Skip to main content

I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Anti-Sin

Some people object to the association of homosexuality and sin, but by and large, I think they know they are fighting against their own consciences, and the law of God. This is why the activism--when the extremely generous estimates tell us that 1 out of 100 people experiences sexual attraction to people of the same sex--is so intense. When Satan has a stronghold, it's a stronghold.

I can't recall a time when such a small percentage of people was able to shift public opinion in this way. It's certainly odd. But our sexuality is powerful. Sins against it, whether by us, or others, do a lot of damage. The inverse of the total self-gift of sexual complementarity in marriage is an endless array of variations on the theme of selfishness.

I've got to wonder how many "fallen-away" Catholics and other once-practicing Christians are "allies" of the homosexuality movement because of shame for their own sins? Or even misplaced shame, because someone abused them. Someone tries to convince you of a "new normal" because holiness and goodness was so far away, or a facade, like The Brady Bunch.

We've got to simply pray and lament all that, more than anything. I'm going to remember that if someone attacks me, or makes absurd comparisons (like I'm Fred Phelps) that it could be the Holy Spirit wounding their conscience. The people trying hardest to convince you that they are happy are the most unhappy.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

What I Should Have Said

 I was functionally fired from my teaching job in November, 2024, after an unjust administrative "process" initiated by HR , and triggered by false accusations the content of which I was never told. My "defense" therefore could have no reasonable basis or direction. I won't say the name of the Local Education Agency, but the town where I lived and worked was Cheraw, South Carolina. I think that once I was on administrative leave, they could use nearly any indiscretion of mine as the final straw to remove me. I did connect with students on social media in protest, and I did express hope that I would quickly be returned to the classroom. The principal of the high school where I worked--a true lackey of the bureaucracy, and fully committed to educational ideas, methods, and solutions that don't work--also allowed his personal dislike of me to take the form of a belief that I was a substandard teacher. He gave me an unsatisfactory review on October 12, and we ha...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...