11 June, 2013

Russia passes anti-gay law, activists detained | Reuters

Pierre Trudeau said it best with his snappy phrase "The State has no place in the bedrooms of the nation" when, as Justice Minister in the L.B. Pearson government, he changed Canada's Criminal Code* to remove homosexual acts as punishable offenses. As a Catholic priest I believe that homosexual acts - like all extra-marital sexual acts - to be a grave sin and an immoral act. But they shouldn't be considered a crime. Doing so grants too much power to the State to interfere in the intimate lives of its citizens.

The State must have limits. If a house is supposed to be a man's castle - and if a citizen's sexual partner is another adult capable of freely consenting to participate, then the State has no business saying it's a criminal offense. These matters will be settled in a court far beyond the competence of any State's at a hearing we all will eventually face with Christ as our judge. That verdict is sufficient to deal with the consequences of any extra-marital infidelity and sin. It's not a matter that's appropriate to be judged and sanctioned by civil authorities.

I hope that citizens of whatever conviction or creed will add their voice in condemnation to this proposed Russian law as an illegitimate violation of basic human rights. After all, if the State has the right to violate the bedroom door to prohibit consensual gay sex, then it can come in whenever it wants make other demands such as demanding the fecundity of the act to deal with the demographic collapse currently afflicting all of today's First World countries.

PET was not my favorite prime minister, but he was right when he closed the bedrooms of the nation from the agenda of the State.  

(*Note: even though he opened the door to legal abortions in Canada, the fact remains that the panels he set in place to authorize such an act could only do so if the pregnancy threatened the life of the mother. It was the Supreme Court that eventually paved the way for the current 'abortion on demand' regime we sadly have today. So while he wasn't perfect, his reforms of the CCC were of benefit to all Canadians.)

Russia passes anti-gay law, activists detained | Reuters

7 comments:

  1. Carmen Fitzmaurice11 June, 2013

    These comments above are out of the mind of someone who does not believe in people , using their Government, try to keep their Country from falling into the great sin of outright, uncontrolled, disgusting behavior which has a very harmful effect of future generations.
    Pierre E Trudeau, who I once supported, was the WORST P M Canada has ever had.
    His experience was of a malcontent who never lived up to his Jesuit training, to the Catholic Faith, or to the moral standards of his parents.
    Those comments made above come from someone who has a very skewed idea of right and wrong. Absolutely disgusting

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous11 June, 2013

    I agree with the above comments from Carmen, who ever wrote the above article was either delusional or has no understanding of theology or politics.

    Michael Wagner in his book, "Leaving God Behind" chronicles how the Charter was intended to transfer power from the government to the Supreme Court. PET knew exactly what he was doing, he may have been evil but he was very intelligent.

    In fact Beaver Magazine voted Pierre Trudeau the "worst prime minister". Need more be said?

    Cliff

    ReplyDelete
  3. Then I assume Carmen and Anonymous would have the state enforce penalties on homosexual behaviour and possibly adultery. While I personally disagree with both acts, I would not want to have the state enforce them.

    When contraception was being legalized in the US Cardinal Spellman of New York was asked if he wanted the state to keep it illegal. He replied that he didn't need the state to enforce Catholic morality. Whether he right that he didn't need the state may be questionable but he was right in he should need the state to enforce Catholic morality. The same applies to homosexual acts and adultery.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous13 June, 2013

      Rationalist1, I think this was a high fast ball over your head, and you didn't have a clue where it was. Your logic at times befuddles me, how you can twist things around. I was simply talking about the evil PET. But I guess that's what you do best. It's called "fuzzy logic".

      Cliff

      Delete
  4. As usual, you try to muddy the waters with stupid comparisons.
    You can not compare Truth and Wrong and say that sometimes either might apply.
    It was said long ago the Devil can quote from the Bible, but you, who does not believe in the Devil or the Bible, are trying to use some situation in which a Cardinal of the Catholic Church may or may not have said in a different matter.
    Your horns are showing!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not a stupid comparison, it's saying the state should not be employed to enforce the morality of any particular denomination.

      Delete
    2. Carmen - Here's one you may like

      "Russia today is voting on a Vladimir Putin supported bill that makes it illegal to tell children gay people exist or that homosexuality is equal to heterosexuality, and provides for fines, jail time, and deportation for those who violate the law."

      http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/russia-poised-to-pass-bill-making-it-illegal-to-tell-children-gay-people-exist/politics/2013/06/11/68483#.Ubi_1_nVCK8

      Delete

Followers of this blog:

Blog Archive

Google Analytics