Tolerance

[ToJesusMyHeart]

She wasn't fired because she IS gay. Simply BEING gay is not sinful. She was fired because she purposefully had a sexual relationship with another woman while working at a Catholic school which says you can't do that. 

[PhuturePriest]

Imagine if you had a facility that taught people the evil of cigarettes, and your head teacher smoked a pack a day. Would you keep that person, or fire that person?

[Guest Raz]

OK. If that is how you believe it to be. She was fired for "being gay". Then please define what "being gay" is? 

 

I'm assuming that you're trying to point out that "being gay" and "engaging in sexual activity" are two different things, which is of course very true. But being human, it is not always easy to resist temptation. We are all tempted into sin in many different ways all the time.

 

This woman was clearly not outspoken against anything the Church taught, she was not in the classroom (or gymnasium  in her case) telling kids that homosexuality was a good thing. She taught there for 19 years knowing full well the Church's stance on homosexuality and never spoke out against it, so obviously she was okay with it all.

 

All of that considered, and taking into account the fact that being around gay people does not make kids gay, there really was no just reason to fire her, except for her sexual orientation.

[Apotheoun]

That's all correct. I just don't think that firing someone is a good way to help them with a disorder and doesn't set a good example for how others should treat homosexuals.

It is certainly a poor idea to allow a person who is publicly living a morally objectionable lifestyle to work for a Catholic institution. To allow a person openly opposed to the Church's teaching to continue in their position will cause public scandal, and that could damage not only the soul of the individual himself, but others who may be harmed by the Church's failure to support the moral norm written into human nature by God Himself.

[CatholicsAreKewl]

People need to stop making disordered passions and desires into identifying characteristics of the human person. No one is gay; instead, some people are afflicted with homosexual desires and inclinations, 

If the research I mentioned about homosexuality starting in the womb is accurate, how would this change your views? I think if someone is born a certain way, we can identify them as such... unless they don't like that. Then that'd be kind of weird.

 

The call to celibacy is something to be respected, true. However, I don't know if it's fair to tell people who have been loyal to an organization for so long that they have to adopt a celibate lifestyle. An organizations can hire and fire whoever they want, don't get me wrong. I just think it's somewhat irrelevant. 

Edited April 25, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl

[Apotheoun]

If the research I mentioned about homosexuality starting in the womb is accurate, would this change your views? The call to celibacy is something to be respected, true. However, I don't know if it's fair to tell people who have been loyal to an organization for so long that they have to adopt a celibate lifestyle. An organizations can hire and fire whoever they want, don't get me wrong. I just think it's somewhat irrelevant. 

The homosexual condition has its origin, like all disorder passions, in the ancestral sin. Christians are - with the aid of God's grace - to resist all the disordered passions that may afflict them, and that is true whether the disorder is homosexual in nature or if it is a compulsive urge to steal things from other people. The passions are to be controlled by grace and right reason.

Edited April 25, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Guest Raz]

Imagine if you had a facility that taught people the evil of cigarettes, and your head teacher smoked a pack a day. Would you keep that person, or fire that person?

 

Imagine you are the head of a school that teaches people the good of Christ, and you heard one of your teachers was living in sin, would you show your students how to help that person, or would you simply cut them out of your life and tell your students that its the right thing to do?

 

Also, this was a physical education teacher. Not a head teacher. Not a religion teacher.

[4588686]

She wasn't fired because she IS gay. Simply BEING gay is not sinful. She was fired because she purposefully had a sexual relationship with another woman while working at a Catholic school which says you can't do that. 

 

 

Which sex acts did they perform?  

[PhuturePriest]

Imagine you are the head of a school that teaches people the good of Christ, and you heard one of your teachers was living in sin, would you show your students how to help that person, or would you simply cut them out of your life and tell your students that its the right thing to do?

 

Also, this was a physical education teacher. Not a head teacher. Not a religion teacher.

 

The good of Christ is also firm and sometimes harsh. Remember when Christ was speaking quite blankly and uncharitably to a woman in the Gospel (I'm not a biblical scholar, so I can't cite verses or books well)? In the beginning, a quote from Venerable Fulton J. Sheen was used. It's funny he should be mentioned, because once he was saying Mass, and afterwards he was with the altar boys as they took off their vestments, when suddenly a man walked into the church and said "Your excellency, your excellency! I just came back from the East, and I have written a book combining the best of Catholicism with the best of the Eastern teachings!" Archbishop Fulton Sheen turned around, pointed his finger at him, and exclaimed "Get out! The Holy Mother Church is created by God and is perfect the way it is, I will not have you polluting it, get out!" He wasn't a bad man. He had just written a heretical book is all. Fulton Sheen could have conversed with him and beat him to the floor with theology, but he didn't. Instead, he told him firmly to get out of the church and not show his face.

Edited April 25, 2013 by FuturePriest387

[CatholicsAreKewl]

The homosexual condition has its origin, like all disorder passions, in the ancestral sin. Christians are - with the aid of God's grace - to resist all the disordered passions that may afflict them, and that is true whether the disorder is homosexual in nature or if it is a compulsive urge to steal things from other people. The passions are to be controlled by grace and right reason.

That's a bit different. It would be very hard to argue someone is born a Kleptomaniac. Let's look at psychopathy instead. The brain of a psychopath is actually wired differently than yours or mine. Such a person lacks empathy, explaining why an estimated 20-30 percent of the prison population is believed to be psychopathic. Psychopaths are marked by egocentricity, an incapacity for love, and an inability for feel remorse for their actions.  Wasn't it St. Augustine that said that self-love is the root of all sin? In that case, these people's lives revolve around sin. Many of those suffering from psychopathy end up depressed due to their failure to hold steady relationships and their inability to control their behaviors. Can we really use the fall of man to explain something like this? 

Edited April 25, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl

[Basilisa Marie]

I'm confused as to why the school hired her in the first place if they knew she was Methodist.  I think it's incredibly tacky that an "anonymous parent" called the school after reading about their kid's teacher IN THE OBITUARIES.  As far as we know, no one knew the teacher was gay or in a long-term relationship, so the teacher was doing the right thing by keeping her sex life to herself.  Plus we don't know what went down between the principal and the teacher. Maybe they told her they'd give her a great recommendation despite having to let her go. I sure as heck hope that the school routinely fires any teacher that admits to using birth control, having premarital sex, or not attending Sunday Mass.

 

I don't fault the school for letting her go, but I think the "anonymous parent" was wrong to deprive the teacher of her livelihood if she wasn't parading around that she wasn't following Church teaching.  

Edited April 25, 2013 by Basilisa Marie

[Guest Raz]

The good of Christ is also firm and sometimes harsh. Remember when Christ was speaking quite blankly and uncharitably to a woman in the Gospel (I'm not a biblical scholar, so I can't cite verses or books well)? In the beginning, a quote from Venerable Fulton J. Sheen was used. It's funny he should be mentioned, because once he was saying Mass, and afterwards he was with the altar boys as they took off their vestments, when suddenly a man walked into the church and said "Your excellency, your excellency! I just came back from the East, and I have written a book combining the best of Catholicism with the best of the Eastern teachings!" Archbishop Fulton Sheen turned around, pointed his finger at him, and exclaimed "Get out! The Holy Mother Church is created by God and is perfect the way it is, I will not have you polluting it, get out!" He wasn't a bad man. He had just written a heretical book is all. Fulton Sheen could have conversed with him and beat him to the floor with theology, but he didn't. Instead, he told him firmly to get out of the church and not show his face.

 

Christ spoke to a lot of people, can you be more specific?

 

And you're right, Fulton should have conversed with the man. Two wrongs don't make a right.

[PhuturePriest]

Christ spoke to a lot of people, can you be more specific?

 

And you're right, Fulton should have conversed with the man. Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

I'm afraid I can't be more specific. He said something about giving the scraps from the table to the dogs or something, if that rings a bell.

 

You're wrong: I never said he should have conversed with him. I think he handled the situation quite nicely. Did Jesus converse when he went into the Temple and he saw the men ripping off the poor by making outrageous prices? No. He made a whip and whipped them out of there, flipping tables and yelling as he did so. Was that wrong of Jesus?

[Guest Raz]

I'm confused as to why the school hired her in the first place if they knew she was Methodist.  I think it's incredibly tacky that an "anonymous parent" called the school after reading about their kid's teacher IN THE OBITUARIES.  As far as we know, no one knew the teacher was gay or in a long-term relationship, so the teacher was doing the right thing by keeping her sex life to herself.  Plus we don't know what went down between the principal and the teacher. Maybe they told her they'd give her a great recommendation despite having to let her go. I sure as heck hope that the school routinely fires any teacher that admits to using birth control, having premarital sex, or not attending Sunday Mass.

 

I don't fault the school for letting her go, but I think the "anonymous parent" was wrong to deprive the teacher of her livelihood if she wasn't parading around that she wasn't following Church teaching.  

 

Actually we do know what went down. There is a video interview with the woman where she explains exactly what happens.

[Guest Raz]

I'm afraid I can't be more specific. He said something about giving the scraps from the table to the dogs or something, if that rings a bell.

 

You're wrong: I never said he should have conversed with him. I think he handled the situation quite nicely. Did Jesus converse when he went into the Temple and he saw the men ripping off the poor by making outrageous prices? No. He made a whip and whipped them out of there, flipping tables and yelling as he did so. Was that wrong of Jesus?

 

Ah sorry, I misread your "could" as "should".

 

Jesus flipped the tables because those men were turning the temple into a "den of robbers", creating an order that was not in line with his teachings. This teacher was doing no such thing. She was not teaching kids that homosexuality was good. The situations are entirely different so that comparison doesn't hold much water. If she was outspoken against the church's stance on homosexuality then sure, flip all the tables you like, but that's not what she was doing.