Sunday, December 4, 2011

What's At Stake

Here is a lengthy quote from a new star troll over at Thinking Anglicans. This is so wrong-headed and wrong-hearted on so many levels that I don't know where to begin.

Marriage does not come into the sphere or ecclesiology but moral theology; the first is confined to Church order. All of the conditions defined by the Prayer Book lead to the ultimate aim of creating new life, of increaing and multiplying, of stabilising society. Homosexuality does not enter the questions. Barrenness has never been a ground for nullity; failure to consummate a marriage has. But I believe that fertile couples who want to marry without the intention of having children should question their reasons. In the Catholic Church this provides grounds for annulment.

Patriarchy does not enter homosexual relationships unless they are trying to perpetrate a parody of the norm. For illumination on the woman as chattel myth, read Ephesians which defines marriage as a state founded on equality and complementarity. What radical homosexuals of the past resented was the imposition of a social norm on a condition that was inimical to the applied model. Why, they asked, should we be pressured into adopting a heterosexual lifestyle when we are not heterosexuals? Marriage was seen, rightly I believe, as the heart of the heterosexual norm.

I am sorry that Nat has only heard of heterosexual life, rather than actually knowing it. The watershed for heterosexual physical relations was the availability of the contraceptive pill which for the first time put women on an equal basis for promiscuity as men.
This led to the present sexual turmoil. The pill does not affect homosexuals because they are incapable of creating life. But look at the results of excessive promiscuity in the 1970s, the era when the concept of gay 'marriage' was derided by many homosexuals. That lay in AIDS which has been responsible for millions of deaths on a universal scale and has spread into heterosexual life with devastating consequences. I support a charity set up to help children infected by AIDS in the womb and I have seen personally the devastation it has caused. Nat may, or may not, know that AIDS was once known as the gay plague, not least among homosexuals themselves.
Posted by: John Bowles on Sunday, 4 December 2011 at 10:25am GMT

As I said, there is so much wrong that I don't know where to begin, so I won't.

Instead, I'll take this whole argument out of the realm of abstraction with this:


JCF said...

I posted, at TA, "John Bowles Is An Art Project" (after Rachel Maddow's meme re Herman Cain. I also cited Poe's Law)...but Simon Sarmiento (apparently w/ one of his cases of the vapors O_o) didn't publish it.

Counterlight said...

Simon's very strict sense of decorum is why I'm publishing this here instead of there.

Counterlight said...


Speaking of star trolls, "Msgr/ Franklin/ Sammy/ etc" over on Fr. Harris' blog tried to pass himself off as you recently, but was caught out. Such a coward!

MarkBrunson said...

Personally, I've just about had it with Thinking Anglicans. There's a huge double standard, there. It's perfectly allright to publish any vile diatribe about gays and lesbians, as long as you don't name names.

Call the poster out personally as a liar creating an atmosphere of violence, and that post will never see the light of day.

With friends like that . . .

Murdoch Matthew said...

I had a shot at Mr. Bowles on TA, though his responses to reasonable objections indicate invincible ignorance, if not a set agenda. I said:

As Nat points out, marriage is not so patriarchal as it was. The woman is no longer part of the property handed over from one family to the head of a new one. Marriage is now a contract between two people for their mutual benefit. Hence, it is now appropriate for same-sex couples.

When the existence of gay people was a dirty secret in society, relationships were clandestine and often transitory. As gays and Lesbians have become acknowledged members of the community, they're pairing off, like everyone else. The push for same-sex marriage has come from existing gay families, many with children, who need the same community support and protection as other families.

I experienced eighteen years of traditional marriage; We never united despite common interests and faith, and five children. I've now had a good, constant man at my side for twenty-nine years; we are truly a couple and we contribute to our community. My wife and I used to look around the university town where we lived and observe, "There's a hundred different arrangements, all called marriage." My present one is more of a marriage than the first. Please open your eyes, Mr. Bowles. There are more things in the world than are drempt of in your philosophy.

I do think TA might be less accepting of trollery.

JCF said...

Someone tried to pass themselves off as ***ME***??? :-O

Oh Mama, I've MADE it!