[ the actual title of this page:]

  ( for ComputerIcon   or   SmartPhone-Icon )


Does the Catholic Church
"protest too much"
about homosexuality ?

Before becoming a United Methodist preacher, I was a Roman Catholic priest. So I am comfortable addressing both Protestants and Catholics. I've addressed this page to Roman Catholics, and to those interested in the part they play in the controversies over homosexuality. But I have a separate page, addressed to all Christians, and I would recommend that you read the first half of CatholicArrogance.Org/ChurchvsGays page, if you have not already done so, at which point you will see a link redirecting you to this page.

the R.C. Church's "Crusade"
against same-sex marriage :

In order to better understand the Catholic Church's problem with homosexuality, we urge you to read our ChurchvSex.html chapter, which shows that homosexuality is just one of that institution's many issues with sexuality.

In 2003 the R.C. hierarchy and the "Knights of Columbus" promoted a petition drive in its churches in the state of Connecticut.  They succeeded in persuading 70,000 Catholics (note that number!) to deny homosexual citizens the privileges and obligations that this state and the U.S.A. provides for its heterosexual citizens, when they get married.  (Note that gay people who are not even Catholic are not asking for whatever rights and privileges Catholic heterosexuals may obtain through "the sacrament of marriage".  All that they are asking is to be included whenever secular governments decide to provide secular benefits to people who take on the responsibilities of civil marriage.)

How inspiring that the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church (and some Fundamentalist allies) succeeded in persuading so many of their followers to oppose any legislation designed to end centuries of oppression and discrimination against their homosexual brothers and sisters !   Since then the same church engaged in similar efforts in the neighboring very Catholic state of Massachusetts, where many of the country's worst cases of priestly pedophilia took place.)

Do you have any idea how many Roman Catholics were persuaded by their church leaders to oppose the killing of six million Jews and four million or so other innocent victims?  Roman Catholics comprised a larger portion of Germany's population during World War II than they do in the United States today, i.e. 33% of Germans then, vs.  some 25% of Americans today.  When Hitler needed a vast army of "willing executioners", as one author called those who actually carried out Hitler's diabolical plans, he didn't go to Mars or Pluto to recruit the millions of workers and soldiers he would need. He found them in the pews of Germany's so-called "Christian" churches, who claimed at least 95% of the nation's population.  The Protestant Lutheran record was at least as bad as that of the Roman Catholics.  But about a third of NAZI Germany's army, police, railway workers, prison guards, etc., etc., etc., were Roman Catholics.  And http://CatholicArrogance.Org/NaziLeadership.html shows that a much larger percentage of the top leadership of the Third Reich were Catholics.

Given the zeal of Catholic bishops in opposing gay marriage today, the pope and bishops surely made every effort to arouse the faithful against the Nazi holocaust, right? Was it 7 million German Roman Catholics nationwide that their church persuaded to oppose Hitler's murderous administration ?  No.  Was it 700,000?  No.  Was it 70,000?  No.  Neither was it 7,000, 700, or even 70 !
        When the German-speaking American Catholic scholar, Gordon Zahn, went to Germany 30 years after WWII, in the hope of finding evidence of resistance on the part of his church to the NAZI regime, he was astounded to find a grand total of seven Roman Catholics who had refused to be a part of Hitler's regime.  And he also found that these seven did so, not because of the leadership of their church, but in spite of that leadership !  Looking back on this period, this devout Roman Catholic sociologist came to the soul-wrenching but honest conclusion:

"The (ordinary) German Catholic supported Hitler's wars not only because such support was required by the Nazi ruler but also because his religious leaders formally called upon him to do so; not only because the actions and opinion of his fellow citizens made him feel obligated to share the nation's burdens and sorrows but also because, by example and open encouragement, the Catholic press and Catholic organizations gave their total commitment to the nation's cause; not only because of deep-felt fears of the terrible price (that) nonconformity would bring or the warm surge of satisfaction accompanying nationalistic or patriotic identification with the war effort, but also because his most cherished religious values had been called into play to encourage him to take his post 'on the field of honor'  'in the defense of Volk and Vaterland.' (the people and the fatherland) " p. 56   (the parentheses are Ray Dubuque's)
       "The German Catholic who looked to his religious superiors for spiritual guidance and direction regarding service in Hitler's wars ( because these leaders claimed to represent the Divine Trinity to the faithful) received virtually the same answers he would have received from the Nazi ruler himself."  p. 17 {German Catholics and Hitler's Wars)

The few heroic Catholics who stuck their necks out to help Jews, clearly weren't following the leadership of their church, but did so entirely on their own initiative, against the tide of the hundreds of thousands of their fellow Catholics who did the bidding of their NAZI rulers.  Several of the "conscientious objectors" above were actually refused the sacraments on the grounds that their refusal to cooperate with the NAZI government evidenced lack of Catholic faith and obedience!
       Neither Pius XI nor Pius XII ever excommunicated any of these Roman Catholic dictators, or ever directed the 40 million or so Catholics in Germany not to read the Nazi manifesto that Adolf Hitler had published long before he carried out his murderous plans, by putting that NAZI Bible on the Church's "List of Forbidden Books".  Contrast the speed with which the Catholic hierarchy resorts to its most powerful weapons when its members are viewed as straying too far to the Left, as opposed to its reluctance to use such weapons when its members may have strayed too far to the Right:
The Catholic Church refused to condemn Hitler & Co,  Yet there are Catholic bishops in America today threatening Catholic office holders and even lay people with public denial of the sacraments and/or excommunication if they don't oppose choice in the matter of abortion and/or homosexual rights in this democratically ruled country of ours.

Adolf Hitler is gone, but many leaders of the Roman Catholic Church are still persecuting homosexuals, one of the groups that he despised as much as the Jews, hundreds of thousands of whom he had rounded up and exterminated along with the Jews.  Hitler could have been speaking words dictated by his Catholic superiors when he said:

"Homosexuality is the mark of Cain, of a godless and soulless culture which is sick to the core.  The teaching of the youth to appreciate the value of the community, derives its strongest inner power from the truths of Christianity.  For this reason, it will always be my special duty to safeguard the right and free development of the Christian school and the Christian fundamentals of all education."

What I have said here about Hitler's relationship to his Church is but a summary of what I spell out and document in great detail elsewhere. I challenge anyone who would question the points here to examine the extensive proof that supports these statements at www.CatholicArrogance.Org/RCscandal.html.

How could the Catholic Church object to the Nazi holocaust after the the church itself had promoted contempt for the Jews for at least 16 centuries, which we summarize at ChurchvsJews.html.

Is Pope John Paul II in Hell?hatefilled3.jpg If you are a Catholic, then it probably offends you when the religious convictions of the followers of the Rev. Fred Phelps display signs proclaiming that their recently deceased pope is in hell. If so, then try imagining for a minute what it is like to be at the receiving end of the preachings of Conservative Catholic bishops, telling people that they will go to hell if they continue to be the homosexuals they were born to be for their entire lives, whether they like it or not.

JohnPaul_IC Pope John Paul the 1st may have been murdered just 33 days into his papacy in 1978 in part because of his extremely liberal views on homosexuality :

"We have made of sex the greatest of sins, whereas in itself it is nothing more than human nature and not a sin at all." page 68

"The desire to parent children is a basic human need . . .  Until we can guarantee basic human rights to the tiniest minority we cannot truthfully call ourselves a democracy." page 56

"Never be afraid to stand up for what is right, whether your adversary be your parent, your peer, your teacher, your politician, your preacher, or even your God." page 48

So spoke Albino Luciani (who was John XXIII's first choice as a Bishop, then Paul VI's first choice as a Cardinal, and the one whom this pope groomed to be his successor as Pope John Paul the First).

(The future Pope John Paul I) "did much to encourage single persons to adopt parentless children. It was his lobbying in the Italian Parliament that made it legal for single persons to adopt children in Italy.

When an opposition member of the assembly challenged his proposal: "But, that would make it legal for homosexuals to adopt children," then Bishop Luciani responded, "The desire to parent children is a basic human need . . . Until the day comes that we can guarantee basic human rights and dignity to the tiniest minority, we cannot truthfully call ourselves a democracy."

Yet, his adversary objected, `But homosexuals have a record of splitting up after the `honeymoon' is over and this would cause children to lose either one or both parents."

Luciani responded: "There are two major forces involved in making for long term loving relationships and regardless of what Rome might believe, sex is not one of them. As a matter-of- fact, sex is most often a declining force in many relationships. It often has very little to do with the long term survival of a union. The longevity of a relationship of two people who parent children that is so important to protecting the rights of children until they reach adulthood depends not on sex, but rather on the two major forces that create long term relationships, love and companionship. When one considers the latter, the homosexual has a great advantage. Two people of the same sex who fall in love with each other make much better companions of each other because they are more likely to share common interests. It is for this reason that children parented by homosexual couples are less likely to undergo the trauma of arguments in marriage and of divorce. "

His opponent had still another objection: "Nevertheless, homosexuals are pedophiles. This will put children in great danger."

"To begin with, " Luciani responded, "homosexuality has nothing to do with pedophilia; one is sexual orientation and the other is sexual perversion. Yet, in that most cases of pedophilia involve incest, we must consider the question. If our objective is to prevent pedophilia in adoption then the only logical action is to permit only homosexuals to adopt children who are only of the opposite sex. This would reduce incest to zero. If we permit heterosexual couples to adopt children, then children would be at risk."

Within a few years of the passage of that measure, more than a half-million children, who had previously been confined to the streets, were provided loving and economic support by single parents. Some of these were homosexual couples, in which case one of the parents had adopted the child, as it remained illegal for two people of the same sex to adopt the same child.

Very little is known of Luciani's involvement with homosexual parents other than a few short notes written in connection with his orphanages, "We have found that homosexual

couples will take handicapped and less than healthy and attractive children. Most importantly, they will take bastards. Heterosexual couples, on the other hand, go for the cutest babies as if they were shopping for a puppy in a pet shop. "

There is another note written in diary format, "Dear Mama,

"I have for many years counseled a young couple. They have great sexual attraction for each other, yet, beyond that they have nothing in common. I have yet to be in their presence when they have not been arguing between themselves or yelling at their children. In addition, they both suffer from a serious ongoing drug and alcohol addiction problem for which neither one has ever sought counsel. Both children, having been bombarded during their growing-up years by the incompatibility of their parents, are now confined to institutions. In that I sanctioned this marriage, I must live the rest of my days with this on my conscience.

`Last week, this same couple came to me on a matter of such great urgency that I had to cancel another appointment. They told me of a neighbor - one of the new single parents in Italy - who was a homosexual. As a matter-of-fact, another man has been living with him for many years.

"I have known of this queer relationship for sometime. Both men are contributing members of the community and spend much of their free time helping out in the parish orphanage. Their two beautiful children, a boy and a girl, are the envy of all who are privileged to experience them.

"One night as they were leaving, I noticed tears in their eyes. They told me, it grieves them that they cannot take all of the children home with them.

"Mama, it is this experience, more that any other, that has caused me to understand the qualifications of a good parent. There is something terribly wrong with a society that thinks that one's sex is what makes one a good parent. "

Just three months before his death, Pope Paul VI permitted Cardinal Luciani to address the Vatican cardinals on the possibility that the Church might encourage homosexuals to enter into long term loving relationships as they represented the only population group that was large enough and willing to provide economic and emotional support to millions of children who otherwise would be aborted by women too young or too poor to support them. Luciani argued that the Church's traditional position exiled homosexuals from society, forcing many of them into lives of loneliness and despair. He argued the Church's position was one of prejudice, as medical science had proved that sexual orientation cannot be changed and the Bible's condemnation of homosexual acts was scant compared to its vast condemnation of heterosexual acts.

At the conclusion of the session, Luciani had been unable to convince no more than a handful of his audience that the matter should even so much as be discussed. He thanked Paul for having given him the opportunity. He then turned to the Vatican cardinals and told them, "The day is not far off when we will have to answer to these people who through the years have been humiliated, whose rights have been ignored, whose human dignity has been offended, their identity denied and their liberty oppressed. What is more, we will have to answer to the God who created them. "

Forty years before the world's psychiatric and medical communities came to the same conclusion, Luciani reasoned that sexual orientation could not be changed by therapy, that the ability to fall in love is a basic instinct.

Yet, as the psychiatric community tells us today, Luciani found that unlike sexual orientation, sexual behavior could be conditioned by therapy or other circumstances. He reasoned that there are two forces that drive a sexual act, love and lust. He knew when two people are in love, love tends to drive the sexual act and that when two people are not in love, lust tends to drive the act. He understood then what we are coming to know now; a homosexual male, for example, can be conditioned to have sex with a woman only by changing the motivating factor from one of love to one of lust. It is because he felt strongly that God's children not be products of lust; he opposed this type of experimentation.

Luciani's intermediate thesis "Strategy of a Strange War", written when he was an advanced student in theology at the Gregorian University in Rome, was based on this subject. As a young seminarian in Belluno he had done much work in the local prison and had found that heterosexual men who were confined for long periods of time did engage in homosexual acts. But he also found "No matter how long the practice went on a heterosexual male could never fall in love with another male, that lust and not love was the driving force behind such behavior, that when a heterosexual male would have a long term intimate relationship with another male in prison he might grow to like him and even develop great affection for him, but he would never be able to fall in love with him. " pp. 58-59

Contrary to the apologists for the Catholic Church who claim that the villainy of its church is "old news", i.e. a thing of the distant past "dark ages", read CatholicArrogance.Org/murderedpope/, the little known but very true story of the 1978 & 89 massacre of Popes, Cardinals and other important liberal Catholic leaders in Rome and the Vatican, which is what enabled the ultra-Conservative wing of the Roman Catholic Church to replace the ultra-Liberal John Paul the First, after he had been pope for only 33 days, first with the ultra-Conservative John Paul the Second and now with the ultra-Conservative Benedict XVI.

Now, how about we take a break from reading
and listen to the great song,
White Men In Black Dresses,
by the delightful folk singer . . .


Crusaders against Gay Rights :

For those who claim to get their inspiration from the Bible :
  How can those who are living in or who condone heterosexual sins, like divorce or adultery, cast stones at homosexuals?

It's amazing how good the eyesight of heterosexual sinners are, such as re-married adulterers continuing to live in sin with their second or third spouses (and those who condone such "sins"), when it comes to reading scripture that portrays homosexuals in a bad light.  But they can't seem to make out what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 7: 10- "To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband 11(but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife."

If Paul is right, then the Church leads the world in immorality because the divorce rate, exceeds that of much of the unbelieving pagan world.  According to "Focus on the Family," divorce statistics shows a substantially higher divorce rate amongst "born again" christians than society as a whole, even atheists and agnostics.

Now Paul had even more to say to heterosexuals: ( in v.27-29) namely that they should forget about getting married and/or ever having sex again :

"Are you married? Do not seek a divorce.  Are you unmarried?  Do not look for a wife.  But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned.  But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.  What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short.  From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none;"

I find it fascinating that Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, the extremely conservative head of the "Holy Office" i.e.  the "Grand Inquisitor" as he would have been called in the good old days, has always been a champion of what would normally be called a "liberal approach" to the dissolution of marriage.  Christ's Vicar, he has maintained, has such tremendous power that he can dissolve far more marriages than had hitherto been believed.  { Vicars of Christ, by Peter De Rosa, p. 291 }

One of the most famous leaders of Roman Catholic Church for many years, New York City's Francis Cardinal Spellman, has been called "one of the most notorious, powerful, and sexually voracious homosexuals in the American Catholic Church's history")

See http://www.trincoll.edu/depts/csrpl/RINVol5No2/gay%20press.htm &
http://nypress.com/print.cfm?content_id=6204 .


Georgia Sen. Bill Stephens' glass house

His first wife and the mother of his first two sons questions the right of Georgia State Senate GOP leader to defend the 'sanctity of marriage', after he caused the breakup of their marriage and got their 15-year marriage "annulled" by his Catholic Church, so that he could marry another Catholic with the blessing of his church.


R.C. Bishops' president
(G.W. Bush) endorses anti-Gay
Federal Marriage Amendment

Bishop Wilton Gregory, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, on Friday endorsed the proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. He urged all Roman Catholics to lobby for its passage. In a letter this week to his fellow bishops, Gregory wrote that the Senate leadership had asked them to "formally register support" for the legislation. Introduced by Sen. Wayne Allard (R-Colo.), the Federal Marriage Amendment defines marriage as "the union of a man and a woman" and is expected to come before the Senate around July 12.

Gregory asked bishops to urge their senators to get behind the amendment and to encourage priests and parishioners to do the same. "This situation challenges Catholics – and all who seek the truth – to think deeply about the meaning of marriage, its purposes, and its value to individuals, families, and society," Gregory wrote. Catholics are the largest denomination in the country, with 63.7 million members. The Southern Baptist Convention, the nation's second-largest denomination with 16.3 million members, has also backed an amendment against gay marriage, as have several other conservative religious groups. Conservative Protestants are organizing Marriage Protection Sunday on July 11, encouraging pastors and religious educators to address the topic and then mobilize their congregants to lobby their senators the next day.

Several other denominations oppose a constitutional amendment. Twenty-six religious organizations, including the Episcopal Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and the Union for Reform Judaism, have together urged Congress to reject the legislation. Although several Senate opponents of the amendment are Catholic, Gregory, of Belleville, Ill., said nothing in his letter about any obligation they might have to vote for the measure. The Vatican last year said Catholic politicians have a duty to uphold the church's "nonnegotiable ethical principles" – specifically mentioning opposition to abortion and recognition of same-sex couples.

Did a single U.S. bishop
support same-sex unions ?

By Rachel Zoll, AP Religion Writer, Washington (November 12, 2003)

"America's Roman Catholic bishops overwhelmingly approved a statement Wednesday that urges states to withhold recognition for same-sex marriages.  The bishops approved the statement by a vote of 234-3, with three abstentions.

The bishops said they did not intend to offend homosexuals, and they called discrimination against gays unjust.  The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops in September gave its general support to amending the Constitution to define marriage as a union of a man and woman.  Pope John Paul II also spoke out last summer against gay marriage.  The prelates said they felt a need to make another public statement now - as gay couples gain greater acceptance in society and seek the same benefits as heterosexual couples.  The document, called "Between Man and Woman: Questions and Answers About Marriage and Same-Sex Unions," defines marriage as a "lifelong union of a man and a woman." The document says authorizing same-sex marriage "would grant official public approval to homosexual activity and would treat it as if it were morally neutral."

How many heterosexuals would be fooled if, after telling them that their marriage was invalid, having intercourse with their spouse was reason for their being denied the sacraments, and they were being stripped of all of their legal rights in connection with one another, their clergy told them that they would condemn anybody who "discriminates against you" and that they "had no intention of offending you" ?

This game the Catholic hierarchy plays reminds me of the way the Vatican endorsed Vichy France's "Jewish statutes" (the French version of the infamous "Nuremberg laws" stripping Jews of all rights and legal protections) and the cardinals and bishops of France announced their moral outrage of these measures, the Vatican undermined the French hierarchy, by declaring that it did not consider such legislation to be conflicting with Catholic teachings. No conflict in principle; all that was asked was that the new statutes be applied with "charity" and "justice."

UN drops Gay Civil-Rights

[ article from 365gay.com ]

(London)  "A move to add sexuality to the list of categories protected by the United Nations has been dropped in the midst of intense pressure from the Vatican and Muslim nations.

It is the second year in a row that the motion has been withdrawn at the Geneva-based UN Commission on Human Rights. The proposal had been put forward by Brazil and supported by Canada and most of the European Union states."

One member of the European Parliament called the opposition "The Unholy Axis".

"Millions of people across the globe face imprisonment, torture, violence, and discrimination because of their sexual orientation," said MEP Michael Cashman, who is gay.  "For the second year running the UN has failed to condemn this discrimination and the continuing abuses of human rights on the basis of a person's sexuality.  "Both the Vatican and the Conference of Islamic States should hang their heads in shame for having reduced their beliefs to the gutter of bigotry and discrimination," said Cashman.

The same "axis" is attempting in New York to revoke an executive order by Secretary General Kofi Annan that would provide the same-sex partners of UN workers the same benefits as married couples if their home countries approve. "

Pope John Paul II is important enough to deserve
his own separate web page.
featuring (among other items) the following :
Vatican City, Feb. 1, 2001
    " Stressing again the Vatican's opposition to gay marriage, Pope John Paul II today said there was no possibility the church would redefine its view of matrimony."

Cracks in Vatican
anti-gay stance :

by Malcolm Thornberry
Posted: May 5, 2004
(Madrid) "The papal ambassador to Spain has made a stunning admission: The Vatican made a mistake in not supporting same-sex couples.

It is the first time that a high ranking official in the Catholic Church has questioned the official position that gay relationships are "evil and deviant" and indicates, Church-watchers say, a major crack in what was until now considered an impenetrable wall of opposition to gay unions.

"The new political situation in which we are living in Spain sets new challenges in the spreading of the gospel and we must meet those challenges in an appropriate manner," Monsignor Manuel Monteiro de Castro told a conference of Spanish bishops.

The speech shocked some in the audience, surprised the government, and gave hope to thousands of gay couples in what is considered Europe's most Catholic country. . .

Last month (April, 2004) the Spanish government formally announced it will bring in legislation to legalize same-sex marriage."

For "the rest of the story", see
Just prior to the presidential election, the Vatican
Ordered St. Joan of Arc Church in Minneapolis
to stop its Gay Outreach

In good conscience:
Sister Jeannine Gramick's
journey of faith

In 1971, a young American nun founded a controversial and groundbreaking ministry to gay and lesbian Catholics.  In 1999, Pope John Paul II issued an ultimatum: 'denounce homosexuality or lose everything.'

The story is about an American nun who is taking on the Vatican over her compassionate and innovative ministry to gay and lesbian Catholics. Church officials want her to shut down her life's work and never speak or write about or minister to gay people again, but she has refused to obey them, following her conscience instead.  Barbara Kopple, the Oscar-winning documentary filmmaker, calls * In Good Conscience * "a masterpiece", "brilliant", "courageous", "fabulous storytelling."  "This is the most insightful and motivational film so far about the Catholic Church. "We are premiering the film at the following domestic and international venues as well.  Please forward to anyone – relatives, friends, associates, grassroots Catholic organizations, gay organizations, educators, clergy. –


Discrimination against
gay parents in adoption :

"After a three-month study, Catholic Charities of Boston concluded that a Massachusetts anti-discrimination law makes it impossible for the agency to adhere to Roman Catholic teachings that prohibit the placement of children with same-sex couples (i.e. require discrimination against gays). Rather than challenge the law in court, the agency opted to end its 103-year-old tradition of facilitating adoptions.

Massachusetts’ four Roman Catholic bishops sought the state’s permission (to no avail) to limit the church’s adoption services to heterosexual couples. "We are asking the commonwealth to respect the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom and allow the Catholic church to continue serving children in need of adoption without violating the tenets of our faith," the bishops said.

Eight board members resigned their duties at Catholic Charities of Massachusetts in protest of the bishops’ position."

{from http://www.thelutheran.org/article/article.cfm?article_id=5875 ]

How do you know
that you are "normal" ?

Were you born "normal", as either a boy or a girl with all the right sex organs in the right place and with the "normal" sex drives?  Are you sure?  Many people who think so are wrong, and may never know it.  Most us have been taught to believe that everybody is either a boy or a girl, period.  But that is simply not the case.

"Sex differences occur on a number of independent dimensions.  Genetic sex, or the organization of the "sex chromosomes," is often thought to indicate the true sex, with males having one X and one Y, while females have two Xs.  However, about one in 400 people are neither XX nor XY, but have less common combinations, such as XO (a single X), XXY, or even different combinations in different cells within the same individual, for instance some cells XX and some cells XY.  During gestation (pregnancy), the sex chromosomes determine the differentiation of the gonads, usually into ovaries or testes, but sometimes into ovo-testes (combining ovarian and testicular cells), and occasionally the gonads are absent.  For the first six weeks, all fetuses have essentially female genitals.  Testosterone produced by fetal testes causes the clitoris to grow to form a penis, the inner labia to wrap around the penis to create the penile urethra, and the outer labia to fuse to create a scrotal sac.  The process may not complete, resulting in genitals which may look nearly female, but with a large clitoris; nearly male, with a small penis and perhaps with the urethral meatus (urinary aperture) along the bottom rather than at the tip of the penis; or they may be truly "right in the middle" ambiguous genitals, with a structure that might be considered either a large clitoris or a small penis, surrounded with what might be a split, empty scrotum, or outer labia, and with a small vaginal pouch that opens into the urethra rather than into the perineum.  Because different hormonal systems control the differentiation of the genitals and of the internal reproductive organs, some individuals are born with nearly male genitals outside, and a uterus, tubes, and ovaries inside.  Some are born with female genitals outside and undescended testes inside.

Boy or girl?  This is one of the first questions new parents are asked.  But sometimes it's not so clear.  About one in 45,000 children are born without a clearly identifiable sex. (Someone emailed me to argue with some authority that it was closer to 1 in 2,000).,  Doctors, patients and parents are faced with huge dilemmas when they have to make the choice - boy or girl.  Rae Fry asks at what stage in the child's life should the choice be made?  And does the choice have to be made at all?  At the core of the debate is surgery on babies and very young children.  For decades, this has been conventional medical practice for children born with sexual organs that are in between male and female.  It sounds barbaric, and patient groups and some surgeons are calling for the practice to be stopped.  They say surgery should be delayed until the child is old enough to consent.  But surgery or no surgery is not the only issue.  Intersex conditions include a wide variety of internal and external, genetic and hormonal characteristics.  Many aren't visible at birth.  And every individual affected is unique.


How many people would continue to deny that people are born homosexual if they had any idea how ambiguous the whole issue of sexuality really is and how tenuous their own sexuality is?

Was Jesus' earthly father Joseph
the product of a "gay marriage" ?

The discrepancies in the genealogy of Jesus is a great example of the lengths to which bible apologists will go to deny the obvious. Some claim, for example that Luke's version differs from Matthew's because Luke traces the lineage through Jesus' mother (who is the only biological parent in this case), while Matthew traces the lineage through Jesus' father (though he was only the putative father in this case). This claim, however, is blattantly false, not only because lineage was always traced through the father, but because Luke is as clear as Matthew in identifying the lineage from Jesus to Joseph, to Joseph's father, etc., etc.

But am I (Rev. Ray Dubuque) the one and only person who has ever noticed that the Bible, which many take to be "the Word of God", seems to say rather clearly that Jesus' earthly father Joseph was the product of a "gay marriage" of two men, namely Jacob and Heli? Both of them are identified as the father of Joseph!

        I have described in great detail many of the contradictions to be found in the bible by anyone willing to read the bible with an open and retentive mind, at CatholicArrogance.Org/inerrancy.html

Sergius and Bacchus, the
patron saints for homosexuals ?

[ one of many great paintings by Brother Lentz available at
www.trinitystores.com ]

Sts. Sergius and Bacchus are ancient Christian martyrs who were tortured to death in Syria because they refused to attend sacrifices in honor of Jupiter.  Recent attention to early Greek manuscripts has also revealed that they were openly gay men and that they were 'erastai', or lovers.  These manuscripts are found in various libraries in Europe and indicate an earlier Christian attitude toward homosexuality.

After their arrest, the two saints were paraded through city streets in women’s clothing, treatment that was meant to humiliate them as officers in the Roman army.  They were then separated and each was tortured.  Bacchus died first and appeared that night to Sergius, who was beginning to lose heart.  According to the early manuscripts, Bacchus told Sergius to persevere, that the delights of heaven were greater than any suffering, and that part of their reward would be to be re-united in heaven.

The feast of these saints is October 7.  The inscription at the bottom of the icon is their names in Arabic.  The saints are particularly popular throughout the Mediterranean land, in Latin America, and among the Slavs.  For nearly a thousand years they were the official patrons of the Byzantine armies, and Arab nomads continue to revere them as their special patron saints.

http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9411/articles/darling.html looks like a very good book review in which Robin Darling Young argues that the book, "Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe", in which John Boswell tries to make the case that there are many instances of the Christian church conducting gay marriage services in ancient times is very flawed.

While some Catholics may doubt the authenticity of this account, it is as credible as any number of saint stories that Catholics would never think of questioning.

And here are some additional links:

Does God really  hate fags ?

Why "Christian Conservatives"
prefer    P a u l   to   J e s u s  !

The Freedom to Marry Collaborative

the "Letter to Louise" by a studious minister

Sandy Rapp explains why gays can't be "converted"

And here's a great article about the fear in America's
religious community in the 1880's of Women's Suffrage


Christian Conservatives are energized by
the campaign against Gay Marriage

The Vatican Targets Gay Marriage Laws

For much more on what the GLBT community needs to do to confront the so-called Christian "men of God"   who are leading the opposition to justice and equality, see


Click on this banner to see
the whole picture!

If ever you are moved to critique,
support, or enlighten me,
here's the way to do it :
email image