Home Greetings Who We Are Teachings Commentary Editorial Special Featured Saint Radio Station Contact Us / Links Letters to Editor Archive
Hero Award - Archbishop Nienstedt
Millstone Award - Bishop Zurek

Commentary Page

A Common Sense Look at Homosexuality

 

Slowly but surely, the American public is embracing homosexuality as normal behavior. As stated by Father Paul Scalia, “One of the greatest issues before us now is that of homosexuality. The phenomenon of homosexuality is nothing new. But now we face something completely new in the history of the world: the demand that homosexual relationships be approved as normative and recognized as marriages. Such approval would radically change the understanding of marriage and family that has been at the heart of our civilization for millennia. Given not only this threat but also the misunderstanding and misrepresentation of the Church’s teaching, we must know the truth about homosexuality.”

Fr. Scalia goes on to clarify the teaching of the Catholic Church in regard to homosexuality; however, I would like to approach it from the viewpoint of “Common Sense” such as how the Apostle of Common Sense, G.K. Chesterton, would look at it.

Let’s start with “They are born that way.” The first major claim for a ‘gay gene’ came in 1991 when a researcher, Dr. LeVay, published a study in Science noting a difference in brain structures, called the hypothalamus, between homosexual and heterosexuals. The results of this study were widely published, even though LeVay, himself, an open homosexual, cautioned that his study did not prove homosexuality is genetic. Nor did he locate a gay gene or a gay center in the brain. The study participants were adults, and no indication was given of the brain’s appearance at birth. Nineteen of the subjects died of AIDS; one of many problems encountered in the study. In 1993, 2000 and 2003 there were similar studies with similar inconclusive results.

Common sense would indicate if a characteristic is generic, it must remain as it is and cannot be changed at will. You inherit the genes to be an outstanding athlete, with a supportive environment; you may become an outstanding athlete. If you do not inherit these genes, you will not become an outstanding athlete, regardless of the environment. This is not true in the case of homosexual behavior.

Finding the homosexual gene is the elusive kingpin of the homosexual movement. If gays can find proof of a homosexual gene they can demand affirmative action in the same way as someone born with black skin. They have not been able to prove this in over 40 years. Some studies claim subjects demonstrated feminine traits in childhood. Other studies contradict this.

Cardinal Burke recently stated, “(A) behavior such as the practice of homosexuality cannot be equated with a physical type or a cultural standard. While ethnic characteristics are inherited with the genetic patrimony and cultural features passed on with upbringing, individual behavior depends on the person’s free will. There is no such thing as a scientific proof of the existence of a homosexual gene that would lead people compulsively to act in a homosexual fashion. Nor is the anatomy or physiology of homosexuals different from those of other human beings.”

Up until 1973 homosexuality was classified as a mental disorder. Then in 1973, after years of lobbying by gay rights groups, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) changed the standard criteria for classification of mental illness. This was even after the DSM had a record of healing for gays that was comparable for other mental disorders. Dr. Robert Spitzer, who was the author of the DSM change at the time, has just recently reversed his position on therapy for homosexuals based upon his own research. He now supports sexual reorientation therapy although he is still a proponent of homosexual activism. For further information, see www.cwfa.org/images/content/bornorbred.pdf.

Is homosexuality really a disorder?  Noah Webster defines an addict as "any person who by habit or strong inclination indulges in something."

Edward T. Welch and Gary Shogren in their book Addictive Behaviors state, "Addiction is bondage to the rule of a substance, activity, or state of mind, which then becomes the center of life, defending itself from the truth so that even bad consequences don't bring repentance, and leading to estrangement from God."

Jeffrey Satinover, M.D. in Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth makes this statement, "Because the reinforcement mechanism (cessation of pain, pleasure) for the biological drives is medicated by naturally occurring opiates in the brain, to rename as addictions those compulsions that fall within any of the biological drives; hunger, aggression, sex--is not far off the mark. It is especially accurate in the domain of sex."

Former homosexual Andrew Comiskey in his book, Pursuing Sexual Wholeness states, "After my first homosexual experience at age sixteen, I quickly developed an addiction to it because of the affirmation and sense of acceptance I was finally receiving from other men."

Examples show us homosexuals were lured gradually from thought to feeling to experience, which increased the thoughts and feelings and led to more experiences until homosexuality became an entrenched part of their nature. In some instances their immediate culture and association with homosexuals such as in the field of employment or same culture have led them to accept this lifestyle and even the mannerisms and speech associated only with that culture. The only way they will ever reverse the process is to undergo a change in nature. For that they need outside help. With the help of a priest/counselor with the appropriate training, they may be able, through deep desire, faith, prayer and strength of will to overcome their inclinations, turn away from homosexual practices and assume a heterosexual lifestyle. If they can achieve this in a state of wholehearted acceptance, they may experience peace and joy. They do not need support for their addiction as provided by those who lack common sense and who believe homosexual lobbyists.

A coalition of Jewish Rabbis and respected mental health professionals has released a formal statement saying, “being ‘gay’ is a behavior that can be changed and healed with therapy, if the person has the desire.” The document has been signed by a coalition of more than 100 rabbis, community organizers, leaders and mental-health professionals.

"We emphatically reject the notion that a homosexually inclined person cannot overcome his or her inclination and desire. Behaviors are changeable. The Torah does not forbid something which is impossible to avoid. Abandoning people to lifelong loneliness and despair by denying all hope of overcoming and healing their same-sex attraction is heartlessly cruel. Such an attitude also violates the biblicalVayikra (Leviticus) 19:14 'and you shall not place a stumbling block before the blind,'" it states.

Does common sense support the lifestyle that shaves an average of 20 years from the expected life span? A recent study provides additional evidence that the practice of homosexuality, with its attendant lifestyle, shortens the life of practitioners by 15 to 25 years. This study correlates with Centers for Disease Control (CDC) data. In 2000, the CDC reported the median age of death of homosexuals at 43. The CDC reported that 9% of heterosexuals who died of AIDS were at least 65 years of age. But less than 4% of homosexuals and IV drug abusers who died of AIDS reached 65. In addition to higher rates of AIDS and HIV other factors contributing to the higher death rate of homosexuals are a much higher rate of suicide, smoking, alcoholism, illicit drug use and anal cancers. Isn’t it common sense not to support the homosexual as it is being accomplished from TV programming and by teachers in the public schools? 

Does same sex marriage make common sense? Most arguments are for the rights of the homosexual, but they all ignore the negative effects of raising children without a mother or without a father. There is no more important reason to prohibit same-sex marriage than the effects it would have on children. It's just common sense and sound science. To quote many family analysts, "In every area of life, cognitive, emotional, social, developmental ... at every phase of the life cycle ... social evidence shows that there are measurable effects when children lack either a mother or a father. ... The evidence is overwhelming. Mountains of evidence, collected over decades, show that children need both mothers and fathers." Research by dozens of groups including research done by the National Center for Health Statistics, the U.S. Department of Justice, University of Chicago and peer-reviewed publications that appeared in the Archives of General Psychiatry, Journal of Social Services Research, and the American Sociological Review show that exposure to both sexes is vitally important to the developmental needs of children because it helps them to form their sexual identity.

Even if the father and mother behave in generally similar ways, they provide contrasting images for the infant. Mothers and fathers have different verbal styles when communicating. Involved fathers are more likely to stimulate the infant to explore and investigate new objects whereas mothers tend to engage their infants in relatively pre-structured and predictable activities. The father and mother offer the child two different role models to learn from as well as providing separate sources of love and support. There are hundreds of nuances in men and women that even newborn infants can readily distinguish and that make a difference in the way the child develops.

The American College of Pediatricians, a nonprofit organization funded by members and donors, wrote to school superintendents saying, "It is not the school's role to diagnose and attempt to treat any student's medical condition, and certainly not a school's role to 'affirm' a student's perceived personal sexual orientation."  Further, schools can create a "life of unnecessary pain and suffering" for a child when they reinforce a behavior chosen out of a child's "confusion." "Even when motivated by noble intentions, schools can ironically play a detrimental role if they reinforce this disorder," said the letter, signed by Dr. Tom Benton, the organization's president. The group also has created a website called Facts About Youth as a resource for school officials to obtain the facts from a "non-political, non-religious channel."

When same-sex couples adopt a child, their insistence proves they know little about the true needs of the child. Forcing an adoption agency to put a child in a family where both parents need therapy, where both parents have a predicted shorter life span of 15 to 25 years and with a missing male or female role model, is forcing child abuse. It does not make any sense, let alone common sense.

Let’s use common sense instead of politically correct nonsense when we think about homosexuals.

Cardinal Burke recently emphasized, when speaking of Catholics being persecuted for their beliefs about homosexuals, that Christians must “stand strong, give a strong witness and insist on what is right and good for us both as individuals and society.”

 Above all, let us not forget it is out of Christ-like love for the individual and for the good of their immortal soul the Church teaches homosexual behavior is intrinsically wrong and the Church is ready to offer healing and on-going sacramental grace to aid them.  Jim Fritz

Dear Friend of CatholicVote,

Hero Award

 

 Archbishop John Nienstedt

 

Our Bishops get criticized a lot -- sometimes legitimately, sometimes unfairly. For this reason, we encourage and applaud the courage of Bishops when they boldly stand up for the teachings of our Church, and in this case – to protect the Holy Eucharist.

 

Recently homosexual activists, wearing rainbow sashes and buttons, attempted to receive Holy Communion from  Archbishop John Nienstedt of Minnesota. The activists even bragged: “We were making a statement during the Eucharist.” His Excellency stood firm, blessed them, but charitably denied them the Eucharist.

Anti-marriage activists in Minnesota are furious at the Archbishop for backing a statewide mailing of DVD’s to every Catholic in Minnesota urging them to support a constitutional amendment to protect marriage. The media is hounding the Church, calling the effort ‘too political’ and demanding to know who paid for the mailing (a private donor paid for the DVD’s).

As Americans, we acknowledge that citizens are free to disagree with the Church. But a Catholic bishop has every right to speak to the Catholics in his diocese – even during election season!

Archbishop Nienstedt we congratulate you and support you. God Bless You!

 

Jim Fritz

 

 

Millstone Award

Bishop Zurek

 

On September 9, 2011, Diocese of Amarillo Bishop Patrick J. Zurek sent a letter to his fellow bishops notifying them he had suspended Father Frank Pavone, head of Priests for Life (PFL), from public ministry outside the diocese, beginning Sept. 13.

The Bishop cited "deep concerns regarding his stewardship of the finances of the PFL organization." After the bishop's suspension became public, Fr. Pavone produced professional audits of PFL for the years 2005-2010, which he said had been sent to the diocese every year. While the organization did well in previous years, PFL ran a $1.4 million deficit in 2010. PFL has an annual budget of $10 Million, larger than the budget of the Amarillo diocese.

 

No one questions the authority of Bishop Zurek had to place Father Pavone on forced hiatus. However, good people do question whether the bishop's decision was warranted. The bishop certainly must have realized that to abruptly, and without warning, bar Fr. Pavone from fulfilling his pro-life speaking obligations for an undefined period would create some havoc and damage to innocent bystanders. It seems a one-day visit to the Bishop's office would have sufficed.

 

If Bishop Zurek has concerns about Fr. Pavone, it still seems hasty for him to write to all the bishops of the USA a letter ending with the sentence:

 

        "If you judged it to be prudent, I would like to ask that you would inform the Christian faithful under your care to consider withholding donations to the PFL (Priests for Life) until the issues and concerns are settled. Taking this opportunity to express my esteem and to ask for your prayers, I am.

    Sincerely yours in Christ  +Most Rev. Patrick J. Zurek, STL, DD, Bishop of Amarillo"

 

        Surely a prudent person would know such advice could deliver a long-lasting, devastating blow to this pro-life organization supported by direct mail fundraising. 

 

        There were few Bishops who asked for such action in regard to the serious revelations about the pro-abortion, pro-homosexual actions of the "Catholic Campaign for Human Development" (CCHD) which has an annual collection of millions of dollars collected in virtually every parish in the USA.

 

Meanwhile, Fr. Pavone is appealing his suspension to the Vatican’s Congregation for Clergy and says he has answered every question the bishop asked about the finances of PFL. Bishop Zurek disputes that point. To give Fr. Pavone credit, 21 bishops and cardinals sit on his PFL Advisory Staff, and he has been obedient to his bishop.

 

            On November 13 and 14, a number of pro-lifers lined the streets holding signs outside the Marriott Hotel during the UCSSB Conference in Baltimore urging the bishops to settle this dispute. There was no positive response from the bishops. Please pray for them.

 

Jim Fritz

Return to Top of Commentary Page

Close this window to return to current Commentary page