The Catholic Thing
HOME        ARCHIVES        IN THE NEWS        COMMENTARY        NOTABLE        DONATE
Obama’s Obsession with Sexual Orientation Print E-mail
By Austin Ruse   
Friday, 01 July 2011

A few weeks ago, Malawi’s Ambassador to the United Nations said privately that the Obama administration had threatened to withhold $350 million in aid unless Malawi’s government struck down its laws on sodomy.

Let’s take a look at tiny Malawi. According to the CIA World Fact Book, among Malawi’s roughly 16-million inhabitants, the life expectancy is a paltry 5I.7 years, which turns to be the 211th lowest life expectancy in the world. Malawi has the eleventh highest infant mortality rate in the world. And 44 percent of the population does not have safe sanitation, meaning they very well might be peeing where they drink.

Malawi is also among the poorest countries in the world. A $350-million aid package goes a long way there, yet here are President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton holding Malawi hostage to the new U.S. homosexual agenda. Make sodomy legal or your people can twist in the wind.

Malawi did not exactly arrive at its sodomy laws through a fatwa. It is 82-percent Christian and a multi-party democracy with a bi-cameral legislature and judicial review.

Within days, its government committed to changing Malawis sodomy laws. Obama the Bully hailed this as a great victory. Yes, you can usually get your way by threatening the world’s poorest people.

This is just a small and shocking measure of how the LGBT agenda has come to dominate at least part of our young president’s foreign policy.

On June 21 our U. N. Ambassador, Susan Rice, rose in the General Assembly to congratulate Ban Ki-Moon for reelection as Secretary General. In her short speech she thanked him for insisting on “recognizing that lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, and transgender rights are, simply, human rights.” No other ambassador made such a reference.

One incensed ambassador wondered if she was under instructions from President Obama reaching out to his N. Y. homosexual constituency. He said, “In that solemn atmosphere the reference to LGBT sounded very strange, if not totally out of place or even something of bad taste.” He pointed out that Rice did not even mention the Millennium Development Goals, a sign of where the administration’s heart really lies.


          Steamrolling even tiny Malawi to promote the LGBT agenda

A few weeks ago the administration put great pressure on Latin American governments to support a U.N. resolution calling for a commission to study violence against homosexuals. It had wanted something far stronger: sexual orientation and gender identity as new categories of non-discrimination in international law, similar to religious freedom. The commission is only a first step. In a speech to organized homosexuals in the State Department, Hillary Clinton called it “the first ever U.N. resolution recognizing the human rights of LGBT people worldwide.” Though not entirely accurate, that shows how she wishes to be seen.

In the same speech, Clinton talked about an array of global programs to advance the homosexual agenda which our State Department pursues in an alphabet soup of agencies: USAID, the International Organizations Bureau, Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, European and Eurasian Affairs, and Western Hemisphere Affairs. She described how a homosexual rights parade in Slovakia sparked violence last year and how we orchestrated support for the parade with twenty other governments. She bragged, to great laughter from the diplomatic crowd, that she had helped with Lady Gaga’s appearance at a homosexual rally in Rome. Take that, Catholic Church!

Months ago the administration directed all U.S. Embassies in the world to monitor and assist domestic homosexual movements. The wishes, traditions, or religious practices of the home populations do not matter.

The U.S. President can be himself on social policy at the U.N., because it’s mostly a backwater. Americans do not pay attention except for certain security matters or during times of scandal. Most Americans totally ignore the U.N., especially when it comes to U. N. social policy, where the only partisan activists on both sides follow developments. This is where real payback to the political base comes. President Bush, for instance, was more pro-life at the U.N. than in any other venue. President Obama is more pro-abortion, if you can imagine, and certainly more pro-homosexual there than anywhere.

The good news is there is a solid and growing bloc opposed to this agenda. In 2008 the pro-homosexual forces got sixty-five countries to sign a petition calling for sexual orientation to be a new category of non-discrimination. But sixty governments signed a counter statement. Last fall, eighty-five governments signed a new and similar pro-LGBT statement. On the other hand, regional groups representing more than eighty countries condemned it.

How much difference can America make on this issue around the world and at the U.N.? Certainly, we can threaten poor countries into going along, and that will certainly continue. But the U.N. is not the U.S., and other countries aren’t either. There are not enough homosexual billionaires or Hollywood moguls to change minds globally or in countries where homosexuality is properly seen as a threat to public health and morals.

The Church needs to do more but sadly there is a split within the Church about the question of decriminalizing homosexual acts. In a statement at the U.N. two years ago, the Holy See confused the issue by saying that “homosexuality” should be decriminalized. The distinction the Holy See failed to make is between the homosexual condition or homosexual thoughts, and homosexual actions. We are told the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has issued secret guidelines on this issue and has come out in favor of decriminalization. Of what, we are not certain. But the Church is needed on this to teach clearly and loudly that, no matter the issue of decriminalization, sexual orientation and gender identity can never come alongside freedom of religion in human rights law. In that match-up, freedom of religion always loses.

 
Austin Ruse is the President of the New York and Washington, D.C.-based Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute (C-FAM), a research institute that focuses exclusively on international social policy. The opinions expressed here are Mr. Ruse’s alone and do not necessarily reflect the policies or positions of C-FAM. 

©2011 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to:  This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.
   

Rules for Commenting

The Catholic Thing welcomes comments, which should reflect a sense of brevity and a spirit of Christian civility, and which, as discretion indicates, we reserve the right to publish or not. And, please, do not include links to other websites; we simply haven't time to check them all.

Comments (41)Add Comment
0
...
written by Br. David OSB, July 01, 2011
Mr. Ruse, I applaud your call for a distinction in decriminalization. However, at the very end of your article, you leave a lot of uncertainty yourself - provided of course that I have correctly understood what you wrote. As Catholics, it is clear that we should be against condoning homosexual acts all the while accepting and love the homosexual. We are called to be chaste. I fail to see how the Church or even individuals, Catholic or not, can condemn someone because of their orientation. You can't tell someone what they feel because you (or the government) are simply not them. To do so is to negate their inherent human dignity. It is possible to teach, to help understand, to show why it is not moral to act on their feelings. A homosexual is not less of a person than a heterosexual.
0
...
written by Joe, July 01, 2011
If the economy was a special interest group, I believe with Mr. O, we would not be where we are today.
0
...
written by Manfred, July 01, 2011
When we were younger, and we read of Sodom and Gommorah, did any of us understand that one day we would live there?
When we discuss the Church's shortcomings in dealing with the subject of homosexuality, do we understand that, fairly or not, many people understand the Catholic priesthood as a homosexual profession? When the president of the Catholic League argues against the most recent John Jay Report (cost: $1.8 million) as not being clear that most priestly predations were by homosexual priests, don't we get the impression that we live in a vast culture of degeneracy in which we struggle to survive? The "filth" Benedict describes is both in and outside the Church and it is Satanic.
0
...
written by Ars Artium, July 01, 2011
"Be not afraid." It was necessary to remember this strengthening admonition after reading this piece, particularly because I find these events frightening. We are facing a formidable adversary and the day is far advanced.

It was helpful to separate the matters cited into two categories. The first is the action of the Obama administration pressuring Malawi to revoke criminalization of sodomy. These laws (if I understand correctly) provided that persons engaging in this behavior were subject to arrest and imprisonment. Such policy is not legal in the United States nor is it, as far as I am informed, consistent with Catholic teaching. It is not the same as the enthusiastic support for normalization and enthusiastic affirmation shown by our ambassador to the U.N. and our Secretary of State. Their words seem to relegate human sexual conduct to a category not subject to any moral restrictions whatsoever. Is there anything which would evoke their disapproval?

I agree that with respect to Malawi the matter could and should have been handled more privately with respect for the dignity of the Malawi government and its people. Such a vigorous response has not happened in the matter of oppression of Christians, to offer one example.

Again I do believe we are facing a powerful, wealthy, and well-organized adversary. Its true objectives - the destruction of the Church for one - are not immediately obvious. We will have to carefully structure our responses making certain they are consistent with the teachings of the Church and of Christ himself. We should not in my opinion, "play into their hands" by advocating criminalization of this condition - or indeed any law or practice that does not offer compassion and help to those struggling with this disorder.
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, July 01, 2011
Brother David,
where did I call for us to condemn anyone for anything?

Ars Artium,

I am interested in seeing the Church document that condemns criminal penalties for homosexual behavior.
0
...
written by Gary Seaton, July 01, 2011
Question: What's the Church's position (or "right reason's") on the U.S. going $350Mil deeper in debt to the Chi-Comms in order to provide coercive aid to Malawi? The imprudent debt, the coercive aid, Sec/State Clinton's bragging about U.S. involvement in getting Lady Gag to participate in a LGBT parade on Rome.....it all adds up to a vivid poster for Obama's agenda. Does the average American voter see it, or care? Does the average American Catholic? On one level, that's our challenge. Let us pray....and support Austin Ruse and his work financially. He can't fight these battles alone. He SHOULDN'T fight these battles alone.
0
...
written by Br. David OSB, July 01, 2011
@A. Ruse: Mr. Ruse, perhaps I have misread/misunderstood the end of article where you say: "...no matter the issue of decriminalization, sexual orientation and gender identity can never come alongside freedom of religion in human rights law." I fail to see how it is possible for us to be silent on penalizing someone for their sexual orientation. Certainly there is the HUGE psychological debate of nature vs. nurture. Personally, I feel that there is a lot on the nurture side as a reason. But regardless: it still stands one cannot torture, imprison, or execute someone for having a sexual orientation. Some people clearly choose to be homosexual. But I believe these people are truly a minority. My comments are based on the citation here from your article.

On the whole, your article criticizes (and I believe rightly so) the Obama Administration for forcing Malawi to repeal its anti-sodomy laws. Those laws target homosexual ACTS. But at the end of your article, instead of maintaining your stay on the act, you write about orientation and identity. Those are two things intrinsically personal. No one can tell another person that he/she feels this or that or worse still IS this or that, when the person in question thinks/feels otherwise.

I find what the Obama administration did with Malawi reprehensible. But your critique of them at the beginning of the article was about a sexual act, not orientation as is the case at the end of your article.
0
...
written by Ray Hunkins, July 01, 2011
Thank you Mr. Ruse for shining a bright light on the sordid agenda of this administration. I don't much like what it illumes but the first step in hope and change 2 is understanding what is at stake. Your column adds to the body of knowledge necessary to overcome the natural inertial of the body politic. Mr. Seaton, this average American voter sees it, gets it and is going to do something about it.
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, July 01, 2011
Brother,

Even the Church recognizes there is such a thing as just discrimination against the homosexually oriented person. But, in the piece, on the question of criminalization, I do make the distinction between orientation and action.

I think your problem is that I say sexual orientation and gender identity should not become a new category of non-discrimination in human rights law. The Church also opposes this proposition. Such opposition, however, is not nearly the same thing as supporting criminalizing status.
0
...
written by Dave, July 01, 2011
Brother David: what you right is true enough, but Austin is right: he didn't condemn orientation in his column, only the coercion by the US Government for foreign governments to accept the importation of US social policy as a condition for receipt of aid.

The pattern is clear and troublesome: Malawi, largely Christian; support for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, and increased persecution of Coptic Christians there; support for an Islamic regime in Iraq, and those Christians who aren't fleeing are subject to beheading, crucifixion, and sexual violence; Yugoslavia, where we threw our weight behind the Muslims against the (Orthodox) Serbs; Latin America, where receipt of aid has long been conditioned upon liberalizing access to abortion and contraception and now, we may safely assume, the LGBT agenda; Hillary Clinton's brazen insult to the Catholic Church, made in Rome.

Obama is merely accelerating what has been the overt pattern for at least twenty years: Republicans justify abandonment of Christians overseas in the name of strategic necessity, while Democrats justify it in the name of "social justice." Laws and regimes must be overthrown when they do not support "our" agenda, whoever is running the show at the time; but when they do support the agenda, or are changed to support the agenda, behold the pious shibboleths and nostrums in its defense.

And the American public continues along, blithely unaware or accepting of the notion that liberty means libertinage and opposition to libertinage means support of tyranny. I feel we are living at the end of the Two Towers, the second book of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Great courage is required of us in these times. Thanks, Austin, for your lead.

0
...
written by Ars Artium, July 01, 2011
To Mr. Ruse: It is impossible for me to exaggerate the intensity of my agreement with you that "sexual orientation and gender identity should not become a new category of non-discrimination in human rights law." A human person is certainly much more than this particular aspect of his or her being and should not be reduced to such a categorization.

My comment on the question of criminalization of sodomy is based on commentary by credible writers but I cannot cite chapter and verse from Church documents. I absolutely agree that I should provide factual evidence for my assertions and will post my findings in support or refutation of my claim as soon as possible. Thank you for asking. One great benefit of sites like thecatholicthing is the opportunity they provide to develop a credible stance on matters like this one.
0
...
written by Louise, July 01, 2011
I know that you must all be tired of my "Johnny One Note" song about the use of precise words. Here I thank and applaud Mr. Ruse.

A Christian news site from the UK has reported that the Scottish government has banned the use of the word "homosexual" by any governmental official or agency. It offends people. The word "gay" must be used instead. The word "heterosexual" is also banned because it is "too confusing," and the word "straight" must be used. (Isn't the opposite of "straight", "crooked"?)

But I found this statement especially curious: "The new rules will be applied when civil servants question members of the public, customers, patients and staff about their sexuality." Why would civil servants find it necessary to question "members of the public, customers, patients, and staff". Patients, maybe, but the rest? Is there no respect for privacy anywhere? Do they stop you on the street and ask? Why is it anyone
s business?

So, the full weight and power of the government stands behind a lie--indeed, it sponsors the lie. What happens to a society when we can no longer rely on language to communicate with each other, when the very means of communication has been corrupted and debased and words have been emptied of shared meaning?

I was about 12 years old when my father (who did not complete high school) told me to always choose the most precise word, the one that meant exactly what I intended to say. It's been my theme song for 66 years. Words matter, and the ideas behind the words have consequences.
0
...
written by Rob, July 01, 2011
You can be sentenced to death for homosexual acts in Malawi. We should be lobbying them to change such barbaric laws.
0
...
written by Ars Artium, July 01, 2011
Re the comment by Louise: The question of language and the danger of its abuse - a question so well understood by your father and by you - is the subject of a book by the eminent Catholic philosopher, Josef Pieper. The title is "Abuse of Language - Abuse of Power".

Those who lived through the Soviet era of European history understood all too well the consequences of abuse of language which has acquisition of power as its (unstated)primary goal. The danger is very great.
0
...
written by Aeneas, July 01, 2011
This is just more reason to kick Obama's sorry butt out of office! Is he not the most ideologically driven zeolot of a president that we have ever had!

A little off topic but...Dave said "I feel we are living at the end of the Two Towers, the second book of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Great courage is required of us in these times. Thanks, Austin, for your lead."
Very nice! Making a good point AND getting a reference to "The Lord of the Rings" in there to boot!

3 cheers for Louise and here "one note" song, its needs to be sung more often! Words are incredibly important, and our enemies have been twisting their meanings for some time now.

0
...
written by Anonymous, July 01, 2011
Decriminalize homosexuality?

How dare they! Why, that would mean that they can't be punished under the law for private acts of intimacy. For shame!

Why, next they'll be saying that homosexuals are actually *people* and that you shouldn't discriminate against them because they're not people. Heavens to Betsy!

How will anyone be able to live free and experience freedom of religion with 1.7% homosexuals free to love one another in our midst. I know I can't!
0
...
written by Thomas C. coleman, Jr., July 01, 2011
Prez Obama's obsession is not with sexuality per se but with the destruction of Christian civilization. Sexual license and perversion are merely tools used by the revolutionary to make a society ripe of takeover. He is a US citizen, but just like red-diaper babies and some US-born Muslims, he was brought up to hate what this country stands for. He was baptized by a Marxist disguised as Christian and he still calls himsefl a Christian while he champions what the Bible tells us is an abmonination, calling it "love," is in "Now one should be prevented from serving thier country becuase of who they love." We are powerless over these enemies as long as we are afraid to name them. Thier is is Legion.
0
...
written by TW, July 01, 2011
I see an interesting paradox. Some seem to think that it is our obligation, via our government, to meddle in the affairs of foreign governments to get them to do what we want.
It is frequently those same people who object when church leaders (aka citizens) speak up about the internal affairs of our government, state and federal, regarding abortion and homosexualist agendas. The standard screech is that the church is meddling in affairs it has no business in. It is my opinion that our government should stay out of FOREIGN government affairs but that every citizen in the USA has a right and obligation to speak up about what is going on here.
0
...
written by Hans Moleman, July 01, 2011
Obama's push for LGBT rights has its limits, of course. Virtually every Muslim nation on earth prohibits homosexuality, yet their US aid flows unvexed.

In part, this is a continuation of the "multiculturalism" that demands deference to every culture or religion except Christianity. It works well because Christians don't believe in fighting back, and poverty basket cases like Malawi can't afford to.

This policy amounts to bullying only the easily bullied.
0
...
written by Pastor Glenn Koons, July 01, 2011
Politically, not morally,it seems that the entire DNC as well as the CEO_CIC wants to shove their views on not only domestic citizens but foreign citizens too. It does not seem that an understanding of either Western history nor American history-heritage-culture or our Judeo-Christian values have much sway with liberal media outlets, leftist pols and this Prez. A question will be for 2012: will Christians from the Prot and RC denominations vote for secular humanist socialists like Bama and his legions of devotees? Or will he be able to scam the same type of voters who seem to dis our values and history as they did in 2008?
0
...
written by Pierre Lebegue, July 01, 2011
Shame! shame! shame ! How a so-called Christian (Hussein) president dare twist a wee country's arm?
0
...
written by Chris in Maryland, July 01, 2011
An important acknowledgment about all this is that the progressive parasite inside the Body of Christ (laity and clergy, led by certain bishops) approves of the coercion of Christians in Malawi. The parasite inside the Church operates externally to perpetuate the progressive political project represented by Obama, and simultaneously prevents effective opposition by The Church.

The recent homosexual ‘marriage’ outcome in NYS shows how the parasite works: (1) Bishop Hubbard and his progressive cohorts give the veneer of Church approval to a governor publicly known to be in a state of mortal sin; (2) said governor gets other Catholic politicians to give state sanction to another type of mortal sin; (3) B. Hubbard and other treacherous Bishops aiding and abetting #1 and #2 return behind the façade of faithfulness by co-signing a letter with the other Bishops of NYS, expressing their corporate “disappointment” that #2 happened. Hubbard and progressive cohorts inside The Church prosper, the governor prospers. And together, they tend the open wound in The Church, drinking a flow of its resources to energize themselves, and managing The Church in NYS as their anemic parasitic host.
0
...
written by BW, July 01, 2011
Hans Moleman is spot on. Islamic countries literally collapse walls on gays as a manner of execution. Manner aside, they...execute...gays. How does that sit with the Wesetrn liberals?
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, July 01, 2011
The assertion that Malawi imposes the death penalty for homosexuality is false. And as someone from Malawi pointed out in a newspaper article, the US outlaws polygamy; you don't see Malawi trying to impose polygamy on the U.S.
0
...
written by MrUniteUs, July 01, 2011
Two easiest ways to transmit HIV,sodomy and intravenous needles. Average cost of treatment for HIV $20,000 a year.
Doubt if many Malawans can afford that.
0
...
written by Matins, July 01, 2011
Someone is obsessed, but it is not Obama. IOW, I don't care what you claim to read in your special holy book, hating people because you think their sex lives are icky is just wrong. If there is a hell for unrepentant sinners, you and your ilk are on hot rails to it. LOL.
0
...
written by Louise, July 01, 2011
Thank you for your kind words, Mr. A.A. and Mr. Aeneas. I have always heard good things about Mr. Pieper, but never gotten to his books. I think I'll have to make his work a priority.
0
...
written by Manfred, July 02, 2011
In support o Louise's excellent point above, Msgr William Smith (Dunwoodie, deceased) used to insist that "Social engineering begins with verbal engineering." In a televised debate years ago, the catholic (sic) nun he was debating said: "But Father, we are saying the same thing. We are just using different words". He replied: "Then use my words, as we are NOT saying the same thing."
0
...
written by Michael Paterson-Seymour, July 02, 2011
As regards the criminalisation of sodomy, it is worth noting that, in Europe under the Ancien Régime, sodomy was always classified as one of the “offence against religion.” That is why, on 26 September 1791, the French Assembly abolished, in a single resolution and without debate, the crimes of blasphemy, sodomy and witchcraft [la sorcellerie]

Not long thereafter, such laws were everywhere abolished wherever the armies of Napoleon gave a code of laws to a continent and restored the concept of citizenship to civilisation. Even the most ardent Throne and Altar conservatives never sought to revive them.

The connection with freedom of religion is closer than one might imagine.
0
...
written by Mark, July 02, 2011
Why all the tip-toeing around the truth. Our president seems to embrace anything which is in opposition to the truth or decent behavior (OK evil, I said it!) The LGBT agenda, murder of the unborn, terrorist nations, seizing the income of the working family to force redistribution of wealth to those HE deems worthy, Vacation..date night...golf...golf...golf when I haven't been able to take but one 4-day weekend in the last 3 years...It's not my fault, it was the previous president, insulting our allies embracing those who wish us ill, hiring socialists for high Gov't positions. Need I go further?
Each day we watch the news, another insult to America and the religious. I almost wish these were the last days because If it gets much worse....
0
...
written by Louise, July 02, 2011
You are not alone, Mark.
0
...
written by Abel M Kurian, July 02, 2011
This is my most certain and fair view about the church and the rules and laws that written in the hearts of man.
1. I believe every man is called forth towards a perception of chastity regardless of sexual orientation. (remember the biblical context of people who were deprived of sex, this means that chastity applies to men and woman regardless of sexual passions.)
2. I believe that marriage is a calling of the one flesh covenant, where only one man and one woman are instituted into this divine law. (It is biblically written as well as written in the hearts of every human beings.)
Catholic Christians should not support the homosexual agenda because of the dissipation it holds towards our country and every other country out there. Now do I believe that the church is aimed at ridiculing and secluding people with such passions, (of course not...)
In fact the Church truly welcomes every man and woman to truly (regardless of sexual orientation) practice the act of chastity. No one should be secluded and no one should be left behind. But if freedom eliminates the constituents of morality, then it ain't freedom no more.
0
...
written by Christopher Williams, July 03, 2011
I know that the idea of fulfilling a Promise is an idea that may seem strange to SOME republicans, But Pres. Obama made a promise to the Gay Community to do what was possible to set aside Don't Ask, Don't tell and to move along with Gay Marriage. I am not saying that I approve of Gay Marriage, only that those saying that he is "OBSESSED" with the topic are off the mark...as usual
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, July 03, 2011
Actually, Christopher, Obama said during the campaign and even now that he opposes homosexual marriage, though everyone knows he is lying. His obsession is mostly realized, as I make clear in my piece (did you read it?), in the international sphere, where he has made the "2% Agenda" central to his foreign policy unto threatening the poorest people in the world.
0
...
written by Louise, July 03, 2011
In addition, Mr. Ruse, an article in this morning's newspaper says that the Obama administration is ready to challenge the Defense of Marriage Act in the courts as unconstitutional. The thing is that Mr. Obama never has the courage himself to say what he is going to do, but he sends it through other agencies. That is not only obsessive but it is also deceitful.
0
...
written by Nick, July 03, 2011
In an era where sex outside of marriage is trivialised, where pornography is rampant and where going with a prostitute is perceived as being non-consequential I am really not surprised that homosexuality (and here I am referring to the homosexual act and not homosexual leanings)has lost its immorality.
0
...
written by J. Graves, July 03, 2011
A note to Matins. It is always easy to spot a liberal progressive in these discussions. No one said anything about hating and no one, not even homosexuals, is hated by Christians. A person born blind must face life without the exercise of sight, but still can overcome this deficiency and live a faithful and virtuous life. A person born with a homosexual orientation can like wise face a rich and fullfilling life without the exercise of homosexual acts. I am not aware of anyone who ever died for lack of sexual activity. The LGBT game is simply one of attack upon the Church to make it accept their deviant lifestyle.
0
...
written by Donald J Chakras, July 04, 2011
Do not put the blame on Obama on his administrations positive views on gays, abortions, sodomy laws across the world - he is only a a President. No president in the world has powers greater than his cabinet etc. It is these guys that run the presidents of the world

Regarding the Catholic issues on sexual abuses etc it is wrong to term the priesthood as homosexual - perhaps the system for priesthood selection needs to more investigative and more thorough observation done on tell tales of homosexual tendencies during the first 3 years of priesthood training
0
...
written by Louise, July 04, 2011
Mr. Chakras,

You are not familiar with President Truman's famous words, "The buck stops here."?
0
...
written by John Bovay, July 09, 2011
Biblical literalist intolerance towards LGBT people has been helping American Protestant Dominionists/theocrats to gain increasing political power for nearly 40 years--and they are now within reach of the White House. To learn what Dominionists are teaching their kids about Catholics (and others) - and thus where Catholics stand in their worldview - Google: | Preview of "School Choice: Taxpayer-Funded Creationism, Bigotry, and Bias"
0
...
written by G.Ritter, February 20, 2012
Lets get real and honest. Obama is a very bright and ambitious man. His agenda is power, the more the better. His power derives from people supporting him with votes.
Getting votes requires money. The more the better. The gay and lesbian group are not only wealthy, but very influential in getting more money.So itis obvious thatby courting that group, he simply furthers his own agenda, and to hell with what ever is best for the country.

Write comment
smaller | bigger

security code
Write the displayed characters


busy
 

Other Articles By This Author

CONTACT US FOR ADVERTISERS ABOUT US
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner