Why Homosexuals Shouldn’t Adopt

June 27, 2009

Update: Due to the nasty nature of some comments, I have disabled comments on this post.

I’m not able to find the initial story I had read about this person; it indicated that he lives with his male partner and was only able to molest the child when the partner was away on business. Thus the heading.

~~~

A Duke University official has been charged in federal court with offering his 5-year-old adopted son up for sex. Frank Lombard, associate director at the university’s Global Health Institute, was arrested Wednesday in Raleigh, the FBI said.

PHOTO: Frank Lombard offered his young son up for sex

In an undated photo provided by the Durham County Sheriff’s Office, Frank Lombard is shown. The Duke… Expand

(Durham County Sheriff’s Office/AP Photo)

An unidentified informant who already faces child porn charges in a different child sex case pointed investigators to Lombard, according to court documents. The informant told investigators he had met Lombard on the Internet four years ago. The informant described in graphic detail how he allegedly observed Lombard molesting an African-American child on four occasions over an Internet video chat service called ICUii.

The informant said, according to court papers, that Lombard, who is white, said that he lived in the Raleigh-Durham area of North Carolina and that the child was one of two adopted African-Americans in his custody.

Lombard has been charged with attempting to induce someone to cross state lines to engage in sex with a child, punishable by a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.

Lombard allegedly used the adult Internet service to conduct his video chats. According to an affidavit in support of the arrest warrant, the Internet service indicated that Lombard’s profile “stated he was interested in “perv fam fun,” a reference to “incestuous child molestation.” The service also told investigators that a customer service complaint had been sent to the company in January 2007. A customer who had chatted with Lombard complained to the company that Lombard said he was “into incest” and had adopted two African-American children, court records said.

//

A Washington, D.C., police detective who was investigating the case set up undercover chats with someone matching Lombard’s description during which the detective says he was invited to fly to Raleigh to have sex with the person’s 5- year-old adopted child. In his affidavit, Det. Timothy Palchak wrote that he engaged in a chat with someone using the screen name “FL” who provided nude pictures of himself. The pictures matched Lombard’s North Carolina driver’s license photo, according to the affidavit.

During the chats, according to the affidavit, “FL” told undercover investigators that he had himself molested his child, whom he adopted as an infant, and that he had allowed others to molest his child. “FL” stated that “the abuse of the child was easier when the child was too young to talk or know what was happening, but that he had drugged the child with Benadryl during the molestation,” Palchak wrote in his affidavit.

Two children were taken from Lombard’s home and put into protective custody by the North Carolina Department of Social Services, an FBI statement said.

Michael Schoenfeld, a Duke University spokesman, told ABC News that Lombard has been placed on unpaid leave and that the university is cooperating fully with the investigation. Lombard has been employed by Duke since 1999, Schoenfeld said.

//

Appearing today in federal court in Durham, Lombard agreed to be transferred to Washington for a later court hearing. His lawyer did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

Source: ABC News


To the Lions!

May 26, 2009

marytrsincolosseumatromeFed to the Lions !!

From the Spectator:

The Equality Bill currently going through Parliament is the latest and potentially most oppressive attempt to impose politically acceptable attitudes and drive out any that fall foul of these criteria. Since the attitudes being imposed constitute an ideological agenda to destroy Britain’s foundational ethical principles and replace them by a nihilistic values and lifestyle free-for-all, they represent a direct onslaught on the Judeo-Christian morality underpinning British society.

The most neuralgic of these issues is gay rights. This is because the tolerance of homosexuality that a liberal society should properly show has long been hijacked by an agenda which aims at destroying the very idea of normative sexuality altogether – and does so by smearing it as prejudice. The true liberal position, that it is right and just to tolerate behaviour that deviates from the norm as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else, is deemed to be rank prejudice on the grounds that homosexuality is not ‘deviancy’ but normal. ‘Normality’ is thus rendered incoherent and absurd and accordingly destroyed altogether.  The agenda is therefore not liberal tolerance but illiberal coercion against mainstream moral values, on the basis that the very idea of having normative moral principles at all is an expression of bigotry. So anyone who speaks out against gay rights is immediately vilified as a ‘homophobe’ and treated as a social and professional pariah. Read the rest of this entry »


Paglia Takes on GLBT Orthodoxies on the Origin of Homosexuality

January 17, 2009

paglia

Every so often I have to catch up on what Camille Paglia is saying.  I certainly don’t always agree with her, but her writing is rich,  thought provoking and usually breaks through the liberal/conservative impasse in a creative way.  She is courageous, bold and tough minded as well as sharp tongued.

I recommend the first half of this month’s column on Salon.com.  She, by the way, is the only author I find worth the read over there.  Herself a post-Christian lesbian, she takes on the GLBT orthdoxies this month.

There has been a lot of discussion (though not much lately) of whether homosexuality is inborn or caused by outside factors. Whatever happened to the Electra and Oedipus complexes of Freud, of which so much was heard when I was in college way back when? And what do you think?

This is from a hetero male happily married to a hetero female. The question is one of intellectual curiosity.

Henry Delahunt
Shreveport, La.

Yes, the intellectual climate of the 1950s and ’60s, during which I was educated, was saturated with Freud, even at the level of stand-up comedy (as in Lenny Bruce or Mike Nichols and Elaine May). I loved it! But the Freudian style of lacerating self-examination would pass from the scene after the politicized ’60s, which promoted a new worldview where everyone is a victim of oppressive external power.

In clinical psychology, pharmaceutical intervention became the norm. Long-term Freudian psychoanalysis, which probes childhood memories, began to seem too protracted and expensive. Practical, short-term help with current problems was now sought. Freud was also turned into a cartoon sexist by feminist philistines like Gloria Steinem, who dismissed his entire body of work merely because of a few passages they didn’t like. French poststructuralist readings of Freud became a campus fad in the ’70s and ’80s but sank in a sludge of their own gobbledygook.

After the American Psychiatric Association, responding to activist pressure, removed homosexuality from its list of mental disorders in 1973, psychological inquiries into homosexuality slowly became verboten. To even ask about the origins of homosexuality was automatically dubbed homophobic by gay studies proponents in the ’80s and ’90s. Weirdly, despite the rigid social constructionist bias that permeated the entire left, gay activists in and out of academe now leapt on the slightest evidence that could suggest a biological cause of homosexuality. The very useful Freudian concept of “family romance” (typified by the Oedipus and Electra complexes) is almost completely gone. Yet the intricate family dynamic of every single gay person I’ve ever known seems to have played some kind of role in his or her developing sexual orientation.

The widespread desire to find a biological basis for homosexuality seems to me very misconceived. It will inevitably lead to claims that gays are developmentally defective at the prenatal level. I myself believe (as I argued in “No Law in the Arena” in “Vamps & Tramps”)  that everyone is born with a potential for bisexual responsiveness and that exclusive homosexuality is an adaptation to specific social conditions. When a gay adult claims to have been gay since early childhood, what he or she is actually remembering is the sense of being different for some reason, which in boys often registers as shyness or super-sensitivity, leading to a failure to bond with bumptious peers. This disjunction, with all its painfully stifled longings, becomes overt homosexuality much later on. But retrospective psychohistory is out these days, and the only game in town is pin the tail on the oppressor.


Gay Political Extortion Crushes LDS Prop 8 Supporter

November 15, 2008

lastsupper1

Diana West comments on a despicable scene taking place in Hollywood.   The gay community has now targeted a popular restaurant for harassment and boycott because the own exercised her right to participate in the political process according to her conscience.  They have threatened her with the destruction of her business unless she support publicly now gay marriage.  All for her $100 donation to support Prop. 8.

The mainstream media have so far failed to get across the intensity of the ordeal that supporters of Prop 8 may now be subject to–something I realized on coming across this extraordinary blog account of a meeting at the legendary restaurant El Coyote in Hollywood, not far from where I grew up in Laurel Canyon. The meeting was between the elderly Mormon owner, who donated $100 to support Prop 8, and Prop 8 opponents, who are threatening a boycott, and it is as soul- grinding as something out of Soviet show trial history. Peacelovelunges.com–billed as “the blog of ex-Mormon, reformed porn star and Hollywood fitness trainer Sam Page”–reports:

In a dramatic, closed door meeting, the owner of a renowned Mexican eatery in Hollywood expressed regret in her decision to donate $100 to the “Yes on Prop 8″ campaign, but her remarks before a group of about 60 members of Los Angeles’ LGBT community fell short of an outright personal apology.

Just the spectacle of an American citizen expressing regret for her political conviction to avert economic harm is gruesome already. But it goes on: Read the rest of this entry »


Prop 8 and the politics of H8

November 11, 2008

templesign

Those Episcopalians who now fancy themselves Anglicans have learned a bitter lesson.  The Mormons this week have learned the same one:  Those who differ with the gay community will be accused of hate. In a time when escalated language is de rigeur, the accusation of hatred is not enough, so it is made more graphic by associating the opponent with a heinous act.  Cue Matthew Shepherd.  So Mormons and Anglican by differing with the gay community, are now often accused of complicity in the murder of Matt Shepard, the countless murdered gays through the ages, gay bashings, Hitler.  It always goes back to Hitler, doesn’t it?

Today I am shocked by one thing only:  that nothing shocks me and that being called worse than Hitler is a kind of badge signifying that someone was actually listening to what I said.  Phony outrage is a rhetorical weapon as old as the hills, but the gay community has mastered the craft. Read the rest of this entry »


Beetle on Gay Marriage Prop 8: Mormons Stole Your Rights………Huh?

November 9, 2008

protester-antimormon_epithets

The Mormons have been unfairly targeted for their position in favor of the gay marriage ban in California.  Beetle Blogger has the facts on the broad coalition supporting Prop 8.

From Beetle Blogger.

1. Mormons make up less than 2% of the population of California. There are approximately 800,000 LDS out of a total population of approximately 34 million.

2. Mormon voters were less than 5% of the yes vote. If one estimates that 250,000 LDS are registered voters (the rest being children), then LDS voters made up 4.6% of the Yes vote and 2.4% of the total Proposition 8 vote.

3. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) donated no money to the Yes on 8 campaign. Individual members of the Church were encouraged to support the Yes on 8 efforts and, exercising their constitutional right to free speech, donated whatever they felt like donating. Read the rest of this entry »


Gay Parish is Part of Brisbane Gay Network, May Get Closed

August 26, 2008
According to Queensland Pride, there is a broader network of gay parishes in Brisbane, Australia, which the Archbishop ought to be looking at.  Again with the identity politics.
See Also: St. Mary’s, Brisbane Told: Be Catholic or Be Shut Down.

“In reality St Mary’s South Brisbane has taken a Roman Catholic parish and established its own brand of religion,” Bathersby wrote.

The church has previously angered conservatives in the church by welcoming gay couples and allowing the Brisbane Gay and Lesbian Choir to perform there in June 2003 as part of Brisbane Pride Festival celebrations. Bathersby opposed the performance and said it was “inappropriate”.

However, gay Catholic activist and St Mary’s parishioner, Tony Robertson, told Queensland Pride supporters were rallying to save St Mary’s.

“The response and support from across all social justice networks has been overwhelming,” Robertson said. Read the rest of this entry »


HLI Video: Pro-Life Counselors Homosexually Assaulted

August 11, 2008

Abortionists hire thugs to homosexually assault sidewalk counselors:

View Video: Read the rest of this entry »


Orthodox Metropolitan Soft on Sacred Tradition

August 5, 2008

Metropolitan Kallistos Ware was waxing philosophical in the wake of the Lambeth Conference, presenting a soft approach to Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture. There are some interesting parallels with an earlier post of mine, Orthodox EP Soft Like Anglicans on Abortion, in that these comments are given with the intention of being sympathetic with the current Anglican predicament. Still, this cannot be understood as mere diplomatic speech as it was given in the wake of the Vatican’s stunningly frank language on the same matters delivered by Cardinal Kasper just days prior. The full interview is found here.

An interesting exerpt (emphasis mine):

… First, I admire deeply the way in which Archbishop Rowan is fulfilling his role as Archbishop of Canterbury, at this moment of crisis. It’s easy to say, with reference to his position here at the Lambeth Conference or generally in the current Anglican world, that he is in a no-win situation. But granted the immense difficulties that he is facing, he is not doing too badly. Now, what should he be doing here at Lambeth? Should he be offering very firm and clear leadership, insisting on a particular point of view, putting forward resolutions to the plenary gathering of the bishops for their acceptance? He has not chosen to do that. Some people feel disappointed. Some people feel he should be doing that. But if he were to do that, it would create confrontation and division. If you walk through the mountains and you find a large rock in your path, one method is to kick it out of the way. The other is to walk around it and go on with your journey. Now Archbishop Rowan has probably understood that if he tries to kick this particular stone, or this double rock – the ordination of women and homosexual relations – if he tries to confront it head-on and insist on a clear expression of the position of the Anglican Communion, to kick the stone out of the path, he is likely to hurt his toe. Read the rest of this entry »


Text of Cardinal Kasper to Anglican Bishops: It’s Over

August 1, 2008

Anglicanism Fading from Historic Christianity

Cardinal Kasper, the best Catholic friend to the Anglican Communion, the one who has remained most optimistic for an ongoing relationship with Anglicanism, delivers the coup de grace wearing a velvet glove. Anglican orders will never be recognized and Anglican-Catholic relations are no longer ordered toward a future unity.

Emphasis mine.

Full text here.

The Catholic Church’s teaching regarding human sexuality, especially homosexuality, is clear, as set forth in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, nn. 2357-59. We are convinced that this teaching is well founded in the Old and in the New Testament, and therefore that faithfulness to the Scriptures and to apostolic tradition is at stake. I can only highlight what IARCCUM’s “Growing Together in Unity and Mission” said: “In the discussions on human sexuality within the Anglican Communion, and between it and the Catholic Church, stand anthropological and biblical hermeneutical questions which need to be addressed” (§86e). Not without reason is today’s principal theme at the Lambeth Conference concerned with biblical hermeneutics.

I would like briefly to draw your attention to the ARCIC statement “Life in Christ”, where it was noted (nn. 87-88) that Anglicans could agree with Catholics that homosexual activity is disordered, but that we might differ in the moral and pastoral advice we would offer to those seeking our counsel. We realise and appreciate that the recent statements of the Primates are consistent with that teaching, which was given clear expression in Resolution 1.10 of the 1998 Lambeth Conference. In light of tensions over the past years in this regard, a clear statement from the Anglican Communion would greatly strengthen the possibility of us giving common witness regarding human sexuality and marriage, a witness which is sorely needed in the world of today. Read the rest of this entry »


GAFCON did nothing…

July 10, 2008

…well next to nothing. Status of conservative Anglicans prior to GAFCON:

  1. problematic membership in the AC which de facto now ordains gay bishops.
  2. odd structures not recognized by Canterbury (bishops of some provinces exercising authority in the territory of other provinces)
  3. inability to force the ABC to enforce church discipline
  4. a unity of agreement on gay issues between Anglocatholics and evangelical Anglicans
  5. status a party within Anglicanism rather than defining Anglicanism

So, what is the status of conservative Anglicans post GAFCON? Exactly the same with some minor differences: Read the rest of this entry »


“orthodox” Anglicans

May 30, 2008

In the past 5 years two bitterly opposed camps on issues like scripture and sexuality have rent the fabric of the Episcopal Church (TEC) into two very unequal parts–the liberals having almost complete say and the power of the courts to crush the self proclaimed “orthodox.” At least this is the point of view of the so called “orthodox” Episcopalians/Anglicans, who bleat on and on about their victim status in TEC and in the Anglican Communion. Theologically, as a Catholic, I am on the side of the “orthodox.” Their moral position on homosexuality is the right one. But, I don’t agree entirely that they are either victims or orthodox.

What has happened to TEC since the 2003 ordination of practicing gay bishop is clearly the fault of the “orthodox” who have stood by with hands on hips for decades while their church has been swirling down the toilet. Read the rest of this entry »


Natural Law and Homosexuality made simple

May 24, 2008

Many educated Catholics know that the Church bases her moral teaching on Natural Law, but few educated after the 60’s know what that means. It all begins with Romans 1:18-21:

“The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness.For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse…”

In a Nutshell

  1. Despite our fallen nature, man can by his intelligence can determine right from wrong (though many fail to do so). This is very important in that while moral principles are revealed in scripture, they have a natural basis which allows for a common language for dialogue between believers and non believers. In other words, morality is reasonable and not only a matter of faith. Thus, unlike the Protestants, Catholics can discuss morality without pointing the non-believe to scripture which would be unconvincing.
  2. Moral teaching is discernable from the way we are physically made. That is, it is grounded in biology and common sense (which is less and less common these days, to be sure). Again, this is common ground with non-believers.
  3. A sense of moral good and evil, that is conscience, is written in the hearts of men and therefore imposes moral obligations. Read the rest of this entry »

John 6 in Our Day

May 16, 2008

I have been carrying around this thought for over a decade:

As a result of this hard teaching [just pick one], many of the Anglicans, Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists, Lutherans and Evangelicals returned to their former pagan way of life and no longer accompanied him.

Jesus then said to the Twelve, “Do you also want to leave?” Read the rest of this entry »


Must Read: Prager on “Why Judaism Rejected Homosexuality”

May 15, 2008

Dennis Prager has written the best explanation of the essential theological-sociological nature of Catholic-Jewish teachings on human sexuality. Starting with a description of male sexuality and implicitly the necessity of social mores/boundaries on the male, he demonstrates the connections between the dignity of the human person, particularly women and children, and the sublimation of male sexuality into exclusively heterosexual outlets. In Catholic terms there is a continuum between the consistent ethic of life and heterosexual family building. It’s an absolute must read!

To a world which divided human sexuality between penetrator and penetrated, Judaism said, “You are wrong — sexuality is to be divided between male and female.” To a world which saw women as baby producers unworthy of romantic and sexual attention, Judaism said “You are wrong — women must be the sole focus of men’s erotic love.” To a world which said that sensual feelings and physical beauty were life’s supreme goods, Judaism said, “You are wrong — ethics and holiness are the supreme goods.” A thousand years before Roman emperors kept naked boys, Jewish kings were commanded to write and keep a sefer torah, a book of the Torah.

Read the rest of this entry »