Audio only:
In this episode, Trent responds to Stephen Woodford of Rationality Rules’ video “If atheists acted like apologists” in which Woodford critiques Trent’s lack of concern over being called “homophobic.”
Transcription:
In one of my recent episodes I said I don’t care if people say I’m homophobic because that word can mean almost anything. Homophobia refers not just to people who have a malicious hatred of those who identify as LGBT, but even to people who express in the most charitable way possible that sexual acts between persons of the same sex are disordered. In my video I even showed how a Catholic school in Canada removed a book from its library that simply articulated these Catholic teachings claiming it was homophobic.
And now Stephen Woodford, the atheist host of Rationality Rules, wants to give me a taste of my own medicine in a video called when atheists act like apologists. So in today’s episode Iam going review his reply to me and show where it fails. So let’s take a look:
The basic argument seems to be that if I don’t like Stephen being an atheist who acts like me, than I shouldn’t like me acting like me. Except, as we will see, Stephen either doesn’t act like me or he does act like me and that’s totally fine.
I didn’t say anything about LGBT people being irrational or dishonest. All I said was their claim that a person with a penis is actually a woman is false. Having a penis is the opposite of being a woman. Stating facts about reality isn’t hateful. If Stephen said he’s not going to refer Jesus as the risen lord because that’s the opposite of what Jesus is, since Jesus is dead, from his perspective, I would say he’s mistaken, not bigoted. It isn’t bigoted to merely say someone has a false belief about reality.
If he want to go one step further and say theists who have access to arguments like his and choose to remain theists are irrational, go ahead. He’s just wrong, not hateful.
I agree saying someone is Christo-phobic for saying Christianity is false is silly just like it’s silly to say someone is transphobic for saying transgender ideology is false. True, a transgender club probably wouldn’t invite me to speak just as a Catholic church wouldn’t invite Stephen to defend on atheism. But I’d be happy to debate him on atheism at a place like the Franciscan university of Steubenville even though transgender associations would never host a debate on their ideology.
Remember Stephen is supposed to be impersonating me, not saying how he really feels about Catholics. But he really believes this. He thinks Christianity is drivel and that it has opposed scientific advancement. And guess what, I’m not offended and most Catholics I know aren’t offended. That’s because we believe in trying to persuade the world to accept our ideas. Unlike many defenders of LGBT ideology, we don’t have an entitled attitude that says people must accept what we believe else they’re bigots.
I miss Stephen Woodford from the 2010’s because back then he got it right: blasphemy laws are bad in a society where we are trying to discover ultimate truths about reality among different ultimate truth claims. So, while this take on blasphemy is supposed to be a caricature of me, that’s how Stephen actually felt just a few years ago, and frankly, I think he still feels this way today:
What Stephen would truly say to someone who complained he was blasphemous is the same thing I would say to someone who says I’m homophobic: I don’t care.
You should be able to tell people truths they don’t want to hear even if those truths upsets them. But guess what, it is usually defenders of LGBT ideology, not Christians, that want to use the power of the state to deprive people of their jobs and businesses just because other people disagree with their sexual morality.
If you want to say my beliefs don’t deserve respect, that’s totally fine. The atheist AC Grayling said “It is time to reverse the prevailing notion that religious commitment is intrinsically deserving of respect.” As an atheist you can’t ridicule Christian beliefs because you say they contradict reality but also say Christians can’t ridicule secular beliefs that contradict reality, like that women can have a penis. Keep in mind I stood up for Stephen a few months ago when he criticized the Catholic Youtuber Kennedy Hall’s bad arguments against the theory of evolution. When we publicly defend a certain view we open ourselves up to criticism, be it charitable or uncharitable and you have to get used to that. And Christianity has been enduring 2,000 years of criticism, some of it violent in nature, and has held up quite well.
Yes, it is what the Catholic Church teaches. The Catechism of the Catholic church says “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.” (CCC 2357)
I think a lot of atheists would be surprised at what Stephen does next because they’d just say, “Yeah the Catholic church as an institution is homophobic. And if you don’t like homophobia, don’t send your kid to a Catholic school and don’t be Catholic. But instead, Stephen tries to argue that somehow this is just a personal prejudice of mine and the Catholic Church actually doesn’t teach this about homosexuality.
And if you’d like to help us continue to teach and defend what the Catholic church teaches, please like this video, subscribe to the channel and support us at trenthornpodcast.com.
And here is what the Pope said recently on 60 minutes clarifying that these blessings are for the people in these relationships since God wants to bless everyone regardless of their sins. However, the Pope was firm that same-sex relationships can’t be blessed because they violate natural law and the law of the Church, which is what this allegedly homophobic textbook said that was removed from a Catholic school.
I’ll also add the translator renders it “given right” but the pope said derecho natural, natural law. Same-sex unions go against natural law, which is what the Catechism says.
And of course, there were reports from last month that the Pope used a slur referring to gay people when he said there were too many gay men in the priesthood.
Next, Stephen makes the argument that I’m bigoted because the Church changed its teaching on slavery and so maybe it will change this teaching again. Even if that were true, that hasn’t happened yet, so Stephen can’t say I’m homophobic but the Catholic church isn’t even though I’m just saying what the Catholic Church teaches.
The first country to outlaw slavery was Catholic France in the 14th century. The leaders of the abolitionist movement were Christians like William Wilberforce. In contrast, consider David Hume, one of the leading atheists of the 18th century. Here’s Stephen praising his insights into morality:
However, Hume also said “I am apt to suspect the negroes and in general all other species of men (for there are four or five different kinds) to be naturally inferior to the whites” and he loaned money for one of his patrons to buy a slave plantation. Hume scholar Felix Waldmann admits that “David Hume was a brilliant philosopher but also a racist involved in slavery”
The Church didn’t teach evolution was false for thousands of years and then change its mind and said it’s true. The Church doesn’t teach on scientific questions. Instead, it said that this new theory of origins doesn’t conflict with the theological truths that God created the world and human beings. If anything, Stephen should be praising the Catholic church for having a theology that is welcoming of scientific discoveries and not antagonistic towards them.
The Church has praised women before John Paul II’s letter on the Dignity of Women in 1988. In Luke 1:48 scripture says all generations will call Mary blessed and there are just as many Catholic female saints as male saints if not more. And recently Pope Francis made clear his position on whether women can be priests or deacons.
This is just an argument from skepticism. The Church was wrong before so maybe it’s wrong now? I could say the same thing to Stephen, science was wrong before about phrenology, a static universe, phlogiston, and a whole host of other pseudoscience’s. So, maybe it’s wrong now about evolution. But science has been right before and the Church has been right before, like when Christianity invented the hospital.
Notice the shift in the goal posts. At first Stephen was trying to show I’m bigoted but now he’s just reduced to saying, “Other Catholics disagree with you so maybe you’re wrong about homosexuality.”
Once again, “I do not care.”
There are atheists who disagree with Stephen on his views of gender. What matters isn’t what other people think. The only thing that matters is what evidence and inference says.
And more importantly, you can’t claim a Catholic like me saying what the Church officially teaches is being homophobic but then say the Catholic Church isn’t homophobic just because other Catholics disagree with Church teaching.
Finally, I want to note that Stephen’s video was called when atheists act like apologists, but don’t forget that Stephen and other atheists like him on YouTube are apologists. He is an apologist for atheism. Some atheists use the term apologist in a pejorative way similar to the term used car salesman, and they only apply the label apologist to religious apologists. But an apologist is just someone who uses arguments to defend a position. There are good and bad apologists for every position, including atheism, so Stephen shouldn’t act like this is unique to Christianity or religion in general.
Instead of using terms like homophobic or Christophobic, we should just engage one another’s ideas, even controversial ones related to sexuality and see which ones make the most sense.
Thank you guys so much for watching and I hope you have a very blessed day.