homosexuality issues, because they generally view blacks as inferior "brothers" in their elitist liberal causes.  as long as they can get them to vote pretty much along party lines....it's all good.  besides, their prejudice also makes them afraid of getting their asses kicked.

"Here comes the orator! With his flood of words, and his drop of reason"  Ben Franklin

Ecclesiastes 10:2 The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left

Back in the old days life was simply a continuous struggle for survival. People banded together in villages and small towns. (I'm talking Biblical old days here, not the 19th century)

The family unit was crucial for the survival of the community as a whole. The whole point of life was to continue the family line.
All behaviors that had a negative effect on this supreme goal of survival were dealt with harshly.

Murderers were not 'imprisoned' they were executed. Thieves were severely punished because their behavior threatened their victims very lives. (when you can just barely subsist on what you have, any loss is devastating)
Adultery destroys the family unit and therefore could not be tolerated by society.

Homosexuality is universally abhorred by primitive societies. It is an unnatural union which produces no offspring. (The union of a male and a female is REQUIRED by nature to produce offspring, therefore man on man or woman on woman IS UNNATURAL. How is this not blatantly obvious?!)
Since it produces no offspring, homosexuality CANNOT be tolerated by a subsistence society.
All sexual deviancy is psychologically harmful to those who practice it and those whom they practice it upon. Therefore they weaken the fabric of society. They are anti-social.

ANY INDIVIDUAL WHOSE BEHAVIOR ATTACKED, THREATENED, DIMINISHED, OR UNDERMINED THE SURVIVAL OF THE FAMILY UNIT WAS A DEADLY THREAT TO THE COMMUNITY.
Sounds harsh, but there it is.

Just as a minor flesh wound can become life-threatening when infected; deviant behavior left unchecked will spread through society (the body) and destroy that which its own existence depends on.

When mere survival is no longer an issue, and particularly when luxury abounds, society as a whole becomes more permissive of anti-social behaviors. Lying, cheating, stealing, fornication, adultery. All these behaviors are indicative of supreme selfishness.
'I want what I want and I don't care what I have to do or who I have to hurt to get it.'
The infection spreads until the host is overwhelmed and succumbs.

Every great society on the face of the earth has crumbled to dust because they grew rich, and proud, and they said in their hearts "There is no God".
And so they followed their base lusts, petty desires, and cheap thrills.
How are the mighty fallen. How soon the glory fades.

'For this world which seems,
To lie before us like a land of dreams,
Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,
Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain,
But we are here as on a darkening plain,
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.
Matthew Arnold

Such is the ultimate end of the progressive secular agenda.
May God gave mercy on us.

Merry Christmas! :-)

In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.

Thank you for your response.  Here is my response to your concerns:

I believe that the American Catholic church is far more liberal in its
views then the church in Rome. And in fact, several times was warned to
toe the line under JPII.

It is true that - between the 1960s and 1980s - the seminaries and lay Catholic institutions gave rise to more liberal theology.  I don't deny it.  Read Michael S. Rose's book Goodbye, Good Men to get an idea of what havoc they caused.  These priests, eventual bishops, nuns/other religious, and Catholic laity grossly misinterpreted (either intentionally or otherwise) the Vatican II Council.  They held in contempt the teachings of the faith, especially in regard to social issues like abortion, homosexuality, marriage, birth control, the celibate priesthood and women's ordination.  They sought positions of power within the heirarchy to attempt to achieve these ends.  Rose's book details how good, faithful, orthodox men were often harrassed in and expelled from seminary so that the more liberal could manufacture the priest shortage they said required opening up the priesthood to women, gays, and married men.

How can you say what you have said regarding this issue, when the church has its' own SSA problems.

Because I'm able to draw a distinction between SSA and homosexual behavior.  By and large, the priests who committed the abuse were gay.  While not reflective of the general population the fact remains that the priests were gay.  If it follows that SSA is the cause of the abuse, then every person in the world with SSA would be an abuser.  SSA is an inclination no different than heterosexuality.  The problem comes when people act on unnatural, sinful desires - both SSA and heterosexual.

Don't get me wrong, what the priests did - and the bishops who covered for them - is terrible and wrong.  They should be defrocked and thrown in jail.  The problem - and you admit as much - is that those hostile to Catholic teaching run (or ran) the seminaries, parishes, and diocese that made this possible.  Many bishops - and, living in Milwaukee, I can tell you OUR former archbishop - sympathized with the abusers because they, like I mentioned earlier, had a vision for the Catholic Church uncompatible with her teachings.

I also see the Church making strides to correct this.  Mostly by screening candidates to the seminary and - quite possibly - barring many homosexual candidates if it seems their inclinations will not be compatible with Church teaching and the priestly discipline of celibacy. But, of course, you know what this means: the very same media that lamented the abuse will now attack us for "homophobia."  Mark my words (taken from another Catholic blogger): the day is swift coming where the Church will not be attacked for the cover-up scandal, but for punishing the abusers.

We DO have to walk a fine line because there are many SSA persons in the Catholic Church who believe the Church's teachings on sexuality who have to, on a daily basis, make the commitment not to give in to popular culture and sin.  You shouldn't need me to tell you that SSA individuals who live chastely according to their faith are lambasted by the libertines in culture who think sex with anyone or anything, at any place or time, is a fundamental human right.

I believe that for the most part those who practice the faith turn a
blind eye on these transgressions. And there are a large majority of
Catholics in MD and other states, who will also look the other way at
the ballot box and continue to elect politicians that absolutely defy
the very teachings of the church they hold so solemn in their hearts.

I don't disagree.  There were a few cars in my parish parking lot with Obama bumper stickers on them.  It broke my heart.  But I would counter that those Catholics who vote for a politician - any politician - who supports policies inimical to the Catholic faith don't (as you claim) "hold so solemn in their hearts" the teachings of the Church.  If they did, they would not that the BIG non-negotiables of Catholic voting are:

1. The protection of life in all stages.
2. Recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family (a union based in marriage between a man and a woman).
3. The right of parents to educate their children.

Now, anyone with a brain can tell you 99.99% of mainstream Democrats oppose all three and that no Catholic should vote for them.  Unfortunately, through a combination of the media lying, politicians lying, a dumbing-down of theology (again, by the self-same wishy, washy liberals who despise the true Catholic faith), and a general lowering of education in society at large, people don't make these connections.

It frustrates me to no end because I believe you cannot seperate your religious beliefs from your civic duty.

I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU!  In fact, I walked away from an event at a sister parish because some woman showed up with an Obama button on, and I wanted to say something to her (my husband strongly encouragd me not to).  And I think you'd be surprised to learn that many lay Catholics and the next generation of clergy/religious agree with you, too!

I would highly recommend reading Render Unto Caesar, by Bishop Charles Chaput (http://www.amazon.co...) or Bishop Chaput's other book Living the Catholic Faith (http://www.amazon.co...).  

It is IMO hypocrisy at its ultimate. But its OK you can genuflect to
the cross (sorry we don't do that anymore) attend the Sunday Mass (do
the good deed) and all will be right for another week.

I know it's frustrating and upsetting.  Getting involved with blogs and social networking, and just being an adult who keeps up with the news in general makes it very disheartening sometimes.  There are days when I feel the Catholic Church is an island - liberals want nothing to do with us because we don't think promiscuous sex is okay.  Conservatives want nothing to do with us when they think we're getting to liberal in our ideas (like "social justice", which isn't the same thing as liberals think).  The media quotes the Pope with praise when convenient (like when he talks about caring for the planet) and belittles him when he reinforces the exact same things we've been teaching for years (see the whole "saving the planet from gays is like saving the rainforest" debacle).

Would I like to see "Catholic" politicians be denied communion (or possibly excommunicated) for their behavior?  You bet.  However, excommunication is a sword that must be wielded carefully.  When politicians in the past have been excommunicated, it often does not bode well for the Catholic laity.

And you don't need me to tell you that the next 4-8 years, with Barack Obama in the White House and Dems in Congress, indicate a very difficult time for the Catholic faith.  Bishops have already vowed to challenge FOCA; I anticipate swift reaction and legislation a la Canada - wherein anything that goes against liberal ideology is a hate crime.  Do not be surprised if bishops, priests, and laity are either sued or jailed for opposing Obama on issues.

But I still have reason to believe.  Here's why:

1. The theological liberals who caused so much damage from the 1960s through pretty much the early 1990s are aging and leaving.  Look at a group like Call to Action and see that 99.9% of the attendees at such events have grey hair and a median age of 55+.  
2. The future of the faith belongs to people like me (I'll be 26 next month), and our children.
3. Liberal parishes and religious ordes lose numbers at significantly higher rates as people either leave the faith all together because of their behavior/theology (I mean, I wouldn't see the point to going to church if the priest's sermons and theology sounded like a Jack Handey speech...what's the point in being told everything I do is okay and God requires nothing of me?).
4. Conservative, orthodox parishes and orders are thriving.  My husband knows many orders that have so many new religious that they can't build housing fast enough to accomodate all of them.
5. Pope Benedict XVI has, with his loosening of the Latin Rite mass and other things, shown there is a shift back to orthodox Catholicism coming from the top down.  I know for a fact this irks the theologically liberal because a few have lamented the "return to the dark ages" under this "evil pope" (to which I say, "AMEN"!)
6. The faith itself has never changed.  Not over two millenia, not in the face of great threat and evil.   I believe Christ is present in the Eucharist, and in His Church, at each and every single Mass.  I believe the Catechism holds the Truths of the faith that will not waiver or be subject to popular opinion.
7. I believe - with the rise of the Internet, blogs, and social networking - I, as a lay Catholic who understands her faith, have ample opportunity to preach the truth to others and fight to defend what is most dear to me: the Church and her teachings.
8. I believe that the wheat and the chaff will be separated and that those of us who hold true to the faith - no matter how many commit sin around us - will be rewarded.

I believe you can contact me through this site.  Feel free to do so if you wish to discuss this matter in greater detail.  I would also ask - if you're willing to share such information - where you are located.  My husband knows many religious and clergy, and studies the goings-on in parishes throughout the country.  I'm 100% certain he'd be able to direct you to a parish, and a priest, faithful to the Catholic Church so you can come home.  We haven't left you - you just haven't found a parish that "gets it."

Aut viam inveniam aut faciam

If gayness were identified, in the womb, "you betcha" that the whole view of "the sanctity of life" would be revisited. And re the "America is aborting minority babies." No, "cool arrow" (phallic imagery?) it's women of color who are making their own decisions about their own bodies. In these very tough economic times, it's a decision that is readily understood. Minority women are capable of making their own decisions - or do you think that they are like little children who are easily manipulated?  But gay gene identified - one way to keep Roe intact!!!!!

We're equating Christianity and other belief systems with sexual deviancy now?

--Mike 

www.thebrattonreport...