The Catholic Thing
HOME        ARCHIVES        IN THE NEWS        COMMENTARY        NOTABLE        DONATE
Where’s the Outrage? Print E-mail
By Austin Ruse   
Friday, 20 April 2012

Editor’s Note:
At the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast yesterday, Supreme KofC Knight, Carl Anderson, made a strong case for religious liberty and asked, “What kinds of Catholics do they think we are?” What he meant, of course, is quite straightforward: do the people who are trying to impose their views on the Church – while claiming that it’s the Church that’s authoritarian – think we’re stupid, or cowardly, or unable to act? We know what’s going on, we’re not going to be intimidated, and we’re already speaking out loud and clear. As I listened, I said to myself, that’s exactly what The Catholic Thing has been up to for almost four years now. And the voice we try to bring into the public square is need today more than at any point in that time. If you agree and are ready to take action yourself as part of the great mission that the Church is called upon to undertake in these days, please do all you can to help us: prayer, recommendations for new subscribers, and with your donations. Some reader apologize that they can only give small amounts. Small amounts in large numbers add up. Do your bit -- $35, $50, $100, or more – for The Catholic Thing without delay. – Robert Royal

A“writer, teacher, and gay porn star” named Conor Habib recently published an article in Salon.com called “Rest Stop Confidential.” He describes how, when he was fifteen, a grown man exposed himself to him in a highway rest stop. The image churned in the young man’s mind until he was old enough to buy his own car. And among the first trips he took was to a highway rest stop, where he found homosexual nirvana, anonymous sex, and plenty of it.

Habib writes, “If you’ve ever pulled over to a rest area, you’ve been near men having sex. I’m one of those men, I’ve done it a hundred times; we go into the woods or a truck with tinted windows, in a stall under cold light. It never stops, not for season or time. In the winter, men trudge through snow to be with each other, in the summer, men leave the woods with ticks clinging to their legs. Have you ever stopped at a rest area and found it completely empty? There’s always one man there, in his car, waiting to meet someone new.”

It’s not just rest stops either. Habib says men will go almost anywhere at any time to have anonymous sex: “Often, there was a fence that blocked off the woods, and a break in that fence cut by someone who had been there before. There was a path of mud through the grass, worn down by use.  In the woods, we’d find a clearing, and there, many things would happen.”

Habib wants you to know this is part and parcel of the homosexual experience. The online comments after his article attest to this. There were some criticisms, but mostly from those who were obviously heterosexual. Others expressed disbelief that such a scene exists. Still others chime in to second Habib that this kind of thing is widespread.

One man really objected, however, and actually did something about it. Mott Huddleston – a lawyer from Kansas City – citing Habib’s column as the last straw, launched a petition drive calling for homosexuals to abstain from sex before marriage or civil union and for fidelity within marriage. In a few short weeks, the petition has already gathered more than 5,000 names.

None of this is exceptional except when you know that Huddleston is himself a homosexual who says he is waiting for marriage to have sex and his petition is only for those homosexuals who agree. His petition states, “We, as gay men and women, call upon our fellow gays, lesbians, bi-sexuals, and transgenders to consider that human sexuality is ordered to one partner and this in a life-long commitment of marriage or union.”

The petition has been so successful that Huddleston and his fellow petitioners have announced the formation of an organization they are calling Trad-Gay that they intend will be active in all fifty states. They say there is a great number of homosexuals who profoundly oppose the sexual profligacy of what they say is the dominant homosexual culture.

Huddleston claims to be a typical homosexual. He's felt gay all his life. He believes sexual orientation is innate. He is not particularly religious though he was raised Methodist. He jokes, however, that he may become the Jerry Falwell of homosexuals.


        Mr. Mott Huddleston, activist

Now here is the question. Between these two fairly outrageous stories, between Conor Habib and his sexual mania and Mott Huddleston and his church-lady disapproval, which one is real and which one is fiction? I am tempted to suggest that to ask the question is to answer it.

On the one hand, there is Habib. His story seems sadly unremarkable. We all know about anonymous homosexual trysts in city parks and bathrooms. Remember Larry Craig and the airport bathroom? Remember singer George Michael getting arrested in a Beverly Hills bathroom? Did any of this go out of style with the advent of the AIDS threat? It sure seems not.

We know there are, in fact, websites devoted to telling homosexuals where they can have anonymous sex in any city they may visit. And social science tells us the average homosexual has huge numbers of sex partners, dozens, hundreds, and even thousands of them. Studies show that even those who are in “committed” relationships still have dozens of other sex partners outside their primary relationship.

On the other hand there is Mott Huddleston. In the current marriage debate you hear homosexuals insist they want and need marriage in order to bless their “long-standing” relationships and to engender the blessings of marital stability in their community.

If they really mean this, wouldn’t at least some of them see Habib’s sexual idiom as troublesome and worthy of public condemnation? Wouldn’t there be Mott Huddlestons? Wouldn’t there be homosexual scolds who not only recoil at such activity as Habib’s, but who are willing to go on the hustings about it?

OK, Mott Huddleston is fiction. He does not exist. But then you probably figured that out. I made him up to underscore what we already know, that someone like Mott Huddleston not only does not exist he likely cannot exist in the homosexual community. Someone in the homosexual community who disapproves of sexual buccaneering? Not a chance.

And Habib? You just know he’s real and we fear he may be the norm. The question therefore becomes, do all homosexuals support this type of sexual sickness? Is this kind of moral insanity so mainstream that it infects the moral judgment of even those “conservative” Log Cabin Republicans? Where are they on this? Silent, that’s where.

And what about those in the mainstream of the homosexual rights movement, the Human Rights Campaign? Wouldn’t they think anonymous sex with hundreds of partners is not such a good idea?

Where is the outrage about Conor Habib? Where the heck is Mott Huddleston when we really need him?  


Austin Ruse is the President of the New York and Washinton, 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.
 
 
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 (23)Add Comment
0
...
written by Michael PS, April 20, 2012
Once sex is severed from procreation it is difficult to find any rationale for sexual fidelity.

In 2005, the French Senate pointed out that "The presumption of paternity of the husband rests on the obligation of fidelity between spouses and reflects the commitment made by the husband during the celebration of marriage, to raise the couple's children." The Code Civil contains no definition of marriage, but for 200 years, jurists have found a functional definition in Article 312 “The child conceived or born during the marriage has the husband for father”

It is not surprising that the France's highest courts have rejected claims to SSM on equality grounds.
0
...
written by Manfred, April 20, 2012
A grand slam for you, Austin! What a great piece. Our former governor here in N.J., not the one who lost $1 billion at MF Global-that was Corzine, Jim McGreevey was an active homosexual who was often chased from rest areas by his own Troopers (one of whom was my son) while he was governor! Your point on the rampant promiscuity is absolutely true and your numbers are not exaggerated.
Thank you again. This is a keeper.
0
...
written by Grump, April 20, 2012
Sheesh, Austin, thanks for ruining my breakfast. Unlike cockroaches, when you shine a light on homos, they do not scamper away. They come out in droves. Some things are best left unsaid.
0
...
written by James Danielson, April 20, 2012
Conor Habib. The name attests to "diversity." How can we have too much of it?
0
...
written by will manley, April 20, 2012
This piece is regrettable in a blog promoting Catholic virtue. Those who have been born with same sex attraction need our prayers and understanding, not ridicule. Judge not; lest ye be judged.
0
...
written by Other Joe, April 20, 2012
Individuals deserve our understanding and prayers. One cannot see into another's heart. However, behavior must be judged if civilization is to be preserved. For too long now we have been asked to tolerate disordered behavior of all kinds by the same people (the phobiphobes) who deny the right of others to forthrightly discuss the results of that behavior.
0
...
written by Sue, April 20, 2012
Interesting article. It used to be thought homosexuals didn't even want to be married, though. It was even more recently that we realized that homosexuals wanted children to care for, notwithstanding their sterile couplings. (E. Michael Jones points out that John Maynard Keynes, the homosexual economist whose "In the long run, we're all dead" reflected his lack of concern with posterity in more ways than one.)

The way-stops on the slippery slope included the privacy of the bedroom, then don't ask don't tell, then it was civil unions, now it's marriage. The endgame is to get these sterile couples government-issue children, then the redesign of marriage and the family will be complete. Artificial reproduction is the Iwo Jima of the culture war. Once the technocrats are able able to command and control human reproduction like a Monsanto garden (plant only government sanctioned organisms and weed-spray the rest), there'll be no distinction between us and Brave New World. Homosexuals and the useful idiot ivf consumers are the vanguard.

What a long road we have traveled from the word "matrimony" ("mothermaking") to the test tube. Thank God for the Church's vital witness to the truth.
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, April 20, 2012
Mr. Manley, you cannot muster any outrage over someone having sex with hundreds of partners in public? You cannot judge such behavior as being not only wrong but harmful and even disgusting? Really? Truly?
0
...
written by Bob Reilly, April 20, 2012
Bravo, Austin! What a marvelously imaginative way to show the heart of the homosexual disorder.
0
...
written by Grady, April 20, 2012
I bet manley can find outrage over greedy men that make more than their fair share of money, or those that oppose "illegal" immigration, or those that oppose higher taxes to give to those that want it etc. The liberal's compassion is always directed to some very specific sins; sexual perversion and abortion.
0
...
written by A Woman's Opinion, April 20, 2012
I am heterosexual and would never condone the concept of anonymous sex. I do find it interesting that all of this outrage is about men having sex with men. Once again, the church seems to have overlooked the viewpoint of women, straight or gay.
0
...
written by Frank, April 21, 2012
There was a time when sex had a narrower definition that enjoined an act with procreation. Homosexual sex does not create for the potential of offspring. So I ask this question. Is homosexual "sex" actually sex or is it consensual masterbation?
0
...
written by will manley, April 21, 2012
grady, I find your comment laughable in that you make a number of assumptions about me that are completely false. Instead of addressing the meaning of my comment you have responded with a personal attack that is completely baseless. I thought trolling was not allowed on this site. I expected better of the administrators especially since they purport to encourage civil dialog.
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, April 21, 2012
Yes, Mr. Manley, and instead of answering any question, you go on the attack. How about answering my question? You cannot muster any outrage or judgement against men having sex in public places with hudnreds of partners? You cannot judge this at all? Answer that...or go on the attack. Your call.
0
...
written by will manley, April 21, 2012
Mr. Ruse...hate the sin; love and pray for the sinner. It's the Catholic thing.
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, April 21, 2012
Mr. Manley, glad to hear you hate this behavior, too.
0
...
written by Sue, April 22, 2012
Will Manley, we all love the sinners - but must oppose the actions of the treacherous sinners. These are the deliberate attempts of certain (many) homosexuals to subvert the family, giving over our society to the repro-crats. These homosexuals deploy sarcasm as a weapon, and must be willing to take it back again.
0
...
written by Catholic, April 22, 2012
As a homosexual Catholic, I can say that the author of this article is mistaken. There are Mott Huddlestons out there, and there are just as many heterosexual people who engage in rampant promiscuity as there are homosexual people. It is unfortunate that so much judgment is being passed, because the reality is that Catholicism is about fostering growth in faith, hope, and love. It is my experience that growth in these areas is entirely possible within homosexual relationships. You must, however, be willing to step off of your moral high ground and interact with homosexual people in order to discover this. It is ignorance coming from the unwillingness to do this that results in articles like this.
0
...
written by Gian, April 23, 2012
Having anonymous sex is not really flaunting it. That would be a stable monogamous relationship.

So from the society's point of view, promiscuity is not the greatest evil. That would be the existence and acceptance of monogamous committed gays.
0
...
written by Achilles, April 23, 2012
Dear Homosexual Catholic,

Certainly it is possible to grow in faith hope and love when involved in a homosexual relationship in the same way a drug addict or an alcoholic can grow in these areas by the grace of God. However, in the words of Jesus, after He forgives us He says “go and sin no more.” There is nothing about getting involved with homosexual people or getting to know them better that can change what sinful behavior is. I have never heard any “mott huddlestons” from the gay community. I do know gay couples that live together in an apparent committed relationship, but how would this differ from a committed couple living together that does not have a valid marriage? Very little outside the incongruity of parts.

You are certainly right, there are many heterosexuals that are promiscuous and as Catholics we have no choice but to recognize that reckless and immoral behavior for what it is, sinful. Gian said something that we can almost all agree on, that the greater evil would be to accept a homosexual union as unsinful weather it is in a committed relationship or not. It cannot happen in the Catholic Church.

In short, you are trying to confuse categories, that of sympathy with that of Truth. We in the Catholic Church see all “homosexuals” as Humans and recognize that “homosexual” is not what you are, but what you choose to do. We are not the sex acts we choose to commit, we are human souls made in the image of God with His law written on our hearts. We can no more change that law than we can stop breathing and still live.

Best wishes, Achilles
0
...
written by Scott W, April 23, 2012
Catholic,
Homosexual men are far more promiscuous than heterosexual men (read Masters & Johnson, etc), that is a crucial piece of evidence in the natural law argument against homosexuality.

Achilles,
If a person is knowingly and persistently defying God's will, they they will make precious little headway in the spiritual life, and will never become sanctified. So remaining in a monogamous homosexual relationship does substantially cut you off from the life of grace. I can't believe I just had to state that "for the record" in a Catholic journal...
0
...
written by Gian, April 23, 2012
Scott W,
I thought that homosexual act was per se against Natural Law. Could you elaborate where does promiscuity come into play?

Indeed, I think that the outrage in this article is misplaced. That homosexuals are promiscuous and engage in restroom sex is not as much an outrage as the acceptance and normalization of gay relationships as Family in the City.
0
...
written by Achilles, April 24, 2012
Scott W. Thank you for you comment. You must not hold the Catholic Journal accountable for my ignorance, please forgive me.

Gian, again, I agree with you completely on this point!

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