In an article posted in the CBCP website, Archbishops Paciano Ancieto and Oscar Cruz reveals the gist of the book. In the said article, the CBCP urges the the homosexuals to "come out in the open" because "there is nothing to be ashamed of". Further, the CBCP also defended same-sex attraction, saying that it does not merit condemnation at once because homosexuality is a natural disposition. Fair enough, right? But this seemingly welcoming remarks of the Church is actually superficial.
In the same article, Bishop Oscar Cruz said:
"Don't condemn those who had a different sexual orientation for one thing, they did not chose it. Second, it is possible they could redeem themselves. Third, a good number of them are just behaving that way but they are not acting on their sexual orientation"
Let us dissect this statement:
- The first sentence is commendable. It is true (although my opinion on this would be biased) that one cannot condemn anyone who is sexually deviant. Condemning homosexuals are as disgusting as racism. The high rate of gay teen suicides in the past couple of months is alarming enough and the primary root of this sad events is bullying. The neanderthal comparison of the homosexual phenomenon to a certain kind of viral disease adds up to the burden of a "closeted" homosexual trying to figure our his identity. I believe though that being homosexual is a choice- a choice to enjoy the freedom of being one's self- and it is this choice that makes the person comfortable with.
- The second sentence, however, is clearly dangerous because it implies that homosexuals are originally destined to be thrown in the fiery seas of hell. The placement of the word "redeem" suggests that gays and lesbians already committed a sin being themselves. Clearly, this sentence is contradictory to His Eminence's previous statement. With this two sentences combine, it is like saying "Do not condemn them because they are already condemned."
- The last sentence of this statement further reveals the true stand of the CBCP on homosexuality. Behaving and acting are to terms with clearly different meaning, but aren't these terms in a antecedent-consequent relationship with each other. While the CBCP says the there is nothing wrong on being gay (and they also encourages the "coming-out"), the bishops instruct homosexual to not act on their being. Again, we go back to the choice of being one's self. The choice of being gay entails the assumption that after the choosing being homosexual, the freedom to act as one follows. The CBCP says that a man can be attracted to another man is a "natural sexual disposition" and does not merit any persecution from the populace. However, they also imply that a man falling in love with another man merits a commission of a sin. These arguments are hilariously preposterous! For more, while the CBCP acknowledges homosexuality as a "natural disposition", it denies the existence of "third sex". WHAT?!
Homosexuality is not a sin, it is a form of self-expression, of being one's self. The "welcoming" remarks of the CBCP towards us homosexuals are good, but I say, "No Thanks!". These affirming-but-actually-denying statements are disgusting. It doesn't do anything good to the LGBT community. The CBCP condemns us further, by the mere superficial acceptance. These statements are just compounding the persecution homosexuals undergo in their everyday lives. As per being one, I have just learned to ignore the insults and the laughs being thrown at me as I am being judged with my choice of clothes and my sexual preference. Reading these statements are actually more insulting than the petty mockery that ordinary people throws on homosexuals. This is the reason why day after day, people our being discouraged on going to the Church. In reply to these statements, let me say to the CBCP that there are worse thing rather than losing "morality" for being gay. For example, losing religion.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comments are highly appreciated