Mexican activist targets archbishop over homophobic remarks

Mexican activist targets archbishop over homophobic remarks May 25, 2019
Image via YouTube

TO the enormous displeasure of Archbishop Jesús Carlos Cabrero Romero, above, the state of San Luis Potosí in central Mexico legalised same-sex marriage on May 16.

Romero immediately went on the offensive, saying in a statement that:

The fact that a law has been passed by congress does not imply a priori that said law is good or morally right. Ever since the most ancient times, marriage has been understood as being between two different but complementary parties: a man and woman.

Never before, until recent years, and we don’t understand why, has this ancient institution been under judicial attack …

Claiming that the law sought to destroy traditional marriage, he added:

At this point in history in San Luis Potosí we can respect, but we cannot approve something that according to our consciences as a church community we cannot accept.

Image courtesy of the Rise Up network

Jeús Paúl Ibarra Collazo, above, President of Red de Diversificadores Sociales (Social Diversifying Network) was having none of this baloney, and lodged a hate speech complaint against the Archbishop with the federal Secretariat for Domestic Affairs and its Office for Religious Affairs.

Collazo is demanding that Archbishop Cabrero publicly apologise and retract his statements or face a reprimand or even monetary sanctions.

‘Church leaders sometimes forget that they are also subject to the law and should observe it, and contribute to an environment of healthy coexistence and respect to the rights of everyone.’

La Razón newspaper quoted Collazoas saying:

The archbishop continues with his homophobic remarks, and these cases have been seen elsewhere: that when the Church places itself in opposition [to the redefinition of marriage], there will be seen a string of actions: first threats that then become violence, and we don’t want to reach those extremes.

According to a site called Rise Up, Red de Diversificadores Sociales is a network dedicated to defending the rights of the LGBT community.

Collazo is:

Deeply committed to fighting for equality for every person in his community. He is a writer for one of the most important digital media news sites in his locality, through which he has been able to put LGBT topics on the public agenda.

His life goal is to get everyone to see important issues through a gender, human rights, and sexual diversity lens, both in the public and the private spheres.  Je has a master’s degree in Human Rights.

Collazo told the Pulso news site that Church leaders:

Sometimes forget that they are also subject to the law and should observe it, and contribute to an environment of healthy coexistence and respect to the rights of everyone.

"But the ritual went horribly wrong... Actually the ritual went extremely right. The cow got ..."

Muslim cleric killed by a cow ..."
"The kosher scam appears to have been passed on to a new generation.This guy has ..."

Rabbi’s daughter opens a kosher sex ..."
"Doing it on holy day AFTER turning the lights off yourself?"

Rabbi’s daughter opens a kosher sex ..."
"Pell is unlikely to attract any sympathy from the High Court, since their record in ..."

Elated crowds cheer as Cardinal Pell ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • larry parker

    Ever since the most ancient times, marriage has been understood as being between two different but complementary parties: a man and woman.

    How do you become an archbishop without reading the bible?
    Eta: https://bigbible.org/sansblogue/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/marriage.jpg

  • Broga

    ” marriage has been understood as being between two different but complementary parties: a man and woman.” And, of course, marriage conveniently means a superstitious ritual carried out by a priest. I attended one of these marriages in February and the words left us cringing.

    My “marriage” a long time ago was in a Register Office.

  • Broga

    Naughty. You confuse with facts. That’s the last thing that the Archbishop wants. He has to weave his personal fantasies or his entire sick, cruel, punitive beliefs begin to crumble.

  • Michael Neville

    It takes a lot of chutzpah for a supposedly celibate bachelor to pretend he has any understanding of marriage. Considering that same-sex marriage doesn’t affect him in any way, all the archbishop is saying is that he thinks it’s icky.

  • Brummie

    This echoes the Anderton Park School fiasco. Religion versus gender equality.

  • zenlike

    “The fact that a law has been passed by congress does not imply a priori that said law is good or morally right.”
    Hey, Romero, you got something right! Of course, the opposite is also true. So up to you to provide evidence on why the law isn’t morally good or right.

    “Ever since the most ancient times, marriage has been understood as being between two different but complementary parties: a man and woman.”
    Romero, remember when you said that passing a law that legalises something doesn’t automatically mean the law is good or right? Well, the same applies to tradition. Just because something was done for a very long time, does not mean it is morally good or right.

    “Never before, until recent years, and we don’t understand why, has this ancient institution been under judicial attack …”
    It isn’t too hard to understand. More and more people understand that bigotry against gay people is entirely unfounded. The times they are a-changing, my friend, and people like you are left behind in the dust.

    “At this point in history in San Luis Potosí we can respect,”
    But you do not respect, Romero, why tell this transparent lie?

    “but we cannot approve something that according to our consciences as a church community we cannot accept.”
    Well, bud, hate to say it, but a secular society should not care what your religion accepts or not.

  • Zetopan

    Without instilling fear and hate where would the catholic church priests find money for nothing? The promise of an afterlife is an empty sack that the priests claim is full of all kinds of goodies.

  • zenlike

    Sad that I am banned from LifeSiteNews, otherwise I would give some pushback to the nutters who post there. And there are some doozies:

    “There is no negotiating with these homo-terrorists, period.”
    This in response to a quote of the activist pointing out the archbishop is beholden to the same laws as everyone else. Sounds legit.

    “stop your regressive Christophobic persecution”
    Yup, even a slight pushback against the bigots who repressed a minority for thousands of years is “christophobia” and “persecution”.

    “Ibarra calls “love speech” hate speech because he doesn’t know any better.”
    Bigotry against gay people is “love speech”. As usual, rightwing christians show they have absolutely no idea what the word “love” means. Keep that in mind when they talk about a “loving god”, because they don’t mean what you think they mean.

    “Mexico has a long masonic tradition, anti-Catholic.”
    Mexico. One of the staunchest catholic bastions, where it still permeates almost every aspect of life. Mexico, where 83% of the population is catholic. These people simply live in a different reality.

    “flaunt their illness to the world.”
    He is talking about homosexuality. Then he rants about the supposed hate of the left. Self-awareness is not his strongest point.

  • TheBookOfDavid

    The Catholic church does not really encourage bible literacy among the laity. Romero had no doubt read it extensively, but is counting on the masses to be ignorant of its content.

  • Facebook User

    I wish this activist’s example was followed by women’s groups and groups that campaign for children. The Catholic Church needs to be forced to remove child abuse from its scriptures. It definitely is hate speech for this prelate to condemn same sex marriage when his religion allows marriage between a mature man and a female child of 14. Think about how many 14 year olds are biologically younger as oppossed to their chronological age.

    The fact remains that many people who read their Bibles and know their
    history is that “God’s word” does indeed fail to condemn child sex abuse in
    marriage. There are condemnations of bestiality and adultery and gay sex and no
    mention of the respect due to the sexual innocence of a child. Silence is
    consent anyway. But silence is more consent in a holy book which claims the
    right to be obeyed as the word of God and which encourages people to see that
    they must obey the book just because it says they must do it. Those biblical
    cultures did accept men having sex with girls whose bodies were not ready for
    sex or having babies. Men married female children. There are several clues in
    the Bible that a man is allowed to molest the child he “marries.” The child at
    least should have the right to get away from the husband who raped her and
    abused her and who could divorce her to get his hands on a new child bride.
    Jesus reinforced these doctrines by saying that a girl cannot divorce her
    husband or she becomes an adulteress if she weds another. What is worse is he
    was being hypothetical for women did not have a right to divorce in his society.
    Calling her an adulteress was abusive in itself and was virtually calling for
    her murder for the Jewish God had decreed death by stoning for adulteresses.
    (And Jesus made no attempt to do away with stoning in his ministry. The
    adulteress who was brought to him for stoning was brought to him as a test but
    even then he said she should be stoned but only by worthy accusers. He did not
    stone her for it was not his place and it was never done by one person. And it
    was a test anyway.) I repeat: the fact remains that these women were forced into
    marriage, were too young as well and had every right and perhaps the duty to
    leave their husbands. A male could easily divorce his child bride and marry
    another so that you have serial child molesting of serial child-brides. The
    story of Jesus starts with Mary conceiving him without sexual intercourse. I
    think that the expression that Jesus is being conceived by the Holy Spirit is a
    euphemism for Mary conceiving by a human sperm without full sex. She was
    probably molested by Joseph which resulted in a “miraculous” pregnancy. It would
    have seemed marvellous in an age that did not understand about eggs and sperms.
    Whatever the conception means the word is there and it was thought to have
    something to do with human seed and that is the bottom line. When Joseph took
    her to wife he had to take her that day to the chupa and then present the
    bedclothes stained with blood from her hymen to the authorities as proof that it
    was a real marriage and she was a virgin and he was capable of sex.

  • Jim Jones

    ISTR that the RCC used to marry men to each other until they changed their rules.

  • Jim Jones

    > Sad that I am banned from LifeSiteNews

    Google disposable email address

  • Jim Jones

    There are plenty of options.

    https://www.themonastery.org/ordination