Yet Another Blog on Fortress Homosexuality

Sorry, but the comments section says it’s too long. John takes me to task in a comment down below. Here’s my reply:


a) It’s “Matthew Shepherd”, not Andrew. And I agree his death, while heinous, is used far too much by the “All Critics of Gays are Morally Equivalent to Fred Phelps and Shepherd’s Murderers!!!!” crowd (one of whom has so delightfully graced this very blog with his measured analysis) as a pot of boiling oil to pour on any critic who gets too close to Fort Homosexual.

b) I associate Gay Christians with such activities because the MCC is a denom that 1) is packed with people who identify themselves as gay Christians and 2) associates itself with such activities. If they wish to disassociate themselves from such activities, I will happily blog the public statement they issue. Until then, I’m simply taking them at their word.

c) The intent of my message was 1) to point out that the Fortress Homosexual “see no evil” response to rot in its midst is just as bogus as the Fortress Catholic “see no evil” response to the Scandal and 2) to make a bad joke playing off my earlier urinary imagery about the Arts Elite community. It is only hysterics who assume from this that I’m saying “All gays are alike. All gays do this, etc.” My point is best summed up in David Morrison’s words: “I am less troubled with the acts themselves as I am with the fact they were advertised on the church’s websites as though there was no trouble with them at all – as though folks were not being used as the means to sexual ends, as though the meaning and dignity of sex were not being trampled as though, in fact, everything was fine.”

or “Juuuuuust Fiiiiine” as I put it.

d) I set no trap. My opinions are not a huge secret. The fact that somebody’s ideology prevents them from seeing my point and leads them to inadvertantly reinforce it with their own pre-recorded rhetoric is not my problem.

e) No, I don’t think your rhetoric is “hate” (something I don’t think I’ve ever accused anybody of on this blog except perhaps Bp. Cawcutt with his fervent wish for JPII’s death).

f) I have no power to “break” the defensiveness of Fortress Homosexuals, just as I have no power to “break” the defensiveness of Fortress Catholics. I only have the ability to point out when they are irrationally pretending that any criticism of the rot in the midst of their community is an Assault of by the Forces of Evil on All that is True and Good. This I will continue to do, from time to time, whether the irrational person is gay, a Catholic, or both.

Oh, and to the delightful interlocutor asking me to disasociate myself from Islamic female circumcision, Moloch worship and circumcision, Hindu Tantric practices and such, perhaps just a bit more familiarity with what baptism implies might be in order (Hint: I already have disassociated myself from them by being baptized). Also a quick read of Colossians and Galatians might help. The only things on your laundry list that remotely pertain to a Catholic are: “Religious masochism in the orthodox Catholic tradtion” (I’m against it) and “Use of feces as holy relics” (I’ve not heard of it, but I see nothing particularly immoral about it). Thanks for your input though.