What homosexual “marriage” advocates are really after

This was sent by an alert reader.

From the site of the Illinois Family Institute earlier in April comes this.

Homosexual Activist Admits True Purpose of Battle is to Destroy Marriage Written

By Micah Clark | 04.06.13

Even knowing that there are radicals in all movements, doesn’t lessen the startling admission recently by lesbian journalist Masha Gessen. On a radio show she actually admits that homosexual activists are lying about their radical political agenda. She says that they don’t want to access the institution of marriage; they want to radically redefine and eventually eliminate it.

Here is what she recently said on a radio interview:

“It’s a no-brainer that (homosexual activists) should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. …(F)ighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there — because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie.

The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. And again, I don’t think it should exist. And I don’t like taking part in creating fictions about my life. That’s sort of not what I had in mind when I came out thirty years ago.

I have three kids who have five parents, more or less, [Ahhh… aren’t they all just soooo hip? Soooo superior?  That’s what the MSM and entertainment industry would have you think by their portrayal of them.] and I don’t see why they shouldn’t have five parents legally… I met my new partner, and she had just had a baby, and that baby’s biological father is my brother, and my daughter’s biological father is a man who lives in Russia, and my adopted son also considers him his father. So the five parents break down into two groups of three… And really, I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality, and I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.”

(Source HERE)


Read the rest there.

Remember this when you read something on a dissident site such as the Fishwrap that we need to evolve in our view of same-sex unions or “marriage”.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Liberals, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill, The future and our choices and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality, and I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.”

    Riiiiiiiight. So society in general has to change its rules and institutions to fit ME, so that what I want to do can be okay and I never, ever, have to face criticism that might make me feel bad about myself.
    How utterly, contemptibly adolescent.
    And that’s an insult to adolescents everywhere.

  2. sciencemom says:

    Masha Gessen has one thing absolutely right:
    “I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.”
    If only everyone understood that.

    Clearly the destruction of marriage as an institution is the goal. Nothing else explains why the same folks who 25-30 years ago kept saying in support of cohabitation, “We don’t need a ring to show our love and commitment,” or “It’s just a piece of paper,” now can’t imagine how homosexuals can live a happy life without that “piece of paper.”

  3. The gay agenda wants to redefine our “collective consciousness” and do away with those “wasscally white male Christian dominated influences of Euro-American settlers” who no longer “serve a societal function”. But their alternative is to send us back to barbaric times of rampant immorality.

    A Yahoo site actually reveals their agenda by discrediting morality while praising sodomy:

    “Because of our largely Judeo-Christian background, homosexuality is considered immoral. Some Christians are quite aware of their religious reasons for being against homosexuality, and the reasons for their issues with it are obvious, but it may go beyond that. Religion serves a societal function. It acts to keep people united in a set of values and norms. If a set of values and norms is a society-wide phenomenon, then deviation can be kept to a minimum because what constitutes deviation is in collective consciousness. Despite individual religious beliefs being quite diverse in the United States, there is still a widespread acceptance of the Judeo-Christian moral code. An acceptance of homosexuality would not just be an acceptance of same-sex love and sex, but it would be a divergence from a set of values/norms which include the perspective of homosexuality as deviant.”

    “Before the Spanish conquest of Latin America, the major philosophies concerning the social acceptance and morality of homosexuality were based in the Mayan and Aztec traditions. The Maya of the Yucatan peninsula would have large sex celebrations in which homosexual behavior was a regular occurrence (The Economist 1999, Nesvig 2001). The Aztecs, much like antique Greek and Roman cultures, accepted homosexuality . . . ”

    . . . and these cultures fared . . . how? Oh that’s right: in utter ruin.

    Notice how everything from their agenda comes back to the dissolution of our Christian tenets (declaring our disgust with homosexuality as merely a “Judeo-Christian moral code” holdover of the past that has established roots in our society – roots that must be uprooted and replanted with a new set of “values and norms.” Hollywood, Pelosi, Biden, et al. are all orchestrating this effort to “fundamentally transform” our nation’s “values and norms” to get us to eventually swallow their ladle full of snake oil after they’ve pinned us down long enough and worn us out.

    They are merely in siege mode trying to wait us out and slip in their agenda after they’ve besieged us long enough. They are evil and they are waiting us out. This is why they will not relent with the gay marriage thing. They will try and try and try and wear us down until we swallow their snake oil.

  4. Supertradmum says:

    Well, if people had been reading Gramsci, Chomsky, Alinsky, and the gay manifesto, After the Ball, (1990) they would have known this. The trouble is, except for the very few, most Catholics have no sense of history or the workings of those who started the culture wars in the 19th century. The Popes knew this and as Gramsci wrote in his very first published letter from prison, the only people who figure out what was going on with this movement of kulturkampf, which was designed to create stupid, pliable populace, were the Popes, and Gramsci names them.

    The horse bolted from the stables a long time ago, way before the 1960s. I tried to warn people for decades, but the false optimism of the American Catholic Church continues.

    It has been the goal of those who hate the Church and Western Civ to do this all along.

  5. JabbaPapa says:

    The Gates of Hell will not prevail …

    In one way, bring it on !!!

    The Sacrament of Marriage cannot be destroyed by these evil people, and when the civil marriage is left broken and shattered in tatters on the ground, the Holy Institution of Marriage will remain, shining bright and clear in the Light of God.

  6. Supertradmum says:

    JabbaPapa, and mostly, underground and possibly, without legal definition or legal protection. One of the possibilities, that once civil unions are legal, the Catholic Church will have to leave the business of accepting civil status and only accept sacramental status. In other words, the Church may be put in a position where she only recognizes sacramental marriages, which means, that Catholic married couples will be seen by the State as merely living in concubinage and therefore, without any civil or tax rights.

    This has already happened, in England under the persecutions, when Catholic marriages were not seen as valid by the State, as only Anglican ones were. I predict this will happen both in America and in England, as the only way the Church will be able to avoid gay marriages. That is, no civil involvement at all.

    Therefore, Catholic married people will not be recognized by the State as married and will not benefit from marriage tax breaks, etc.

  7. Lizzy says:

    What should we make of Father Lombardi saying this about civil unions:

    “[I]t is a good thing for the child to know that he has a father and a mother”; [it must be] “made clear that matrimony between a man and a woman is a specific and fundamental institution in the history of mankind. This does not prevent that other forms of union between two persons may be recognized”.

    This seems like an evolution on the issue of civil gay unions, which is quite troubling coming from the Vatican. I honestly don’t know what to make of it, not least whether he is actually speaking with the authorization of the Holy Father.

  8. Ben Trovato says:

    You can hear her deliver this on youtube, here… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9M0xcs2Vw4&feature=player_embedded Listen for the audience applause – and weep.

  9. Supertradmum says:

    Lombardi made a huge mistake here. Of course, he is not speaking for the Pope.

  10. Imrahil says:

    Dear @Absit invidia,

    as an addition, whenever someone praises the Aztec and Maya culture, the words “human sacrifice” pop up in my mind.

  11. Kerry says:

    “…a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality”. Do those words mean anything? The mind stammers. “Shall I compare thee to a drain, clogged with hair? Thou art more blechy and frumitch than one’s eyeore vetch. Massed with globules and intransigence .”

  12. Legisperitus says:

    This piece needs to go viral.

  13. jaykay says:

    Imrahil: “whenever someone praises the Aztec and Maya culture, the words “human sacrifice” pop up in my mind.”

    Well, the advocates of SSM who praise Mesoamerican cultures for their enlightened tolerance of homosexuality more than liklely also have no problems with human sacrifice.

    They call it “choice” rather than “tlamictiliztli”, but it’s the same concept, basically.

  14. Liz says:


  15. ocalatrad says:

    What total and utter perversion. However, let’s not fool ourselves. When the sodomites complain that we are not so forceful against birth control and divorce, they are right. When they say that we have no basis to argue the “sanctity of marriage” they are right, because compared to non-Catholics there is basically no distinction demographically. Somewhere on the order of 54% of Catholics divorce just as non-Catholics do. We cohabitate, abort, divorce and contracept as much as everyone else. We’re going to lose the battle against this horrible threat of sodomite unions so long as we fail to get real on these other issues. I can’t recall ever hearing a good sermon against divorce.

  16. LarryW2LJ says:


    Good one! If the ring and the paper were so trivial back then, why are they so important now? I’m going to remember that one – thanks!

  17. eben says:

    Western Civilization is slipping into the long, dark night of self-destruction. I can only pray it lasts until I shuffle off my mortal coil.

  18. Legisperitus says:

    We really are circling the drain at a dizzying pace.

  19. charismatictrad says:

    “I have three kids who have five parents. My adopted daughter is actually Russian, and her brother considers him his father, who was also adopted and twice removed from his first gay partner. His ex then married my sister, who is married to my best friend’s aunt, who I am also married to. Their child is actually a Scottish sperm mixed with my partner’s egg, which was implanted into my mother’s uterus, which is also where I happened to be implanted: how special!? My partner’s ex-partner and I are neighbors and we let our children play together every other day, when my partner has custody of her two sons, but not her daughter, because that’s some other guy’s offspring with some other woman in Timbuktu,” said Masha Gessen.

  20. Greek Fire says:

    I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality

    I would like to live in a legal system that reflects actual reality (namely that every person has one mother and one father), rather than the whimsical realities that are fabricated in this woman(?)’s mind.

    Strange how this type of thing is now more and more lauded as being “courageous.” Being a faithful observant Christian… that takes guts.

  21. Choirmaster says:

    Let’s not oversimplify this. Of course, the total annihilation of the secular institution is a goal of the SSM agitators, but it is not the only goal. Indeed, if they worked simply to abolish the government institution of marriage the Church would have nothing to fear, since in that case we would be able to regulate Catholic sacramental marriage, and teach about non-canonical, natural marriage, without persecution.

    However, whatever these commentators may say, the milestone of unnatural “marriage” codified into the secular institution, enjoying the full force of Government support, is a critical goal to reach, and an important weapon to wield against the Church and all righteous cultural currents. Do not discount the importance of SSM just because, in and of itself, SSM is not the “end game”.

  22. Choirmaster says:

    Maybe I should clarify: The total abolition of government-regulated marriage would leave the Church free to do as she pleases with her own marriages among her own adherents. The codification of same-sex “marriage” means that the government has an obligation to coerce organizations who resist to comply with the law, such as the Church.

    SSM is more about attacking the Judeo-Christian culture, that is the West, in general, and her champion the Church in particular, than it is about governments, law, and family, or even homosexuality.

  23. Giuseppe says:

    @Imrahil re. ‘human sacrifice’: I recall one 2000 years ago that worked.

  24. eribeck79 says:

    “Riiiiiiiight. So society in general has to change its rules and institutions to fit ME, so that what I want to do can be okay and I never, ever, have to face criticism that might make me feel bad about myself.
    How utterly, contemptibly adolescent.”

    I also noticed how she says her children have two parental groups of three adults in each out of a total of five parents. Guess who is the parent that doubles up, that is, the one who is included in both of the subsets of her family(ies?)… that’s right, it’s HER. All about me, me, me, is exactly right. Hit the nail on the head. This is the disease of human selfishness and wanting to “have it all.”

  25. Supertradmum says:

    And, as a confrere has just reminded me, here in England, since 1948, it is illegal in GB to be married in a church without a civil license. Interesting days ahead.

  26. James Joseph says:

    I sat and listened to a forum at a state university in an auditorium filled to the brim with applause. “We must end all vestiges of Western Culture. We must remove all reminders. We will not stop!” (or something like that)

  27. wmeyer says:

    Therefore, Catholic married people will not be recognized by the State as married and will not benefit from marriage tax breaks, etc.

    Actually, I think this would be a benefit. Right now, it seems, a (possibly slim) majority of Catholics here in America are content to go along with all this madness. This sort of discrimination, however, which affects the pocketbook, is harder to ignore. There is a need to awake the complacent, and this sort of change may finally do it.

  28. Supertradmum says:

    Well, it may be that some do not care if others suffer, Bill. Those who have guilty consciences frequently hate those who remind them of their sins and want those “goody-two-shoes” punished.

    So be it…

  29. Maltese says:

    No need for concern: marriage will always be a Sacrament between a man and a woman, presided over by a Priest, as exemplified by Shakespear’s Romeo and Juliet…

  30. Maltese says:

    I’m trying to marry an agnostic; is that wrong? No. St. Augustin’s mother, St. Monica was married to a Pagan. [Who converted.]

  31. Sam Schmitt says:

    As if this isn’t bad enough, others are working not for the elimination of marriage, but for its extension.

    In an article aptly titled “Beyond Gay Marriage,” the great Prof. Robert George reports that “A group of self-identified ‘lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender and allied activists, scholars, educators, writers, artists, lawyers, journalists, and community organizers’ has released a statement explicitly endorsing ‘committed, loving households in which there is more than one conjugal partner.’ Got that? More than one conjugal partner.” He adds: “The people putting out this statement are not fringe figures.”


  32. Cantor says:


    At which point, Chico steps up and says, “Ha ha ha ha ha! You can’t fool me. There ain’t no Sanity Clause.”

  33. AngelGuarded says:

    For it is written: As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. Therefore every one of us shall render account to God for himself.
    Romans 14:11-12

    And won’t some be shocked and surprised? What they don’t get is that He loves them and He died for them and these people will never get it, until it’s too late for them.

    Jesus, I trust in You.

  34. Cathy says:

    To be honest, I think this is the final attack on innocent children and their right to innocence. With so-called “same-sex marriage” come children whose nightmare lives must be accepted and celebrated by their peers so they don’t feel different. To place children in a homosexual paired home is to accept a child’s participation in the homosexual lifestyle without any recourse to right reason or deserved sympathy or legal recourse for their loss. I honestly don’t think this is about a “right” to marry, I do believe this is about a “right” to publicly abuse children in an all-inclusive manner through a mandate that this must be celebrated by little children in school.
    The vocations prayer at my parish asks us to be blessed with priests, deacons, consecrated religious and lay ecclesial ministers. What about Holy Matrimony?

  35. Cantor says:

    Have any of these organizations seriously looked beyond “mere Christianity” at the social/legal implications?

    Whose insurance policy does the “family group” fall under? You’d require some sort of socialized medicine or universal health care in place to … oh.

    If a parent dies, which children are beneficiaries of Social Security benefits? This would likely lead to a need to restructure the entire Social Security structure before … oh.

    Do the children have any rights in this? If mama accepts a sperm donation with no strings attached, are the rights of the child forfeit even if the “father” is well suited financially? This would need governmental revocation of the child’s rights even before being born… oh.

    Sounds like folks are doing a pretty thorough job.

  36. Panterina says:

    What I find revealing (and sad) is that it shows that the agenda is all about “ME.” Who cares about the children that can’t say who their father and mother are? Is making them live in promiscuity and confusion of parental roles the good and right thing for them? But again, children are just “collateral damage” of the agenda as these activists.

  37. workingclass artist says:

    I think Father Z that the goal is to drive the Catholic Church out of America. Silence the moral critics…A Purge.
    ” There is now a push underway to remove the exemption for religious-affiliated employers by no less than the ACLU and a number of LGBT legal organizations…
    This harkens back to something I have been trying to sound the alarm over all year — that the goal here has nothing to do with gay rights and everything to do with the left’s ongoing crusade to destroy the Christian Church…
    What we are really dealing with here is an extremist/nihilist element embedded in the left (including the media) that is currently using the issue of gay rights as a wedge against the Christian Church. The goal is two-fold: First, smear the Church and those who preach the Bible as de facto bigots over a long-held doctrine that sees homosexual sex as a sin. Second, use civil rights and non-discrimination laws to either force the Church to violate its own conscience or close down. ..”

  38. Supertradmum says:

    I suggest a close reading of the history of persecution in England. We are in persecution stage four, where laws are being passed which will make our Faith illegal and the sacraments underground. This has happened before when people allow governments to bully the churches.

    I hope parents with young and adolescent children are raising them totally in the truth of the situation and preparing them for what is ahead. To pretend anything else is abdicating one’s role as a Catholic parent.

    Most of the Catholics in England conformed and joined in either the outward or tacit persecution of their so-called brothers and sisters in the Church.

  39. Facta Non Verba says:

    And so it begins:
    From today’s Wall Street Journal law blog: “Minnesota lawmakers are proposing a bill that would treat straight and same-sex couples equally by defining all marriages as civil unions.”

  40. workingclass artist says:

    Hungary adopted a Pro-Life & Pro-Marriage/Family Constitution in January.

    A light in the wilderness.

  41. Long-Skirts says:

    Lizzy says:

    “What should we make of Father Lombardi saying this about civil unions:
    “… This does not prevent that other forms of union between two persons may be recognized”.”

    …not Man & Woman but “two persons may be recognized”.


    I send our children
    To the slaughter
    Two sons of six
    And now a daughter.

    Why encourage
    Staying poor
    But pay high price?

    Giving all
    To those in need
    Suffer wounds
    For Mother’s Creed?

    All for Him
    Take the thorn
    Then ignored
    Not worth their scorn.

    Not worth the bother,
    As feminists fail,
    A wasted life
    That takes the nail.

    Where daily climb
    Upon the Cross
    Some Roman men
    Count them as loss

    But worry of
    Debased desires
    “No need forgo”
    Just stoke those fires.

    And at your legal
    Unions wink,
    “We don’t condone
    Though aid your kink.”

    Cassocks, habits, Vatican Two
    In reverse —
    Forward couples’ Civil Unions
    We’ll pretend aren’t perverse.

  42. Imrahil says:

    Dear @Giuseppe,

    OT but I strictly disagree with what you are implying (as I would likewise insist that we are eating Our Lord’s living, resurrected Flesh and thus not being cannibalistic in the Holy Eucharist). Cf. John 10,18. I do acknowledge, however, the possibility to perhaps find glimpses of such mysterious truths, even amongst so very hideous and barbarous practices.

    End OT.

  43. Carolina Geo says:

    As this whole sorry mess is being orchestrated by Satan – who is the father of lies – is it any surprise that his minions resort to the same tactic of deceit? May God grant us the grace to be strong in our battle.

  44. workingclass artist says:


    A Hedge Schools era in America?

    Americans on the whole are not accustomed to this persecution/purge kind of thing…Most will be in denial ably abetted in their ignorance by the agitprop media.
    Former citizens of totalitarian regimes who live here now are warning Americans…

  45. tzard says:

    When looking at this, I continually try to figure out the goal of the various activists. But I keep getting distracted by all the different causes – and the seemingly contradictory and illogical goals.

    It’s hard to describe, but this seems like just one battle in a larger war. Abortion, wars against the family, children, the poor…. All the virtues being attacked, and the vices being pushed.

    It’s in a real sense, diabolical. I think we need to keep this in mind that it’s not something that can be ultimately fixed by mere laws.

  46. Indulgentiam says:

    @Supertradmum-11am- I agree with all. And yet I have hope that prayer, fasting and mortification may yet turn the chastisement. You are right and I will prepare my child for the worse. All the while praying, fasting and offering mortifications. Because I remember one of many examples from the inerrant Word of God.

    2 Paralipomenon (2 Chronicles) chap. 20

    [3] And Josaphat being seized with fear betook himself wholly to pray to the Lord, and he proclaimed a fast for all Juda. [4] And Juda gathered themselves together to pray to the Lord: and all came out of their cities to make supplication to him. [5] And Josaphat stood in the midst of the assembly of Juda, and Jerusalem, in the house of the Lord before the new court,

    [6] And said: O Lord God of our fathers, thou art God in heaven, and rulest over all the kingdoms and nations, in thy hand is strength and power, and no one can resist thee. [7] Didst not thou our God kill all the inhabitants of this land before thy people Israel, and gavest it to the seed of Abraham thy friend for ever? [8] And they dwelt in it, and built in it a sanctuary to thy name, saying: [9] If evils fall upon us, the sword of judgment, or pestilence, or famine, we will stand in thy presence before this house, in which thy name is called upon: and we will cry to thee in our afflictions, and thou wilt hear, and save us. [10] Now therefore behold the children of Ammon, and of Moab, and mount Seir, through whose lands thou didst not allow Israel to pass, when they came out of Egypt, but they turned aside from them, and slew them not,

    [11] Do the contrary, and endeavour to cast us out of the possession which thou hast delivered to us. [12] O our God, wilt thou not then judge them? as for us we have not strength enough, to be able to resist this multitude, which cometh violently upon us. But as we know not what to do, we can only turn our eyes to thee. [13] And all Juda stood before the Lord with their little ones, and their wives, and their children. [14] And Jahaziel the son of Zacharias, the son of Banaias, the son of Jehiel, the son of Mathanias, a Levite of the sons of Asaph, was there, upon whom the spirit of the Lord came in the midst of the multitude, [15] And he said: Attend ye, all Juda, and you that dwell in Jerusalem, and thou king Josaphat: Thus saith the Lord to you: Fear ye not, and be not dismayed at this multitude: for the battle is not yours, but God’ s.

    [16] Tomorrow you shall go down against them: for they will come up by the ascent named Sis, and you shall find them at the head of the torrent, which is over against the wilderness of Jeruel. [17] It shall not be you that shall fight, but only stand with confidence, and you shall see the help of the Lord over you, O Juda, and Jerusalem: fear ye not, nor be you dismayed: tomorrow you shall go out against them, and the Lord will be with you. [18] Then Josaphat, and Juda, and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem fell hat on the ground before the Lord, and adored him. [19] And the Levites of the sons of Caath, and of the sons of Core praised the Lord the God of Israel with a loud voice, on high. [20] And they rose early in the morning, and went out through the desert of Thecua: and as they were marching, Josaphat standing in the midst of them, said: Hear me, ye men of Juda, and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem: believe in the Lord your God, and you shall be secure: believe his prophets, and all things shall succeed well.(Douay-Rheims)

  47. Indulgentiam says:

    Goodness I forgot to give you the happy ending. Though y’all probably know it. Just in case… :)

    [21] And he gave counsel to the people, and appointed the singing men of the Lord, to praise him by their companies, and to go before the army, and with one voice to say: Give glory to the Lord, for his mercy endureth for ever. [22] And when they began to sing praises, the Lord turned their ambushments upon themselves, that is to say, of the children of Ammon, and of Moab, and of mount Seir, who were come out to fight against Juda, and they were slain. [23] For the children of Ammon, and of Moab, rose up against the inhabitants of mount Seir, to kill and destroy them: and when they had made an end of them, they turned also against one another, and destroyed one another. [24] And when Juda came to the watch tower, that looketh toward the desert, they saw afar off all the country, for a great space, full of dead bodies, and that no one was left that could escape death. [25] Then Josaphat came, and all the people with him to take away the spoils of the dead, and they found among the dead bodies, stuff of various kinds, and garments, and most precious vessels: and they took them for themselves, insomuch that they could not carry all, nor in three days take away the spoils, the booty was so great.

  48. Supertradmum says:

    And, thanks to Therese, here is the Government’s Paper on Sex Education in the Schools.


    If you think you can have your child in a public school, look at the curriculum notes.

  49. StJude says:

    Legisperitus says:
    “We really are circling the drain at a dizzying pace.”

    Absolutely agree.

  50. StJude says:

    Wondering if you all heard about this:

    Girls Told to Ask for Lesbian Kiss at School

    Parents of children attending a Red Hook, New York, middle school are outraged after a recent anti-bullying presentation at Linden Avenue Middle School.

    The workshop for 13 and 14-year-old girls focused on homosexuality and gender identity. They were also taught words such as “pansexual” and “genderqueer.”

  51. chantgirl says:

    I do not think that same sex marriage is the end-game here, but rather state control of children. Strong families, strong marriages are secure protection for the rights of children. When marriage has been redefined into oblivion and everything counts as marriage, the state will become the main arbiter of what happens to the children when these loosely-based families break apart. A family of several adults is inherently unstable. When these families fall apart, the state will dictate what will happen to the children and will usurp the place that biological parents have traditionally held. When the state assumes the role of parent for its’ citizens, no one will be safe as the state has no built-in love for the children, and will only look at what is most expedient to its’ agendas. This is about the indoctrination of new generations.

  52. @Panterina:

    But again, children are just “collateral damage” of the agenda

    You’re right, but I think “consumer goods” might be an even more appropriate term. In the psychological world where everything revolves around ME, I have a baby if I want to have a baby… if it makes me feel more “fulfilled” in some foggy way. But if, on the other hand, I am having sex as I see fit and I conceive but don’t want to have a baby, I kill it. Other human lives (of children) don’t have any importance or, indeed, any reality on a par with MY life.
    I recall reading somewhere a word for people who think like this — people for whom other people just aren’t fundamentally real the way that THEY are. That word was “Sociopath.” Serial killers like Ted Bundy thought and talked this way.

  53. marylise says:

    St. Catherine of Siena (1347-1380), Virgin and Doctor of the Church, wrote in her Dialogue (#124) that the sin of sodomy is so filthy that it not only arouses the Divine Wrath but also disgusts the devils themselves. It is true that the devils instigate this sin by shooting “the poisoned arrows of concupiscence.” However, when the sin is actually being committed, the devils are so horrified that they run away. They might enjoy watcing people steal, lie and cheat, but they can’t stand the sight of sodomy. St. Catherine says it is because of their angelic nature, which they still possess despite being dedicated to evil. The devils can hardly believe they succeeded in tempting any human being — made in the image and likeness of God — to stoop to such depths of degradation. They have nothing but disgust and contempt for those among their victims who engage in unnatural vice.

  54. Indulgentiam says:

    Chantgirl says:”This is about the indoctrination of new generations.”
    Absolutely. But they don’t need ssm to accomplish that. They already control the public school system. They are no longer even bothering to veil their agenda.
    Take a look—


  55. Indulgentiam says:

    “I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality(read chaos), and I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage(read order).”
    Chaos is incompatible with order. A grain of truth amidst the lies. the evil ones m.o.
    There is NO head to this family, no leaderhsip. Leaderless people are easier to confuse and scatter. God help them and our children who face a world overrun with these people.

  56. Maltese says:

    As a right of the road Tradition Catholic, I’m embarrassed to admit that I no longer care about this debate, because I believe the majority of ‘marriages’ in this Country and throughout the world are un-Sacramental; so I don’t worry about it!

  57. drea916 says:

    “This is about the indoctrination of new generations.”
    Yep. The more government gets involved with providing for children (and adults) the more they can control them.

  58. AvantiBev says:

    Tomorrow is the feast of Saint Joseph the Worker; a worker who raised Jesus, fed Him, provided for Him, taught Him and loved Him. We hetero Boomers dissed St. Joseph and fathers big time with our sexual revolution. Always remember we opened this door that homosexuals are walking through. With out of wedlock births, shack ups, hook-ups and divorces we have 40+% of our kids already confused about what a FATHER is. Let’s pray to St. Joseph that we can not only stem the tide but reverse it. IF there is no counter-revolution soon, then it will be too late and the chastisement will be well deserved.

  59. Legisperitus says:

    In the good old days there were two great powers, the Church and the State. They were more or less equal in influence, but separate in their spheres of activity. The two complemented and balanced each other so that no single entity could achieve absolute power. (The Church, especially, could protect the rights of the people against excessive governmental force.) Among other things, the Church had the duty to regulate marriage, and the State recognized her competence in the discipline of the Sacraments.

    In our world today, at least in most places, it has been made impossible (schwerst verboten) for the State to recognize the Church (or even a false church) as a unitary spiritual authority. The result has been a gradual overtaking by the State of traditional Church functions such as education, welfare, health care, and domestic relations. The State now holds all the power, on the reasonable grounds that it alone can do these things in a comprehensive way. As someone said (I think) at last year’s Democratic Convention, “the government is the only thing that we all belong to.” The result has been the gradual corruption of all those functions, because they properly belong under the spiritual authority, not the political.

    I don’t know what the solution is, barring a miraculous mass conversion. But no piece of paper from the State will ever turn a sin crying to Heaven for vengeance into a holy and lifelong union established by God and ordered toward the procreation and education of children.

  60. Giuseppe says:

    @Imrahil – I knew you’d help me put it into perspective. I very much appreciate your posts and insights.

  61. Clinton says:

    As others have noted above, the state-sponsored deconstruction of marriage must involve
    the indoctrination of the next generation. While things are devolving quickly here in the US,
    they’re much further down the road in Canada. Earlier this month, the Peel District in BC
    instituted ‘Pink Day’, where elementary school kids wear pink to school and learn the state’s
    line on “respecting diversity” with regards to all things sex-related. That in itself isn’t too
    surprising, but what is eye-opening are the bullet-points issued by the British Columbia
    Teacher’s Federation’s ‘Homophobia and Heterosexism Social Justice Action Group’. It
    seems the BCTF anticipated parents’ objection to the curricula and wanted teachers to have
    ready responses to shut parents down:

    #”As teachers, we do not condone children being removed from classes when we teach
    about … LGBTTIQ people”.

    #”You can teach your own values at home. Public schools teach everyone about respecting
    diversity and valuing everyone”.

    #”This is not about parent’s rights. Children have the right to inclusive education free
    from discrimination”.

    I imagine the same notions are at work here in the US: the state is arrogating the right to
    deconstruct the concepts of sex, family, and marriage. To do so, it must indoctrinate the
    next generation. Get ready to see these sort of bullet-points more often.
    Link to BCTF arrogance

  62. Clinton says:

    I apologize, I’ve botched the link above. I suppose it’s just as well, since it is to a blog
    that occasionally employs… er, salty language. If one wanted to see the Peel
    District’s BCTF bullet-points, there’s enough info above to google. Again, I’m sorry
    for the lame link.

  63. JabbaPapa says:

    Supertradmum :

    And, thanks to Therese, here is the Government’s Paper on Sex Education in the Schools.


    doncha just luuuuuuuuurrrve the trendy definition of “heterosexual” :

    “A term used to describe people who are romantically and sexually attracted to people of a different gender from their own.”

    (Gender : The emotional, behavioral and cultural characteristics attached to a person’s assigned biological sex. Gender can be understood to have several components, including gender identity, gender expression and gender role (see below).)

    assigned biological sex” ??? What is THAT supposed to even MEAN ???

    Translated into “English” — a male transvestite who is attracted to an active male homosexual is, according to these definitions, “heterosexual” !!!!!!!

  64. Long-Skirts says:

    Homosexual Activist Admits True Purpose of Battle is to Destroy Marriage Written
    By Micah Clark said:

    “…I have three kids who have five parents, more or less,”

    Fr. Z replies:

    ” [Ahhh… aren’t they all just soooo hip? Soooo superior? ”


    My daughter
    Is my niece
    Her Daddy is
    Her Uncle,

    Hicks inbred
    A spiritual

  65. Indulgentiam says:

    @long-skirts- ROFL :D thank you!

  66. Indulgentiam says:

    JabbaPapa says:“assigned biological sex” ??? What is THAT supposed to even MEAN ???

    “Direct propaganda, aimed at modifying opinions and attitudes, must be preceded by propaganda that is sociological in character, slow, general, seeking to create a climate, an atmosphere of favorable preliminary attitudes. No direct propaganda can be effective without pre-propaganda, which, without direct or noticeable aggression, is limited to creating ambiguities, reducing prejudices, and spreading images, apparently without purpose. …” Edward Bernays “Father of Public Relations”, c.1923

    They’re working the crowd by manipulating language. Hitler, Castro etc… All knew and used this technique.

  67. rcg says:

    The idiot already has everything he wants; except universal approval and immunity form responsibility. Even then he cannot have it. All it takes is for just one of the victims of his lust and self centered adolescence to resent his actions and demand anything even approaching amends and he will be frustrated. He is a complete fool.

  68. OrthodoxChick says:


    “assigned biological sex” is defined as THE WAY GOD MADE YOU!

    That shout is for the foolish and misguided, not for you. Can you imagine one of these poor transgendered people showing up to face God at their judgement? Their altered bodies will still be on earth somewhere, and God will know them by their soul. No switched-gender body to hide behind; no flesh or gender required at all. Spoiler Alert to transgendered individuals: No, He will not be amused that you trashed His work and overpaid some so-called doctor to imitate Him. But I pray He will have Mercy on these poor souls who are being indulged by this progressive society, instead of being loved by it.

    What is wrong with the people who legitimize this? Do they honestly think that expressing their social approval for such radical surgery and hormone treatments is best for the health and well-being of someone suffering from feeling born the wrong gender? Really?? That’s better for them than getting these people legitimate help to stop hating themselves?

  69. sciencemom says:

    @LarryW2LJ – You’re welcome! :)

    @tzard –
    Yes, you are right! Definitely diabolical, even though those advancing these agendas may not realize it. Destroy life itself (abortion, euthanasia, etc.), destroy civilization by destroying families (attacks on marriage and God’s design for sexuality), limit people’s ability to learn the truth (attacks on the Church) and to teach their children the truth (attacks on parental rights).

  70. maryh says:

    As some others have said, this isn’t about homosexuality or even marriage. @chantgirl It’s not even about indoctrination – that’s already happened. As @AvantiBev said, over 40% of American children don’t even know what a father really is.

    It’s about control on the most basic level.

    Our sex is not an essential and immutable part of who we are. It’s “biologically assigned”. And it can be “reassigned” through “sex reassignment” surgery.

    Marriage isn’t an arrangement that recognizes the responsibilities that the mother and father that create a child owe to the child. It’s an arrangement where the government confers rights on two or more people for … what? Having sex? And child ownership?

    @chantgirl You won’t even have to wait until the group of adults breaks up or changes. Since the definition of family rights won’t be based on any crass biological accidents, it will be totally defined by the government, meaning defined by those people who get elected.

    Whoever has the government’s certificate of ownership (whatever they end up calling it – assignment of custody) gets the child. If custody is a “right” the government “gives” rather than a “duty” the government “recognizes” based on biological kinship, then why couldn’t some other person or group of persons who better meets the government’s criteria take a child from one custody arrangement to another?

  71. maryh says:

    About those definitions:

    A medical intervention that ends a pregnancy

    Like a ceasarian? Or forceps? Or all the other medical interventions that are meant to end a pregnancy without killing the child? It’s only called an abortion if the medical intervention is meant to end the pregnancy by killing the child. If the child lives, it’s called a “botched” or unsuccessful abortion.

    Any means to prevent pregnancy, including abstinence, barrier methods such as condoms and hormonal methods such as the pill, patch, injection and others.

    Interesting. Abstinence is now contraception. No wonder the polls show so many Catholics use “contraception.” [sarcasm]

    assigned biological sex
    Not defined at all, of course. And begs the question of who is doing the “assigning”. And someone who is transgender is said to have “sex reassignment” surgery. So if your biological sex is “assigned” and can be “reassigned”, it means that it can be controlled. As in, someone else can decide your biological sex needs to be “reassigned.”

  72. Rachel says:

    Although part of the reason why “same sex” marriage is being pushed by several western governments is to control people and to banish the Church, there is another reason that I have not heard debated here in the US. However, France has debated it and sadly their silly government passed “same sex” marriage anyway. We often hear that this is a civil rights issue. Well, why aren’t we using civil rights and our own racial past to argue against “same sex” marriage? Here are two articles that can shed light on it: http://englishmanif.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-thirteenth-amendment-and-debate.html
    and this testimony:


    The rhetoric that traditional Marriage advocates use is killing the cause. We are not using the arguments that “same sex” marriage proponents use. Don’t make it an issue about religious freedom. Don’t use the slippery slope argument. No. Read the links. This argument, about human trafficking is the best one I’ve heard. Read it. Why isn’t this talked about more often? Although we know that the Church is against IVF, I have never heard an argument comparing it to slavery and human trafficking and that is exactly what it is. Apparently in France, IVF/surrogacy is illegal. Why? Because they have successfully compared it to slavery. Although many in France are for “same sex” marriage. They are vehemently against gay adoption. How else do homosexuals aquire children? Sure, there are adoptions but many of them go the surrogacy/IVF route. They aren’t the only ones of course. Many couples who are infertile go the IVF/surrogacy route. Its not discussed here very much but this has a huge part to play in the whole scheme too.

  73. Kathleen10 says:

    ahhh…Fr. Z’s blog, where one can fellowship and breathe the fresh, clean air of Truth.
    So many good comments.
    tzard, you are right, it is diabolical, completely. Prayer, prayer is the thing. I need to do a better job of dedicated time for prayer myself. I have a vision of the Good Lord saying someday “soundbites, soundbites, why could we never have conversation!”. Prayer is THE thing we need most. In the Fatima movie, the one with Ricardo Montalban as the narrator, Alexander Solzyytzin (sp?) states we “have pushed away the warm hand of God” due to our perceived lack of need of Him. We must search and FIND that hand, and hold fast. Then get active in a real way.
    I, and I guess others, often wonder, what do they WANT? I mean, why all this? I don’t know. My feeling at this point is, they just hate, with a bitter intensity, God, and all He represents, and they want it all gone. About twenty years ago, I remember a conversation with my husband, and we agreed, the next target would be children, in all sorts of terrible ways. It has come to be so. Children are the poor pawns in this, and they lose in same-sex parental relationships. That is something that we can read up on to be prepared. I saw some fantastic conferences on EWTN when they were at Aquinas University? Or is that a college. Whatever. Superb talks by researchers about the sad effects of same-sex marriage on the children. There is good data on this topic. Sometimes, when people are getting obnoxious about things, assuming everyone “feels this way”, and you can whip a few actual facts out of the holster, it clams them up a bit. Feels good too. They’ll hate you for it, but there’s always a price. Silence implies consent.

  74. maryh says:

    The connection of IVF and surrogacy with human trafficking is great! Interesting that the movement against gay ‘marriage’ in France spent more time concentrating on those kinds of issues – putting the child first – and they had the support of some of the gay rights groups against gay ‘marriage’.

    Thanks for the link to englishmanif dot blogspot dot com
    I’m going to start following that blog.

    You might want to look at Spiritual Friendship: a blog by a Catholic and Episcopalian on how to live the Church’s teaching on chastity for those with same sex attraction/who are gay. Lots of practical stuff, and a re-discovery of the value of Christian friendship. spiritualfriendship dot org

    From your references, it looks like it’s the people who’ve grown up with the liberal “advancements” that are the best advocates for the Church’s positions because they’re not apologetic.

    One who got to grow up as the child of a sperm donor:
    The facts of my conception are that my father was paid to abandon me.

    One who was the child of a lesbian in a loving relationship with another woman
    I love my mother and am grateful for my childhood, but I would not wish it on an innocent child if there is another way for such a child to live.

Comments are closed.