Saturday, 27 June 2009

Aiding and Abetting Launched in July 2001, the Catholic Exchange website has distinguished itself as the premier Catholic portal on the Internet.... We currently receive thousands of visits each day.

From Catholic Exchange:
Legalizing Deception: Why “Gender Identity” Should Not be Added to Anti-discrimination Legislation

Persons who present themselves in public as the other sex say they need such protections because they are afraid of violence. This fear is real. When someone is deceived — particularly in such a personal matter has the sex of an intimate partner or potential spouse — anger is an understandable reaction. Violent acts can never be condoned, but if such legislation is passed those who have been deceived will be denied any legal recourse and the deceivers will be portrayed as victims.
Which is why Trans people should be denied actual rather than nominal legal protection from violent acts. Not that violence can be condoned of course.

Because if violence against Trans people was actually illegal, or existing laws enforced, then the murder victims would be portrayed as, well, victims. And the killers would have no legal recourse, they'd face prosecution for what they did. This is a Bad Thing in the Catholic Exchange's view.

Not that violence can be condoned of course. Just... allowed. Legally, not morally.
If “gender identity” is added to anti-discrimination legislation, the lie of “sex change” will be taught in the schools. It won’t be long before we will have children’s books about how Johnny’s daddy is now Johnny’s mommy and everyone is living happily ever after.

It's Andrew. My son's name is Andrew, not Johnny.

Attack me, it's one thing. Attempt to make my son's life more difficult for having the grave misfortune to have such a peculiar parent, that's another. People may differ in opinions as to my own actions, but this "premier Catholic portal on the Internet" opines that it would be highly desirable that my son be persecuted for that.

And should I get upset by that, it's just a sign of mental illness, "narcissistic rage".It's not enough that we suffer, we must be made to suffer in silence or sustain additional slurs.

Now I'm not saying that all Catholics share the author's views, let's be clear on that. I'm not saying that most do, as I don't believe that either. I'm not even saying that many do, though that's only because I lack insufficient evidence to prove that beyond any doubt. But where is the outcry from those Catholics who deplore these views?

It's called Aiding and Abetting.

Crossposted from the Catholic Answers Forum


pe1biv said...

Well, I think it's the official stance of the RCC, as last December their leader announced that it was important to protect humanity from all that do not adhere to hetrosexual standards and male female roles. That obviously implies lesbian, gay as well as trans people and many more...

MgS said...

Hi Zoe,

This is not terribly surprising. From the perspective of the RC hierarchy, transpeople more or less deserve whatever we get from society as the cost of defying norms.

However, what they don't acknowledge is that just like the insane rhetoric of the anti-choice crowd contributed to the murder of Dr. Tiller, the church's position with respect to transfolk contributes to the violence and discrimination we face on a daily basis.

Dr. Veronica Drantz said...

This kind of concerted ignorance and heartlessness is exactly what I've come to expect from these "moral leaders".

Anonymous said...

This is the direct result of Paul McHugh's lifelong project.

MgS said...


Other than an oft-quoted article in First Things, what has McHugh done in recent years?

I'm curious more than anything - he seems to be a fairly low profile character that is often quoted, but seldom makes any real statements in public.

Anonymous said...

Actually, this kind of claptrap in the referenced Catholic Exchange article is a direct result of the out-loud-proud-defiant GLBT and homosexual transgender activists.

Anonymous said...

TG's on one hand and Catholics on the other, these two groups do great harm to people born with a transsexual condition.

Paul McHugh sits behind the scenes and pulls strings, wielding enormous influence. Besides sitting on Bush's Bioethics council, he is also close to the Vatican and is directly responsible for the strident tone against transsexuals in the US coming from the Catholic Church.

In addition to that, he also works behind the scenes in the APA to seat anti-transsexual people on the committee that is trying to wield power over the process. If I'm not mistaken, he was also listed in that division as an 'advisor' on such matters, taking an active seat.

It is a mistake to think that only loudmouth media types are doing damage. People who work behind the scenes can do just as much harm, letting others take the heat. As Lynn Conway pointed out, McHugh slipped up and recently (last few years) was quoted finally taking credit for a lot of the nastiness going on, openly bragging about the damage he has done.

People like McHugh and "Charles" Prince are two sides of the same coin. Thanks to the lies and misinformation they spread, a whole generation of people born transsexual went without accurate knowledge of their birth condition. Theirs is a legacy of malice and deceit.

Anonymous Woman said...

The negative backlash effect of jaw-droppingly ludicrous behavior by some transgender people can't be denied.

My transsexual condition did not spark my 'narcissistic rage' all those years ago.

i have the forced 'prayer therapy cure' sessions for that.

Catholics aren't the only ones to blame in the 'Aiding and Abetting by silence' game. Not by a long shot, as the distinct lack of 'protest' in protestant will attest.

Aria summed it up perfectly. Paul McHugh is a shadowy snake that is difficult to pin down.

"Pretty soon, we'll have a syndrome for short, fat Irish guys with a Boston accent, and I'll be mentally ill."

Paul McHugh
New York Times, June 7, 2005

No need, Paul. You already are.

Lloyd Flack said...

No, if what Ariablue said is correct McHugh is not mentally ill, he is evil. He appears to be a willfully blind zealot. They usually end up doing evil. Their conviction that they are doing good merely ads insult to injury and is part of their evil.

Anonymous Woman said...

The Reader's Digest answer is i agree with you.

The longer answer is, i have a tough time with the words 'good' and 'evil'.

They usually have religious connotations, and are thrown around with an emotional reaction rather than thought.

And too often those words overlap with others. Would a pedophile be evil, or mentally ill?

It devolves into philosophical or spiritual arguements that don't go anywhere.