church teaching, but also for civil law. Civil governments have recognized marriage throughout human history as between a man and a woman because of marriage's unique role in protecting the rights of children to have both a mother and a father and because it creates a stable and secure foundation for our society.
Marriage is more than just a union of two people who love each other and are committed to each other. It is reserved for man and woman because of their complementarity and, thus, unique ability to create and then nurture children with the different gifts that men and women offer. This definition has remained unchanged throughout time.
Recent efforts to change this historically and fundamentally essential institution by redefining it without the input of the electorate is unjust and makes this initiative necessary. We respectfully request your favorable action on the initiative.
Sincerely yours, Most Reverend Barry C. Knestout, Auxiliary Bishop and Vicar General.
*****
In addition to this letter from his Auxiliary, Washington DC Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl sent a personal letter to 300 local priests defending marriage against any efforts to redefine or undermine it and directing them to do the same. It included these words, “One challenge we see today is a lack of understanding by many people about what marriage is… Marriage simply recognizes a relationship that is fundamental to nature: the complementarity of man and woman. That relationship is not a creation of church or civil law. However, governments and faith groups recognize marriage as between a man and woman because the exclusive, mutual and lifelong gift of a husband and wife to each other is the most stable and secure foundation to create and nurture children.”
This courageous move by Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl is joined to the hard work of other genuine and dedicated Christians in the District to defend marriage. Together it provides an example of a new and true ecumenism mobilizing around this vital social justice issue. Just as the efforts to respond to the cry of the “poorest of the poor”, children in the womb, brought us together in the Pro-Life movement, this effort to defend marriage - and the family founded upon it - is doing the same. Bishop Harry Jackson of Hope Christian Church in Washington, D.C., has been a courageous leader in the defense of marriage with “DC Stand for Marriage.” This genuine man of God has stood firm in a valiant effort to defend marriage and family in Washington, D.C. I am honored to serve along with him on the Steering committee of the “Freedom Federation”. I am sure he now welcomes the support of many more of his Catholic brethren in this vital struggle.
Peter Smith of LifeSite News comments in the report which follows this article, “One might call it the "new ecumenism," an example of solidarity between Christian denominations at its best: the Catholic Archbishop of Washington, D.C. has joined forces with local Christian ministers in the nation's capital to give strong support to a ballot initiative that would define marriage as the union of a man and a woman and stop the legalization of same-sex "marriage" in the District of Columbia. Bishop Harry Jackson of Beltsville's Hope Christian Church, fellow black Christian pastors, and members of the Stand4Marriage Coalition D.C., submitted a ballot initiative on Monday to preserve the traditional definition of marriage to the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics (BOEE) for approval.”
May this “New Ecumenism” for Marriage and Family signal the beginning of a genuine movement of cooperation which not only protects marriage but advances the true common good of our Nation.By Genevieve Pollock
ENCINO, California, JUNE 15, 2009 (Zenit.org) - A Catholic psychologist who specializes in reparative therapy with homosexuals says it's possible for those with same-sex attractions to change, despite agenda-driven ideologies that state the opposite.
Joseph Nicolosi, founder and director of the Thomas Aquinas Psychological Clinic in Encino, spoke with ZENIT about his experience as a clinical psychologist and the former president of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH).
NARTH, a "scientific, non-religious and non-political" organization, recently put out an article about the little known revision of the American Psychological Association's (APA) statement on homosexuality, which was highlighted last month in a WorldNetDaily article titled "Gay Gene Claim Suddenly Vanishes."
Nicolosi explained that NARTH has been actively working on a research project compiling scientific data to dispute the APA's claim on homosexuality, targeting three unscientific assumptions that form the basis of their policy.
He stated that these erroneous assumptions are: "Psychotherapy does not change homosexuality, trying to change the homosexual person will harm him, and there is no greater pathology in homosexual persons than in heterosexual persons."
The psychologist asserted that the "APA is not governed by scientists, but by political interests."
"There has been no new data to justify their policies," he added, "but they tend to give in to social and political pressure," and thus "NARTH has been putting pressure on them to scientifically back up their stance on the biological nature of homosexuality."
Now, Nicolosi reported, the APA has "diminished its position saying homosexuality is biologically determined." They have dropped the specific reference to a hypothetical "gay gene," he affirmed.
In other words, he said, they are beginning to recognize that homosexuality is also due to environmental factors, not just biological elements.
"In fact," he stated, "I and many of my colleagues at NARTH believe it is more environmental than biological."
Nicolosi noted that "the most important scientific information" gives "much more evidence for environmental causes of homosexuality than for biological."
Possible
The most essential point however, the psychologist affirmed, "is that change is possible, that men and women can come out of homosexuality."
"This idea of 'once gay, always gay' is a political position, not a scientific position," he added.
The therapist affirmed that he has seen this in his own private practice, and that it is also substantiated in a body of scientific research.
Nicolosi, also the author of "Healing Homosexuality: Case Stories of Reparative Therapy" and "A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality," asserted that many people have already adopted the erroneous assumptions put forth by the APA.
There is a need to assist and minister to men and women "who are looking for help to come out of homosexuality," he said, "because so many times they are just told 'Well, you're born this way,' pointing to the APA and saying 'because they said it.'"
He expressed the hope that as the APA recognizes the efficacy of therapy with homosexual persons, more psychologists will be encouraged to be involved in this type of treatment.
"Within our profession," the psychologist explained, "we trump politics with science." In other words, if we challenge the APA with scientific data, it "has to override any political or special interest forces."
The therapist emphasized the need for all people to share this message with homosexual persons that "you don't have to be gay."
Encouragement
If you know a homosexual person, he said, "encourage that person, educate him, give that person information, take the opportunity to let him know that choice is possible." "They need to believe it," he added.
Nicolosi explained: "It is a very hard therapy. First of all, it is hard in itself because you have to dig deep into emotional issues. Homosexuality is not about sexual issues, but emotional. There are the emotional underpinnings that have to be addressed.
"Then not only are you having to deal with those emotional underpinnings that are challenging on an individual level, but you have the other battle of a culture that is saying to you, 'You're homophobic; you're naïve; you're not facing reality; you're just a guilt-ridden Christian, get with it.
"You're fighting a culture that is not supporting you, plus you have your own individual battle. So it's a two-front war."
"With the AIDS epidemic, this could be about life and death here," he asserted. "We're not talking about something insignificant."
The psychologist underlined the need to "inform and educate young people."
He explained: "So when a 15-year-old boy goes to a priest and says, 'Father I have these feelings, I have these temptations,' that priest should say, 'you have a choice; if you don't want to be gay there are things that you can do.'"
"The boy should not to be told, 'God made you this way,'" Nicolosi said.
Scientific data
He continued: "This is not about going after an oppressed minority. It's not about pointing out pathology for the sake of pointing out pathology.
"This is telling young people, look, if you go down this road, you are likely to have a higher level of depression, anxiety, failed relationships, sexual promiscuity, drug and alcohol abuse than people who live their lives heterosexually. You will get involved in more, to be polite, esoteric exotic sexual practices. It goes on and on and on.
"And that's just science, simply a comparison of two groups."
The therapist added, "This notion that you are going to fall in love with a man and live happily ever after is Hollywood. The reality is that it's a hard lifestyle."
Nicolosi, also a national speaker on the topic, urged the development of more Catholic programs, noting that other faiths have already been putting forth a "vital ministry helping people coming out of homosexuality."
"Our doctrine is clear," he said, "and even if we have a weaker ministry, our doctrine on homosexuality is more brilliant than anything the Protestant denominations can come up with."
The psychologist specifically referenced a 1986 document signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger before he became Pope, addressed to the Catholic bishops "On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons."
In the letter, the cardinal, at that time prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, outlined the moral underpinnings and practical considerations of the pastoral care of "those whose suffering can only be intensified by error and lightened by truth."
In this light, Nicolosi underlined the importance of helping homosexual persons who want to change, because "if you are Christian, you have to believe that you are intended for the opposite sex" and that "sexual complementarity is part of the natural law."
This is something that "should be evident to everyone," as "our Christian anthropology," he stated, and yet "it is amazing" how many people are confused about this.
"They actually believe, or want to believe, either for personal reasons or political reasons, that God created two kinds of people: homosexuals and heterosexuals," Nicolosi noted.
"It is seeping into the consciousness without critical evaluation," he cautioned, the resignation that "God just made them that way."
Courage
The psychologist appealed to priests to not be intimidated to teach about homosexuality from the pulpit, noting that he has met many Catholics who are "discouraged that there is no resource for them."
"We have Courage as the only orthodox Catholic ministry, and it's underfunded, underrepresented and essentially pushed to the side," he stated.
He reported that "Courage is only represented in 10% of the parishes in this country" and thus many "men and women who want to come out of homosexuality" are left without resources on a local level, making it "very tough for them."
Nicolosi suggested that if a priest is working with a homosexual person and is uncertain about how to help, to refer him to a reparative therapist, "who really knows about this particular kind of treatment."
"Not to just any generic psychotherapist," he added, "but to a therapist who has training in sexual re-orientation change."
Referencing Cardinal Ratzinger's letter, he warned against a "studied ambiguity" in the face of the real need homosexual persons have for outreach from the Church.
