Cosmos-Liturgy-Sex

A San Francisco man has filed a lawsuit against a Daughters of Charity Catholic hospital for their part in refusing to allow plastic surgeons to perform “transgender” type surgeries at their facility. According to the man, who ironically feels he no longer needs surgery to increase his breast size, is filing the discrimination case against the Catholic hospital because only women are considered as acceptable patients for breast augmentations. Despite there being other hospitals in the area which would allow such a man to have any type of surgery his little ole heart desired, he and his opportunistic attorney are hellbent on establishing a precedent which would diminish the right of Catholic Hospitals to their religious freedom and to their moral obligation to remain in accord with the Catholic faith. I suspect that we are dealing with a delusional man whose monumental sense of entitlement makes him think that his dysfunctional “personal preference”–getting bigger boobs at the Catholic hospital of his choice–supersedes the right to religious freedom of an entire Hospital system to keep from compromising the core values of their faith.

While claiming the status of victim and blaming others for all of their misery, it’s typical to establish some sort of personal, moral superiority in order to validate a sense of value and self-worth, while simultaneously disowning any personal responsibility or concerns over their irrational expectations in seeking to satisfy their distorted view of justice and fairness. The miserable souls who see every inequality as a failure that must be corrected and mistakenly believe they have the unalienable right to pursue happiness at the expense of the rights of others are sorely in need of a wakeup call.  They need to recognize the reality that in many cases of victim-hood there are varying degrees of guilt and responsibility that must be assumed by the victim.

For whatever reason, there’s been a basic assumption in our culture and legal system that there is always one party who is 100% guilty and completely responsible for an injustice, while the other party is always assumed to be totally innocent. While that may be true in cases which involve children and random acts of violence, many other cases are a little more complex. For example, one side of the spectrum are victims who continue to put themselves in positions of being victimized and therefore share varying degrees of the responsibility for their victim-hood and on the other side are those who suffer from lung disease from a life of cigarette smoking that share 100% of the responsibility for their position in life.

Victim-hood is a way of life as the actions of self described victims usually provide enough rewards and benefits to sustain the victim type behaviors. In other words, as long as the cost of being a victim is less than its benefit, or when a victim’s behavior is rewarded, the individual will maintain the behavior. While the costs and suffering of victims are apparent, the benefits are much more subtle and many times - subconscious. Examples include things like a right to empathy and pity that is free from responsibility or accountability. They may have a feeling of self righteousness, or even a sense of relief as their bad self is punished. This is why in dealing with these folks one needs to walk a fine line between empathy and collusion.

Although authentic victims should never take total responsibility for their suffering, they must develop an understanding of how they may contribute to their own victimization. We must treat these individuals with sincere empathy with the understanding that what we see is many times a self-destructive behavior which often is contributed to because of events in their past - but to mollycoddle them and allow their self- destructive behaviors to continue will not only be the cause of their own life of misery, but it will also contribute to a mindset which may have negative eternal consequences.

Share on Facebook