Every day we hear the word homophobia. In the news, school, the work place, with our friends: we cannot avoid it. Just what does this esoteric, talismanic word imply. We say imply because it has no clear definition and is hurled against anyone that has the courage to take a stand contrary to the homosexual agenda.
Homophobia is a word that was recently invented as the result of fusing the words homosexual and phobia. It implies that one has a horror of homosexuality. Those who empathize with the vice of homosexuality find such horror unwholesome and thus, have created a talismanic word to defend their erroneous choice in life. Anyone can construct a new word in like fashion, such as latrophobia, which expresses a horror of thieves and insecurity.
Let us imagine we overheard the following conversation:
“We must do away with latrophobia! Horror of thieves and stealing is a mental illness of our times. It’s an antiquated prejudice, just like homophobia. This is discrimination against the poor thief, who is a victim of society. It’s not his choice, he was born that way. Everything would be better if we just banished latrophobia from everyone’s mind or get rid of these people!”
If you heard this, you would think these words were spoken by a crazy person in a mental institute. Thievery has, and always will be evil. Therefore, latrophobia, the proper rejection of thievery, is good, and therefore, the whole paragraph above is utter nonsense.
Let us now analyze the attempt by a small minority of people, backed by the entire media, to punish those who are now unjustly labeled homophobic. It is absurd to punish latrophobia, as it is a proper and just reaction to a moral wrong, it is equally absurd to punish what the homosexuals now call homophobia. Yet some people want to do just that.
It so happens that homosexuality, that is, the practice of homosexual acts, is and always will be a moral evil that should be vigorously rejected. So, in an analogous way, what was said about latrophobia is also valid regarding homophobia. Both thievery and homosexual activity deserve our profound rejection. We are not in any way equating homosexual acts with stealing, as they are very different things. Nor do we wish to create personal animosity with accusations or innuendos. We are however, stating firmly that both are worthy of the utmost rejection as they constitute moral errors.
The homosexual agenda repeats ad nauseam, that anyone who is against homosexuality is practicing prejudice. Unfortunately, it is they who commit this error, for prejudice is to reach a conclusion before due analysis. An example of prejudice would be to believe that homosexuality is blameless just because your friend is a homosexual or it that it is politically correct so I must accept it.
Obviously, we are not referring here to anyone in particular. But Sacred Scriptures are not only clear, but extremely severe regarding homosexuality. In his epistle to the Romans (1:24-32), Saint Paul states:
“For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error. And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient. Being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness, full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity, whisperers, detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
“God delivered them up”… Not by being author of their sins, but by withdrawing his grace, and so permitting them, in punishment of their pride, to fall into those shameful sins.
Foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy. Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.”
Will the adversaries of homophobia have the courage to publicly censure the words of the great Saint Paul? And what about censuring the more than 2,000 years of glorious Church teaching and history? If the Saint Paul lived in our times, would his words be considered a crime? Would he be called a “first degree homophobe?” Would he be thrown in jail?