Tolerance

[Papist]

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.

 

According to a contract between the Columbus diocese and the Central Ohio Association of Catholic Educators, teachers can be terminated for "immorality" or "serious unethical conduct."

 

 

If Miss Hale knew this, which she should have since she was an employee of 19 years, she knew the risk of your conduct. For 19 years, her conduct was not known. Hence, no action taken against her. But when her conduct was public (i.e. known) her termination is not unjust. Perhaps could have been carried out better....I don't know. The article lacks much details.

 

and speaking of tolerance, http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archbishop-prays-while-topless-gay-activists-shout-curses-and-douse-him-wit

[Apotheoun]

The parents who came to the Catholic school where I served as Vice Principal a few years ago were looking for an orthodox school. If the administration of the school had not enforced Catholic morals we would have lost a lot of students. Moreover, as I see it, it is a form of false advertising to call a school Catholic while simultaneously publicly endorsing or openly allowing immoral practices as if there is no consequence to one's actions.

Edited April 25, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Papist]

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.

 

I missed the part in the article that the diocese refused helping her. Or is the only way to help her is to put head in sand (take no action) and allow her to keep teaching?

[dominicansoul]

and speaking of tolerance, http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archbishop-prays-while-topless-gay-activists-shout-curses-and-douse-him-wit

 

those rabid lesbians had every justifiable right, after all the intolerant archbishop was preaching against sin! :|

 

(thank God it wasn't acid they threw on him...)

 

 

 

As far as this thread, I don't think we should be so quick as to condemn the diocese.  Do we really know every minute detail of what went down?  We can't know it by reading only one side of the story.  And I find it sad to speculate in such ways as to paint the diocese as the big bad wolf...

Edited April 25, 2013 by dominicansoul

[Apotheoun]

If Miss Hale knew this, which she should have since she was an employee of 19 years, she knew the risk of your conduct. For 19 years, her conduct was not known. Hence, no action taken against her. But when her conduct was public (i.e. known) her termination is not unjust. Perhaps could have been carried out better....I don't know. The article lacks much details.

 

and speaking of tolerance, http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archbishop-prays-while-topless-gay-activists-shout-curses-and-douse-him-wit

The world is truly a morally sick place, and the only cure is Christ.

[hotpink]

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.

 

Raz,

 

Again what world are you living in?

 

They did not handcuff her and escort her off the premisis with an armed guard.

They did not say she was a danger to students physically (she's not)

 

The school did the right thing by the teacher by being honest with her firing.  Charity.

 

There is no word anywhere in the article that said she is forbidden to speak to students.  There's nothing that she's forbidden to go to Church.   They are, however, stopping her from being in a position of authority at a Catholic school.

 

Like I stated before, what if this was a poligimist case?  How would you feel then.  And don't say it's a straw man beucase I KNOW practicing poligimasts.

[hotpink]

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.

 

Raz,

 

Again what world are you living in?

 

They did not handcuff her and escort her off the premisis with an armed guard.

They did not say she was a danger to students physically (she's not)

 

The school did the right thing by the teacher by being honest with her firing.  Charity.

 

There is no word anywhere in the article that said she is forbidden to speak to students.  There's nothing that she's forbidden to go to Church.   They are, however, stopping her from being in a position of authority at a Catholic school.

 

Like I stated before, what if this was a poligimist case?  How would you feel then.  And don't say it's a straw man beucase I KNOW practicing poligimasts.

[MissScripture]

those rabid lesbians had every justifiable right, after all the intolerant archbishop was preaching against sin! :|

(thank God it wasn't acid they threw on him...)



As far as this thread, I don't think we should be so quick as to condemn the diocese. Do we really know every minute detail of what went down? We can't know it by reading only one side of the story. And I find it sad to speculate in such ways as to paint the diocese as the big bad wolf...

Especially since the diocese most likely is very limited in what they can say, legally.

[Guest Raz]

Raz,

 

Again what world are you living in?

 

They did not handcuff her and escort her off the premisis with an armed guard.

They did not say she was a danger to students physically (she's not)

 

The school did the right thing by the teacher by being honest with her firing.  Charity.

 

There is no word anywhere in the article that said she is forbidden to speak to students.  There's nothing that she's forbidden to go to Church.   They are, however, stopping her from being in a position of authority at a Catholic school.

 

Like I stated before, what if this was a poligimist case?  How would you feel then.  And don't say it's a straw man beucase I KNOW practicing poligimasts.

 

If she actually was teaching anything that conflicted with catholic doctrine then they would have been well within their right to fire her. Same goes for a poligimist, or anything else.

 

Of course they didn't hand cuff her and escort her off the premises, she is a totally reasonable woman and that wasn't necessary at all. She was simply handed a note, was terminated, and since she is a well mannered respectable adult she left the campus without conflict.

 

By firing her they are removing her professional interaction with her students, which had been a part of her life for almost 20 years. Students have rallied on her side and have continued to see her, but she will miss out on meeting new students coming into the school as time goes on, and mroe importantly, those new students will miss out on a great teacher with 19+ years of experience, it's a loss for all parties involved. The lesson we're learning from these students is that the school did teach them something quite well, to love everyone and support their livelihood (not they're lifestyle, mind you, they're livelihood). The students that have gathered on her side (and there are many) are not supporting her because they believe homosexuality is okay, they're supporting her becuase they believe that she was a good teacher and a good person who deserves the job she had.

 

I do believe the school and diocese was within their rights to fire her, I just don't think every right needs to be exercised to it's full extent in every circumstance. There needs to be room for reasonability if we are going to show the world the difference between tolerating persons and verses principles.

[hotpink]

If she actually was teaching anything that conflicted with catholic doctrine then they would have been well within their right to fire her. Same goes for a poligimist, or anything else.

 

Of course they didn't hand cuff her and escort her off the premises, she is a totally reasonable woman and that wasn't necessary at all. She was simply handed a note, was terminated, and since she is a well mannered respectable adult she left the campus without conflict.

 

By firing her they are removing her professional interaction with her students, which had been a part of her life for almost 20 years. Students have rallied on her side and have continued to see her, but she will miss out on meeting new students coming into the school as time goes on, and mroe importantly, those new students will miss out on a great teacher with 19+ years of experience, it's a loss for all parties involved. The lesson we're learning from these students is that the school did teach them something quite well, to love everyone and support their livelihood (not they're lifestyle, mind you, they're livelihood). The students that have gathered on her side (and there are many) are not supporting her because they believe homosexuality is okay, they're supporting her becuase they believe that she was a good teacher and a good person who deserves the job she had.

 

I do believe the school and diocese was within their rights to fire her, I just don't think every right needs to be exercised to it's full extent in every circumstance. There needs to be room for reasonability if we are going to show the world the difference between tolerating persons and verses principles.

 

She didn't loose her teaching certificate!  She can go teach elsewhere.  Is it sad that the school can't have her?  Sure, but that's HER decision to co-habitate.  Again, that's what I'm against.  Co-habitation destroys marriage, and either straight or gay or pologimious it's not good.

 

And regardless of WHAT she is teaching she's still in a position of athortiy.  The choices we make deeply affect us.  The fact that she had allowed her actions, which are against the Catholic Church, to be known does affect her teaching. We cannot live separate lives completely and fully.

 

Oh, and no one, not even the Pope "deserves" their job.

[Guest Raz]

If she actually was teaching anything that conflicted with catholic doctrine then they would have been well within their right to fire her. Same goes for a poligimist, or anything else.

 

EDIT: If she actually was teaching anything that conflicted with catholic doctrine then they would have been more justified in their action of firing her. Same goes for a poligimist, or anything else.

 

I realized I used accidentally used some conflicting language in that past post, this is what I meant to say (writing quickly at work, as I'm sure we all are haha).

Edited April 25, 2013 by Raz

[Guest Raz]

She didn't loose her teaching certificate!  She can go teach elsewhere.  Is it sad that the school can't have her?  Sure, but that's HER decision to co-habitate.  Again, that's what I'm against.  Co-habitation destroys marriage, and either straight or gay or pologimious it's not good.

 

And regardless of WHAT she is teaching she's still in a position of athortiy.  The choices we make deeply affect us.  The fact that she had allowed her actions, which are against the Catholic Church, to be known does affect her teaching. We cannot live separate lives completely and fully.

 

Oh, and no one, not even the Pope "deserves" their job.

 

The actions that the students have taken proves that the public knowledge of her homosexuality in no way changes the students view on homosexuality. So her being in that position did not negatively impact the school's and church's teaching on the matter.

 

Finding a job is not super easy, especially in this economy. She may have to relocate. She will very likely have to take a pay reduction. This was a life altering action no matter how you look at it.

[PadrePioOfPietrelcino]

The Church also teaches to love thy neighbor as thyself. To treat others with respect, and tolerance. If they wanted to fire her homosexuality, Id' be fine with that. Unfortunately that's impossible. I refer you to the quote I started  the article with. The diocese had a choice, they could uphold the teaching that Jesus told us was the most important of all, or make a stand against homosexuality by directly affecting the livelihood of this woman. They chose the latter, and I am dissappointed.

 

 

The Scriptures clearly teach us that those in positions of authority are to be thoroughly tested, as well, Did Jesus also not warn that if someone was to lead even the least of the little ones astray it is better to have a millstone tied around the neck and cast into the sea? As a teacher it IS a position of not just authority but teaching authority at that. They are to be held to a high level of expectations especially when working as a teacher for the Church. The value of the person herself is not a question, tolerance for her is not a question, but should we be intolerant of someone working in our schools who publically denounce key ideas of the faith with their actions? YES. If she was able to keep her lifestyle private and NOT a public issue, which apparently she had done for 19 years, then I'm sure it would have stayed a non-public issue. BUT, she chose by her own actions to bring her lifestyle into the public view as such there are public ramifications of that. Just because the Church has deemed somebody an inappropriate candidate right now for a particular ministry or role in the Church right now does not mean the Church does not love them and want to support them.

[Guest Raz]

The Scriptures clearly teach us that those in positions of authority are to be thoroughly tested, as well, Did Jesus also not warn that if someone was to lead even the least of the little ones astray it is better to have a millstone tied around the neck and cast into the sea? As a teacher it IS a position of not just authority but teaching authority at that. They are to be held to a high level of expectations especially when working as a teacher for the Church. The value of the person herself is not a question, tolerance for her is not a question, but should we be intolerant of someone working in our schools who publically denounce key ideas of the faith with their actions? YES. If she was able to keep her lifestyle private and NOT a public issue, which apparently she had done for 19 years, then I'm sure it would have stayed a non-public issue. BUT, she chose by her own actions to bring her lifestyle into the public view as such there are public ramifications of that. Just because the Church has deemed somebody an inappropriate candidate right now for a particular ministry or role in the Church right now does not mean the Church does not love them and want to support them.

 

 

Once again, this teacher was not leading anyone astray as we can see by the actions of the students.

 

You are right that if it wasn't made public it wouldn't be an issue but I don't really like the idea of "we won't punish you as long as it stays a secret." That's what some bishops did for child molestors working in their parish and it's really just not a very good way to deal with anything. Cardinal Mahony of California covered up child molestations for decades, did they strip him of his authority? No. They simply urged him not to go to conclave, advice which he of course ignored. What message does that send about the teaching of the Catholic church? It's okay to have an authority figure in the form of a Cardinal who covers up child molestation but it's not okay to have an authority figure in the form of a gym teacher who engages in homosexual acts? Is the latter really less forgivable than the former?

 

It's no wonder that many people hold the church in such low regard when these are the messages were sending to the world through our actions. We are better than this.

Edited April 25, 2013 by Raz

[BG45]

In before it gets moved to Debate Table

 

Boy I sure called that one....