Why is the UN censoring pro-life speech?

“They promise..freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption…” (2 Peter 2:19).




Wendy Wright, reporting for C-FAM, notes how, "Youth attending a UN conference on women’s issues this week say UN security officers confiscated their backpacks after discovering pro-life literature.

The confiscated materials were petitions to 'Stop Sexualizing Children,' and were connected to a UN approved workshop led this week by Dr. Miriam Grossman, a child psychiatrist and author of 'You're Teaching My Child What? A Physician Exposes the Lies of Sex Education and How They Harm Your Child.'

The offending flyer announced a project called the 'Girls Coalition to Protect the Health and Innocence of Children,' which is an ad hoc group that sponsored the Grossman event. At the panel, girls from China, Spain and Mexico launched a petition calling on UN agencies to 'Stop Sexualizing Children.' They charge the UN’s promotion of 'comprehensive sexuality education' is harmful to children.

The young people insist they were not leafleting, which is forbidden on UN property, though it is routinely ignored. The young students left UN grounds to make more copies. Upon their return they were stopped by UN security.

One of the students, Kalli Lawrence, said that the guards noticed the group’s distinctive green backpacks and then ordered the students to hand them over. 'The guards had this confused, angry look on their faces,' she reported, 'and they started telling all the security guards, "don’t let any of these yellow papers go through, just take them all and keep them."'

The green backpacks and literature were stored in lockers at a security checkpoint. Students and their teachers were allowed to retrieve some of the backpacks as they left UN property. According to teacher Jody Dunn, some of the backpacks were not returned, those that contained a pro-life documentary called '180'. Dunn then insisted and those backpacks were returned also.

Pro-lifers have long felt the sting of selective enforcement of UN rules. Kali Lawrence said, 'They didn’t stop anyone else that we could see passing out flyers.'

Upon questioning by the Friday Fax, the security officer in charge at the time said guards don’t 'target' items. He went on to say they were not allowed to discuss policies or procedures.

Observers speculate that someone connected to Commission organizers complained to UN security. At the Cairo conference on Population and Development in 1994, without any evidence, former US Senator Timothy Wirth told UN security that a certain pro-lifer was a violent threat. The person was detained and deported.

Alliance Defense Fund attorney Piero Tozzi told the Friday Fax, 'The UN cannot censor speech it does not agree with. Both the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression and the Human Rights Committee have recently emphasized the need to protect this fundamental freedom. Why then is speech by respectful, clean cut kids on a topic vital to keeping young people healthy being censored at the UN?'

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom . . . to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." (See article here).

Why is speech by respectful, clean cut kids being censored at the UN?  Because, the United Nations has succumbed to demonic ideology.  If you doubt this for even one moment, consider that the same UN permits professor (and Catholic priest) Michael O'Flaherty, a radical homosexual activist, to promote the Yogyakarta Principles, a blueprint for usurping parental rights while indoctrinating children in gender-bending ideology.  See my past post here.

Satan does not want us to live in peace and harmony. His intention is to make a physical and spiritual wreckage of all God’s creation. To this end he enlists men in that attempt by their lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes and pride of life. He is especially anxious to seduce the young and to corrupt them so thoroughly that they come to resemble more and more the devils they then follow.

The Catholic Church teaches that, “Educating children for chastity strives to achieve three objectives: (a) to maintain in the family a positive atmosphere of love, virtue, and respect for the gifts of God, in particular the gift of life; (b) to help children to understand the value of sexuality and chastity in stages, sustaining their growth through enlightening word, example, and prayer; (c) to help them understand and discover their own vocation to marriage or to consecrated virginity for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven in harmony with and respecting their attitudes and inclinations and the gifts of the Spirit.” (The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality (Guidelines for Education Within the Family), issued by the Pontifical Council for the Family, No. 3).

This requires self-control, which is why chastity is so important: “One cannot give what one does not possess. If the person is not master of self – through the virtues and, in a concrete way, through chastity – he or she lacks that self-possession which makes self-giving possible. Chastity is the spiritual power which frees love from selfishness and aggression.” (The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality, No. 16).

Satan knows this. And so he wages a battle against chastity through sex-education which radically separates sex from the very idea of the covenanted love of man and woman, a sex education and propaganda which the group POPE (Parents for Orthodoxy in Parochial Education) referred to as, “the spiritual, emotional rape of our children through various and devious methods of mind manipulation” (“Do Sex-Education Programs Corrupt Youth? The Wanderer, April 17, 1969).

Just as Pope John Paul II created a World Youth Day to instill Gospel values in our young people, the Evil One has enlisted men to create a World Youth Conference in which Gospel values are subverted. As Terrence McKeegan, J.D., reported for C-FAM back in 2010, "...at the World Youth Conference, organized primarily by the Mexican government and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the main event for most of [the] estimated 5,000 ‘participants’ was the Interactive Global Forum, a massive expo with hundreds of booths and exhibits. A tour of the booths revealed what passes for ‘age-appropriate’ sexual education in some UN circles. Because the venue for the World Youth Conference had considerably more exhibit space than most UN conferences, it was a unique opportunity for organizations focusing on youth to put their best face forward. In the expo hall, there were dozens of booths with pornographic or sexually explicit materials or presentations.

At the International Planned Parenthood Federation (the largest provider of abortion services in the world) booth, their table featured the sexually explicit brochure: 'Healthy, Happy, and Hot', which garnered headlines last March due to its distribution at a Girl Scouts side event at the UN Commission on the Status of Women.
At a booth by an organization named 'RECREA,' there was a table with a bowl of condoms and a wooden phallus. The walls of the exhibit booth were covered with pornographic and sexually suggestive photos. Nearby there were two glass cases featuring rubber models of male and female genitalia, as well as a bright assortment of condoms.



At the Fundacion Collectivo de Mujeres Jovenes booth,which was staffed by two middle-aged men, the presentation largely consisted of a collection of thong underwear hung up around the booth, as well as a 'snakes and ladders' floor game with puffy dice." 

Did you catch the name of that "game"?  Snakes and ladders.  Who is the serpent?

To sum up: Pro-Life literature is taboo at the UN.  But not wooden phalluses, condoms, pornographic and sexually suggestive photos.

This is the essence of the new anti-Christian sex education in preparation for the Moloch State. As George Kendall explains in Witness for the Truth, this sex education "radically separates sex from the very idea of the covenanted love of man and woman. Sex becomes merely a self-centered appetite to be satisfied and not a gift of self to another. As a result, what this kind of education produces is the lonely, autonomous individual. This is the ultimate in alienation. The autonomous individual is alienated even from his own body, which becomes to him only a thing, too - a thing to be used as a means to his autonomous pleasure. The end result is depersonalization which, if it lasts into eternity without being healed, means eternal loss.

Few have put it as eloquently as Randy Engel did: 'Is it any wonder that the state must wage war against the family? For the state requires not individuals who dream, and think, and pray, but rather what has come to be called 'the mass man' - rootless, unaffirmed, a reactor - a mere reed blowing in the wind - a thing to be manipulated, to be used, to be disposed of, but never, never, to be loved, for the giant has no heart. And since the modern state has no heart, that which men previously have done out of love, must now be done out of fear, and hatred, and brute force.' So clearly, centemporary sex education, 'Catholic' or otherwise, is a profound attack on human dignity and on the human person.." (Witness for the Truth, pp. 399-400. citing Randy Engel "The Family Under Siege," Wanderer, March 6, 1980).


And now I would add, satanic. The United Nations, spiritual headquarters for the Termite Nations of the West, is advancing the concept of the Moloch State which claims total jurisdiction over man. The Moloch State will serve as a demon-state which rejects God's Commandments and His plan for the human family. This demon-state (and make no mistake about it, our leaders increasingly have recourse to demons) denies that there is any transcendent, higher-than-human voice or authority that cares for man. R.J. Rushdoony explains that:

"The Moloch State simply represents the supreme effort of man to command the future, to predestine the world, and to be as God. Lesser efforts, divination, spirit-questing, magic and witchcraft are equally anathema to God. All represent efforts to have the future on other than God's terms, to have a future apart from and in defiance of God. They are assertions that the world is not of God but of brute factuality, and that man can somehow master the world and the future by going directly to the raw materials thereof."

Enter the Man of Sin.

John 5: 43.

Read More

Clark University in Worcester: Demonizing religious opposition toward homosexuality

Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts is engaging in what the French philosopher Gabriel Marcel labelled the "techniques of degradation."


In his work of critical importance entitled "Man Against Mass Society," Marcel explains, "I understand by 'techniques of degradation' a whole body of methods deliberately put into operation in order to attack and destroy in human persons belonging to some definite class or other their self-respect, and in order to transform them little by little into mere human waste products, conscious of themselves as such, and in the end forced to despair of themselves, not merely at an intellectual level, but in the very depths of their souls.." (p. 42).

Through the fanatical employment of such techniques, radical homosexual activists hope to smash down their opponents, to categorize them as mentally ill (suffering from a "phobia"), as hate-filled "bigots" who cling to "worn out arguments" based upon an "archaic morality" which is rooted in Divine Revelation and Natural Law, as superstitious and backward people who need to be re-educated in order to fit into the new Culture of Sodomy.

Marcel writes, "Having abandoned the behaviour of a thinking being, he [the fanatic of any stripe who seeks to impose rather than propose] has lost even the feeblest notion of what a thinking being, outside himself, could be. It is understandable therefore that he should make every effort to deny in advance the rights and qualifications of those whom he wishes to eliminate; and that he should regard all means to this end as fair. We are back here again at the techniques of degradation.." (p. 149).

In the New Order, those who oppose homosexuality on moral grounds must be degraded. They must be placed in a ghetto. Just as the National Socialists employed the techniques of degradation in their propaganda war against the Jewish People, portraying them as rats emerging from a sewer, as subhuman people who stood in the way of a new republic and a more glorious era, so too radical homosexual activists seek to demonize any and all moral opposition toward homosexuality and will use any and all means to achieve that end.

Clark University, the same institution which employs Doctor Abbie Goldberg, a radical homosexual activist, is most anxious to demonize those who oppose homosexuality on moral grounds [Divine Revelation and/or the Natural Moral Law] and to paint such people as hateful and discriminatory.  Those who believe that marriage is between a man and a woman are categorized as "heterosexists," as people who mistreat homosexuals and lesbians and who have the audacity to believe that heterosexual relationships are the norm.  The University asserts:

"Heterosexism is the systematic, day-to-day, institutional mistreatment of gay, lesbian, transsexual and bisexual people by a heterosexually dominated culture. At its core, heterosexism assumes that heterosexual relationships represent the norm and are, therefore, implicitly superior to gay, lesbian, transsexual or bisexual relationships. Out of heterosexism stems homophobia which is the fear and/or hatred of gays, lesbians, transsexuals and bisexuals because of their sexual orientations." (See here).

By affixing the homophobic label on those who oppose the deviancy of homosexuality, Clark University (as with other institutions which seek to impose the radical homosexual agenda) hopes to intimidate those who oppose the psychopathology by dismissing their arguments based on right reason as "irrational fears."

Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, in their blueprint for propagandizing Americans to accept homosexuality entitled "After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear & Hatred of Gays in the 90s," write that, "By conversion we actually mean something far more profoundly threatening to the American Way of Life, without which no truly sweeping social change can occure.  We mean conversion of the average American's emotions, mind, and will, through a planned psychological attack, in the form of propaganda fed to the nation via the media." (p. 153).

These tactics are employed not only via the media but by college campuses across the nation.  As this article makes clear, the propagandists will stop at nothing to desensitize the "average American" and will even resort to violence if all else fails:

"In 1989, Dr. Chuck McIlhenny, pastor of San Francisco's First Orthodox Presbyterian Church, exercised his Constitutional rights of free speech and assembly and helped engineer the defeat of a domestic partnership law that would have forced the public to accept homosexual immorality by compelling everyone to treat two sodomites as a family.


McIlhenny and his family soon became the focus of intense and vicious sodomite hate. For three years, they received thousands of threatening and harassing phone calls 24 hours a day, and many callers swore to sodomize and then kill the McIlhenny's three daughters.

His home and church were firebombed. In 1990, sodomite groups repeatedly vandalized the church and home with graffiti like 'Dykes for Choice,' and attacked the crisis pregnancy center housed in the church. Cowardly, skulking sodomites broke the church's windows so many times the parishioners boarded them up permanently.

Institutions such as Clark University are encouraging this sort of climate by portraying Christians and others who oppose homosexuality on moral grounds as "bigots" who suffer from irrational fears and as religious fanatics (see here).

Clark University is fomenting hatred and Christianophobia.  This shouldn't really come as a surprise.  The Church proposes but the world imposes.  See here.

Read More

Stacy Trasancos, homosexual activists and dialogue...

Earlier this year I posted on how an Ontario panel, organized by the University of Toronto's Institute for Studies in Education, discussed how to silence religious opposition to LGBT propaganda in schools.  See here.  Although there are, of course, homosexual persons who are people of good will, the homosexual movement itself is totalitarian in nature and seeks to impose its agenda on all.  Even if this means silencing religious opposition.

Most of those who advance the radical homosexual agenda are simply not interested in authentic dialogue.  See here for example.  Stacy Trasancos discovered this recently when she blogged on homosexual activity and received many insults and even threats directed against herself and her family.  Readers of this Blog know that I have been threatened repeatedly.  One homosexual activist called the Mothertown News to tell them that he was going to kill me with his high-powered rifle because I had written a piece for that paper explaining the magisterial teaching of the Church regarding homosexual acts.

In his Encyclical Letter Redemptoris Missio (The Mission of the Redeemer), Pope John Paul II said that, "The Church proposes; she imposes nothing." (No. 39). Such was the teaching of Vatican II: "The Church strictly forbids forcing anyone to embrace the faith, or alluring or enticing people by worrisome wiles. By the same token, she also strongly insists on this right, that no one be frightened away from the faith by unjust vexations on the part of others." (Ad Gentes, No. 13). And Dignitatis Humanae, No. 10 teaches that: "It is one of the major tenets of Catholic doctrine that man's response to God in faith must be free: no one therefore is to be forced to embrace the Christian faith against his own will. This doctrine is contained in the word of God and it was constantly proclaimed by the Fathers of the Church. The act of faith is of its very nature a free act. Man, redeemed by Christ the Savior and through Christ Jesus called to be God's adopted son, cannot give his adherence to God revealing Himself unless, under the drawing of the Father, he offers to God the reasonable and free submission of faith. It is therefore completely in accord with the nature of faith that in matters religious every manner of coercion on the part of men should be excluded. In consequence, the principle of religious freedom makes no small contribution to the creation of an environment in which men can without hindrance be invited to the Christian faith, embrace it of their own free will, and profess it effectively in their whole manner of life."


But while the Church respects freedom of conscience and shuns any form of coercion, our Holy Father reminds us that, "We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one's own ego and desires.

We, however, have a different goal: the Son of God, the true man. He is the measure of true humanism. An "adult" faith is not a faith that follows the trends of fashion and the latest novelty; a mature adult faith is deeply rooted in friendship with Christ. It is this friendship that opens us up to all that is good and gives us a criterion by which to distinguish the true from the false, and deceit from truth."

This dictatorship of relativism seeks to impose its immoral agenda on Christians in the name of "tolerance." But this "tolerance" is a sham. It is simply an attempt to make an idol out of a false conception of freedom. Again, our Holy Father explains that, "..what clearly stands behind the modern era's radical demand for freedom is the promise: You will be like God...The implicit goal of all modern freedom movements is, in the end, to be like a god, dependent on nothing and nobody, with one's own freedom not restricted by anyone else's...The primeval error of such a radically developed desire for freedom lies in the idea of a divinity that is conceived as being purely egotistical. The god thus conceived of is, not God, but an idol, indeed, the image of what the Christian tradition would call the devil, the anti-god, because therein lies the radical opposite of the true God: the true God is, of his own nature, being-for (Father), being-from (Son), and being-with (Holy Spirit). Yet man is in the image of God precisely because the being-for , from, and with constitute the basic anthropological shape. Whenever people try to free themselves from this, they are moving, not toward divinity, but toward dehumanizing, toward the destruction of being itself through the destruction of truth. The Jacobin variant of the idea of liberation...is a rebellion against being human in itself, rebellion against truth, and that is why it leads people - as Sartre percipiently observed - into a self-contradictory existence that we call hell. It has thus become fairly clear that freedom is linked to a yardstick, the yardstick of reality - to truth*. Freedom to destroy oneself or to destroy others is not freedom but a diabolical parody. The freedom of man is a shared freedom, freedom in a coexistence of other freedoms, which are mutually limiting and thus mutually supportive: freedom must be measured according to what I am, what we are - otherwise it abolishes itself."

In the name of "tolerance," the New World Order seeks to impose its rebellion from truth on all. It will not tolerate any dissent, any disagreement. Coercion is an acceptable tool in a dictatorship. Soon, the New Order will use violence to achieve its goals and not just coercion and propaganda. In the end, every dictatorship must rely on violence in its vain attempt to hold onto power.

Already the signs are emerging.  Catholics who oppose homosexuality on religious and moral grounds are being demonized.  So too the teaching authority of the Catholic Church.  See here for example.  Before a dictatorship can resort to violence, it must first demonize the group it wants to suppress or eliminate.

Read More

Conference seeks to normalize pedophilia

John Rossomando, in an article for The Daily Caller, is reporting that, "If a small group of psychiatrists and other mental health professionals have their way at a conference this week, pedophiles themselves could play a role in removing pedophilia from the American Psychiatric Association’s bible of mental illnesses — the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), set to undergo a significant revision by 2013. Critics warn that their success could lead to the decriminalization of pedophilia.


The August 17 Baltimore conference is sponsored by B4U-ACT, a group of pro-pedophile mental health professionals and sympathetic activists. According to the conference brochure, the event will examine “ways in which minor-attracted persons [pedophiles] can be involved in the DSM 5 revision process” and how the popular perceptions of pedophiles can be reframed to encourage tolerance..." (See here).

For years I have been warning that the Reign of Antichrist will witness a celebration of sin and perversion the likes of which few can imagine. Pleasure is the new principle par excellence. When I wrote [several years ago] that, "If pleasure can justify homosexual behavior (and increasingly that is what our sin-sick society is saying), then other deviant forms of sexual activity which are viewed as pleasurable by some will also be logically justified. This will include pedophilia, pederasty, ephebophilia, gerontophilia, necrophilia, sadism, masochism and bestiality," I was mocked by homosexual activists.

As noted here, Homosexual Alfred Kinsey, the USA's preeminent sexual researcher, found in 1948 that 37 percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old.


A recent study published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that 'The best epidemiological evidence indicates that only 2 - 4% of men attracted to adults prefer men. In contrast, around 25 - 40% of men attracted to children prefer boys. Thus, the rate of homosexual attraction is 6-20 times higher among pedophiles.'

Another recent study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that '... all but 9 of the 48 homosexual men preferred the youngest two male age categories.' These age categories were fifteen and twenty years old.

A third study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that 'Pedophilia appears to have a greater than chance association with two other statistically infrequent phenomena. The first of these is homosexuality ... Recent surveys estimate the prevalence of homosexuality, among men attracted to adults, in the neighborhood of 2%. In contrast, the prevalence of homosexuality among pedophiles may be as high as 30 - 40%.'

A study in the Journal of Sex Research noted that '... the proportion of sex offenders against male children among homosexual men is substantially larger than the proportion of sex offenders against female children among heterosexual men ... the development of pedophilia is more closely linked with homosexuality than with heterosexuality.'

A study of 229 convicted child molesters published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that 'eighty-six percent of [sexual] offenders against males described themselves as homosexual or bisexual.'


Culture in crisis!

Read More

Is St. Cecilia's "Rainbow Ministry" engaging in cultic behavior?

Even within the Catholic Church, charismatic individuals can inspire a cult-following. Religious communities (and a parish is a religious community) can fall victim to the cult phenomenon. In his book "Cults, Sects, and the New Age," Father James LeBar, who has served as a Consultant on Cults for the Archdiocese of New York, notes, "...to be sure,..cultic behavior is possible at any time in any place. It has also been demonstrated that some legitimate actions of Catholic Church groups can be carried to excess, so that the cult label is applied....Church leaders must be vigilant to make sure that cultic practices do not creep into otherwise legitimate groups." (p. 99).

So the Catholic Church is not necessarily immune from cults.  Fr. LeBar stresses this truth in his book writing, "Are there 'Catholic' cults?  Are there practices in the Catholic Church that can be compared to the cults?  Are there groups operating with church approval that use the same techniques, the same methods of operation that may confuse people?  Unfortunately, each of the above questions can be answered affirmatively, with the possible exception of the first.  In the strictest sense, there are no Catholic cults, because of our system of accountability and responsibility.  Should a person or group go astray, the competent authority, be it local (the pastor), regional (the bishop), or international (the Vatican, or the Holy Father himself), after due investigation, corrects them, or excludes them from the Church."

That there are groups which occasionally spring up within the Catholic Church and which operate using the same techniques that cults employ is a given.  Some recent examples are The Fatima Crusaders (also known as the Tridentine Latin Rite Church - TLRC)  which denied the legitimacy of the last four popes; the Bayside Movement, also known as "Our Lady of the Roses," which was founded by Veronica Leuken; the Apostolic Formation Center which was the brainchild of L. Roy Legere; and the Integrated Humanities Program which was conceived by three Catholic professors at the University of Kansas.

One of the chief characteristics of a group which engages in cultic behavior is that it does not tell the truth about itself.  As Rev. Wm. Kent Burtner explains in his "Outline for a Talk on Cults, Thought Reform and Mind Abuse":

"Most people want us to believe the best about their group.  They are also willing to tell the truth about their: ideology, the meaning of becoming a member, what the goal of the group is, what is expected of new members.  But cult groups are NOT willing to do so.  Cult leaders know that if they do, people might not join, or might leave..."

Bearing this in mind, let's read what Father John Unni of St. Cecilia's Parish in Boston's Back Bay had to say about his parish and the "Rainbow Ministry" which plays such an important role there:

"The Cardinal’s been supportive, he’s been very clear what the Church teaches and what it doesn’t, and he knows I have no other agenda there. That’s not going to please everybody, but that’s the Gospel….My thing is, nobody gets excluded from the door, and nobody gets excluded from the table, and then from there, I’m just assuming we’re all trying to do the best that we can do."


But here we immediately encounter a serious problem.  Joe Sacerdo explains:

"Yes, we know the Cardinal’s been supportive. That’s a big part of the problem. He has been only somewhat clear on what the Church teaches and doesn’t teach by the mixed messages coming out from him and his spokesman. If Fr. Unni has 'no other agenda there,' then why has he sponsored speakers who have worked in favor of gay marriage talking in favor of gay marriage, in direct opposition to what the Catholic Church teaches? Fr. Unni, Cardinal O’Malley, and Terry Donilon, can we get an answer to that question? And 'nobody gets excluded from the table'? Does that mean that regardless of the level of mortal sin anyone might have committed, and an absence of repentance for that sin, they should still receive the Eucharist?  

To which I would add, if Father Unni has no other agenda, why does his "Rainbow Ministry" Blog link to a Blog post entitled "Mychal Judge embraced his homosexuality as a gift of God" (Father Mychal Judge was a Franciscan priest and chaplain for the New York Fire Department who lost his life during the World Trade Center attack on 911), in which the author writes, "Some have asked, Why do we need to know that Fr. Mike was gay? First, because Mychal himself brought it up. He felt it important to share this aspect of himself, to put a human face and name upon the despised label of 'homosexual'. Recall how Christ, when asked, 'Who is my neighbor?,' tells the parable of the Good Samaritan, putting a human face on the Samaritans who were despised by the Jews. To truly understand Mychal Judge, to fully appreciate how God worked through him, we must recognize this truth about him. Mychal’s gayness was a major reason for his deep empathy with others, especially outcasts. He was holy in part because he was gay, not despite the fact.


Second, we should know that Fr. Mike was gay because Rome wants to purge many good, gifted gay seminarians. Mychal Judge and many like him would be barred from the priesthood under this regime. Christ had no problem with Mychal’s orientation, but Rome does.

Third, awareness of Fr. Mychal’s gay identity saves lives, and we are a pro-life Church. 1500 gay and lesbian teenagers commit suicide each year in the U.S., succumbing to intense rejection and internalized shame.

Mychal intervened in at least one family whose teenage son came out to his parents. That story had a happy ending, but thousands of gay kids are still rejected, abused, driven to suicide, and thrown out to the streets by their parents.

Public awareness of Mychal's gay identity continues to save lives by providing greater understanding, fulfilling Christ’s command to “go and do likewise” as the Good Samaritan.

Some have asked, Shouldn't sexual orientation be kept private?

Intimacy is a private matter. But identity and prejudice are public matters affecting the mental, social, physical, and spiritual health of millions of families and individuals.

Those who are embarrassed by this serious, mature discussion wrongly associate guilt and shame with homosexual orientation and relationships. They ought to examine where their visceral reactions really come from. They ought to question Rome’s faulty assumptions and, indeed, Rome’s own 'objective disorders' which more often resemble a severely dysfunctional family than the Body of Christ.

For centuries, Catholics were also taught to fear left-handed people as 'servants of the devil,' and the left-handed were burned at the stake along with faggots and heretics. (The word faggot, literally “burning bundle,” derives from these church burnings of gay men).

Now we know that homosexuality is no more 'disordered' or 'sinful' than left-handedness. Medical and scientific research strongly point to sexual orientation as determined at birth; that it’s nature over nurture for most people. Therefore, homosexual orientation, like left-handedness, is a Divinely created, normal variation within natural law. As such, gay people face the same moral challenges as everyone else.

The truly disordered homosexuals, psychiatrists say, are the ego-dystonic ones -- the self-loathing and dis-integrated, those who don't accept themselves. The most strident homophobes often have unresolved fears and wounds of their own which they project onto others. Christ warned of such projection: “Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but not the beam in your own eye?!”

Homophobic guilt, shame, and fear are pathological reactions; they are not of Christ. Christ spreads healing, not pathology -- holiness, not neurosis. Whatever is psychologically unhealthy can never be spiritually holy. (The very words “holy” and “holiness” derive from healthy, happy, and wholeness).

Mychal Judge rejected pathological shame, and embraced his homosexuality as God's will for him."

Again, one of the chief characteristics of a group which engages in cultic behavior is that it does not tell the truth about itself.  Father John Unni has not told the truth about his agenda.  Nor have other members of the "Rainbow Ministry." 

The competent local authority needs to investigate St. Cecilia's "Rainbow Ministry." 

We read here that: "Christoph Cardinal Schönborn, editor of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, has noted that, "sects are marked by dissent from the Church’s teachings, promoting heresy and even schism."  Now John Kelly, Chair of the "Rainbow Ministry," has said that he doesn't look to the Vatican for guidance or teaching.  His group has promoted same-sex "marriage," and links to a Blog which describes the homosexual orientation as a "Divinely created, normal variation within natural law" while accusing Rome of "faulty assumptions" and "objective disorders."

It doesn't take a theologian to discern that something is radically wrong with the "Rainbow Ministry."  Only someone whose eyes are open.

Read More

Father John Unni claims he has no idea what the Gay Pride agenda is and that he just wants to be inclusive

This past Sunday at Holy Mass, Father John Unni, "pastor" of Saint Cecilia's Parish in Boston which had planned a "Gay Pride Mass," engaged in falsehood before God and the parishioners present saying, "In the past week, folks have talked about the Gay Pride agenda.  I confess to almighty God and my brothers and sisters that I don't know what that group is.  I apologize for my stupidity and ignorance.  We put ads in the bulletin saying all are welcome."  See here.

Sure.  And I play spin-the-bottle with Carmen Electra every Friday night.

In past bulletins, Fr. Unni has promoted presentations given by Rabbi Devon Lerner and Charles Martel.  Rabbi Lerner has served as the Executive Director of the Religious Coalition for the Freedom to Marry (RCFM) and Charles Martel, a militant homosexual activist and clinical social worker in Boston who received his BA and MSW from Catholic University of America, has worked for Catholic Charities within the Diocese of Worcester and for the Family Counseling and Guidance Center in Braintree, Massachusetts, a clinic which is affiliated with the Boston Archdiocese.  Mr. Martel served as a member of the Board of the Religious Coalition for the Freedom to Marry and recently co-founded Catholics for Marriage Equality.

The Massachusetts Religious Coalition for the Freedom to Marry, website may be found here, has the following mission statement: "The Massachusetts Religious Coalition for the Freedom to Marry consists of more than 1000 rabbis, ministers, and faith leaders, as well as congregations and faith-based organizations from more than 20 faith traditions. We support civil marriage rights for same-sex couples and families as a matter of religious freedom and civil rights. We help citizens understand the distinction between civil and religious marriage. We provide religious support and pastoral care for same-sex couples and families as well as educational programs and projects that support the full inclusion of same-sex families into our society."


If Fr. Unni is not in support of the "Gay Pride" agenda, why has he promoted two individuals who agitate for same-sex "marriage"?  In one bulletin, which may be found here, there is the following promotion: "'Called by Name' Prayer Service for GLBT Community.  The Catholic Gay and Lesbian Concerns ministry at Saint Ignatius Church, Chestnut Hill, is hosting a prayer service, 'Called by Name: Praying for Tolerance & Understanding' on February 23 at 7:15 p.m. in their upper church.  This is a service of welcome and affirmation for the GLBT community as well as for their parents and family members...For further information, please contact Charles Martel.."  The same Martel who founded the dissident group "Catholics for Marriage Equality, which describes itself as encompassing,  "faithful Roman Catholics throughout the United States who through prayerful discernment are supporting civil marriage for same-sex couples" and which asserts that member's consciences "are informed by..Catholic social justice tradition based in Hebrew and Christian scriptures."  See here.  

So here's where we're at: Father John Unni is now claiming that he has no idea what the "Gay Pride" agenda is all about even though his June 5th parish bulletin states, "The Rainbow Ministry of Saint Cecilia Parish invites all friends and supporters of the LGBT community to a Mass in celebration of Boston's Pride Month."

The same priest who has promoted radical homosexual activists who work for same-sex "marriage" has the full confidence and support of the Boston Archdiocese.

God help us all!

Read More

Sentinel & Enterprise Editor: "We run a wide variety of columnists who are all over the political spectrum.."

Bernard Goldberg, in his book "Arrogance: Rescuing America from the Media Elite," notes how, "Quite simply, when it comes to gay issues, once again ideological journalism routinely fails the public - tilting the news of highly complex issues mainly to one side almost as a matter of course.  Once again, as with stories involving race or gender, narrow-interest pressure groups both inside and outside the newsroom are accorded special deference and respect.  And yes, once again it is liberal sympathizers, in this case straight ones, who help enforce the code, branding those who dissent from the approved liberal position as morally flawed..."  And, referring to those who oppose homosexuality because of their religious convictions, Goldberg writes, "I don't think someone is a homophobe just because he or she thinks that way - or, for that matter, honestly disagrees with some of the other items on the gay agenda.  More to the point, as it pertains to journalism, I think those people deserve a full, fair, and equal hearing.  The fact is, the gay agenda demands a fundamental shift in the way we've thought about sex and morals for a very, very long time.  It literally seeks to wipe away several thousand years of social and religious tradition.  So it would be crazy for us not to have a free and open debate about its consequences.  Yet what we most often see instead in the media is the sort of name-calling that wouldn't be tolerated on a playground.  Even traditionalist religious leaders and respected conservative social commentators regularly get called bigots for doing nothing more than upholding the tenets of their faith." (Arrogance, pp. 167, 168-169).

In this past Sunday's Sentinel & Enterprise, Bonnie Toomey categorized religious believers as being "stuck in the 20th century."  The implication being that those who adhere to the tenets of their faith tradition are somehow backward and "behind the times."  In addition, Ms. Toomey implied that it is this "backward thinking" which is responsible for "the many ugly stories involving harassment, mistreatment and even homicide."

I answered Ms. Toomey's asinine article in my last post.  What is most interesting is that a reader of this Blog contacted the editor of the Sentinel & Enterprise - Mr. Charles St. Amand -  to address her concerns regarding Ms. Toomey's article and he responded by asserting that the newspaper runs "a wide variety of columnists who are all over the political spectrum - left, right and center" and that he welcomes "letters and guest columns from..readers and community leaders on all topics."  This comes as a complete surprise to me.  For I have submitted guest columns and op-ed pieces in the past dealing with the issue of homosexuality and same-sex "marriage" and these have never seen the light of day.  Years ago, another Sentinel editor - Ann Connery Frantz - would routinely mock my views as she informed me that the paper would not be publishing them.

Does such an attitude represent a "full, fair and equal hearing"?  A fellow Catholic Blogger has written about the Worcester Telegram & Gazette's bias with regard to the issue of homosexuality.  See here.

Journalistic integrity or radical homosexual agenda?  You decide.

Related reading here

Read More

George Soros and INET in New Hampshire: A Plan of Action for the United States

Brother Nathanael Kapner, writing for Novakeo.com, explains that George Soros, "..a proponent of the 'hard left,' has also been funneling money into the Democratic Party and to its candidates with the intent on building a slate of Senators and Representatives with socialist leanings. 'George Soros has purchased the Democratic Party,' said Republican National Committee spokeswoman, Christine Iverson, 'and he who pays the piper calls the tune.'


Through his Open Society Institute, Soros has contributed to left wing socialist groups such as, Human Rights Watch, Jewish Council for Public Affairs, The New American Foundation, ACORN, MoveOn, and his own, Center For American Progress, of which, Obama recently appointed its senior fellow, Todd Stern, as his ‘Climate Czar.’ Stern, a Zionist Jew, is the chief architect of the socialist-inspired Climate Change Bill, just passed by Congress.

George Soros now has a superhighway to Change – ‘Socialist Change.’ We are already beginning to see the largest growth in government in the history of America. Hell-bent on destroying the American dollar and installing a global currency, Soros has got his bought-and-paid-for White House stooge now installing his socialist agenda."

Which is why Soros and the Institute for New Economic Thinking (Soros is its founding sponsor) are meeting at Bretton Woods in New Hampshire.  The Socialist plan to destroy America was actually described in a 1934 Chicago Tribune cartoon.  Take note of the sign in the lower left-hand corner of this cartoon.  It reads (in part): "spend, spend, spend..under the guise of recovery."

Does this sound familar?

At his Blog, Mark Mallett writes, "world bodies such, as the International Monetary Fund...are increasingly warning that America’s foundations are beginning to crumble under its enormous debt. I have written before that Revolution is coming. But it will only come when the social order has been sufficiently destabilized, and then, the opportunity for a new political order is possible. That destabilization is coming hard and fast, it seems, as unemployment and poverty in the U.S. rises and the possibility for social chaos, such as we see breaking out in other third world countries, becomes less remote. Far from a speculation, several popes have been warning for decades that such a revolution has been the intention all along of secret societies working parallel to governments...With the collapse of the United States, the door will be open for a new super-power—or super-world government—to assert a mode of governance that does not place the intrinsic freedom and dignity of the human person at its center, but instead profitability, efficiency, ecology, the environment, and technology as its primary goal."


He then cites Pope Benedict XVI who has said that: "...without the guidance of charity in truth, this global force could cause unprecedented damage and create new divisions within the human family… If there is a lack of respect for the right to life and to a natural death, if human conception, gestation and birth are made artificial, if human embryos are sacrificed to research, the conscience of society ends up losing the concept of human ecology and, along with it, that of environmental ecology. It is contradictory to insist that future generations respect the natural environment when our educational systems and laws do not help them to respect themselves." (Caritas in Veritate, No. 51).

Everything is falling into place. A world currency for a world government which will welcome the Man of Sin with open arms. In his Life of Christ (Image Books, 1977, p. 10), Archbishop Fulton John Sheen wrote, "We do know that at the end of time, when the great conflict between the forces of good and evil takes place, Satan will appear without the Cross, as the Great Philanthropist and Social Reformer to become the final temptation of mankind."

Indeed, Paul Henri-Spaak, who served as Belgian Prime Minister and gained international prominence in 1945 when he was elected chairman of the first session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, had called for such a "Great Philanthropist and Social Reformer": "We do not want another committee, we have too many already. What we want is a man of sufficient stature to hold the allegiance of all people, and to lift us out of the economic morass in which we are sinking. Send us such a man and be he God or the Devil, we will receive him."*

* John 5:43.

Related reading here.

Read More