CENSORED: comments stressing that people who try to claim homosexuality is determined by genetics are profoundly ignorant about psychology

I recently had the following comment censored (redacted to censor all the key points actually) in a blog called The Sheepcat – which was linked a post on First Things/First Thoughts. Tagline of “The Sheepcat” reads: Catholic commentary by a former gay activist and his wife. The thread was “The Latest Gay Genetics Claim–Chill, People“. The topic is this new claim about “epigenetics” causing people to be born homosexual. Another desperate, ignorant attempt to blame biology for what is a psycho-social dysfunction. This is my comment:

Alessandra said: Again, all of these people making biological claims for homosexuality are completely ignorant about psychology, and how various psychological dynamics affect, shape, and deform wholesome, heterosexual desire; how underlying psychological dynamics produce sexual perversions, emotional perversity, disoriented personal relationships, etc. All of these are found in different homosexual profiles and individuals. I found your blog because of a recent post on FT, but given the non-Christian and pro-homosexuality agenda editors, I am not allowed to post there. 5/jan/2012

=====================

The above comment was then redacted to this:

[We have redacted inflammatory remarks of the comboxer’s, which demonstrate that she has spectacularly missed the point of Joshua Gonnerman’s piece in First Things–Eds.]

I found your blog because of a recent post on FT, but given the non-Christian and pro-homosexuality agenda editors, I am not allowed to post there.

[Given that FT continues to publish many orthodox Christian writers, we recommend, Alessandra, that you consider alternative explanations.]

=======================

My reply to the above was allowed:


I can see you want to censor ideas and facts and discussions.

That’s how labels like “heretical,” “inflammatory,” “unAmerican,” and “thought crime” work. You’re just looking for an excuse to run away from addressing a variety of problematic issues regarding sexuality.

 

As for FT, it will only publish a limited number of orthodox Christian views. Then they  allow several anti-Christian liberals tear each article apart and present comments that promote a homosexuality agenda. Then they censor many commenters from questioning these anti-Christian, liberal comments that normalize homosexuality.

 

It’s not that FT doesn’t allow any conservative writers. They only allow certain conservative writers, addressing very limited topics, and then they largely censor the debate that follows to favor the commenters who normalize homosexuality and a variety of other harmful attitudes about sexuality and relationships. So, after an article, you have a sham of a “debate,” which serves to sabotage the very points made in the article. People questioning the liberal agenda are largely censored.

 

It’s clear FT wants to have only  some view points stated and only some topics addressed – and a lot of these are liberal, “normalize homosexuality” discourses. No further explanation is needed.

 

And look, it appears you are going to do the same too! In that respect, you represent the worst of the Catholic Church.

8/jan

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s