sábado, 8 de janeiro de 2011

Former porn actress to men: Stop looking at porn or you will destroy your life

by John-Henry Westen

HOLLYWOOD, January 5, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Jennifer Case left the sex industry three years ago by the grace of God, she says, and her message to men is very clear: “There is a real person on the other side of the images you are seeing, and you are destroying her life and the lives of her children.”

In an interview with The Porn Effect, Case attests from her own personal experience the harm that the porn industry does to the women involved. She says was traumatized, oppressed and abused, and was hooked on drugs and needed the money from porn to continue to afford them. Physically she had to deal with sexually transmitted diseases: “I had so many different infections all of the time. I left Hollywood because I became so ill from Chlamydia. My abdomen hurt so much I had to come back home,” she said.

The porn industry is fueled by its consumers - they and their money drive the destructive business - and hence the damage done to these women can be attributed to the consumers as well as the producers. However, the former porn actress holds no grudge against men for her past life. She possesses a keen insight into the addictive nature of porn and says she realizes it will take God’s help for men to get out of the addiction, as it did for her to leave the business.

“Men, God loves you! I love you too and I will always pray for all of you, for the chains to be broken,” she says. “You are a slave to porn much as much any porn star. If you are viewing porn or addicted to porn, you are trying to fill a void inside of you that only God can fill. Whenever you look at porn, you are making the void bigger, and you will destroy your life.”

She says porn is “evil” and “is a drug and it is poison and a lie.”

“If you think you can keep it in the dark, God will bring it out into the light to stop you and heal you. “

In a heartfelt appeal to men, Case concluded the interview saying: “These women are precious and deserve to be loved just as much as you do. There is a real person on the other side of the images you are seeing, and you are destroying her life and the lives of her children. Every porno has somebody’s daughter in it. What if it were your little girl? You may actually be assisting in someone’s death! Male and female porn actors die all of the time from AIDS, drug overdoses, suicides, etc. Please stop looking at porn.”

See the full interview here.

quinta-feira, 6 de janeiro de 2011

A Very Important Marriage Debate

The authors of “What Is Marriage” have now replied at Public Discourse to a renewed attempt by Prof. Kenji Yoshino of NYU to explode their argument. Yoshino’s second attempt was more serious than his first, but also more revealing of the relativistic radicalism at the heart of the movement to redefine marriage. Turns out you can “redefine” marriage without actually defining it at all!

If you want to start at the beginning of this important debate, here are its parts so far:

1. Sherif Girgis, Robert P. George, and Ryan T. Anderson (hereafter GG&A), “What Is Marriage?” in the latest issue of the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, posted at SSRN on 11 December.

2. Kenji Yoshino, “The Best Argument Against Gay Marriage: And Why It Fails,” Slate, 13 December.

3. GG&A, “The Argument Against Gay Marriage: And Why It Doesn’t Fail,” Public Discourse, 17 December.

4. Andrew Koppelman, “What Marriage Isn’t,” Balkinization, 18 December.

5. GG&A, “Marriage: Merely a Social Construct?Public Discourse, 29 December.

6. Barry Deutsch, “What Is Bodily Union? (A response to What Is Marriage?),” Family Scholars, 21 December.

7. GG&A, “Marriage: Real Bodily Union,” Public Discourse, 30 December.

8. Kenji Yoshino, “Lose the Baseball Analogy,” Slate, 21 December.

9. GG&A, “Marriage: No Avoiding the Central Question,” Public Discourse, 3 January.

I think I can safely say that Girgis, George, and Anderson’s arguments are still standing, while those of their critics have fallen pretty flat.

Can Immunology Corroborate the Two-in-One-Flesh Image in Genesis?

by Donald Demarco
Science, which is immune to political or fashionable trends, bears witness to the unique nature of the conjugal bond between a man and a woman.
Our immune system, certainly one of the great marvels of nature, equips us with 100 billion (100,000,000,000) immunological receptors. Each of these tiny receptors has the uncanny natural capacity to distinguish the selfnonself.[1] Consequently, they are able to immunize or protect our bodies against the invasion of foreign substances that could be harmful to us.[2] from the

Marvelous as nature is, it is never extremist. From a purely immunological point of view (from the standpoint of an all out defensive strategy), a woman's body would reject the oncoming sperm, recognizing it as a foreign substance. But this is precisely the point at which nature, we might say, becomes wise. If our immune system regards sperm as a potential enemy, then fertilization would never take place, and the human race would have come to an early demise with the passing of Adam and Eve.

But something extraordinary occurs that makes fertilization and the continuation of the human race possible. Traveling alongside the sperm in the male's seminal fluid is a mild immunosuppressant. Immunologists refer to it as consisting of "immunoregulatory macromolecules." This immunosuppressant is a chemical signal to the woman's body that allows it to recognize the sperm not as a nonself, but as part of her own self. It makes possible, despite the immune system's usual preoccupation with building an airtight defense system, a self-to-self union or, from an immunological perspective, a "two-in-one-flesh" intimacy.

What is well known is that male semen carries spermatozoa that have the capacity to fuse with the nucleus of the woman's egg (fertilization). What is less known is the presence of the mild immunosupressant it carries that allows the woman's immune system to welcome the male sperm as part of her own flesh. Nature is congenial to heterosexual procreativity.

With regard to sodomy, on the other hand (whether hetero-or homosexual), a pertinent question can be raised: What happens when semen is deposited in the rectal area rather than in the vaginal tract? How do the spermatozoa and the immunosuppressant function when they are placed in this particular bodily environment?

  1. Sperm have the capacity to penetrate the nucleus of cells. While the physiological target of a sperm cell is the oocyte (egg), they can penetrate somatic cells as well. When this occurs with a somatic cell, this fusion of sperm with somatic cells may result in oncogenesis (the development of cancerous malignancies). In an article entitled, "Sexual Behaviour and Increased Anal Cancer," authors Richard J. Ablin and Rachel Stein-Werblowsky, report that "anal intercourse is one of the primary factors in the development of cancer."[3] They make the following observations: a) Spermatozoa are capable of penetrating somatic cells and fuse with their nuclei. b) Nuclear fusion, other than in normal fertilization, can result in malignant transformation in the invaded tissue. c) Immunoregulatory macromolecules may directly and/or indirectly contribute to an immunopermssive environment favourable for the perpetuation of spermatozoa (or otherwise)-induced tumours and/or be a factor for tumorigenic-associated infectious agents.[4] Daling et al., writing for the New England Journal of Medicine, state: "Our study lends strong support to the hypothesis that homosexual behaviour in men increases the risk of anal cancer."[5] In addition, Melbye et al., reporting in the International Journal of Cancer find that "Being single and having practiced anal intercourse appears to be associated with anal cancer and case reports have suggested a recent increase in the number of cases of anal cancer."[6] The medical literature on this point is extensive.

  2. Scientists have confirmed that when the male immunosuppressant is deposited in the rectal area an "immunopermissive environment" is created. This environment, in which the immune system is not working as it should, is favorable for the perpetration of spermatozoa-induced tumors and other pathologies. It is as if, in this instance, the immune system becomes confused and welcomes its enemies. Researchers have documented a decreasing immunocompetence in a substantial proportion of HIV-positive homosexual men, particularly those with a history of intraepithelial abnormalities.[7] It has been shown in a number of studies that, unlike all sexually transmitted disease, where both partners are equally susceptible to the disease, in homosexual males, immunosuppression appears in the anal sperm recipients but not in the partners who deposit the sperm.[8]

Nature does not make accommodations to politically based ideologies or individual preferences. This is a point that Dr. Jeffrey Satinover makes throughout his book Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth.[9] Heterosexual intercourse is biologically completely distinct from male homosexual intercourse, and the consequences of these acts are similarly divergent.

Furthermore, the vagina is an effective biological barrier against viruses. By contrast, the distal colon and rectum, which are designed to absorb water and nutrients in the final stages of the digestive process, possess a rich lymphatic network within the rectal mucosa (the lining of the rectum). Therefore, the distal colon and rectal area is designed to facilitate absorption, including absorption of the immunosuppressive components of male semen, if exposed to them.[10]

One researcher states that, "The risk of anal cancer soars for those engaging in anal intercourse. According to one report, it rises by an astounding 4,000 percent, and doubles again for those who are HIV positive."[11] Despite the well-documented adverse medical consequences associated with sodomy, this damaging practice has been strongly supported in certain influential circles. Indeed, even the Supreme Court (in Lawrence et al. vs. Texas) has specifically upheld male to male sodomy. According to Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, persons in a homosexual relationship may seek autonomy for these purposes ['The right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe'], just as heterosexual persons do."[12] In dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia saw the Lawrence decision as allowing politics to usurp law:

Today's opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.[13]

Science in itself, like nature, is immune to political or fashionable trends. Politicians and lawyers, however, are more vulnerable to the seductions of the Zeitgeist. But in looking closely and carefully at what the science of immunology can tell us about the natural functioning of spermatozoa and the male immunosuppressant, we have even more reason for upholding and honoring the wisdom of marriage as the potentially procreative union of a man and a woman. In this regard, we have added reason to feel awe when we re-read the passage in the first chapter of Genesis that refers to marriage as a union of "two-in-one flesh." Immunology gives us reason to believe that this phrase is not a mere metaphor, but is descriptive of a reality unique to the conjugal bond between a man and a woman.

Immunology, of course, does not tell us what marriage is. But it does underscore the radical importance of the body and the fundamental importance for life of the distinctiveness of the sexes. On the other hand, Al and Tipper Gore's book Joined at the Heart (2002), to take but one example among many that represent a growing trend,[14] by employing a metaphor, fails to appreciate the corporeal solidity of marriage.[15] It is difficult to see how, by missing what is elementary to marriage, one could properly appreciate the subsequent psychological, spiritual, personal, and religious levels of marriage for which the body has prototypic significance.

Immunology, on a scientific level, corroborates the notion of the "two-in-one-flesh" meaning of marriage as recorded in Genesis. It offers yet another example of the compatibility of science and faith.


  1. Daniel E. Koshland Jr., "Recognizing Self from Nonself," Science 248 (1990): 1273; F.M. Burnet, "Immunological Recognition of Self: Such Recognition Suggests a Relationship with Processes Through Which Functional Integrity Is Maintained," Science 133 (1961): 307-311.
  2. These include prostaglandins of the E series, complement inhibitors, transforming growth factor-beta receptors for Fc fraction of gamma-globulin and the more recently described glycodelin-A. See R.W. Kelly, "Immunosuppressive Mechanisms in Semen: Implications for Contraception," Human Reproduction 10 (1995):1686–1693; W.S. Yeung et al., "Glycodelin: A Molecule with Multi-Functions on Spermatozoa," Society of Reproduction and Fertility Supplement 63 (2007): 143–151.
  3. Richard J. Ablin and Rachel Stein-Werblowsky, "Sexual Behaviour and Increased Anal Cancer," Immunology and Cell Biology 75 (1997): 181–183.
  4. Ibid., 182.
  5. J.R. Daling at al., "Sexual Practices, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, and the In-
    cidence of Anal Cancer," New England Journal of Medicine 16 (1987): 937–973.
  6. M. Melbye et al., "Immune Status as a Determinant of Human Paillomavirus Detection and Its Association with Anal Epithelial Abnormalities," International Journal of Cancer 46 (1990): 203–206.
  7. M. Melbye et al., "Changing Patterns of Anal Cancer Incidence in the United States, 1940–1989," American Journal of Epidemiology 139 (1994): 777–780.
  8. G.M. Maviigit et al., "Chronic Immune Stimulation by Sperm Alloantigens," Journal of the American Medical Association 251 (1984): 237.
  9. Jeffrey Satinover, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth (Grand Rapids, MI: Hamewith Books, 1996).
  10. T.C. Quinn et al., "The Polymicro Origin of Intestinal Infections in Homosexual Men," New England Journal of Medicine 309 (1983): 573–582; D.C. William et al., "Sexually Transmitted Enteric Pathogens in Male Homosexual Population," New York State Journal of Medicine 77 (1977): 2050–2051.
  11. M.A. Melonakos, R.N., "Why Isn’t Homosexuality Considered a Disorder on the Basis of Its Medical Consequences?" National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) (May 15, 2004), 2, http://www.leaderu. com/orgs/narth/medconsequences.html.
  12. Lawrence et al. v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003). The purposes Justice Kennedy had defined just prior to this quote by quoting himself from Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992).
  13. Lawrence et al. v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003).
  14. Two examples are: 1) Mother Outlaws: Theories and Practices of Empowerment Mothering, ed. Andrea O’Reilly (Toronto, ON: Women’s Press, 2004), 126, where the author extols the "new" family in which "gendered demarcation and embodiment is forever displaced"; 2) Margaret A. Farley, Just Love: A Framework for Christian Sexual Ethics (New York: Continuum, 2006), 288: "the justice ethic appropriate to heterosexual relationships is the same justice ethic appropriate to same-sex relationships."
  15. Al and Tipper Gore, Joined at the Heart: The Transformation of the American Family (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2002).

quarta-feira, 5 de janeiro de 2011

Gender Identity Disorder in Children

by Dr.s Richard P. Fitzgibbons, M.D. & Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D.

In Culture of Life Foundation

Dr.s Richard P. Fitzgibbons, M.D. & Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D. explain the early signs of Gender Identity Disorder, the sources of the disorder and counsel parents on strategies that can be counterproductive as well as strategies and therapies that are helpful and effective.

A mother, concerned for some time about her 4-year-old son's effeminate mannerisms, lack of male playmates, and interest in Barbie dolls, finally decides to ask the pediatrician if these are signs of a problem. She is particularly worried that her husband has become increasingly upset and alienated from their son.

The pediatrician is reassuring: "This is just a phase nothing to worry about. He will grow out of it." Unfortunately, the pediatrician is probably wrong. Gender identity problems, including cross-dressing, exclusive cross-gender play, and a lack of same-sex friends should be treated as a symptom that something may be very wrong. Boys who exhibit such symptoms before they enter school are more likely: to be unhappy, lonely and isolated in elementary school; to suffer from separation anxiety, depression, and behavior problems; to be victimized by bullies and targeted by pedophiles; and to experience same-sex attraction in adolescence. If they engage in homosexual activity as adolescents, they are more likely than boys who do not: to be involved in drug and alcohol abuse or prostitution; to attempt suicide; or to contract a sexually transmitted disease, such as HIV/AIDS; or to develop a serious psychological problem as an adult. A small number of these boys will become transvestites or transsexuals.

The good news is that if the gender identity problems are identified and addressed and if both parents cooperate in the solution, especially fathers, many of the negative outcomes can be prevented. According to Dr. Kenneth Zucker and Susan Bradley, experts in the treatment of gender identity problems in children, treatment should begin as soon as possible.

...In general we concur with those who believe that the earlier treatment begins, the better. [1]...It has been our experience that a sizable number of children and their families can achieve a great deal of change. In these cases, the gender identity disorder resolves fully, and nothing in the children's behavior or fantasy suggest that gender identity issues remain problematic.... All things considered, however, we take the position that in such cases clinicians should be optimistic, not nihilistic, about the possibility of helping the children to become more secure in their gender identity[2].

The effeminacy in some boys is so pronounced that parents may assume the problem is genetic or hormonal, but no such factors have been scientifically proven. Experts report that children assumed to have a biological problem responded positively to therapeutic intervention: According to Rekers, Lovaas, and Low:

When we first saw him, the extent of his feminine identification was so profound (his mannerisms, gestures, fantasies, flirtations, etc., as shown in his "swishing" around the home and the clinic, fully dressed as a woman with a long dress, wig, nail polish, high screechy voice, slatternly, seductive eyes) that it suggested irreversible neurological and biochemical determinants. After 26 months follow-up, he looked and acted like any other boy. People who viewed the video taped recordings of him before and after treatment talk of him as "two different boys."[3]

Healthy psychological development requires that a little boy be able to feel acceptance by and identify with his father, experience acceptance by male peers, recognize that there are two sexes and that he is male and will grow up to be a man and possibly a father, not a woman and a mother. Additionally he needs to feel good about his body and about being a boy and becoming a man. He needs to believe that his mother and father are happy that he is a boy and expect him to become a man and he needs to feel accepted as a boy by other boys.

If a boy feels inadequate in his masculine identity due to peer or father rejection or a poor body image, identifies with his mother instead of his father, feels that he would like to be a girl, those around him should not pass this off as non-stereotypical behavior. There is a reason why this boy is not developing a healthy masculine identity and that reason should be discovered and addressed.

One often hears boys with gender identity problems called "girlish", but if one observes their behavior carefully, one sees that they do not resemble healthy little girls of the same age, but imitate adult women. For example, while doll play for healthy girls includes mother/baby play and fashion/dress up play, boys with gender identity problems focus almost exclusively on fashion/dress up. While healthy girls combine outdoor physical activities with more sedate play, boys with gender identity problems are often unreasonably afraid of injury, avoid rough and tumble play, and dislike group sports. Cross-dressing and cross-gender fantasy in boys is often passed off by the family as a sign that the boy is a "great actor" or has a "wonderful imagination." Family members fail to understand that a boy who never takes the part of male character, but identifies with either a benevolent, idealized female, such as a princess or Snow White, or a domineering, angry female is revealing a deep ambivalence toward his own masculinity and toward women. Therapy can help the boy and his family understand why he feels more confident, comfortable, and accepted when he is fantasizing that he is a female.

Today many adults try very hard not to impose rigid gender stereotypes on young children, but this push for gender openness can lead parents to ignore the symptoms of gender identity conflict. Children with gender identity problems don't inhabit a gender neutral world where boys and girls play with the same toys. These troubled children reject certain types of play and clothing precisely because it is associated with their own gender or adopt activities because they are associated in their mind with the opposite sex. Boys with serious gender identity problems may use female clothing to gain acceptance or soothe anxiety become angry and upset when deprived of these objects.

Some parents may ask "What is wrong with a boy playing with dolls?" The answer is that the problem is as much what he is not doing -- learning how to be a boy among boys -- as it is what he is doing -- escaping into a female world.

Parents need to be concerned when a child openly expresses a dissatisfaction with his or her sex. such as when a boy says "I want to be a girl" or when a girl insist she is a boy. One extremely effeminate boy when asked, "Do you want to be like your daddy when grown up?" responded "I don't want to grown up." Such statements should be taken as symptoms that something is very wrong. Although the boy may feel or even express the desire to grow up to be a woman, he is male and will grow up to be a man.

Children are born with a drive to seek love and acceptance by each parent, siblings and peers. If this need is met, children develop an acceptance of their masculinity or femininity. When this developmental task is successfully completed, the child is free to choose gender atypical activities. Boys and girls with gender identity problems are not freely experimenting with gender atypical activities. They constrained by deep insecurities and fears and are reacting against the reality of their own sexual identity, usually as a result of failing to experience love and acceptance from the parent of the same sex or same sex peers. Therapy is not directed toward forcing a sensitive or artistic boy to become a macho-sports fanatic, but helping a boy to grow in confidence and be happy he is a boy.

Effeminacy, cross-gender play, and cross dressing are not the only signs that there may be a problem. Some boys suffer from a chronic sense of being inadequate in their masculinity , but do not imitate female behavior. These boys may exhibit an almost phobic reaction to rough and tumble play and an intense dislike of team sports because of poor eye-hand coordination. This inability to bond with other boys through sports boys leads to isolation, profound loneliness, a weak sense of masculinity, deep resentment and often depression.

Gender identity problems also occur among girls, although the problem is less common. In some cases a father may be pleased with his daughter's success in athletics and ignore her phobic reaction to dresses or anything feminine. Girls with gender identity problems may believe that being a boy will make them safe from abuse. Other girls, like the majority of boys with GID, have struggled with low self-esteem and a poor body image and have never appreciated their God-given female gifts and beauty.

What should a parent do if they think that there might be a problem. First, they should take any repeated problematic behaviors as a cry for help. If their pediatrician ignores their concerns, they should find a therapist who is trained in the treatment of gender identity problems. Parents can read up on the subject. in Zucker and Bradley's book Gender Identity and Psychosexual Problems in Children and Adolescence, which offers a complete review of the problem.

Consistent cross-gender behaviors are a sign that the child believes he or she would be better off' as the opposite sex. According to Bradley and Zucker, "This fantasy solution' provides relief but at a cost." These are unhappy children who are using these behaviors defensively to deal with their distress.[4]

Parents sometimes try on their own to stop the overt behavior, but forcing a frightened child to engage in behaviors in which he feels inadequate or fearful is not the solution. The therapist can work with the child and the parents to uncover the root cause of the emotional conflicts, so that the problem can be addressed and resolved.

In our experience a challenging aspect of treatment is helping the father realize how crucial his role is in the healing process and then engaging him to become more involved with strengthening his son’s masculine identity. This difficuly is often the result of the father’s modeling after a father (the boy’s grandfather) who did not communicate praise and love regularly to the father.

It is true that without treatment certain manifestations of gender identity conflicts, such as fantasy fashion doll play in boys or open cross-dressing may disappear by the time the child is 8 or 9, but these coping mechanisms are often replaced by other less overt expressions of an underlying gender identity problem. Once the problem goes "underground" it will be more difficult to treat.

Some people may avoid treatment because they believe that gender identity problems are a sign that the child was born "homosexual" and that the parents should simply accept this outcome as inevitable and encourage the child to accept a homosexual identity. Given the positive results of early intervention, the profound unhappiness of these children during elementary school, and the massive problems which accompany same-sex attraction in adolescence, parents should do everything possible to help their child resolve even minor gender identity problems.

Catholic parents need to be particularly concerned. The Church's teaching on homosexual activity is clearly stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, "homosexuals acts are intrinciscally disordered... Under no circumstances can they be approved" (CCC 2357). For a Catholic trying to be obedient to God, temptations to same-sex activity are a source of deep pain. Treatment of adolescents or adults is possible, but difficult and the outcome is not assured. It is far better to prevent the problem or treat it in early childhood. Those who would like to understand more about same-sex attractions can find information on the website of the Catholic Medical Association (www.cathmed.org) in a report entitled Homosexuality and Hope.

If a boy grows up at ease and confident about his masculine identity as a result of a close loving relationship with his father, with same-sex friends in childhood, with a mother who supports his manly development and is protected from vicious bullying and sexual predators, the chances are minimal that he will experience same-sex attraction in adolescence. Even if one or two items on the above list are missing, the chances are still small that the boy will become homosexually involved as an adult. Generally, the histories of men engaging in same-sex behaviors reveal a history of cumulative problems: significant peer rejection, a distant father, a poor body image, low self-esteem, an overprotective or controlling mother, victimization by bullies, or sexual abuse. Fortunately these conflicts can be resolved, and the masculine identity can be strengthened and then embraced

[1] Zucker and Bradley (p.281)

[2] .(p.282)

[3] Rekers, G., Lovaas, O., Low, B. (1974) Behavioral treatment of deviant sex role behaviors in a male child. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis. 7: 134 - 151.

[4] Bradley, S., Zucker, K. (1998) Drs. Bradley and Zucker reply. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 37, 3: 244-245.

Priest-pioneer for pastoral care of homosexuals dies at 92

by Patrick B. Craine

ELKTON, Maryland, January 4, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The pro-family movement is mourning the loss of a great advocate for authentic sexuality, as Courage founder Fr. John F. Harvey passed away December 27.

The priest, 92, died at Union Hospital in Elkton, Maryland; a funeral was celebrated on December 31 in Wilmington, Delaware.

Fr. Harvey founded the Courage apostolate in 1980 at the request of Cardinal Terrence Cooke, then-Archbishop of New York, and served as director until 2008. The ministry offers a spiritual support system to men and women struggling with same-sex attractions, and promotes chastity and the development of an integrated sexuality. They now run over a 100 chapters in a dozen countries, and have been endorsed by the Vatican.

“For Fr. Harvey, homosexuality was not a cultural issue or a topic to be debated,” said Fr. Paul Check, Fr. Harvey’s successor at Courage. “It was a reality in the life of individual people, who came to the Church with the hope of finding some understanding, some maternal love and solicitude, some compassion, some mercy, and, of course, truth.”

“He understood very well the human condition in both its vulnerabilities and in its nobility,” he added.

Fr. Check called him a “remarkable” yet “undervalued” man and a “pioneer” in authentic pastoral care for homosexual persons. He said the late priest was characterized most by “fidelity to the Church, humility, cheerfulness, great generosity of heart.”

“No matter how much resistance or misunderstanding he encountered - which was a great deal over a long lifetime of dealing with a very controversial subject - he was always very charitable,” said Fr. Check.

The priest was born in Philadelphia in 1918, and ordained for the Oblates of St. Francis de Sales in 1944. He held a doctorate in moral theology, and a graduate degree in psychology. He began teaching theology in 1948 and continued until January 2010.

He wrote over 45 articles for theological and psychological journals related to human sexuality and counseling, and was a frequent lecturer and media commentator. He is the author of The Homosexual Person: New Thinking in Pastoral Care and The Truth About Homosexuality: The Cry of the Faithful.

Though he faced great obstacles even within the Catholic Church, his work won strong support from the Vatican and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. In the words of the late Cardinal John O’Connor, in a foreword to The Truth About Homosexuality, “Few people in the United States have dedicated themselves more generously or wholeheartedly to the pastoral care of homosexual persons than has Father John F. Harvey, O.S.F.S.”

terça-feira, 4 de janeiro de 2011

Countries Reject “Sexual Orientation” Language in Treaty with Europe

By Terrence McKeegan, J.D.

BRUSSELS, December 30 (C-FAM)- Developing nations recently slapped down attempts by the European Union to add “sexual orientation” to an existing treaty.

Seventy-nine countries from Africa, the Caribbean, and the Pacific islands sent a letter to the European Parliament that is notable for its strong demand that the EU stop pushing its homosexual agenda on developing countries.

The treaty in question is an economic development pact between the developing countries—- acting as the African, Caribbean, and Pacific Group of States (ACP)—- and the European Union that allows for the sides to revise the agreement every five years. Earlier this year, during treaty revision negotiations, the EU tried to insert language on “sexual orientation” as a category of non-discrimination. This was repeatedly rejected by the developing nations and was struck from the final version of the revised agreement.

The Secretary-General of the ACP Parliamentary Assembly delivered the letter to the European Parliament in late October. The ACP states that it “is urgently appealing to the European Union to refrain from any attempts to impose its values which are not freely shared in the framework of the ACP-EU Partnership”, a reference to the “sexual orientation” language proposed by the EU.

The letter also noted, “the Partnership can work and be fully functional with due respect for the social differences and cultural diversity of the two Parties.”

In December, some members of the European Parliament issued a defiant response statement to the ACP letter, in which they recalled their support for the inclusion of sexual orientation in the revised treaty. The statement insisted that the “principle of nondiscrimination…including on the basis of sexual orientation, will not be compromised in the ACP-EU partnership.”

Also this month, the European Parliament passed a resolution in December in which the EU reminds Africa that “the EU is responsible for more than half of development aid and remains Africa’s most important trading partner”. It later states, in all actions conducted under the terms of various partnerships” that sexual orientation is a protected category of non-discrimination.

Just last week, the United States, with the backing of the European Union, reintroduced language on “sexual orientation” in a UN General Assembly resolution after the language had been voted down in committee. According to various accounts, high-level pressure was put on developing countries that had rejected the sexual orientation language previously to change their votes. In the final vote, dozens of countries that had voted against or abstained from supporting the US amendment switched their votes to support it.

Although this General Assembly resolution has now included the term “sexual orientation” for the past ten years, it is not defined and the term is not found in any binding international treaties. The failure of the Europeans to insert the language into the treaty with ACP is a major setback in a legal strategy that was devised in 2007 to codify sexual orientation and gender identity into international legal agreements.

domingo, 2 de janeiro de 2011

"La UNESCO tiene un plan para que la mitad de la poblacion mundial sea homosexual"

El obispo de Córdoba, monseñor Demetrio Fernández, ha afirmado durante una misa de la Familia que el cardenal Ennio Antonelli, presidente del Pontificio Consejo para la Familia, le comentaba hacía poco “que la Unesco tiene programado para los próximos 20 años hacer que la mitad de la población mundial sea homosexual”.

“Para eso, a través de distintos programas, irá implantando la ideología de género, que ya está presente en nuestras escuelas” precisó el prelado en la Catedral de Córdoba.

“Según la ideología de género, -explica el obispo- uno no nacería varón o mujer, sino que lo elige según su capricho, y podrá cambiar de sexo cuando quiera según su antojo”. Todo se trataría de una estrategia destinada a romper con el “plan de Dios” para la familia, que consiste, evidentemente, “en la unión estable de un varón y una mujer”.

En su intervención, el obispo señaló que además hay otros muchos peligros para ese plan en esta “cultura que quiere romper totalmente con Dios”: “el crimen abominable del aborto”, “las facilidades para el divorcio”, “la anticoncepción en todas sus formas”, etc.

El prelado terminó la homilía alentando a los feligreses: "No es momento de lamentarse, sino de conocer bien cuáles son los ataques a este bien precioso y de vivir con lucidez y con coherencia lo que hemos recibido de Dios, por ley natural o por ley revelada".