Tolerance

[Ice_nine]

it would be nice I think, while applauding the school's decision to uphold moral values (although did that mean they condone being a methodist? tsk tsk), it would be nice to see some compassion for a woman whose mom just died and who just lost what she probably thought will be a stable job. I mean I would hope that if I lost my job that I relied on, even because I did something stupid or because I wasn't having all that moral instruction thrown at me because of my own stubbornness, that you guys wouldn't be like "well you %^&*d up, sucks 4 u"

 

Now granted this woman isn't personally here so it's different in that respect. And I'm not saying there isn't any compassion but I haven't seen any "I'll pray for this woman type stuff" unless I missed it over all the other noise, which is possible.

 

 

Here's where I may get a little sentimental. Apologies in advance. My main point has alrady been spoken this is just rambling:

 

I don't know can't we speak the truth while being meek and humble as well? I know that's a tall order, but I don't think taking the reactionary stance just to balance out the rabid free loving sex hippies is ideal. In a way I think that's letting the world dictate how we preach the gospel. "Well the world is so morally bankrupt it doesn't even see anything wrong with sin, we must therefore not play around and denounce it in the strongest terms!" Well I don't quite agree with the last part of that sentence, or I don't think the method of being an insensitive hard-liner is the strongest or most effective denunciation.

 

 

People who are gay usually see their orientation as an issue of identity, and unfortunately I think the church and her people imply this concept although it hasn't always been this way, (There's a theory about how sexual-orientation was more or less constructed which I find compelling but that's a story for another day) and I don't believe it has to be an issue of identity, but still phriends, you gotta understand that people who identify as gay think that it's something intrinsic, some fixed, indelible thing inside that dictates who they are in the deepest sense. Now I believe the destiny of the human person, who God created people to be, does not include this thing called sexual orientation (in fact I think it's asinine) but I still think we need to be sensitive to the perception that gay people, and society at large, has about this issue.

 

Instead of just spitting words about how homosex is an unacceptable moral evil (true story bro), we could talk more about how Christ can set us free from even the most vile passions and how these passions don't define us or dictate the love with which God looks upon us. How about we also stop subtly implying that being gay is somehow worse of a disordered passion than wanting to bang everything with a pulse among other sexual sins. At the core all sexual sin is masturbatory right, where the chief end of the act is base pleasure rather than a self-giving love yadda yadda you've heard it before. Just be like yeah so you're gay and that's a disordered desire but congratulations pretty much everyone deals with disordered passions that aren't qualatatively different so yay! No need to feel any worse than anyone else. So let's pick up our crosses and fight evil together hooray! :dance5:  *bro hug

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry guys that I"m a little corny but I am EXTREMELY sleep deprived, but I stand by this post in my semi-drunken state.

[Guest Raz]

I would have to disagree with you. Catholic communities I've come in contact with care way too much about public scandal. The public has never liked Catholics. It confuses me when anything is decided based on this at all. I can understand that the school could require everyone to follow Catholic moral law in order to be good role models for the students. However, that would mean that all of the teachers from my former school, including at least half of the priests, would have to be fired. 

 

Absolutely right on all counts.

 

Teachers, priests, and some cardinals to boot.

Edited April 26, 2013 by Raz

[PadrePioOfPietrelcino]

 

 

Now granted this woman isn't personally here so it's different in that respect. And I'm not saying there isn't any compassion but I haven't seen any "I'll pray for this woman type stuff" unless I missed it over all the other noise, which is possible.

 

You have a valid point here. I didn't post my prayers, because well this was the Debate table and I didn't want to side track the debate. That said, we should always make sure we are praying for those who have failed in what they have done or failed to do, just as we ask for prayers at the beginning of Mass. I do pray that she finds comfort, peace and instruction in her heart for all of the difficulties she is facing.

[organwerke]

I think the parent was perfectly within his or her rights as a parent. It is not the fault of the parent that the teacher withheld information from the school about the objectively immoral lifestyle she had chosen to live. Every contract I signed with the Catholic schools I worked for in the past had a morals clause in it, and it also made it clear that I could be let go for violating Catholic moral principles. What I read in the article indicates that the school in question likewise has a morals clause. It is sad that the teacher chose to live a life in contradiction to the moral norm.

 

I wouldn't be so sure on this.

What appalled me in this news wasn't the fact that she was hired, but that this happened after 19 years she was working at that school.

I would ask the school to show the proof of the clause she broke.

I have worked in catholic schools too but  I didn't have moral clauses in the contract so it is not true that every catholic school has these moral clauses in the contract and we cannot be sure this school had until we see it. I find really hard in fact to believe that the school had it, when she taught for 19 year and no one knew anything about this situation.

And oh, surely the fact that the parent chose to remain anonymus is something we should praise as an act of courage and honesty!

Edited April 27, 2013 by organwerke

[Apotheoun]

Really? From my understanding, The cause of Kleptomania is disputed. I don't know if people are necessarily born Kleptomaniacs. I think they might be predisposed to become Kleptomaniacs. That would still be at a different level than having your sexual preferences decided in the womb.  I'm more than happy to be corrected if I'm wrong. 

The cause (or causes) of the homosexual condition is disputed too, but my point stands, because even if there were some genetic cause to the homosexual disorder, homosexual activity (like stealing, pedophilia, adultery, etc.) would still be immoral, and the condition itself would not be something that could form the basis of "rights."

Edited April 27, 2013 by Apotheoun

[CatholicsAreKewl]

 

Sorry guys that I"m a little corny but I am EXTREMELY sleep deprived, but I stand by this post in my semi-drunken state.

You should be drunk off of the spirit, not off of alcohol or sleep deprivation. 

[Apotheoun]

 

I would have to disagree with you. Catholic communities I've come in contact with care way too much about public scandal. The public has never liked Catholics. It confuses me when anything is decided based on this at all. I can understand that the school could require everyone to follow Catholic moral law in order to be good role models for the students. However, that would mean that all of the teachers from my former school, including at least half of the priests, would have to be fired. 

I am not talking about public scandal among non-Catholics. Who really cares what a non-Catholic thinks about the Church? I don't. I am concerned about the scandal that can be caused among the faithful, and the possible damage that could cause to the faith of Church members.

Edited April 27, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

I wouldn't be so sure on this.

What appalled me in this news wasn't the fact that she was hired, but that this happened after 19 years she was working at that school.

I would ask the school to show the proof of the clause she broke.

I have worked in catholic schools too but  I didn't have moral clauses in the contract so it is not true that every catholic school has these moral clauses in the contract and we cannot be sure this school had until we see it. I find really hard in fact to believe that the school had it, when she taught for 19 year and no one knew anything about this situation.

And oh, surely the fact that the parent chose to remain anonymus is something we should praise as an act of courage and honesty!

I have worked at Catholics schools, and parents have every right to say something if a person is a bad moral influence on their children. God gives children to the care of their parents primarily and only secondarily to the Church as a whole.

[Apotheoun]

I have worked in catholic schools too but  I didn't have moral clauses in the contract so it is not true that every catholic school has these moral clauses in the contract and we cannot be sure this school had until we see it. I find really hard in fact to believe that the school had it, when she taught for 19 year and no one knew anything about this situation.

And oh, surely the fact that the parent chose to remain anonymus is something we should praise as an act of courage and honesty!

Evidently the schools you worked at were derelict in their duty to be Catholic. I have NEVER seen a contract that lacked a morals clause, and now things are even more stringent (i.e., after the pedophile scandal in the Church). 

 

As far as the teacher having worked at the school for 19 years is concerned, perhaps she lied to the school for 19 years, which just adds to the necessity of firing her. If she didn't lie to the school and the administrators knew that she was living an immoral lifestyle and they did nothing, then those individuals should also be let go, because they failed to enforce the contract.

 

The diocese in which I live, which is pretty liberal on a lot of issues, has a zero tolerance for breaking the morals clause and they are very concerned about maintaining the proper atmosphere for the students.

Edited April 27, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

I find it amazing that this woman wants to force the school to rehire her when she is living a lifestyle that the Church openly condemns as contrary to the moral law and the good of the human person. She should be honest enough to move on and get a job at a Methodist school. The United Methodist Church (large parts of it at least) accepts homosexual activity as normal and moral.

Edited April 27, 2013 by Apotheoun

[CatholicsAreKewl]

The cause (or causes) of the homosexual condition is disputed too, but my point stands, because even if there were some genetic cause to the homosexual disorder, homosexual activity (like stealing, pedophilia, adultery, etc.) would still be immoral, and the condition itself would not be something that could form the basis of "rights."

I believe there is more evidence for homosexuality occurring in the womb than there is for kleptomania being a disorder people are born with. Also, I wasn't talking about things like gay marriage. I just thought it might be harsh to kick someone out of an institute for acting on their sexual preferences in private if those preferences are natural to them. Regardless, the schools can do what they like. I'm still interested in your views of original sin and how they would change if gayness was caused in the womb (it's not really "genetic" in this case. I don't believe gayness is genetic). I'm particularly picking on this because if some believe gayness is a disorder, then there seems to be a weird way of dealing with it. From my understanding, if I see someone with OCD or Cancer, I wouldn't tell them, "Hey, your condition was caused by the fall of man and you can be helped if you seek God's intervention." That's insulting. Why, then, do we use this sort of language when talking about gayness or gay inclinations? If we really believe it's a disorder, shouldn't we treat it as such? Instead of focusing on the sins of those involved, shouldn't we focus on ways of helping them cope with this? Calling gayness a disordered and sinful nature seems a bit counterproductive. It can also lead to gay Catholics hiding problems they're dealing with in fear that others will judge them. 

Edited April 27, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl

[organwerke]

Evidently the schools you worked at were derelict in their duty to be Catholic. I have NEVER seen a contract that lacked a morals clause, and now things are even more stringent (i.e., after the pedophile scandal in the Church). 

 

As far as the teacher having worked at the school for 19 years is concerned, perhaps she lied to the school for 19 years, which just adds to the necessity of firing her. If she didn't lie to the school and the administrators knew that she was living an immoral lifestyle and they did nothing, then those individuals should also be let go, because they failed to enforce the contract.

 

The diocese in which I live, which is pretty liberal on a lot of issues, has a zero tolerance for breaking the morals clause and they are very concerned about maintaining the proper atmosphere for the students.

 

As far as the teacher having worked at the school for 19 years is concerned, perhaps she lied to the school for 19 years

 

Well, perhaps she did, or perhaps she simply did not tell a thing that no one asked her. And it is possible that no one in the school knew of the situation because no one asked and she did not tell anyone until that day at the obituary. Have you the proofs that things have gone one way or another? Until that you can't do any assumptions.

Then the fact that the schools where I worked were derelict simply shows that there are catholic schools that are, so who tells you this school too is not another of them? In particular, if you consider that she was employed 19 years ago, it is not so impossible that this is the case.

[organwerke]

I have worked at Catholics schools, and parents have every right to say something if a person is a bad moral influence on their children. God gives children to the care of their parents primarily and only secondarily to the Church as a whole.

 

I stand up for what I said.

Parents have the right to say what they want, but I can't understand why parents should choose to be anonymous if they simply do their right.

Edited April 27, 2013 by organwerke

[CatholicsAreKewl]

I am not talking about public scandal among non-Catholics. Who really cares what a non-Catholic thinks about the Church? I don't. I am concerned about the scandal that can be caused among the faithful, and the possible damage that could cause to the faith of Church members.

Attempting to prevent public scandal can actually have the opposite effect. 

Edited April 27, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl

[PadrePioOfPietrelcino]

Attempting to prevent public scandal can actually have the opposite effect. 

They already clarified, it's not a question of trying to prevent PUBLIC scandal. It's about allowing scandalous behavior in our Catholic Schools. The Scandal trying to be prevented is among the faithful Catholics who EXPECT a Catholic Institution to have a Catholic environment with CATHOLIC STANDARDS. What NBC, ABC, or any other Protestant, Charismatic, Non-Denomination Discovery Church thinks is irrelevant. To think their opinion is scandal is a misunderstanding of scandal being used in this case.