Veritas Posted February 15, 2008 Share Posted February 15, 2008 (edited) [quote name='Deb' post='1463427' date='Feb 15 2008, 01:52 PM']Please, you can't tell me that the rest of the Catholic world would consider this a valid reason to toss an official out of a game. If you can't play like the other boys, then you don't play at all. It is not self-contraditory at all and has nothing to do with the dictates of the Catholic Faith. It is just anal.[/quote] + Actually, this isn't about Catholic or non-Catholic. It's about religious freedom and the rights of conscience perhaps even the rights of assembly and self determination. The claim, "if you can't play like the other boys, you don't play" begets the question, where do we draw the line? Now, if the coalition decides this presence of male and female refs is non-negotiable, they have the right to do so, and this group has the right to exclude themselves. But then, this team also has the right to form their own league with all men or all women. * May I request the exclusion of graphic, unpleasant terms in the future? They add nothing to your argument. Edited February 15, 2008 by Veritas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercy me Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 BUt we are not talking about men. We are talking about boys, high school boys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 [quote name='Mercy me' post='1463774' date='Feb 15 2008, 10:00 PM']BUt we are not talking about men. We are talking about boys, high school boys.[/quote] And high school kids have been taught by nuns for a very long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercy me Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 Exactly! And boys are expected to obey their elders. The same is not true of men who are expected to lead families. Their position doesn't make sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 I doubt FoxNews has any reason to report this story other than to show how absurd this religious fanatics are. I hardly care about this supposedly news worthy story, and I care even less about FoxNews' perspective on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercy me Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 I think that it is newsworthy. Look at the discussion it has sparked. As to a slant on the story it seemed to me to be rather straight down the middle. Trust me I expect a slant when it comes to media and religion. They didn't try to tar all Catholics with this and the tone was, in my opinion, fair. Fox has been far and away the least biased of all the major media sources when it comes to the church. They even have a weekly opinion column written by a priest in Rome, Father Jonathan Morris a Legionary of Christ. Hardly, the type of column you expect from a major media source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excelsior1027 Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 This story just showed up over on the American Papist blog. The post brings up another important side to the story. Here be the link: [url="http://www.americanpapist.com/2008/02/commentary-sspx-hs-refuses-to-allow.html"]http://www.americanpapist.com/2008/02/comm...s-to-allow.html[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 In my opinion, the most interesting and best part of the article: [quote]Campbell did not return phone calls seeking comment Wednesday. However, she told The Kansas City Star that she was "dumbfounded" by the incident but that she is not angry at the school. She said she does not want the situation to go any further than it already has. "This issue was going to come up eventually," said Campbell, 49, a retired Albuquerque, N.M., police officer who now lives in Ozawkie, Kan. "I just happened to be the person who was there this time. "It's kind of a sticky situation. It needs to be looked at carefully, slowly, with all the facts."[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veritas Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 + Here's what American Papist has to say about the other side: There is, however, like there typically is in these cases, another side to this story. Consider, for instance, the testimony of this person who has direct contact with the situation: To all of those who think this is a load of backward Kansas garbage, it is...at least the way it is represented. But I happen to know many of the parents and their children at this academy, and I can tell you, they are extremely upset. Apparently, it was reported that she couldn't ref the game because she would have authority over them. THAT IS NOT WHY. It is because the school has a policy of not playing sports with women (a ref on the basketball court is almost as involved as the players) They believe that because women are naturally weaker than men, they should be protected and treated better than men. They believe that sports diminishes the respect (due to women by virtue of their femenine nature) in the eyes of the boys. It is not about control or subjection or anything like that. In fact they have many females at the school - teachers, secretaries, nuns, administration, monitors,etc...and support women whole-heartedly. Just to clarify, the ref was completely cool with it. When the AD explained quite simply that they prefer males to ref/coach the boys and females to ref/coach the girls she understood the situation completely. It was her fellow ref that made the big stink and misquoted or misrepresented the whole situation. - "ilduce42" The same individual links to this article (which I'm guessing she wrote), which explains why St. Mary's chose to forfeit a football game rather than have its boys play against a girl on the opposing team. Granted, the issue of women playing contact sports with men is not what is in question here. And extending a prohibition against male-female contact sports to prohibiting female refs is both silly and offensive. I don't think, however, you can read misogyny into the school's actions. More likely it is represents a misguided attempt to respect the diginity of women. And that intention is a good one. It would be nice if the SSPX folks would post a note somewhere explaining their decision. Or it will come out anyway when they get sued. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercy me Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 After reading the blog, I at least understand the basis for their decision, even it I disagree with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brendan1104 Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 So was Hitler. Bad argument - you bought propaganda. [quote name='St. Benedict' post='1463294' date='Feb 15 2008, 07:26 AM']Just go to the SSPX website and read the FAQs on the left hand for their view using Canon Law - it is highly convincing.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brendan1104 Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 Even though I'm not SSPX, I agree with the decision - I think St. Paul would too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 [quote name='brendan1104' post='1463953' date='Feb 16 2008, 12:56 AM']Even though I'm not SSPX, I agree with the decision - I think St. Paul would too.[/quote] So you go to a school taught only be males? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brendan1104 Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 No, but it'd be better than the bunch of feminist, secularist carp that I'm getting now. [quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1464170' date='Feb 16 2008, 09:58 AM']So you go to a school taught only be males?[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moneybags Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 [quote name='brendan1104' post='1463947' date='Feb 15 2008, 11:54 PM']So was Hitler. Bad argument - you bought propaganda.[/quote] Seeing an intelligent reflection on Canon 1323 & 1324 is not propaganda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now