Brighten their holiday. Enrich their everyday.Give The Atlantic

Neuhaus Loses It - Again

The theocon-in-shief defends hypocrisy, and slimes gayness as somehow synonymous with the failings of people like Haggard and Foley. He also speaks about the nuances of a conflicted self. Hmmm. Then there's this:

Somewhere between 2 and 4 percent of American males identify themselves as gay. (The figure is much lower for women.) Most of them are congregated in cities, and in those parts of cities known to be gay-friendly. Chelsea and the West Village, along with the Castro district of San Francisco and counterparts in other larger cities, are not America. Gays live in such places precisely because they are not America. 

Not America? So where are these places exactly? Commonweal's blog comments:

The Castro district is 'not America?' I wonder if Fr. Neuhaus has ever read any of Richard Rodriguez’s reflections on the role of Holy Redeemer parish in the Castro, where many parishioners followed the call of Christ in ministering to the sick and dying during the AIDS crisis of the 1980s. Those parishioners continue to do that even today while they also find ways to support those suffering from AIDS in Africa. Not America? I would say this is America at its finest.

Does Fr. Neuhaus seriously believe that the Mark Foleys and Ted Haggards of the world are representative of the gay community? He should come and live out here in the Bay Area for a while. At least in my office, the gay and lesbian staff seem as caught up in suburban domesticity as their straight counterparts. There are pictures of loved ones — including children — on desks and our water cooler conversation revolves around similar struggles to balance work and family obligations.

This is not about whether those called to teach in the name of the Church should teach the fullness of the Church's teaching on human sexuality. I would hold that they have an obligation to do so. But when we talk of gays living in places that are 'not America' or suggest Americans are right to see being gay, in and of itself, as 'morally repugnant,' then we have moved from condemning acts to condemning persons. This the Church does not teach.

But how much Neuhaus hopes the church would teach such hatred. And how hard he has tried to make it so.