Have you seen this? It seems the Sacred Heart of Jesus School in Boulder Colorado told a lesbian couple that their children(!) would not be allowed to continue their education at the school.First of all, how did these two get kids? Just another example of the permissive and perverse society we live in.
The gays and lesbians in the area are of course outraged, calling the act discriminatory and, get this, called for the church to "live up to Jesus' mission of love and acceptance".
So now we have gays and lesbians trying to define Jesus' mission for us.
Please.
Hey gays, read the bible. Whenever Jesus came across a sinner, he rebuked them, and told them not to sin again. Please refrain from scriptural interpretations that are above your pay grade.
I applaud the actions of the school, and Archbishop Charles Chaput for deciding to hold fast to the decision and not cave in to pressure from gays.
But you know the kicker here?
The one thing that absolutely irks the hell out of me? That some dirtbag teachers at the school who didn't agree with the decision are the ones that leaked the info to the press, to force the issue. The gays would have done it to be sure, but why the teachers?
This only proves to those of us who already recognize it, that the smoke of Satan has entered the Vatican (as we reported yesterday), chancery offices, parishes, and even our catholic schools. To achieve victory on earth for our Lord there will be difficult times ahead. Difficult decisions to be made. Lets hope we all can make them.
Most likely my kiddies will end up at a Catholic school should any remain in three years, and God help the liberal teacher who says anything contrary to church teaching.
If you think they can't stand me at the chancery now, wait'll my kids are enrolled in their schools and they have to deal with me face-to-face. Good times are ahead lemme tell ya.
So what do think about the article? Go read it and come back here to discuss.
17 comments:
Do you honestly believe that the Devil is in the Vatican? More than anything, this is but an another excuse in which the Vatican does not take responsibility for its child molesters.
What's so wrong with children of lesbian parents attending schools? Why should children be barred from receiving an education because their parents are homosexuals?
What's wrong with lesbians having kids anyway? Studies show that children of lesbian parents are no better or worse than children of heterosexual parents. More info here:(http://greenatheist.blogspot.com/2010/01/gay-marriage-civil-right-or-religious.html)
*I'll hop in the shoes of a Catholic here*
Catholics do proclaim that Jesus' mission is love and acceptance. If everyone is made in the "image of God," why should people be discriminated against? God apparently made people to be homosexuals, so why should they be condemned not for what they do, but for who they are?
As usual, religion poisons everything.
Imagine if the news story was "White Child of Black Parents Kicked out of School." It's no different than this one...kicking people out for who they are.
I know kids in the Catholic school system and they are just as liberal as those in public schools.
As they said in the 60s, we (liberals) will win your kids. I can count the number of conservative people under 18 I know on one hand.
Catholic Student
It seems mean-spirited, if I'm going to be honest. You're actually EXPELLING the child when they did NOTHING wrong. Because the school does not agree with the PARENT's morals, they kick the children out. That is wrong. I'm sorry.
The only good thing is now the poor child will have less to be conflicted about. I imagine growing up in a Catholic setting (against homosexuality) would be a huge conflict with what her parents at home are saying (to embrace it, that's just how they are and it's okay to be that way, etc.).
I'm not sure how I feel about same-sex parents, really, but to kick the kids out just seems wrong.
And yes, Jesus did rebuke sin, but he WAS also accepting/forgiving/loving and I think would know the difference between the parents' actions versus the kids'. I find it petty and kind of mean. Wtf kind of message is that, anyway. I get that the message they're TRYing to show is that they don't approve of homosexuality. Okay. But, again, why punish the children for that. Very lame I think. Am I missing something?? I can get them not wanting a lesbian who was married working as a teacher. (Although isn't that discrimination, is that legal lol?) I can understand not wanting the students to date same sex for prom (like that other story in the news). I can understand them not wanting the students sporting a Rocky Horror shirt at school. BUt...again...wtf. Expel the kids because they did nothing wrong. That makes a whole lot of NONsense. "Hey child, I do not accept you and banish you because your parents are sinners." Excuse me?
All right I looked it up. I guess THIS is what I was missing:
"According to the archdiocese, parents who enroll their kids at Sacred Heart of Jesus Catholic School are expected to follow the Catholic Church's beliefs.
According to the archdiocese, parents who enroll their kids at Sacred Heart of Jesus Catholic School are expected to follow the Catholic Church's beliefs. So they're not letting the kid re-enroll.
"According to the archdiocese, parents who enroll their kids at Sacred Heart of Jesus [...] are expected to follow the Catholic Church's beliefs."
Still seems wrong, I'm sorry. At what point do they draw the line? So I hope if they find the parents having an affair, or having a wandering lustful eye, or not going to church every Sunday, or any of the other possible sins that exist...read a horoscope one day...that would not re-enroll that kid too, is that what we're supposed to believe? What about parents being Methodist? I knew someone who was methodist and went to Catholic school. Clearly his parents weren't doing all the Catholic things, including confession...so they wallowed around in sin, right? It just seems wrong!!
A sticky-wicket, maybe the school felt if they allowed it, that would seem too spineless. They probably wouldn't allow it if the parents were Wiccans or something. But again...where do you draw that line? Ergh.
Or maybe in the future, would not allow a kid to enroll IN THE FIRST place if gay parents. But this kid was already GOING to that school, and they didn't let him/her back because of his/her parents. That's wrong. They forbade the kid from rejoining his/her friends and school life. At least let the kid finish. Wrong. The end.
And this nonsense about Satan, I'm sorry, I can't get into it. Yes every time someone chooses to sin versus do the right thing...they are giving into that dark side, that self-serving temptation, ie "satan." But saying it in such a dramatic "ooh smoke of satan" way sounds weird and almost seems to excuse people from their actions. Don't blame me, blame the smoke o' Satan seeping around!
- L
Justin, a person can choose to live a celebate lifestyle rather than being a practicing homosexul. A person cannot chose his or her skin color. therefore your example doesn't work.
The Church is right to call homosexual actions disordered as they are. There are groups out there like Courage that help people to live a chaste lifestyle rather than being practicing homosexuals. to say we have to condone sinful activty is to say we have to look the other way as the person condemns him or herself to hell. 1 of the 7 Spiritual Works of Mercy is to admonish the sinner. That is based on what jesus said about coming to call the sinner to repentance.
Also, other studies have shown that children with 2 homosexual parents are more prone to suicide (http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/children_with_same-sex_parents_prone_to_suicide_study_reveals/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+catholicnewsagency%2Fdailynews+%28CNA+Daily+News%29).
Roaming Catholic writes:
A touchy subject here, considering the times we live in. How about children of church-going parents who "shack-up", children of church-going single parents who "bed-hop", or children of church-going parents who have divorced and remarried without an annulment if both parties were Christian? Sometimes I wonder if indeed the church is saying today, "Do as I live, not as I teach".
Justin-You are pretty ignorant of the subject matter. You need to read about the Catholic faith, try the Catechism of the Catholic church, which also points to sacred scipture for each teaching. Then maybe you might understand.
Anonymous who called Justin ignorant - don't forget to sign your name to any future posts, and try to be nice!
Anonymous, the Catholic church can say whatever it wants to try and "defend" its discrimination against homosexuals, but actions speak louder than words.
A great deal of parishioners, priests, and people who designate themselves as Catholic are anti-homosexual. Again, people are being discriminated against not for what they do, but who they are.
You can take any passage from the Bible to justify any action under the sun and say it's right including but not limited to slavery, infanticide, rape, incest, patriarchy, murder, killing of homosexuals, burning of witches, etc. We shouldn't refer to the Bible for moral teachings for a moment and just accept it at face value. Ask yourself what is right and wrong using a rational basis of justification based on all we have learned from philosophy, science, history, and psychology.
---
The church makes it clear that it's against sex before marriage, divorce, and marriage without childbearing...but I don't see campaigns against sterile individuals, people who don't want to have children, fornicators, etc.
If we want to have a real discussion about these matters, let's abandon a mindset outside of the 21st century and move into a 21st century conversation.
There's nothing wrong with being attracted to people of the same sex or choosing whatever actions you want in your private life as long as you aren't harming others or breaking the law.
As far as "you can choose to be gay/not gay..." actually, some people can't do this. Some people are attracted to members of the same gender or both genders at an early age.
---
Discriminating against homosexuals is no different than discriminating against women or on the basis of race. This idea that "homosexuals can change" is no warrant for discrimination and bad behavior. Would you discriminate against women and then say "you can get a sex change operation" to justify this?
----
"Justin-You are pretty ignorant of the subject matter. You need to read about the Catholic faith, try the Catechism of the Catholic church, which also points to sacred scipture for each teaching. Then maybe you might understand."
I don't believe in God or the moral superiority of the Catholic church because God almost certainly does not exist and Catholics and non-believers have access to the same amount of moral information; there is no "divine inspiration" or unseen authority that some particular person has access to that others don't.
I've read a tremendous amount of material regarding Catholicism, listen to numerous debates, have debated various individuals, host a blog, etc, etc, etc.
Justin, If you don't believe in God or the Catholic Church, just why do you spend so much time on the website created by a very religious man?? Anyone is free to offer their opinion, but, just wondering; what attracts you?
Elaine
My only wish is that all Catholic schools would stand up for the faith as this one has. Now they need to do it across the board. Divorcee's, and all that. We just can't single out the gays.
I think we're missing some of the story though. Why did the gays send the kids to a Catholic School to begin with? If you don't agree with the Church on the basic tenets of the faith, why would you want your kids to go there?
I don't agree with Hinduism, so I probably wouldn't send my kids to their school. If they had here. Which they don't. But that's besides the point.
You get my point?
There is no Sacrament of Holy Matrimony in the eyes of God and the Catholic Church between two women nor two men, so presumably these are non-Catholics.
Non-Catholics may send children to Catholic schools but Catholic schools are private institutions which reserve the right to decide who may attend their school and who may not for any reason. That does not fall under the definition of discrimination, that is what makes a school private. Forcing a private school to behave publicly would demand reciprocation by forcing public schools to accept all private acts of worship prayer etc. Is this what is wanted by this debate?
//More than anything, this is but an another excuse in which the
Vatican does not take responsibility for its child molesters.//
Stereotyping. Another stereotype would have it that gays are known child molestors, hence adoption of children by SS couples is a cruel indoctrination into a alternative lifestyle and so who will protect children from such abuses?
Jim
I visit religious websites because I want to engage with their arguments, ideas, and beliefs unlike many theists who don't investigate the views of non-theists.
People who aren't Catholic may attend Catholic schools and do for various reasons. There is a great fallacy implicit in "Why do you attend a Catholic school if you're not a Catholic."
I investigate this claim in full length here via my friend Adam Burt on my blog:
http://greenatheist.blogspot.com/2010/03/atheist-catholic-college-adam-burt.html
The post is simply too long to post here.
The whole "devil in the vatican" argument is nothing but a lie that has no basis in reality. I'm not stereotyping when I'm calling out a lie and an evasion of responsibility.
"The Pope's Entire Career Has the Stench of Evil About it" Slate- http://www.slate.com/id/2247861/
Whats the fallacy to saying "Why do you attend a Catholic school if you're not a Catholic." I think I already covered it. If you are saying that poor single moms send their kids to get a better education, then don't complain when your kids start to question why you aren't married.
Justin also stated that the "Smoke of Satan" statement is a lie and an evasion of responsibility. It is exactly that attitude that prevails among Catholics and our own clergy. The Devil is superstitious nonsense according to non-theists, but the Catholic Church has always known who the creator of lies is. Satan is responsible for evil, and we are seeing the consequences.
According to you Justin, the Christian faith has no basis in reality. Your arguments carry no weight here. I could tell you how Satan has entered your own life and caused you to turn away from your Creator, which has ensured your own damnation. You won't believe it until your last breath has been issued and you are suddenly being judged. At that point it will be too late. Satan will have won your soul.
I will go as far to say as you cannot fully participate in the "Smoke of Satan" debate unless you are a believing traditionalist Catholic. The statement is undoubtedly a reference to the spiritual warfare waged by Satan against the Church from within its walls. It has nothing to do with 'making excuses for criminal acts of molestation' as the statement is misinterpreted by non-belivers with no understanding of the theological implications.
If you do not believe in God or Satan you cannot fully partake and comment on father Amorth's statement because you will not understand why the statement was made.
Without the action of the Holy Spirit the Gospel just seems words on a page. We do not know why but only the Holy Spirit can make one discern (1 Corinthians 2:14)
However, as a former existentialist and atheist of 30 years I will gladly pray for your discernment of things spiritual and conversion to the one true Faith =)
Jim
Can you honestly believe in a being who will torture people for all eternity simply because they didn't believe in him? I've used all of the faculties that you believe God gave me and am doing my best to try and find good reason to believe in him...but there's more reasons everyday not to do so.
An all-loving being would never perpetrate such a mass holocaust of individuals who believe in other gods, no gods, or disagree with his silly rules.
Love should not be demanded from a human or precluded on threats and fear. Love should be earned from a happy, healthy, threat-free human being.
"I've used all of the faculties that you believe God gave me and am doing my best to try and find good reason to believe in him..."
Well, that's a start although I still think you'd look for a reason not to believe even if a squadron of angels landed on your front lawn. What you need to do is to stop looking for a reason and just give yourself over to God's love and mercy.
John 20:29 Jesus saith to him: Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed.
That line of questioning is the right direction to take.
I began to see there is absolutism in nature and everywere. Absolute evil and absolute good.
God is absolute good. When one accepts this one realizes ever how much more vivid the sufferings of Christ during the Passion were and how much God is pained when we sin and how much the mystical body of Christ, the Church, suffers when we read yet another story of a pedophile priest destroying a life.
But when a person understands this magnitude of God's unrequited love and tunes into it , such a love can carry a person through the worst sufferings in life, even torture unto death (Heaven forbid. I do not say that lightly because I know I would easily fail under duress in such circumstances. How Saints do it can only be God's love carrying them)
There is evil and it does rule this world and the human condition, perhaps even the natural state of entropy is an evil contrary to what God is. That's waxing philosophical a bit too much.
And yes, people can separate themselves eternally from God in Hell by not accepting God's revelation to us, His Son who is the new covenant and the Arc of that covenant, the Holy Catholic Church.
Free will is the greatest gift in life, an opportunity for every man and woman to experience this love or reject it.
Jim
Post a Comment