Thursday, June 10, 2010

Amother Hateful Catholic Anti-Gay Diatribe

The Archdiocese of Boston continues in many ways to be ground zero in the USA when it comes to the criminal cover up of the sexual abuse of minors. Among those implicated were Cardinal Bernard Law who basically resigned and fled to Rome to place himself outside the reach of the U.S. law enforcement authorities. Equally guilty were now retired Cardinal Egan of New York City and Bishop Thomas Daly (who was also Supreme Chaplain for the red Prada shoes licking Knights of Columbus) each of whom went out to threaten and silence sex abuse victims and their families. Despite this morally bankrupt background, the Boston Archdiocese had the depravity to run a column by Michael Pakaluk (pictured above) who slanders gay families and goes into near vapors over the fact that allowing children of gay couples to attend Catholic elementary schools might lead to - God forbid - other students coming to know that homosexuals exist. Pakalik's hypocrisy is off the charts. While condemning gay parents, as Andrew Sullivan has noted, Pakalulk is affiliated with the Legion of Christ, an organization whose founder has now been found to be guilty of child rape and other sexual offense, not to mention fathering children despite his vow of celibacy. Sadly, such is the nature of today's Roman Catholic Church. Here are some highlights from Pakaluk's anti-gay screed (NOTE: Pakaluk totally ignores the 280,000+ children and youths molested by Catholic priests):
*
The question arises of whether children in the custody of (one cannot say, “children of”) same-sex couples should be admitted to Catholic parochial schools. Surely everyone’s first instinct is to say “yes.” The children are doing nothing wrong, and, if they are taught in Catholic schools, they will be instructed in the truth about marriage and the family.
*
However, a careful consideration of how this actually works out suggests, I believe, a different answer, which I propose not theoretically but on the basis of experience. My own son in the first grade in a Boston Archdiocesan parochial school had a classmate who was being raised by his father and another man. From what I observed then, I concluded that the arrangement served neither my son nor the other students in the class.
*
There were three basic reasons. The first involves the inevitability of scandal. It was inevitable that either the teacher, or some parent, would deal with the two men in such a way as implicitly to teach my son, or other children in the class, that there is nothing wrong with same-sex relationships. But this is scandal: that is, leading a “little one” astray in some serious matter by the example you set.
*
The second reason is that parents are rightly given access to a child’s classroom, and yet I could not trust the designs of the same-sex couple. A mother or father may volunteer to read to the class or chaperone for a class trip. If the homosexual parent does so, what guarantee would I have that he would not be an advocate for his lifestyle, implicitly if not explicitly? . . . I saw this happening in my son’s school. The same-sex couple was interestingly activist in hosting pizza parties, sponsoring tables at fundraisers, and volunteering when parental help was needed.
*
The third reason is that it seemed a real danger that the boy being raised by the same-sex couple would bring to school something obscene or pornographic, or refer to such things in conversation, as they go along with the same-sex lifestyle, which--as not being related to procreation-- is inherently eroticized and pornographic. He might expose other children to such things, as he might easily have encountered them in his household.

*
Is your blood boiling yet? Mine is. It's crap like this that makes my son's description of the Catholic Church as the "Church of Satan" look pretty much on point.

No comments: