WTF?! This comes out of the mouth of Belgium’s new Archbishop, André-Joseph Léonard, during an address on television.
“Homosexuality is not the same as normal sex in the same way that anorexia is not a normal appetite,” the Archbishop said, showing both an immature understanding of human sexuality and of the biology behind eating disorders like anorexia.
The comparison has drawn fire from a number of civil rights groups, including the Belgium Centre for Equal Opportunities, a government organization that has the power to start legal proceedings if they think something crosses the line toward hate speech. None of these groups are calling the Archbishop’s comments hateful just yet. But stupid? Yeah, they’re all over that.
“When a comparison is made between homosexuality and anorexia, this suggests that homosexuality is a disease,” the groups said. And they’re right. The statement shows a pretty weak sense of compassion, and certainly isn’t kind to LGBT people, or to folks suffering from anorexia.
Well Papa Ratzi himself has called LGBTs disordered, so this is only an extension of the official Vatican line. The view is also shared by Deacon Keith Fournier, who wrote an unbelievable self-loathing screed @ Catholic Online.
Some maintain that same sex attraction is a genetic predisposition. This is disputed. Even if it were the case, that does not give homosexual activity any more of a claim to being given a special civil rights status. Should we really give disordered appetites civil rights status under the law? Let’s consider an absurd example. I have struggled most of my life with fighting obesity. I am on the “winning end” lately, but just give me another Holiday! A very good argument can be made that obesity also has a genetic predisposition. However, I will fight it my whole life because it is unhealthy. It is a disordered appetite. Should we as a Nation decide that fat people have a civil right to be fat? Should those who insist that they resist that “genetic predisposition” to overeat be called Fata-phobic?
Disordered appetites – and the actions engaged in by those who give into them – simply should not be called civil rights.