Approaching Sodom > Trans person wants to lead Islam to Sodom; Pope Francis condemns gender changes and surrogacy

What kind of madness is it that allows a court to change a birth certificate 71 years later? 

Germany: Government recognizes father of seven

as a woman, he becomes a Muslim,

hopes to ‘liberalize’ Islam

APR 9, 2024 12:00 PM BY ROBERT SPENCER

Manuela Donner is in for a rude surprise from his new coreligionists.

Donner's decision making ability is in serious question. He should be locked up before he hurts himself any worse.

=====================================================================================

Vatican declares gender change, surrogacy,

'grave threats' to human dignity

By Sheri Walsh

1 of 2 | Pope Francis, who is shown during the Easter Mass in St. Peter's Square at the Vatican on March 31, joined the Vatican in a 20-page doctrine Monday in condemning gender change and surrogacy as affronts to human dignity. Photo by Stefano Spaziani/UPI | License Photo

April 8 (UPI) -- The Vatican and Pope Francis issued a strong declaration Monday, condemning transgender sex change, surrogate motherhood and abortion as "grave threats" to human dignity.

"We are called to protect our humanity, and this means, in the first place, accepting it and respecting it as it was created," the doctrine states.

The 20-page document titled Dignity's Infinite, or Infinite Dignity, outlines what the Catholic Church sees as growing threats to human dignity, to include gender theory, sex changes, surrogacy and euthanasia, as well as abortion, poverty, human trafficking and war.

"In the face of so many violations of human dignity that seriously threaten the future of the human family, the Church encourages the promotion of the dignity of every human person, regardless of their physical, mental, cultural, social and religious characteristics," Monday's Vatican declaration, issued by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of Faith, states.

The doctrine, which has been in the works for five years, states that any attempts to obscure "the sexual difference between man and woman" should be rejected.

"It follows that any sex-change intervention, as a rule, risks threatening the unique dignity the person has received from the moment of conception."

The document states that God created man and woman as biologically different beings, and that people should not try to alter that plan or "make oneself God."

Or, try to improve on God's work.

"Desiring a personal self-determination, as gender theory prescribes, apart from this fundamental truth that human life is a gift, amounts to a concession to the age-old temptation to make oneself God, entering into a competition with the true God," the document states.

Pope Francis also criticized Western governments for supporting gender theory and imposing their sexual values on society, as he warned against one of the world's "most dangerous ideological colonizations."

Several groups blasted the Vatican's human dignity doctrine for its hypocracy.

"While it lays out a wonderful rationale for why each human being, regardless of condition in life, must be respected, honored and loved, it does not apply this principle to gender-diverse people," wrote Francis DeBernardo of New Ways Ministry.

"Yet again, a group of all-male, celibate clergymen is telling women and gender-expansive people that their lived experiences are not real or valid," Catholics for Choice president Jamie Manson wrote Monday in a statement.

Are paedophiles lived experiences real and valid? Are mentally ill people's experiences real and valid? Gender dysphoric people are mentally ill.

"The root of the problem is that Pope Francis and all Catholic prelates still do not believe that women are equal to men," Manson added.

That's undoubtably true, but has little to do with the real issue here.

Despite the Vatican's strong stance on gender theory, the doctrine opposes the criminalization of homosexuality.

"It should be denounced as contrary to human dignity the fact that, in some places, not a few people are imprisoned, tortured and even deprived of the good of life solely because of their sexual orientation," the document states.

Back to the matter of paedophiles. Should they be imprisoned, tortured and even deprived of the good of life solely because of their sexual orientation?

Last year, Francis became the first pope to condemn the criminalization of homosexuality and urged the Catholic Church to end "unjust" laws that criminalize being gay.

This was probably because he knew that the majority of Bishops and Cardinals in the Vatican are gay.

Last week, a Ugandan court upheld the country's harsh anti-gay law that imposes long prison sentences and in certain cases, the death penalty. Uganda is one of at least 67 countries that criminalize homosexuality.

"We are pleased to see that the document furthered the Vatican's call to ensure that LGBTQ+ are protected from violence and imprisonment around the world," White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters Monday.

"However, the president will continue to be an advocate for the rights, safety and dignity of the LGBTQ+ community, including transgender people here in the United States," Jean-Pierre added.

In addition to condemning gender theory, the Vatican doctrine also came out against surrogacy, arguing that "the immensely worthy child becomes a mere object" in a transaction.

"Because of this unalienable dignity, the child has the right to have a fully human, and not artificially induced, origin and to receive the gift of life that manifests both the dignity of the giver and that of the receiver," the declaration states, adding that having a child is a gift, not a right.

"A child is always a gift and never the basis of a commercial contract," the document states.

"Every human life, beginning with that of the unborn child in its mother's womb, cannot be suppressed, nor become an object of commodity."

And yet.....

========================================================================

Anti-Porn Crusade Finds Unlikely Ally in College Men

One US college’s campaign to block access to adult content is making headway at other schools as a once-moribund part of the culture war takes on a new life, its adherents convinced that porn is like prostitution, only worse.

A Notre Dame University student became a lightning-rod for college anti-porn activism after penning a letter with 80 other male students demanding a porn filter be installed on campus WiFi. Jim Martinson, a senior at the college, led the call for Notre Dame to filter internet access “in order to stand up for the dignity of all people, especially women.”

Pornography is prostitution through the lens of a camera, but more abusive. It exploits the men and women involved, advances a twisted narrative about human sexuality and harms those who consume it.

Martinson was deluged by emails from students at other universities hoping to replicate his campaign. As president of socially-conservative campus group Students for Child-Oriented Policy, he has been involved in several unsuccessful anti-porn crusades. This year, however, the student body seemed genuinely receptive to his proposal.

Amelia Irvine, a senior at Georgetown University who once dumped a boyfriend because of his porn habits, told the Daily Beast she planned to gather support during the winter break in preparation for launching her own campaign in the spring, while students at Princeton and Penn State reported they are already spreading the word about the dangers of porn with tabling and flyering campaigns. Harvard student Will Long said he hoped to partner with “left-leaning women’s groups” to push Martinson’s anti-porn message, blaming internet smut for the rise of “hookup culture” and dating apps.

One might expect such “women’s groups” to call a letter written by 80 men purporting to speak on their behalf an act of male chauvinism, given feminism’s current “sex-positive” slant and the move to legalize and empower sex workers, but more than 60 female students backed Martinson’s campaign with their own pro-filter missive, claiming on-campus porn was “preventing men and women from encountering the full personhood of one another.” Over 10 percent of Notre Dame students ultimately signed a petition calling for the filter.

Not all women were on board with the new moral minority, however. Notre Dame student Jackie O’Brien dismissed the idea as “patronizing” and “degrading” to sex workers, and gender studies major Anne Jarrett concurred. “Rather than judging these consensual acts, let’s celebrate that people are practicing consent and communicating openly with their partner,” she said.

Good grief! That's so pathetically shallow.

Like Starbucks’ decision to install a porn filter on its in-store WiFi – which notably came in response to sustained efforts by an online “child protection” group rather than the customer’s themselves – a porn ban from Notre Dame wouldn’t change much. The school’s technology policy already bars students from accessing “pornographic, sexually explicit, or offensive” material on campus networks.

Student diversity council president Alyssa Ngo told the Notre Dame Observer the ban would block access to the 25 most popular porn websites, “whatever they are measured to be” – a measure which would only push porn-seeking students into the darker corners of the web where they are more likely to find disturbing and degrading content. Since nothing stops them watching porn off-campus, such a policy could exacerbate the very problem it purports to address.

Sin is progressive! Pornography often leads to worse pornography - increasing violence, perversion, and younger and younger girls. Some porn watchers are going to progress to child porn regardless. Some will not because it is just too difficult and, ultimately, dangerous.

A “hard” ban in the form of a filter would also infringe on “protected speech,” according to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, which opposes the move. Martinson is confident the filter will be in place by the end of the year.

Curious - how can porn be called 'protected speech' when there is usually no dialog whatsoever? Is it legal to broadcast directions to make a 3-D gun, or a dirty bomb, or to instruct how to create a massacre?  That which is extremely destructive has to be prevented from being published. In my opinion, pornography is extremely destructive, not only in creating the 'hook-up generation' but in creating the 'culture of rape' that seems to be getting worse each year.

Whether this filter comes to be, whether it works or not, it is good to see some young people with the wisdom, character and courage to stand against pornography. There is little hope for a society where adolescent children have easy access to pornography.