(function() { (function(){function c(a){this.t={};this.tick=function(a,c,b){var d=void 0!=b?b:(new Date).getTime();this.t[a]=[d,c];if(void 0==b)try{window.console.timeStamp("CSI/"+a)}catch(l){}};this.tick("start",null,a)}var a;if(window.performance)var e=(a=window.performance.timing)&&a.responseStart;var h=0=b&&(window.jstiming.srt=e-b)}if(a){var d=window.jstiming.load;0=b&&(d.tick("_wtsrt",void 0,b),d.tick("wtsrt_","_wtsrt", e),d.tick("tbsd_","wtsrt_"))}try{a=null,window.chrome&&window.chrome.csi&&(a=Math.floor(window.chrome.csi().pageT),d&&0=c&&window.jstiming.load.tick("aft")};var f=!1;function g(){f||(f=!0,window.jstiming.load.tick("firstScrollTime"))}window.addEventListener?window.addEventListener("scroll",g,!1):window.attachEvent("onscroll",g); })();

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

tertium non datur

The real issue in this dispute is not gay adoption. The real issue is whether the belief that homosexual acts are immoral is itself immoral. The church does not argue for discrimination on the basis of homosexual inclination but it teaches that there can be just discrimination on the basis of homosexual activity. Of course if it is true that persons with homosexual inclinations are a danger to children or are more likely to be a danger to children then it would be just to discriminate against them in circumstances where the care of children is at stake. However, the intrusion necessary to determine whether someone possesses such inclinations without having ever acted upon them would be a greater evil than the risk itself. It would also most likely not work and quite possibly trigger previously suppressed inclinations on the part of the persons investigated, thereby doing them a great injury. Therefore one can only proceed on the basis of peoples' actions. Homosexual activity used to be illegal in this country. To re-criminalise it at this point would probably issue in greater evils than the evil itself and the law itself would be un-enforceable. The situation is comparable to the criminalisation of smoking. It ought to be done eventually but at the moment too many people are addicted so lesser measures must be taken to return us to a point where a law criminalising the practise would be enforceable. The consensus among the elite in Britain today is that to hold the opinion that it was a mistake to decriminalise sodomy is immoral. The attitude of this elite to this opinion is the same as their attitude to smoking. 'It is too early too make these opinions illegal but we can pass measures which make the lives of people who indulge in them increasingly difficult and slowly reduce the number of social contexts in which they can express their opinion or even hold it.' But smoking is too weak a comparison, for liberals sodomy has a quasi-religious significance. Eventually the expression of support for the previous law or even of moral opposition will be made a hate crime. Finally approval of sodomy will be required as a test for an increasing number of purposes. The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony is the primary symbol in the natural order of the union of Divine and Human nature in Christ the one Saviour of the world. Sodomy is the sacrament of liberalism, it both effects and signifies the overthrow of all moral and intellectual order at once obscene and absurd in a single act of signal depravity. It is the embodiment of the sterility of modern Europe and of the cancer of abomination which is destroying the heart of western civilization. The Mohammedans are waiting to inherit.