Search This Blog

Friday, March 3, 2017

Keeping My Children Home from Beauty and the Beast Does Not Make Me a Homophobe

My little princess at Disney World's princess tea
I'd like to start this post by saying that neither I nor the Catholic Church is "homophobic." My belief, one held by devout Catholics and explained in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, is that homosexuality in and of itself is not a sin. The attraction to another person of the same sex, while disordered, is no more a sin than a man's attraction to a woman who is not his wife. The sin comes with action. A man being attracted to another man is not in and of itself sinful. Engaging in behaviors that are unnatural and immoral or living in a way that goes against God's law is where the sin comes into play.

I love many people who choose to live in ways that are not in line with my moral beliefs. Likewise, I am not perfect. I make mistakes and commit sins. Don't we all? Some sins are more outwardly visible and that's where we have an obligation to acknowledge the wrongness of the behavior especially where it concerns our children.

Having expressed that, here's my point. I've been really looking forward to taking my children to see the new Beauty and the Beast live action film since I first heard whispers of it coming to film. It was with a heavy heart, that I read an interview with the director where he was gleefully promoting LeFu as Disney's first openly gay character. Not only that, but it would have its first overtly gay scene. To say the least, it was disappointing. 

I decided to share my concerns on Facebook even though I mostly try to keep Facebook a politically free zone (My friends are laughing at that one!). I was thinking I might not be the only one unaware. That's when things got dicey. I had a lot of responses: why wouldn't I want to expose my children to different viewpoints or did I think my kids would "catch it?" (No, I do not think so for the record, but I certainly "caught it" for  voicing a different opinion.) 

I thought I should clear some things up. My children are given to me as a gift from God. As such, I have a responsibility to protect them as they grow, especially to protect them from things I believe they're not ready for. And, I do not believe my 8, 5, and almost 3-year-old are ready to face the reality of homosexuality. I have discussed with them the morality of same sex marriage. But, I have not put them in a position where they would be knowingly exposed to men kissing men, women holding hands etc. Have they been exposed to these things? Yes, before I canceled cable (because we didn't watch it, not for this reason actually), there were occasional instances of shows that portrayed same sex relationships. I usually turned them off, but to say my children had never seen them would be inaccurate. I go to the store and on occasion I have seen openly gay couples. My children have not commented on them so I'm not sure they've noticed. I go to restaurants and sometimes have a noticeably effeminate waiter. I believe these things are unavoidable and a good teaching experience. If my children ever asked, I would be honest with them and explain the beliefs of the church. The eight year old has already had some questions and I've answered them as appropriately as I could at that time. 

But, this is where I find the situation different. To take my child to a movie I know has a homosexual agenda is a known danger. I say danger because in my eyes it is dangerous to expose my children to something immoral without addressing it, and I feel my children are too young to understand the morality of the situation. Right now, my children don't really have a sexuality as defined by the desire to have sex with anyone. Right now, they like playing dress up and cars (and, yes, sometimes the boy dresses up as Anna and the girls play with trucks. They're little and don't see these things as girl or boy behaviors and that's okay!). So, why would I knowingly expose them to something that is outside natural law? The answer is, I wouldn't and I won't. 

This brings me back to Facebook. Why bother having these kinds of moral and religious debates? Well, that is a point. In this case, I was simply trying to alert other concerned parents to the possible moral conflict in the movie. It turned into a bit of a debate, but I'm okay with that. 

I don't mind a friendly discussion on Facebook, or anywhere for that matter, and I'm happy to share my beliefs, experiences, and opinions. I know this kind of topic tends to get heated, because so many feelings are all intertwined with it. Not really for me though. I have solid beliefs based on the teachings of the Catholic Church and, in this case, those beliefs are being challenged. I'm even okay with that. What I'm not okay with is a movie based on a delightful children's fairy tale being perverted into a crusade for the homosexual agenda. 

You may say it's just a short scene in a movie; It won't hurt your children. You can expand their horizons. But, to me, taking my children to see Beauty and the Beast would not be expanding their horizons. Instead, it would be exposing them to a perverted world they're not ready to meet. You may think I'm crazy or intolerant or sheltering, but, they're my children.

In the end, will they remember not getting to see the newest Disney movie, or will they remember that they had parents strong enough to go against the grain? I hope one day they will appreciate how we prepared them for this world we live in -- and understand that, sometimes, the best choice is just to stay home. 

44 comments:

Dymphna said...

Jamie, you don't need to apologize for looking out for your children. Several years ago parents who refused to buy Harry Potter books and merchandise were mocked. Now, some parents are wishing that they hadn't bought into the glamorization of the occult and in helping make J.K. Rowling into an influential figure.

Anonymous said...

Yes, yes it *does* make you a homophobe. If you allow your belief to dictate to you that two consensual adults should live in absolute celibacy because their attraction isn't a sin just their *action*? That still counts as homophobia ESPECIALLY if you have "friends" who are of the LGBTQIA+++ community that are living their lives; you will have to "shelter" your children from this too (and I'm willing to bet it's at times a lot more overt then a scene from a freaking Disney movie).
If you are souly keeping your children from the new Beauty and the Beast movie because of a same sex couple that happen to be cast in the movie then you are a homophobe. Simple. Own up to it and begin to heal or at least stop frustrating those around you with cries of acceptance that isn't really there

Catechist Kev said...

Bravo, Miss Jamie. :^)

This father of five could not have said it better.

Mommy Life x2 said...

I am a mom and a lesbian. I am also Jewish and have a personal relationship with G-d. First off there is no Gay agenda. We just want to love our partners and our families openly as you do. Secondly based on my experiences with Christians I could easily say that I don't want to expose my child to the perverse and backwards ideas of the Christian faith in our day to day life. I however am raising a socially responsible, accepting, caring and open minded little person who I will encourage to speak her own truth and be tolerant of others. Kudos to Disney for being forward thinking and embracing the diversity that makes the world interesting and great.

Mary Ann Kreitzer said...

I think your word "souly", Anonymous, was a Freudian slip.

It IS about souls and where they will end up after they die if they continue their immoral lifestyles. Lust is one of the seven deadly sins and people aren't excused from sexual sins because they have a disordered attraction to the same sex any more than a husband or wife is excused from adultery if they're attracted to someone besides their spouse. Married couples are called to celibacy for everyone except the person they married.

By your twisted reasoning, orthodox Catholics are not only "homophobes," but also heterophobes because we follow Church teachings that shacking up and adultery are mortal sins. You'll have to do better than that to try to defend your irrational position.

Thanks, Jamie, for this terrific article.

Anonymous said...

Btw our "agenda" is we don't want to have to adopt our own kids in a legal marriage...We don't want to be beaten to dealth for loving another human...We want acceptance, love and to be included not excluded. We want those who don't "believe" in our "lifestyle" to mind there own business and don't deny us of rights that should be inclusive to all human beings no matter what!

Anonymous said...

This woman turned over the tv and cancelled cable wtf... she's making her kids unaware of the world and all the different things that go on. It won't make it go away. If she's walking down the street and 2 people "same sex" are holding hands is she gonna cross over incase they get SMIT. i bet the children are more intelligent than her. Everybodies entitled to their own beliefs but letting them MISS beauty and the beast REALLY. If they've never seen or heard of a gay relationship the only thing she's gonna do is make them HOMOPHOBES �������� poor children. #twat

Anonymous said...

Thats just YOUR opinion (ehm, excuse me, belief) dont push it on anyone. What if it turns out that it is a deadly sin to be a homophobe? What are you going to say then to St. Peter in front of the heaven gate, hoping to get in and live forever and ever (cause thats so important to you).

Anonymous said...

I'd love to know what the "homosexual agenda" is. Mine is mostly being a good mom, wife, and role model to my kids. I must have missed something in my Lesbian 101 class though because I hear this term tossed around a lot. I have no agenda, nor does my wife or family other than to be just that a loving and accepting family. Your beliefs are yours to have to hold, and apparently to preach, but it doesn't make them right and sure doesn't make them Christian. I teach my children to love, to accept, to include, and that is the only "homosexual agenda" that I'm familiar with.

Anonymous said...

You're right, not taking them doesn't make you a homophobe. But using terms like "homosexual agenda" and "perverted world" does. Your children are in for a rude awakening when they leave your world according to Catholicism. Because guess what? Not everyone is Catholic and lives by that doctrine. Why should your children be taught that those who don't live by your religion of choice will burn in a fiery Hell? Religion is a choice. Homosexuality is not. Using your religion to raise even more close minded people in this world is doing them, and society, an incredible disservice.

Anonymous said...

Comments need approval? How cowardly. You have the gusto to publish something like this, but not to handle the feedback and let a discourse unfold? You wrote this. Own it. Don't hide behind approving comments that pinky fit YOUR agenda.

Morgan said...

See the problem i have with your idea that we Catholics are homophobes does not really have any traction. We do not condone the sexual acts between two homosexuals just as we do not condone two straight consenting adults having sexual relations. Some people have the vocation to be single (arguably one of the hardest) just as some are called to the married or religious life.

So saying we are homophobic because we dont want to see a childrens tale perverted to fit societies agenda is just crap...we dont like it when straight people are portrayed jumping from bed to bed either. Fact. Kthanksbye.

Jamie said...

Well, ruffled your feathers ��‍♀️ But, I accept the person not the action. Just like I don't agree with the use of hormonal birth control or living together before marriage. I do not have any say over whether or not other people do these things and I have friends who do/have. And, they know my feelings on it and guess what. I can say "hey, that wasn't my choice because x" and they say "oh okay cool, I did" and then we go have some more coffee. Life is made up of people who make different choices. You can most certainly judge their actions without judging the person. And, yes I would protect my children from a friendship that involved a same sex couple. Not saying that I wouldn't be friends but I would not expose my children to their life style. I appreciate the talents and contribution of many gay people to the world in many ways. I like a lot of homosexual people because they are kind and giving. I don't agree with their actions because my Faith tells me it's wrong and I will not subject my children to it. But, I love the person. You don't agree??? I'm okay with that!!

Jamie said...

I caught that too. Hilarious.

Ali Rothlizzi said...

I am a Christian mom too finding it so difficult to shield my children from this new tolerance of ignorance in the world. I understand your sentiment as loving "the sinner not the sin" and the active sin in this case being the act of a "man sleeping with another man" 20:13 as described in the Old Testament prohibited for high priests and the lack of male prostitutes in heaven, 1 Corinthians 6:9. But you really lost me when describing this "perverted" "agenda" as a "crusade." How fitting. Not sure how you missed the exponantially more aggressive agenda littering our children's lives with Disney princes and princesses. You are wrong about one other thing though. You are phobic. You probably should be. Stay home.

Mary Ann Kreitzer said...

Anonymous,

I'm still going through your comments. Some I can't post because of the ad hominem personal attacks. And that is exactly why I moderate comments.

Jamie doesn't. I'm the blog administrator. Some people have no sense of civility or good manners. After you receive a few comments filled with f-bombs, you screen out the barbarians if you're smart.

I can see you are incredibly angry. But your anger is misdirected at Jamie. All she is doing is articulating what the Catholic Church teaches, the Church founded by Jesus Christ. It is his teachings, not ours. But if you don't believe that why don't you just shrug and go to another website?

Homosexual behavior IS disordered. The natural order is for men and women to be attracted to each other. If everyone had a homosexual orientation it would be the end of the race. For whatever reason a person is attracted to a member of the same sex (and I think many homosexuals have been seriously sinned against) there is not a shred of evidence that they are "born that way."

As for the homosexual agenda, it's on record and you can see it almost daily in the lawsuits and prosecution against people simply trying to practice their faith who are targeted for persecution if they won't cooperate in a same-sex wedding. They are also working to make any criticism of homosexual behavior as "hate speech."

http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2015/02/24/exclusive-florist-who-refuses-to-do-gay-wedding-speaks-out/

Mary Ann Kreitzer said...

Mommylife2,

The only truth that is "your own truth" is subjective truth, like "I like pizza." or "I hate pizza." Objective truth is true for everyone. Gravity isn't true for me and not true for you. Please don't test that by jumping off a building.

Catholics don't hate homosexuals. That's a slander. And if anything it's homosexuals who hate Christians unless they can be forced to say that something seriously immoral is a public good. It's impossible to do that for someone who takes God's laws seriously.

Jamie said...

You didn't read my article at all. Please go back and do that and then come back with a civil response. Calling names is never nice. I don't remember doing any of that!

Jamie said...

But, I'm not a homophobe- didn't you read the title?

Jamie said...

I don't control the website and I would happily have let all comments go through. But, the irony of the person posting as "anonymous" calling me cowardly! I enjoy civil debate.

Jamie said...

Did I mention hell?

Jamie said...

And, actions are always a choice.

Jamie said...

Where's all the tolerance of my opinion? It differs. My beliefs. Differ. I time and time again said, I love all people and I do. I don't agree with them. I would no more take my children to see Les Mis (one of my favorite plays) than to see this movie. Does that mean I hate French people???? Nope. I just don't think my children are ready to handle the idea of prostitution. Check your language and name calling and then re-evaluate who you're calling phobic.

rrkilshaw said...

Hi Jamie,
I think why people are so upset is because you are saying that you are not homophobic when, in fact, what you are describing is literally the definitition of homophobia.
While it is well within your rights to keep your children from viewing whatever you wish, the issue comes from your argument that you are not homophobic simply because you have homosexual friends/are not outwardly rude to homosexuals. The logic unfortunately does not fit! Just as you are frustrated by people mid-labelling the actions of Catholics and Christians, you must understand that there will be those who will be equally upset by your choice to demonize homosexuality - while still insisting that you are not homophobic.
Good post!

Jamie said...

I probably should be what? Phobic? Of what? I applaud your use of your name though and I can agree somewhat with the archaic attitude of fairytales. Though, I find that versions like Rapunzel illustrate a more real idea of a woman able to help herself but still choosing to fall in love- mind you with a thief so eh but I guess that illustrates redemption (kind of). I don't want my children to think their only goal in life is to grow up and find a spouse (in fact, maybe they will choose to not find one at all) but these concepts are not in and of themselves immoral.

Chrysti Reichert said...

I agree there is no "gay agenda". Do you think us gays are sitting here happy about them making this character openly gay? He's the bad guy! This lesbian mom isn't taking my kids to see this because it's about a kidnapping and tolerance of rude, disrespectful and unhealthy relationship. Bella doesn't go to the castle willingly. There are plenty of other shows with openly gay characters.

As far as your professed "christianity". Even the Pope said "who am I to judge?", I see plenty of judgement in your yes, homophobic post.

Susan Matthiesen said...

Wow. That is all I can say except splendid job, Jamie!

rrkilshaw said...

Is objective truth religious truth? It was my understanding that "objective" truth referred to sceinetific truths - such as gravity (as you mentioned!) Scientifically, homosexuality is not a disorder, as it has been removed from the DSM and no longer holds any standing as a scientific category - only social.
Seems that we all could brush up on the difference between objective and subjective!

Susan Matthiesen said...

Sorry - just couldn't keep this in. To Mommy Life X2: Just wondering about where your socially responsible, accepting and caring little girl person came from. Somewhere along the line someone (You? Your "wife"? A surrogate? Or did you adopt?) had to have the benefit of sperm to fertilize an egg to produce your child. Since you're a lesbian everyone knows the sperm did not originate from the loins of your equally lesbian "wife". Two lesbians cannot procreate their own child. So ipso facto, your lesbian relationship is abnormal. (Must I go into the definition of "normal? That would be a waste of everyone's time since you would make "normal vs abnormal" into relativism.)

Ali Rothlizzi said...

Catholics aren't homophobes. That wasn't what was said.

Ali Rothlizzi said...

The heterosexual agenda won. Daily. Everywhere.

Ali Rothlizzi said...

You don't want to see a children's tale ...perverted? Have you seen any children's tales? Have you ever checked out their origins? They are used to scare and provoke obedience by keeping children "on the path" giving up their voices and in glass slippers.
This isn't about your contention that some agenda has commendered your children's souls. This is about fear - homophobic fear. Phobias are irrational and in this case blind.

Billy Chickens said...

To Alirothlizzi: I'm assuming by your comment, "Not sure how you missed the exponentially (I corrected it for you. It's spelled with an "e".) more aggressive agenda littering our children's lives with Disney princes and princesses," that you have not seen the March issue of Vogue Paris. The same point is made about the "princess" on the front cover (Valentina) who is a man but who is surgically enhanced to look like a fabulously sexy beautiful woman.

The point of other transgender people is that when the editor does not have to write an article about the transgender woman being transgender and on the cover of a woman's fashion magazine, i.e., when a normal transgender woman without the benefit of surgery can appear on the front cover without an added article of explanation, then transgenderism will have become mainstream.

However, the fact is, no man on earth is ever "just born that way"...meaning looking like Valentina. Looks like that for a man take surgery, female hormones, making breasts, removing Adam's apples (how is that done?) Therefore transgender people want to be princes and princesses too, which makes your above comment heterophobic.

CyberSue said...

Thank you Mommy Life x2.

CyberSue said...

You confuse a homosexual orientation with homosexual behavior. One is likely to follow the other, especially if one is a healthy homosexual, but they are not the same thing. Homosexual orientation is not disordered. It is a way of being that leads to a way of loving, just as much a gift from God as heterosexual orientation is. Homosexual desire is no more "lust" than heterosexual desire. Yes it is about souls: the souls God gave us and the freedom to live out that destiny as healthy people, not people tortured by the fear, hatred, and misunderstanding that plagues LGBTQ people. In other words, LGBTQ people do not "struggle" with their identities (or disorders, as you'd put it) they struggle with the hatred, dismissal, mislabeling, prejudice, anger, and assault that comes with living in a homophobic society. I don't see any heterophobia at work torturing heterosexuals for being who God made them to be.

Brooke Klotz said...

This article you wrote is disturbing to say the least. You're not okay with the same sex relationship in beauty and the best but don't bat an eye at the beastiality in beauty and the beast. You say youre not homophobic but sweetheart you most definitely are. Theres nothing perverted about 2 adults loving one another but what is perverted is the amount of child rape, molestation that goes on in the Catholic churches.

Anonymous said...

To Susan's excellent riposte I would only correct the word abnormal to, instead, unnatural. Procurement rather than procreation may unfortunately become the norm, as in brave New world, but it will never become natural.

Mary Ann Kreitzer said...

CyberSue,

Of course homosexuality is disordered. Is the anus a sex organ? Or the mouth and throat? Our bodies were not made for homosexual relations. The early death of so many MSMs (the CDC's designation for Men who have sex with men) proves it. Both syphilis (https://www.cdc.gov/std/syphilis/STDFact-MSM-Syphilis.htm) and gonorrhea (https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/23/1/16-1205_article) as well as AIDS are epidemic among homosexuals, not to mention AIDS (https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/sexualbehaviors/pdf/hiv_factsheet_ymsm.pdf) That is scientific fact, rrkilshaw. And these reports all come from the Center for Disease Control, hardly a religeous-oriented group.

As for removing homosexuality from the DSM that was politics not science. You can't fool Mother Nature. I for one would prefer to see same-sex attracted individuals repent and convert rather than die early from pursuing a lifestyle that not only kills morally, but physically.

Jamie said...

Define homophobia? I'm not afraid of homosexuals or of catching it. Doesn't phobia mean "afraid of"?? Because I'm not at all afraid. I think some gay people are delightful and some not- just as some heterosexual people are and some not. And, I don't really care why or if people are offended or upset by my post. That's what I believe and I stand behind it.

sixlittlerabbits said...

Jamie, thanks for a great post. Sorry the trolls have latched on to it. Mary Ann, thanks for your patience and rational and charitable explanations to these sorry and angry souls. Imagine a mom is actually protecting her children from gay propaganda! GASP!

allandan500 said...

Your use of the word homophobia shows an unhealthy adherence to the homosexual agenda.

Mary Ann Kreitzer said...

To Brooke with regard to "bestiality":

The "bestiality" in Beauty and the Beast is not true bestiality because the "beast" is rational. Rational talking beasts in fairy tales are not true "beasts". Man is sometimes described as a "rational animal" and that is a more accurate description of the "beast" in the fairy tale. It speaks a truth, i.e., that man can make himself more like a beast than a man by his rebellion against God.

When we defy the laws of God that's what happens. In fact, it's actually unfair to call a sinful man a "beast" because the beasts serve God according to the instincts he placed in them. When a man defies God, he makes himself less than a beast -- a creature in rebellion against his creator. Consider the actions of the mob in the French Revolution, the ISIS atrocities, and, in fact, some of the behavior we see in mob riots. When you look at the faces of these people you often see, not beasts, but evidence of the diabolical.

Anonymous said...

The movie is rated PG, which in my opinion already makes it not appropriate for a three-year-old and iffy for a five-year-old. Parental Guidance suggested means exactly that, however, and you are free to parent your children exactly how you wish. Since I doubt there is a sex scene in the movie, you could choose to explain simply that one man has a crush on another man. I will say that I am chuckling at the response further up that questions whether or not mouths, throats, and anuses are sexual organs. Anyone who thinks that plenty of Christian heterosexual couples don't use those organs for sexual purposes is naive. And I understand that your version of Catholicism prohibits all sex outside of that open to procreation. I will just say that until you publicly question and then revile heterosexual couples who use birth control, and have oral and anal sex, in the same way that you vilify homosexual couples (because the only difference is that it is easier for you to speculate), then yes - you are homophobic. Marriage is a partnership about many things, including sexual habits. To pare it down to only sexual habits is baffling. I'll happily take my grandchildren (ages 10 and 12) to see the movie, with their parents' consent. I'm anonymous because I don't have any of the accounts to identify myself, but my name is Cathy and I was linked to this blog on another blog I follow.

Mary Ann Kreitzer said...

"your version of Catholicism prohibits all sex outside of that open to procreation"

Thanks for your comment, Cathy, but you are incorrect. While the Church DOES require that couples be OPEN to life, most of the cycle it is impossible for a woman to become pregnant. I taught natural family planning for almost twenty years. It allows couples to space pregnancies for serious reasons using the natural cycle God provided. And, yes, heterosexual couples also engage in immoral sexual practices. No one said homosexuals were the only ones to misuse their sexual powers.

It's called sin. And particularly during this season of Lent we are called to turn away from sin and turn back to God. And for the record, it's clear you are unfamiliar with this blog since I have often "publicly questioned" couples who use birth control or choose abortion or pornography or any of the other deadly sins.

I don't "vilify" anybody. I want everyone to go to heaven. I do "vilify" immoral actions because that's what leads people to hell. If you read the Bible you know that God vilifies immorality as well and warns us that if we don't repent, we'll go to hell. That's not my morality; it's God's. Frankly, I don't want any of my homosexual or heterosexual brothers and sisters to end up there.

As for vilifying -- that's exactly what calling us "homophobe" is all about. It's part of the homosexual agenda described by Kirk and Madsen in "After the Ball." They call it jamming. Another word for it is bullying and shaming.