pure & simple
By Diogenes (articles ) | June 07, 2006 5:35 AM
Massachusetts's senior Catholic public servant takes a stand:
"A vote for this amendment is a vote for bigotry, pure and simple." Thus spoke Sen. Ted Kennedy in reference to the Marriage Protection Amendment being debated in the Senate today.
Vexing? Yes. A novelty? On the contrary, it's the world's oldest profession.
Writing about the Roman author Petronius -- specifically, about his depiction of the freedman-parvenus of first century Italy -- Erich Auerbach described the mad scramble for riches that attended the break-up of the old regime, "with masters bequeathing large slices of their wealth to slaves who do their sexual bidding." Yesterday, your father carried wood; today, you adjust your morals to your master's caprice; tomorrow, your son will be in a position to buy himself a senatorship.
In the 21st century, as was the case in the 1st, fortunes are to be made by turning catamite. The favors solicited are not always sexual, of course, nor is the payment always monetary. Yet there's no important moral difference between the rent boy who accommodates his client for cash and the congressman who agrees to push same-sex marriage in exchange for political endorsement. Perhaps most people go along with the fiction that the stateman's (journalist's, academic's, judge's ...) principles are somehow more sanitary than the catamite's lower intestinal tract, but in doing so they're swayed more by sentiment than by reason. The willingness to sell what shouldn't be sold, to those willing to buy what shouldn't be bought, is common to all harlotry. Some practitioners show more profit than others.
Annoying though it is, it's impossible take Senator Kennedy's recent statement seriously. In his world it's a career move: that's to say, business is business. We don't know what his real convictions about the gay agenda might be, just as we don't know the real sexual predilections of Petronius' Roman slaves. In both instances, the Inner Man was bartered away to wealthy homosexuals for sordid purposes of their own devising. We have no positive duty to visit contempt upon the persons who have made this bargain. By the same token, when they ask us for our respect, we're under no obligation to humor them.
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach five million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
Progress toward our March expenses ($27,157 to go):
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: -
Jun. 11, 2006 7:26 PM ET USA
Is Kennedy still a Catholic? I know he divorced his wife after he drove her to drink. Lucky for her he did not drive her to the beach. Remarried now! Is that true? If so, on what grounds?
Posted by: -
Jun. 07, 2006 2:03 PM ET USA
Benedictus, you almost caused me to do the unthinkable, i.e. defend his Rogerness. But I think the comparison is valid. Here in his diocese, we have the strongest homosexual lobby and gay cities. We are the pornography capital of the USA. We have a huge abortion industry. We have an entertainment industry that works hard to destroy Christian values. We have among the highest divorce rates. And we have a Cardinal of the Catholic Church whose voice is not heard on these issues.
Posted by: -
Jun. 07, 2006 12:36 PM ET USA
Regarding the senator from Massachusetts: EVERYONE HAS SOME USEFUL PURPOSE IN LIFE, IF ONLY TO SERVE AS A HORRIBLE EXAMPLE.
Posted by: benedictusoblatus -
Jun. 07, 2006 11:37 AM ET USA
Senator Kennedy is as Catholic as the Cardinal Archbishop of Los Angeles.
Posted by: coach1 -
Jun. 07, 2006 9:45 AM ET USA
Respecting Sen. Kennedy is a huge stretch!! He seems to have his following, though, no matter what he says or does.