The aspiration of a Christian, worthy of the name, is to see and evaluate all that is earthly from the perspective of the One who created it all and who has made us know both its meaning and the attitude we must adopt on our life’s path. The amazing thing is that He didn’t just do it with words, but also with concrete deeds and examples. Among other things, He taught us to love both the truth and our fellow human beings, to both denounce and suffer injustice, and to both fight and accept the suffering and death that inevitably determine the way to our ultimate destiny.
A Christian, therefore, is one who, like Christ, both strikes and anoints and both humbly undergoes and boldly fights. Pope Francis is undoubtedly setting a good example in this regard. Our attitude towards homosexuality shows a similar duality. This means that, on the one hand, we treat our fellow human beings with a deviant sexual preference with respect, but on the other hand we cannot approve of the sexual acts resulting from their preference. As far as its causes are concerned, we, as Christians, must make every possible statement with serene neutrality, while we distance ourselves with a healthy skepticism from positions that are forced on us on a large scale by certain interest groups. (1)
One of the questions is whether homosexuality is innate, or whether its cause can be found in experiences from the first stages of life. Only if a tendency to homosexuality is detected from birth (how?), can we speak with complete certainty of a homophilic “orientation”. However, this term is now commonly used. While to date no cause has been found that can explain the “innate” of such a tendency, there is a lot that indicates that, at least in a large percentage, this tendency has arisen as a result of situations or events from childhood or puberty. The difference between the two causes is not something of secondary importance. From various (systematically ignored) testimonies and researches, it can be concluded that non-congenital homosexuality can be reversed thanks to an adapted psychotherapy. How many parents of homosexual children would not be too happy to take advantage of this? (2)
Let’s listen to an expert on this. She is a non-conformist lesbian feminist and libertine writer and therefore certainly an unsuspected source in this matter. So, while her opinions are in many ways the opposite of ours, we should applaud her for the way she consistently ignores anything that smells of “political correctness.” We consider her testimony in this matter to be very frank.
Psychological science cuts itself off by not doing certain studies out of political correctness.
That has the American feminist Camille Paglia (66), herself an emeritus professor of humanities, said in a radio interview. For political reasons, childhood events that may be related to homosexuality are not investigated, Paglia denounces the “psychological establishment.”
“Every gay person I know carries some kind of childhood drama with them. Something has happened that we are no longer allowed to talk about today,” Paglia said in an interview with conservative radio host Dennis Prager. She recognizes certain patterns that occur in her own biography and that of other lesbian women.
According to her, there is “not a shred of evidence” that people are homosexual from birth. Homosexuality is an “adaptation” to certain circumstances, according to Paglia.
According to her, the clearest patterns are recognizable in gay men. As a child, they often had a stronger bond with their mother than with their father and at the same time there was a distance between father and mother. The mother has therefore approached the son as an equal or as a friend, as the actual soulmate. This can manifest itself in different ways. The bandwidth can vary from discreet to theatrical, according to Paglia.
Today, these childhood influences may no longer be explored. Even the demand for it counts as ‘homophobic’, according to Paglia. “The psychological establishment has turned itself off. The highly developed psychoanalysis of the seventies has completely disappeared. It is now only political. Feminists help themselves bankrupt by sending their children to the best schools where only a political way of analyzing is taught. Everything about man ‘is imposed from the outside by an external force’. ‘We are oppressed.’ It’s a sick and stupid way of looking at human psychology.”
(1) We talk about this more extensively in this section, in the series of articles on “the ARM and the sexual revolution”, chapters 4a and b.
(2) As noted in the series cited above, this may only be done under certain conditions, considering the legal requirements. An important fact here is that the chances of success of such treatment increase if one starts earlier. This is apparently the first and most important stumbling block, since it depends on the decision and the cooperation of adults who may themselves be at the basis of these “influences from childhood”.