My view of the Catholic doctrine of sexuality

[fpb]

Comments

[fpb]

I am very unhappy at having to respond to this, but this being my blog, to leave it unanswered would be tantamount to some sort of approval; and that I cannot do. I do not think this counts as a proper answer at all. First, it does not deal with the core of my argument: that the teaching of Jesus centred on the monogamous, lifelong straight married couple, from which any deviation is a descent away from Divine order. You talk about your feelings about "homophobia" as though they were an answer. They are not even an argument. And you talk as though the teaching of Jesus were normative only for Catholics, and as though you could allow yourself to claim a Christian identity while wholly ignoring what He and His disciples taught on the scarcely secondary matter of human identity, sexuality, marriage, and likeness to God. I do not care whether this is Aussie or not, it is dishonest. I mentioned faithless groups such as the Scots Presbyterians exactly in order to underline that this is not a matter of concern to Catholics alone, but to anyone who claims to follow Our Lord. As for homosexuality being entirely different from pederasty, that is wholly contrary to my life experience, to the culture I know, to sociological and anthropological evidence, and, last but not least, to the homosexualists' love for such literature as Plato's Phaedrus. You are simply saying: in my view, homosexuality = good, pederasty = bad, therefore homosexuality =/= pederasty.

Feelings are not arguments. You feel unhappy about the narrow and violent world of the Outback, and happy about that of the cities. Therefore what the one does is bad, and what the other does is good. I repeat: that is not an argument. It is at best a mood, and a clearly deceptive one at that.

As for the niceness, urbaneness, and tolerance of the gay movement, some day I will show you a few instances. You are an utter innocent in their ways and methods.