Reverend Paul Scalia - son of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia - appears to be just as anti-gay as his old man. In fact, he may have one-upped the man voted less likable than Oscar the Grouch, as it appears the reverend doesn't even believe that homosexuality exists.
In a 2012 article he wrote for Humanism: Issues in Family, Culture & Science, Paul Scalia said the following:
"In short, we should not predicate 'homosexual' of any person. That does a disservice to the dignity of the human person by collapsing personhood into sexual inclinations. Indeed, the Church is still trying to find the right vocabulary to speak about this modern phenomenon ... Either our sexuality is oriented in a certain direction (i.e. toward the one-flesh union of marriage), or it is not. We cannot speak of more than one sexual 'orientation' any more than we can think of the sun rising in more than one place (i.e. the orient)."
That was a lovely comparison made by Scalia there at the end of his "piece," but I'm not going to even focus my attention on that. Before that, he referred to homosexuality as a "modern phenomenon."
First off, does Scalia know what the word "phenomenon" means, and secondly, does he know what "modern" means?
Just three months ago, archaeologists discovered the skeleton of a caveman from between 2900 and 2500 BC in the Czech Republic. Due to how he was buried, it's believed that this man was gay.
What is homosexuality again, Mr. Scalia?
"[A] modern phenomenon..."
A 5,000-year-old "modern phenomenon"? With Paul Scalia being my guide, I think it's safe to say that homosexuality is about as modern of a phenomenon as prejudice, ignorance, and denial.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/04/paul-scalia-homosexuality-antonin-scalia_n_3543284.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1374060/Gay-caveman-5-000-year-old-male-skeleton-outed-way-buried.html
In a 2012 article he wrote for Humanism: Issues in Family, Culture & Science, Paul Scalia said the following:
"In short, we should not predicate 'homosexual' of any person. That does a disservice to the dignity of the human person by collapsing personhood into sexual inclinations. Indeed, the Church is still trying to find the right vocabulary to speak about this modern phenomenon ... Either our sexuality is oriented in a certain direction (i.e. toward the one-flesh union of marriage), or it is not. We cannot speak of more than one sexual 'orientation' any more than we can think of the sun rising in more than one place (i.e. the orient)."
That was a lovely comparison made by Scalia there at the end of his "piece," but I'm not going to even focus my attention on that. Before that, he referred to homosexuality as a "modern phenomenon."
First off, does Scalia know what the word "phenomenon" means, and secondly, does he know what "modern" means?
Just three months ago, archaeologists discovered the skeleton of a caveman from between 2900 and 2500 BC in the Czech Republic. Due to how he was buried, it's believed that this man was gay.
What is homosexuality again, Mr. Scalia?
"[A] modern phenomenon..."
A 5,000-year-old "modern phenomenon"? With Paul Scalia being my guide, I think it's safe to say that homosexuality is about as modern of a phenomenon as prejudice, ignorance, and denial.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/04/paul-scalia-homosexuality-antonin-scalia_n_3543284.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1374060/Gay-caveman-5-000-year-old-male-skeleton-outed-way-buried.html
Comments
Post a Comment