Connect with us

Anti-Gay Archbishop: ‘I’m Not Against Gays,’ But ‘Homosexuals Need To Lead Chaste Lives’ (Video)

Published

on

In this stunning video, embattled Archbishop John Nienstedt, refusing to step down amid allegations of inappropriate sex with another man and a disastrous handling of child sex abuse cases, shares his thoughts on gay people and same-sex marriage.

Archbishop John Nienstedt, the man best-known for spamming 400,000 Minnesota households with unrequested anti-gay DVDs in a failed attempt to prevent same-sex couples from being allowed to marry, is at the center of calls from within and without his own church to resign.

The 67-year old Roman Catholic prelate was accused of inappropriate touching of a young boy’s behind. He was cleared of those charges, but shortly thereafter was accused of inappropriate sexual contact with men. He has, and in the video below, denies he has ever had “homosexual relationships,” and denies he is gay or homosexual. 

But Archbishop Nienstedt is also at the center of controversy for ignoring or covering up child sex abuse charges against priests he has overseen.

In a fascinating 30-minute unedited video made by FOX 9 News/KMSP-TV anchor Tom Lyden in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Nienstedt addresses all of these issues, and more.

Below, the interview starts with Nienstedt being asked if he is gay, then moves direct into his beliefs — and those of the Catholic Church — about the lives gay people should lead. It is as full of hypocrisy as his claim that the attempt to ban same-sex couples from marrying was “not intended to be hurtful or discriminatory.”

Nienstedt: I’m not against gays. I look at all individuals [as] children of God and they deserve the respect and the dignity of their personhood.

Lyden: That’s not what you said about Brokeback Mountain the movie. You came out pretty strongly about that being an immoral movie.

N: I was critical of the movie, yes. I don’t know if I used the word ‘immoral.’

L: And yet that seems to contradict what you’re telling me now, your criticism of that movie.

N: The church makes a clear distinction between someone who would have an attraction that would be same sex and the behavior itself.

L: So when you say you have nothing against homosexuals, you have nothing against homosexuals as long as they’re not having sex.

N: We believe, correctly, that sexual relations take place within the context of a committed marriage relationship.

L: And yet the church is opposed to marriage and you fought gay marriage.

N: I didn’t fight gay marriage. I fought for marriage as a traditional understanding of a union between a man and a woman.

L: I don’t want to get too off the rails on this issue, and yet there is a contradiction here that I don’t think can be denied. On the one hand, you said you’re not against homosexual relations as long as they take place in the confines of a marriage, a committed relationship–

N: I didn’t say homosexual… [sex is to take place] within the context of a marriage relationship between a man and a woman.

L: Okay. What about homosexuals?

N: Homosexuals need to lead chaste lives.

L: They need to lead celibate lives?

N: Well, yes.

L: Okay. Does that seem reasonable to you, that we should all lead the lives of priests?

N: Well… um…

L: Tell me, archbishop, why should I lead the life of a priest?

A: Because it is of your nature to, um, express yourself sexually through a committed relationship.

L: I am. I’ve been with the same partner and husband now for 21 years.

Watch:

 

Transcript via Aaron Rupar at Minneapolis City Pages
Image: Screenshot via YouTube

 

Previously on The New Civil Rights Movement:

Gay Sex Investigation Of Archbishop Payback For Condemning ‘Brokeback Mountain’ Says Donohue

US Archbishop: Satan Is ‘The Source’ Of Same-Sex Marriage

Archbishop: Mom Of Gay Son May Go To Hell If She Doesn’t Embrace Church Anti-Gay Teachings

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘I Will Not Stand by Silently’: Sotomayor Blasts SCOTUS Conservatives Over Their Latest Attack on Abortion Rights

Published

on

“The Court may look the other way, but I cannot.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed outrage at her conservative Supreme Court colleagues Thursday afternoon, after the six right wing jurists went one step further in attacking the constitutional guarantee of abortion.

Voting 6-3 against a women’s health care provider the Court denied a request by Texas Women’s Health, which provides abortion services, to change jurisdictions, which according to Justice Sotomayor the Court should have done.

“The lawsuit is now stalled with the Texas Supreme Court,” Rewire News reports.

Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern, a Supreme Court expert calls Sotomayor’s dissent “stunning.”

“This case is a disaster for the rule of law and a grave disservice to women in Texas, who have a right to control their own bodies,” Sotomayor writes. “I will not stand by silently as a State continues to nullify this constitutional guarantee. I dissent.”

She begins her dissent by explaining the case:

“It has been over four months since Texas Senate Bill 8 (S. B. 8) took effect. The law immediately devastated access to abortion care in Texas through a complicated private-bounty-hunter scheme that violates nearly 50 years of this Court’s precedents.”

“Today, for the fourth time, this Court declines to protect pregnant Texans from egregious violations of their constitutional rights. One month after directing that the petitioners’ suit could proceed in part, the Court countenances yet another violation of its own commands. Instead of stopping a Fifth Circuit panel from indulging Texas’ newest delay tactics, the Court allows the State yet again to extend the deprivation of the federal constitutional rights of its citizens through procedural manipulation. The Court may look the other way, but I cannot.”

In response the Guttmacher Institute, an organization focused on sexual and reproductive health and rights, accused the Supreme Court of “once again putting ideology over the rule of law.”

 

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

Ivanka Trump Responds to Committee’s Invite by Saying She Called for End to Violence – Leaves Out ‘Patriots’ Part

Published

on

Ivanka Trump is responding to her invitation from the January 6 Committee by issuing a statement that is being seen suggesting she has no intention of accepting. Earlier Thursday the Committee sent the former First Daughter and White House senior advisor a lengthy 11-page letter asking for her voluntary cooperation.

A statement from her spokesperson given to CNN White House Correspondent Kate Bennett references a tweet posted by Ivanka Trump the day of the attack on the Capitol – a tweet she was forced to delete after massive outrage.

“As the Committee already knows, Ivanka did not speak at the January 6 rally,” the statement reads. “As she publicly stated at 3:15pm, ‘any security breach or disrespect to our law enforcement is unacceptable. The violence must stop immediately.”

But in the actual Ivanka Trump called the insurrectionists “American Patriots,” as CNN reported that day:

 

Continue Reading

BREAKING NEWS

Georgia Prosecutor Asks to Convene Special Grand Jury to Investigate Donald Trump’s Alleged Election Interference

Published

on

A Georgia county district attorney has requested to convene a special grand jury to assist in her investigation of Donald Trump‘s alleged election interference.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in a letter to the county’s Superior Court chief judge writes that her office “has received information indicating a reasonable probability that the State of Georgia’s administration of elections in 2020, including the State’s election of the President of the United States, was subject to possible criminal disruptions,” according to the Associated Press.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (photo) was forced to release audio of then-President Trump appearing to intimidate him into fixing the election in his favor.

Trump, in the audio, can be heard berating and threatening the Republican Secretary of State, demanding he “recalculate” the losing election results and “find 11,780 votes” for him, which would have enabled Trump to falsely be declared the winner. Raffensberger refused.

“So look. All I want to do is this,” Trump told Raffensberger. “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have. Because we won the state.”

“There’s no way I lost Georgia,” he added, falsely. “There’s no way. We won by hundreds of thousands of votes.”

Willis told the AP the scope of her investigation “includes — but is not limited to — a Jan. 2, 2021, phone call between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a November 2020 phone call between U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham and Raffensperger, the abrupt resignation of the U.S. attorney in Atlanta on Jan. 4, 2021, and comments made during December 2020 Georgia legislative committee hearings on the election.”

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.