LAT On Rome: "Sanctimonious Medieval Morality"
I usually don't even bother with Robert Sheer, the columnist who proudly and continuously prevails in the highly charged competition for the "most leftist/most biased" prize among the LATimes' editorialists and columnists.
But today's column is just too much. Taking on the Catholic church's sex scandals, Sheer lets his radical secularism and anti-Christian attitudes run wild. The sex scandals are a terrible stain on Rome and the church's response has fallen far short of ideal, but that does not justify Sheer's anger, or his open promotion of homosexuality.
There's an irony here. Sheer is decrying the homosexual scandals of the church, which deserve decrying for may reasons, primary among them is that early homosexual sex "rewired" some of the victims to become gay. Yet Sheer uses the scandal to promote the homosexual agenda -- so what is it, Bob? Good or bad?
His language drips with hatred for the church and soars with love for the gay agenda.
The chuch: sanctimonious, midieval, repressed (at least three times), severely judgmental, and a perpetrator of "viscious attacks on 'evil' gays."
The gays: "loving and nurturing parents who happen to be gay" and "a model of honest and socially accountable behavior." Is that inside or outside the bath houses, Bob? Are you figuring in the raves where "sextasy" (Viagra and Ecstasy) is leading to open sex and the rapid spread of AIDS? How do such socially accountable people so often end up in the particularly vicious kind of domestic violence that occurs among gay couples? And are those gay pedophiles loving and nurturing?
Painting the gay community with beautiful brush strokes is largely justified. I was raised in a liberal household in Japan, a country where US gays in the 50s and 60s tended to migrate, and I have known many gay couples who, on the outside, seem as happy and loving as do heterosexual couples, on the outside. But Sheer's giddily positive view is not entirely justified, just as painting the Catholic church only with angry, stabbing brush strokes is largely unjustified, but not entirely.
Sheer entirely misses the point that Christians, Catholics and Evangelicals alike, don't look at sex like the secular world does. We celebrate it higher when it's moral and have no tolerance for it when it's immoral. They have to celebrate it when it's moral and immoral, which makes it hard for them to justify moral attacks on the church when it fails.
Sheer, speaking for the left, is entirely unforgiving of the church, and a complete apologist for the secular. It makes his demand that the church vigorously attack pedophile priests -- a very worthy objective -- nothing more than a tinny, hollow, angry, biased temper tantrum.
But today's column is just too much. Taking on the Catholic church's sex scandals, Sheer lets his radical secularism and anti-Christian attitudes run wild. The sex scandals are a terrible stain on Rome and the church's response has fallen far short of ideal, but that does not justify Sheer's anger, or his open promotion of homosexuality.
There's an irony here. Sheer is decrying the homosexual scandals of the church, which deserve decrying for may reasons, primary among them is that early homosexual sex "rewired" some of the victims to become gay. Yet Sheer uses the scandal to promote the homosexual agenda -- so what is it, Bob? Good or bad?
His language drips with hatred for the church and soars with love for the gay agenda.
The chuch: sanctimonious, midieval, repressed (at least three times), severely judgmental, and a perpetrator of "viscious attacks on 'evil' gays."
The gays: "loving and nurturing parents who happen to be gay" and "a model of honest and socially accountable behavior." Is that inside or outside the bath houses, Bob? Are you figuring in the raves where "sextasy" (Viagra and Ecstasy) is leading to open sex and the rapid spread of AIDS? How do such socially accountable people so often end up in the particularly vicious kind of domestic violence that occurs among gay couples? And are those gay pedophiles loving and nurturing?
Painting the gay community with beautiful brush strokes is largely justified. I was raised in a liberal household in Japan, a country where US gays in the 50s and 60s tended to migrate, and I have known many gay couples who, on the outside, seem as happy and loving as do heterosexual couples, on the outside. But Sheer's giddily positive view is not entirely justified, just as painting the Catholic church only with angry, stabbing brush strokes is largely unjustified, but not entirely.
Sheer entirely misses the point that Christians, Catholics and Evangelicals alike, don't look at sex like the secular world does. We celebrate it higher when it's moral and have no tolerance for it when it's immoral. They have to celebrate it when it's moral and immoral, which makes it hard for them to justify moral attacks on the church when it fails.
Sheer, speaking for the left, is entirely unforgiving of the church, and a complete apologist for the secular. It makes his demand that the church vigorously attack pedophile priests -- a very worthy objective -- nothing more than a tinny, hollow, angry, biased temper tantrum.
posted by Laer at 7:20 AM
<< Home