From The Politics of the Cross:
Lately, we have heard that Evangelicals and Catholics (and Muslims, Orthodox Jews and most serious adherants of other world religions, not to mention quite a few agnostic parents, - but I digress) are "scapegoating" homosexuals. This argument presupposes that everyone has already accepted heterosexuals living together without being married as perfectly fine and dandy and that no one justifiably criticizes a married person for sleeping with someone other than his/her spouse anymore. Sexual faithfulness is "medieval" (although why medieval is automatically "bad" seems confusing to me, especially to self-professed "relativists" - but I digress). The whole "scapegoating" argument seems to be premised on "discrimination," that is, that heterosexual behaviour outside marriage is fine but homosexual behaviour is not.
Now, the hypocrisy of that position is obvious and odius. But the trouble is, I've never met anyone who actually says that heterosexual promiscuity is OK but homosexuality behaviour is not. The whole rhetorical gambit is based on the speaker assuming that "everyone" has now accepted fornication and adultery and the argument moves on before anyone notices that, actually, the people against homosexual behaviour are also against fornication and adultery too and so are not in the least hypocritical. And the last time I looked it up in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Church was still affirming the Ten Commandments just as it always has.
For more social conservative news check out BigBlueWave.ca