Ireland Creates Modern Day Babel: Same Sex "Marriage."

by Susan Fox

By an overwhelming vote of 2 to 1, Ireland legalized same

Irish gentlemen celebrate the opportunity to

"marry" in Ireland.

sex “marriage” on May 22, 2015, falling naively for the lie of “marriage” equality

“How have the mighty fallen,” commented one British pundit, Christopher Woodford, pro-life agnostic. The Vatican called it a “Defeat for Humanity.”

Undeterred, Catholic evangelists stared at the same devastation and concluded Ireland was ripe for the New Evangelization, which focuses on the naïve and un-catechized Catholic sitting in the pew next to you rather than the pagan baby in Timbuctoo.   

“I was deeply saddened by the result,” said the Vatican’s Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, on Tuesday. “The church must take account of this reality, but in the sense that it must strengthen its commitment to evangelization. I think that you cannot just talk of a defeat for Christian principles, but of a defeat for humanity.”

Ireland is a nation of non-practicing Catholics.  In 2011, 84.2 percent of the population identified themselves as Roman Catholic. But weekly Mass attendance has dropped steeply from 91 percent in 1972-73 to only 30 percent in 2011.  

By voting overwhelmingly for same-sex "marriage" on Friday, May 22, 2015, Ireland put itself firmly on board for building the modern Tower of Babel. It joined 18 other countries that have legalized same sex unions through legislation or the courts, but shockingly Ireland passed the new form of pseudo “marriage” by popular vote.

Modern man is locked in über hubris, literally redefining the human family in a manner completely unconnected to reality. He has decided that marriage exists only as he wills it, and not in objective reality independent of his will. So if I were treating my desk that way, I could close my and eyes, decide my desk was a soft fluffy pillow and throw myself on it. Ouch!

"At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life," wrote U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy in 1992 in Planned Parenthood vs. Casey.

This definition turns the true nature of marriage on its head.  “Owing to the exceptional complementarity and procreative potential of a husband and wife, the legal form for their relationship is likewise distinctive, and not replicable for other relationships that are neither complementary not potentially reproductive. To use the legal form of marriage for these latter associations is to transfer the goods proper to marriage to those to whom they are not proper. This is an act of injustice – treating something as other than what it is,” said Author Robert R. Reilly in his book, “Making Gay Okay.”

On Saturday, May 23, the day after the historic Irish vote, the Catholic Church quietly celebrated the Sunday Vigil Mass for Pentecost with a reading from Gen 11:1-9, the story of the Tower of Babel.

Same-sex "Marriage" is Modern Day Tower
of Babel

 Here’s one to the Old Tower:

At the time, the whole world spoke the same language and using the same words, understood each other. Fearing they would be scattered all over the earth, the people began to build a city “and a tower with its top in the sky,” so as to make a name for themselves.

The Lord came down to check out the city, and said, “If now, while they are one people, all speaking the same language, they have started to do this, nothing will later stop them from doing whatever they presume to do. Let us then go down there and confuse their language, so that one will not understand what another says.”

So the people of the earth got the very thing they feared – the Lord scattered them all over the earth, and confused their speech – that’s why the city was called Babel.

Talk to a same-sex “marriage” proponent today, and you will feel the same confusion of speech. A Christian speaks objectively about marriage, and the person advocating same sex “marriage” calls him a hateful “homophobe.”  What?

I have had these proponents of same-sex “marriage” carefully find quotes in my copy like, “The Catholic Church believes that homosexual acts are sinful.” And they conclude I have called them a sinner.

The confusion occurs because in their minds, their activity is their identity. “I am gay.” Well I have many activities, but none of them define me. I’m a Catholic. I live in a nation that is not of this earth. My identity is found in my relationship with Jesus Christ.

The Irish people have forgotten that.

They are looking for their identity in sex, the local pub and soccer. Hence they fall for the oldest lie in the book. They are tempted by a false good. They think they are supporting justice -- marriage equality -- and they really are creating a Tower of Injustice, a modern-day Babel. They are destroying the family.  The people building the Tower of Babel feared to be scattered over the earth. Their fear created the very conditions they thought to avoid.  

Marriage comes with the right to have children. How does a same sex couple get children? Not naturally. They use adoption and commercial third party reproduction, including the buying and selling of eggs and sperm, the renting of a surrogate womb, and creating a special class of women called “breeders.”

“The medical process required for egg retrieval is lengthy, and there are serious medical hazards associated with each step in the process,” said Pediatric Nurse Jennifer Lahl in Jephthah’s Daughters: Innocent Casualties in the War for Family “Equality. Women risk their own future fertility, blood clots, and reproductive cancers. Both surrogates and egg donors die. “Multiple embryos are implanted into surrogates in order to increase the chance of live births. Women are treated as commodities, paid vessels, a breeding class,” Lahl concluded. Multiple children do not survive the process. It’s the old game of kill a baby to get a baby.

Children who are conceived by reproductive technologies are more likely to suffer from “premature birth, low birth weight, and fetal anomalies. There is a higher risk of fetal death and stillbirth,” Lahl said.

“Gamete donation creates children who will be intentionally separated from their biological identity, history, and extended family. Genealogical bewilderment is a phenomenon well documented in studies and in the testimonies of those born via donor conception.”

David Alexander writes notes on Jephthah’s Daughters on a web page run by The International Children’s Rights Institute. I discovered them one night linking to my blog. Alexander quotes a poem from Edward Hirsch, whose adopted son, Gabriel, died at age 22 of a drug overdose.

 “…I pulled to the side of the road

When he announced that we bought him

From a special baby store…

…He wheeled his tricycle up and down

In front of the house in a rage

You’re not my parents…” (From Gabriel)

Then there is Manual Half, a European teenager who was conceived by a surrogate mother and raised by a biological father who self-identifies as homosexual. I remember reading the young man’s manifesto in the English Manif, a blog created by Child Rights Advocate  Robert Oscar Lopez’, co-editor of Jephthah’s Daughters.

Manual Half contacted Child Rights Advocate Robert Lopez through Hommen, a French group identifying itself as the "Silent Majority" which opposes same-sex "marriage." Composed of young men over 20 they do not wear shirts as they are mocking the half-naked Femen women who obscenely support same-sex "marriage."

The boy calls himself “Manual Half” because he says he is only half a man, son of a “gay” father, and an “incubator.” Lopez reprised the introduction he wrote for Manual’s Manifesto in his book, but kept the boy’s words unpublished to protect him. Manual will speak again when he grows up.

Manual, however, feels great anger at his father for “buying” him, erasing the role of his mother and exposing him to homosexuality in the home. Just before Mother’s Day in 2014, a veritable firestorm broke out between Pope Francis and Same-Sex “Marriage” Advocate Giuseppina LaDelfa, president of Italy’s “Rainbow Families.”

Pope Francis was so gauche as to defend “the right of children to grow up in a family, with a dad and a mom capable of creating a suitable environment for development and emotional maturation.” The pope reminded us that children, “need to mature in relation to masculinity and to femininity.”

La Delfa shot back, “A child has no right to live in a family with a father and a mother.” In fact, she argued, the father and mother are useless! The suitable place to raise a child is just about anywhere “regardless of who the parents are, of which sex, or of which sexual orientation, no matter whether they number one, two or 18. But one thing matters ... support and attention.”

Manuel Half responded by saying, “There must be some well of humanity hidden inside La Delfa to help her understand why boys

Hommen protects Kids
French anti-gay marriage
advocate

want to know their mothers,” Robert Lopez reported in Jephthah’s Daughters. "Then Manual lit a candle in his window on Mother’s Day and said to his mother – whoever and wherever she was – that he hoped she might pass and see the flame to know he was okay."

Ireland has blithely and ignorantly opened the door to these horrors. Will future generations ever forgive them?

The deliberations of Ireland’s professional body for solicitors, the Law Society of Ireland, gives us a clue to Irish thinking before the “Marriage Equality Referendum” was passed.

Similar to the American Bar Association, the Irish Law Society decided to support same-sex “marriage” based on the false justice of marriage equality. They focused on recent court decisions from the United States.

Specifically, they quoted the California Supreme Court, which in 2008 said there was “no compelling state interest” to justify the retention of the traditional definition of marriage between one man and one woman. California justices feared that “excluding same-sex couples” from marriage could imply that the government officially views same-sex “committed relationships of lesser stature than the comparable relationships of opposite-sex couples.”

Excited Irish proponents of same-sex "marriage" 

They noted that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Court said, “California’s ban on same sex ‘marriage’ serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California.”

Oh, but they did study similar decisions from the state of Connecticut, South Africa, and Canada. The logic of these myopic courts caused the Irish Law Society to conclude: “What is the legal justification for denying equality to same-sex couples in relation to the civil institution of marriage? For any lawyer, the argument that ‘civil marriage has just

traditionally been that way’ cannot provide a sound and just legal justification for denying equal rights to Irish citizens.” Was there no one left in Ireland able to explain to the nation’s

lawyers the dangers of legalized same-sex "marriage" for civilization?!? Apparently not.

As Irish Minister for Justice and Equality Frances Fitzgerald said, “This is an opportunity for Ireland to demonstrate that it is truly inclusive, truly mature in its understanding of marriage.”

No, these are not mature voices; they are the voices of Babel. Homosexual acts are not natural acts because people of the same sex are not structurally complementary and cannot create children naturally. Any civil law that violates natural law creates numerous other injustices by definition.

I haven’t even covered the loss of religious freedom that results from legal same sex “marriage.” Ironically, in Canada where same-sex “marriage” has been legal since 2005, a Christian Law School lost its accreditation because it had a chastity covenant with its students, who were asked to abstain from sex outside marriage and from all same-sex relationships. In other words, Trinity Western University cannot offer an accredited law degree because it doesn’t recognize Canada’s law allowing same-sex “marriage.”  The snake bit the lawyers in Canada.

But in homosexual unions, the primary victims are children. Strangers provide the products of reproduction and the children themselves. Surrogate mothers, egg and sperm donors are being used by same sex couples, who believe they have a “right” to a child even though they cannot make one by themselves. Robert Lopez’s book demonstrates irrevocably (we’ll cover this in another post) that adult children of same sex unions passionately and rightfully oppose same sex “marriage” even in cases where they loved their adult caregivers.

Nevertheless, same sex couples are crowding out opposite sex couples from adoption – an expensive process -- because they often have more financial resources than their opposite-sex counterparts. Same Sex couples offer no charity in adoption, nor in their exotic reproduction methods, which Lopez and his co-writers call “trafficking in children.”

Child Advocate Robert Lopez

Lopez calls himself a “bi-sexual man” because he grew up sexually confused in a household headed by two same-sex women.  Now he is living the life of a faithful husband and father. He understands that the problem of the homosexual is that he or she is averse to living with a member of the opposite sex.

“If there is one thing gay men have had in abundance, it’s imagination. It’s time for them to imagine something else, other than the dreadful agenda that’s been put forward by the fight over marriage. Gay men must find a way to live with women if they want to have children. If they can’t live with women, they should get a dog,” Lopez concluded.

He’s smarter than the Law Society of Ireland!

Let us pray to St. Patrick and St. Thomas More for the conversion of the Irish. We owe it to them for their missionary work in past generations.

Moving Pro-Marriage Pro-Child Protest of the French Hommen, whose messages of "Protect the Child" and "Free Speech" are silenced as they are gagged. They call themselves the "Silent Majority."  Hommen Protest-- Protect the Child
Sadly, France passed a "Marriage for All" law in 2013 against the will of the people. 

Want to read more on this topic?

Same Sex "Marriage," Natural Law and The New Apocalypse

A Child's Right to Mom and Dad: Why Kids of Gays Oppose Gay Adoption

Genderless "Marriage" Threatens the Foundation of Civilization 

The LGBT Agenda and the Triumph of Godlessness

The New Evangelists: Bringing Christ, A Light to All People Who Experience Same Sex Attraction

Christian Bakery, closed by Oregon (In) Equality Law, Resists the Mark of the Beast

The Myth of the "Gay Holocaust:" Lessons from the Nazi Experiment 

The LGBT Agenda and the Triumph of Godlessness

by Christopher Ziegler

Author Christopher Ziegler
can be found @CZWriting on
Twitter 

“Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there—because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie.” —Masha Gessen, journalist and homosexual activist, Sydney, Australia, 2013

The LGBT lobby loves to paint their opponents with a broad brush called “The Homophobe.” “The Homophobe” is a cross-eyed dolt, a sheltered house wife, or, everyone’s favorite, a southern yokel.

The stereotype for the "homophobe,"
anyone who opposes same sex "marriage." 

The homophobe is understood to have a pathological aversion to gays, and this aversion has nothing to do with gays and everything to do with himself. If someone opposes the LGBT agenda, it must be  because they hate homosexuals, and this hatred can only stem from a sheltered lifestyle or psychological derangement. 

But here is an inconvenient truth: I am neither cross-eyed nor a house wife. I have lived my whole life in the “blue states.” Yet I am a steadfast opponent of what I see to be the LGBT agenda.

My opposition does not come from a lack of familiarity with people who self-identify as gay. I’ve known or been friends with several  since high school. One of my house mates in England, where I lived for 9 months, self-identified as gay. I even once dated a woman who described herself as  "lesbian." I do not have an aversion to people who self-identify as homosexual. My opposition stems from purely intellectual, not pathological, reasons. 

In my former days as a liberal, I was a supporter of same sex marriage. Actually, it would be more accurate to say I was not an opponent. I was never “fired up” for the cause, but if you had asked me just a few years ago whether I supported same-sex marriage I would have said something like, “Sure, why not?” In other words, I just really didn't see what all the fuss was about.

Ironically, around the same time U.S. President Barack Obama’s views were supposedly  “evolving” to accept same-sex marriage my views were moving in the opposite direction. But even though I saw homosexual acts in a new light, I was still not an opponent of same sex marriage. I figured that even if homosexuality was a sin, legal same sex marriage did little to change that fact one way or another. I was not eager to give my blessing to such unions, but I didn’t see how they could affect me or my faith.

The truth is that I wish I could still feel that way. But the events I’ve seen transpire in this country since 2013, when the U.S. Supreme Court's United States v. Windsor overturned the federal Defense of Marriage Act, no longer justify that complacency. When I first heard of that decision I was glad because I thought that finally the issue was “settled.” The homosexual lobby had won and gotten what they wanted. “Good,” I thought, “maybe now they’ll shut up.” Whether one was liberal or conservative, we should all agree that there were more pressing problems.

But it was not to be. There was a distinct change in the atmosphere of American culture after that decision. I felt it. Campaigns of bullying and intimidation started against high profile figures like the Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich, who was forced to step down after it became public that he had donated $1,000 to support the gay "marriage" ban in California. Suddenly there were lawsuits being filed in several states against family owned Christian businesses, many of which were bankrupted. And the even wackier concept of transsexualism was being forced down our throats. It was evident that public dissent on these issues would no longer be tolerated. I was honestly shocked by this turn of events.

The latest insult came this spring with the utterly hysterical and fact-free outrage over Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act. As I watched the disinformation and

sanctimonious propaganda spew from the mouths of celebrities and media figures, I began to ask myself, “Is this what fascism feels like?” It inspired me to write this The Myth of the "Gay Holocaust:" Lessons from the Nazi Experiment.

It is now obvious that the country has been deceived. The LGBT agenda was never really interested in marriage for its own sake. Rather, marriage was a just a trophy for them, a symbol of their normalization. If marriage had been their real cause, then their campaign would have ended there. Instead, it

was immediately wielded as a tool with which to force more compliance and political concessions. It is now clear to me that their real goal is to transform our culture.

In a few weeks, the Supreme Court will hand down another decision. If the court decides that homosexual marriage is a constitutional right, we can be sure that the homosexual activists will not declare victory and go home. Rather, this new “right” will be employed as a weapon to weaken the family, strengthen the federal government, and silence all dissent.

Christian schools and churches, which refuse to bless same sex "marriages," will be in violation of the constitutional “rights” of homosexuals. This will make them easy targets for persecution at the hands of activists. They will be denied tax-exempt status and many will be shuttered. Scripture may soon be branded as “hate speech.”

Ultimately, the LGBT agenda is gunning for nothing less than the triumph of godlessness. But why should this be? Why should gay sex and godless philosophy, or any philosophy, have something to do with each other?

I did not see things this way before, and I’m sure many people still do not understand the connection, including some of those who call themselves Christian. I used to believe that the Biblical prohibitions on homosexual behavior were just arbitrary and based on little more than ancient prejudice. But the condemnation of homosexuality actually runs deeper than this. To understand why, you have to understand how Christians see things.

For Christians, the human body is part of divine revelation. It is the finale of God’s creative work, and is thus the capstone and symbol for all of creation. Ours is the only religion where God took on human flesh. Christ’s bodily sacrifice is essential to salvation and we celebrate this in the Eucharist. The body also serves as a metaphor for the church, which is Christ’s bodily presence on earth today. Finally, we believe in the resurrection of the body and the essential unity of body, soul and spirit. Clearly, the meaningfulness of the human body is integral to Christianity.

So what is the meaning of the body with regard to sex? Every part of the body has a purpose, which is expressed in its function. The purpose of the eye is to see, the ear to hear, and the teeth to chew food, etc. Because we know that every organ has a purpose, we can be sure that our sex organs also have a purpose. The purpose of the genitalia of each sex is found in the genitalia of the opposite sex. Men and women “fit” together.

Because our bodies are complementary in this way, we can say with confidence that the purpose of the male body is the female, and that the purpose of the female body is the male. Each has what the other lacks. Only a man can give what the woman lacks and only a woman can give what the man lacks. The purpose of each sex is found in the opposite sex. In order to be fulfilled, each must give themselves to the other. This mutual self-giving is the meaning of sex, and its fruit is the creation of new life. We can be sure that this form of self-giving is the meaning of the body because it alone can bring a new body into the world.

Christians believe that the basic facts of our anatomy reveal a deeper meaning and purpose. Male and female bodies are complementary; same sex bodies are not. Male and female bodies are capable of generating new life; same sex bodies are not. The homosexual cannot deny these basic facts. His only option is to deny that these facts reveal any meaning or purpose. The meaning here is too restrictive on his appetites to be respected. He wants what he wants, purpose be damned.

He will say: “Yes, I know that opposite sex couples ‘fit’ together in a way the same sex couples never could, but so what? Who cares? We can use our bodies however we wish.” This notion that we can use our bodies however we wish contains an implicit denial that our bodies have a purpose which is meant to be fulfilled. It is in this denial of purpose, in the homosexual’s attempt to rationalize his (mis)behavior, that the battle of philosophies is joined.

The significance of the complementarity of the male and female bodies can only be denied at the cost of denying that the human body can reveal meaning. If the human body has no inherent meaning or purpose, then neither does the rest of creation. This removes any basis for discerning law in nature, which results in the rejection of God’s authority. So, in order to permanently justify his actions to himself, the homosexual winds up embracing moral relativism. But it is not enough for him to adopt this philosophy personally and keep it to himself. Ultimately, everyone in society must accept it, too. 

So long as some people in our society refuse to adopt this view, the homosexual will continue to feel the rebuke of conscience. This is because, if the body expresses a purpose, then the act of sodomy is clearly at odds with that purpose. Anal sex is the elephant in the room. Can we really ever convince ourselves that sodomy can be an act of love? The answer, clearly, is “no.” This is proven by a very simple observation that  proponents of same sex marriage never bring it up.

It is an impressive feat of sleight-of-hand that gay activists have successfully managed to obscure this aspect of their lifestyle during these debates. It is not hard to see why they’ve felt a need to do this. Anal sex greatly increases the risk of rectal prolapse, rectal perforation, chlamydia, microsporidiosis, gonorrhea, viral hepatitis B and C, syphilis, and HIV/AIDS.

According to “Correlates of Homosexual Behavior and the Incidence of Anal Cancer,” published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, the chance of anal cancer increases by 4,000 percent among those who practice anal sex. As author Robert R. Reilly says, “If one insisted on using a highway exit as an entrance, one would be told that this is

extremely hazardous to one’s health and safety and to that of others. Why is this so difficult to state when it comes to human anatomy?”

Sodomy cannot be an act of self-giving worthy of the dignity of marital love because it is selfish by design. There is something inherently unfair about the act. Of necessity, one partner is always going to be penetrated in a part of his anatomy that is not designed for penetration. Hence, sodomy is always an act of lust and is incapable of the mutual self-giving for which the sacrament of marriage was created.

Lust kills the love for truth in the soul.  The Bible labels sodomy as an abomination because it is one of the chief acts of lust. Saying this is not hate speech. It is truth. The only real hate speech is the telling of lies. The idea that sodomy is the same as love is a lie. It is a lie about one of the most essential parts of our humanity: the meaning of our bodies. Our bodies were made for fruitfulness, not barbaric pleasures.    

Declaring sodomy to be morally equivalent to coitus, and equal in dignity to marital love (“All love is equal!”) is a lie of grave moral consequence. It puts an act of lust on the same footing as the procreative act, and thus, for the sake of sexual pleasure, obliterates the reality of meaning and purpose in our bodies. It is the triumph of appetite over reason. It is the sacrament of godlessness.

As homosexuals gain more legal recognition their demands become increasingly brazen. This means our culture has a big problem on its hands which many are still refusing to recognize. Christian persecution has suddenly become a reality in our times, and not just in the Islamic world but in the secular west. For if this new philosophy is to prevail, the Christian one will have to be suppressed.  Widespread sodomy and promiscuity cannot co-exist with the idea that man is created in the image of God. Hence, anyone who persists in holding this idea will be reviled for it. 
   
Until this point the only tool the homosexuals had at their disposal was cultural intimidation. Christians were ridiculed and labeled as bigots and homophobes. This will certainly continue, but if the Supreme Court declares same sex marriage to be a constitutional right they will gain a more powerful legal tool. As philosopher Sergei Levitzky wrote, “The relativization of the absolute leads to the absolutization of the relative.”

Persecution is coming in the United States, and American Christians will have to remain strong. If they do, it will be because of an excess of love, not hate. On this topic, ex-gay porn star and author Joseph Sciambra writes that, “Refusing to partake in the physical and moral destruction of another human being is a basic Christian principle.” In other words, the refusal to bless same-sex unions is an expression of Christian love. To do anything else would be to help perpetuate a lie—to stab a lost soul in the back.

Sciambra, who is the author of the blog How Our Lord Jesus Christ Saved Me from Homosexuality, Pornography and the Occult tells us that there are many “trapped in homosexuality, who cry themselves to sleep every night—they are scared and alone, and they need our help.” He asserts that the best way we can help them is to continue to speak the truth boldly. The worst act of hatred we could commit toward them would be to throw in the towel, lay down our principles, and join the frenzy of selfish hedonism.

Real love means doing the difficult but necessary work. It often means tough love, not the fickle “tolerance” of those who follow the path of least resistance. The charitable work we must do today is to continue to uphold the importance of purity, chastity, innocence, chivalry, and marital love. For doing this we should expect to be ridiculed, but in ridicule lies the promise of reward. As Christ told us, “The world will make you suffer. But be brave! I have defeated the world!” (John 16:33)   

Mr. Ziegler returns to the woods

Mr Ziegler has also written: The Battle for the Identity of Man: A House Divided 

On the topic of same sex marriage you might also enjoy: Genderless "Marriage" Threatens the Foundation of Civilization." 

or Same Sex "Marriage," Natural Law and the New Apocalypse   

Don't miss the piece on the U.S. Supreme Decision legalizing same sex "marriage."

Same Sex "Marriage:" Another Chapter in Grimm's Fairy Tales