The sad thing is that the RCC "scapegoated" homosexuals long ago and they came in handy to blame for the pedophile priest assaults on children over the last decades. Since prior propaganda against homosexuals had done its work, members were only too willing to believe that it was homosexuals sexually abusing children now.
Also, if you look at what Freud did with the Oedipus Complex, he didn't even make clear that it is MALES who are our sexual abusers of children. But even right wing women's groups agree with the fact that males are our sexual abusers.
Women will sexually abuse children but usually when they are under the influence of a heterosexual males.
We see this in sexual abuse by nuns of children, from physical assaults on students in their classrooms all the way to sexual abuse of children. However, we cannot discount that they are under the influence of a male-supremacist church and male hierarchy.
Coming back to the issue of homosexuals as parents -- Anita Bryant was a woman who was involved with commercials for orange juice --
she appeared on TV often. Somehow she became involved in a very active campaign against homosexuals, suggesting that they shouldn't be teachers in our classrooms and shouldn't be permitted into scouting -- and most especially that they shouldn't be able to adopt children.
That campaign still echoes throughout our societies, though it was a complete lie in blaming homosexuals for child abuse. That campaign still needs to be corrected in the public mind.
There is an old story I've read that long before the white man came to Hawaii, homosexuals were esteemed and honored within their societies for the care they took of orphaned children. And today as well, they seem to very naturally come forward as adoptive parents and all signs seem to be that they are excellent parents.
Homosexuality was once recognized by the Catholic Church which actually performed homosexual marriages.
Seeming this was commonplace up until about 1,000 years ago when the RCC decided that scapegoating homosexuals would better serve their interests in "normalizing" heterosexual relationships which provide offspring (new members).
The Popish Roman church is not to be trusted. Both old and new testaments are clear about homosexuality. One can reject them, but there is no disputing what they teach.
Granted the Catholic Church/Vatican is not to be trusted.
The Bible and Gospels are written by men who were part of organized male-supremacist religion.
Often the writings were changed to contradict what was previously said.
Previously the RCC performed homosexual marriages.
In fact, there seem to be passages in the New Testament where "Jesus" seems to have a lie down in
the grass with another male. Jesus may have been homosexual.
Also any indication that "Jesus" is at all sexual is buried as much as possible in writings
as clearly Jesus seems to be married to Mary, his disciple to the disciples.
Though obviously someone went to great lengths to try to hide that reality of Mary and Jesus
(joined at the hip) in the "Last Supper" painting in changing Mary to a male disciple.
There is only one way the forces of oppression can rise and that is by violence and lies, deception.
Yeah, we're on different wavelengths, that's an understatement. But don't get me wrong, doesn't mean I don't like you.
I went through a very real spiritual experience years ago, something I can't deny, and my inward subjective experience and conscience aligns with the objective revealed written word and will of God. Yeah, what you're saying, to me, is blasphemy, but I was there once too. (Not patronizing you, just telling you where I'm at.)
But if you reply to me I will reply that male-supremacist religion (including the Old Testament which was written
to cement patriarchy) has one interest in mind in its writings and that's to establish a patriarchy and to protect it.
It also has many enemies, beginning with Nature and Women, on and on.
As is made clear by "god" and "Jesus" on the cross in "Ask and you shall receive" ... no one needs a middle-man to god.
You go direct.
There is no such thing as blasphemy, especially in a democracy if you support democracy.
If there is a "god" she is not a fascist -- which is proven by the fact that she gave every human a free conscience, free thought,
and free will. And you are obviously expected to use those gifts.
Organized patriarchal religion (which in fact underpins Elite patriarchy) is one of the most harmful forces
against democracy and freedom of conscience as taught by the RCC which acts as a dictatorship against its members.
Vatican II attempted to create a church which was a democracy, but a right wing coup has done all they can to buy
Vatican II and lie about it. The beloved Pope John XXIII was very quickly gone and well as two other succeeding Popes
who seemed headed to also confirm the right of members to use their own personal consciences to decide for themselves
whether or not to use contraception.
So you say, I bet your conscience gives you a rapping though, if you were honest. Obviously you are gay. Christ was God, his affection towards other men was deistic. Goodnight.
view the rest of the comments →
Votescam ago
The sad thing is that the RCC "scapegoated" homosexuals long ago and they came in handy to blame for the pedophile priest assaults on children over the last decades. Since prior propaganda against homosexuals had done its work, members were only too willing to believe that it was homosexuals sexually abusing children now.
Also, if you look at what Freud did with the Oedipus Complex, he didn't even make clear that it is MALES who are our sexual abusers of children. But even right wing women's groups agree with the fact that males are our sexual abusers.
Women will sexually abuse children but usually when they are under the influence of a heterosexual males. We see this in sexual abuse by nuns of children, from physical assaults on students in their classrooms all the way to sexual abuse of children. However, we cannot discount that they are under the influence of a male-supremacist church and male hierarchy.
Coming back to the issue of homosexuals as parents -- Anita Bryant was a woman who was involved with commercials for orange juice -- she appeared on TV often. Somehow she became involved in a very active campaign against homosexuals, suggesting that they shouldn't be teachers in our classrooms and shouldn't be permitted into scouting -- and most especially that they shouldn't be able to adopt children. That campaign still echoes throughout our societies, though it was a complete lie in blaming homosexuals for child abuse. That campaign still needs to be corrected in the public mind.
There is an old story I've read that long before the white man came to Hawaii, homosexuals were esteemed and honored within their societies for the care they took of orphaned children. And today as well, they seem to very naturally come forward as adoptive parents and all signs seem to be that they are excellent parents.
:)
HollandDrive ago
Good grief man. It's a perversion of natural order.
Votescam ago
Homosexuality was once recognized by the Catholic Church which actually performed homosexual marriages. Seeming this was commonplace up until about 1,000 years ago when the RCC decided that scapegoating homosexuals would better serve their interests in "normalizing" heterosexual relationships which provide offspring (new members).
HollandDrive ago
The Popish Roman church is not to be trusted. Both old and new testaments are clear about homosexuality. One can reject them, but there is no disputing what they teach.
Votescam ago
Granted the Catholic Church/Vatican is not to be trusted.
The Bible and Gospels are written by men who were part of organized male-supremacist religion.
Often the writings were changed to contradict what was previously said.
Previously the RCC performed homosexual marriages.
In fact, there seem to be passages in the New Testament where "Jesus" seems to have a lie down in the grass with another male. Jesus may have been homosexual.
Also any indication that "Jesus" is at all sexual is buried as much as possible in writings as clearly Jesus seems to be married to Mary, his disciple to the disciples. Though obviously someone went to great lengths to try to hide that reality of Mary and Jesus (joined at the hip) in the "Last Supper" painting in changing Mary to a male disciple.
There is only one way the forces of oppression can rise and that is by violence and lies, deception.
HollandDrive ago
Yeah, we're on different wavelengths, that's an understatement. But don't get me wrong, doesn't mean I don't like you.
I went through a very real spiritual experience years ago, something I can't deny, and my inward subjective experience and conscience aligns with the objective revealed written word and will of God. Yeah, what you're saying, to me, is blasphemy, but I was there once too. (Not patronizing you, just telling you where I'm at.)
Votescam ago
Understand -- and if it works for you, great.
But if you reply to me I will reply that male-supremacist religion (including the Old Testament which was written to cement patriarchy) has one interest in mind in its writings and that's to establish a patriarchy and to protect it. It also has many enemies, beginning with Nature and Women, on and on.
As is made clear by "god" and "Jesus" on the cross in "Ask and you shall receive" ... no one needs a middle-man to god. You go direct.
There is no such thing as blasphemy, especially in a democracy if you support democracy.
If there is a "god" she is not a fascist -- which is proven by the fact that she gave every human a free conscience, free thought, and free will. And you are obviously expected to use those gifts.
Organized patriarchal religion (which in fact underpins Elite patriarchy) is one of the most harmful forces against democracy and freedom of conscience as taught by the RCC which acts as a dictatorship against its members.
Vatican II attempted to create a church which was a democracy, but a right wing coup has done all they can to buy Vatican II and lie about it. The beloved Pope John XXIII was very quickly gone and well as two other succeeding Popes who seemed headed to also confirm the right of members to use their own personal consciences to decide for themselves whether or not to use contraception.
HollandDrive ago
As I said, we couldn't disagree more.
Votescam ago
Works for me. :)
HollandDrive ago
So you say, I bet your conscience gives you a rapping though, if you were honest. Obviously you are gay. Christ was God, his affection towards other men was deistic. Goodnight.