P
pnewton
Guest
I am sorry. I did not say what I meant and completely messed up. What I meant was that they are arguing that the school violated the city ordinance.
- Status
F
fix
Guest
Catholics do not compartmentalize their moral life from other aspects of their life. There is nothing loving about scandal.
F
fix
Guest
As it is used such things almost are non existent.
L
Lucky7
Guest
Not a problem. I had a feeling you misspoke, but I could have been wrong too.
D
Dakota_Roberts
Guest
Portmanteaus don’t need to follow the meaning of the components precisely and we don’t do that for other words either. If we followed the meaning of word roots precisely then weddings can be used to describe gay ceremonies.
F
fix
Guest
It is a propaganda tool.
L
LtTony
Guest
Yes, we are all sinners. Obviously. But to continue to live the sin, means a person isn’t confessing it as a sin, isn’t making amends and has no intention of changing. That’s the difference. It’s one thing to be a sinner and admit it, but another to sin and essentially deny it, especially when employed at an institution that is teaching the faith.
I hope you see the distinction. There is no hypocrisy involved here.
Plus, as another poster wrote, “What is underhanded is to teach at the Catholic school and live a life contrary to Catholic teaching. It is patently dishonest.” In addition, there are can be some legal complexities involve, depending on the circumstances, as someone else pointed out.
Geez, she wasn’t fired for being a “sinner.” If that were the case, NONE of us would have jobs at Catholic schools.
Most us, though, admit we made a mistake, and vow to try and do better. We usually fail, but we keep admitting to our shortcomings. get back up and try again, by the grace of God.
L
LtTony
Guest
Exactly.
Exactly again.
I’ve committed the same sin. Like you, I have confessed it and repented, and intend to avoid doing it again.
J
josh987654321
Guest
What about protestants? are only Catholics able to work in a Catholic school?
Because protestants are in protest to the teachings of the Catholic Church, so wouldn’t they be living contrary to Catholic teaching?
Protestants
Scientologists
Athiests
Muslims
Buddhists
Are any of these unable to work in a Catholic school and if so why?
Like I said before, I think we should be opposing sin, but I also think we shouldn’t be oppressing sinners and I think this was more oppressing the sinner rather than opposing the sin.
I wouldn’t fire a homosexual from employment who lived a homosexual lifestyle, I wouldn’t agree with it nor would I encourage or advocate it in any way and if they tried to envolve such a lifestyle in the workplace than I would fire them.
However if the work lifestyle and the personal lifestyle are separate, than I don’t see a problem, because they are there to teach and part of that is teaching Catholic morals, they arn’t there to promote personal beliefs or their personal lifestyle.
If she was teaching anything other than the acts of homosexuality being acts of grave depravites, than I would completely agree with firing her. However whats her personal life got to do with teaching something like maths or physics? I just don’t see the need to fire such a person.
I definatly see the need to make sure that the sexual acts of homsoexuality are not advocated in any way, but couldn’t this have been done just by talking to her about keeping her personal life and work life separate, by making sure she obeys and teaches the church’s teachings while ever at work? and setting an example which is that of the churchs teachings while ever at work?
Note: I am still contemplating my position though, currently I think the school didn’t make the best decision in firing her and she is definatly wrong in trying to sue the school.
Thank you for reading
Josh
M
MHT32
Guest
If she was trying to impose her beliefs on the students directly then yeah, I think she should have been fired (or atleast warned) but since no one knew she was a lesbian until the obituary came out, then I dont see why they’d fire her. I mean, yeah, its wrong that she is in a relationship with a woman. But did anyone at the school know that until she mentioned something in an obituary? No. So really, I dont think she should have been fired. But others might see flaw in my logic
2
21faces
Guest
I find it really annoying when people say “hate the sin, love the sinner,” but it’s even more depressing when supposedly religious individuals cannot muster the smallest amount of emotional intelligence necessary to scrape together a bit of genuine empathy and compassion to honor this superficial platitude.
Since the details of her relationship status were apparently unknown until the publication of the obituary, Carla Hale was obviously successful at maintaining a separation between her professional and personal life. So why allow the information to be printed in an obituary at all?
I wonder how I would feel if my mother died, how emotionally difficult that would be. If I had a long term partner whom I loved very much, who had been a part of my life during difficult times- and who was known and loved by my mother, I would want that person to be honored in the remembrance of my mother’s death. To ignore their role and contribution to my life in the context of an obituary after so many years together would be horrible.
Having attended 4 different Catholic schools through childhood I’m sure Carla Hale considered the risks. Maybe she didn’t want to believe some sick husk of a person would really read her mother’s obituary and then decide to use her mother’s obituary as grounds to pursue her termination. Seriously, what kind of person does that?
And again, after attending parochial schools? I guarantee this woman’s sexuality was an open secret around the time she was hired as the gym teacher. Let’s not kid ourselves. And who cares? She was teaching gym, not theology or human sexuality- as others have observed. She obviously took efforts to keep her personal life personal. And while personal tragedy forced her to make a difficult decision not to compromise herself and her mother’s memory through an obituary, you would think that any admin. with a shred of compassion or spine would honor her other efforts at privacy and not pursue termination.
I hardly think that NOT firing this poor woman would be confused by any sane person as a Catholic endorsement of homosexuality, although I would bet anything the majority of staff and students are perfectly fine with Ms. Hale. When I was in high school, similar action was pursued against some faculty by a small, obnoxious, and very vocal minority of neurotics who resembled the gym teacher from Donnie Darko. I’m sure it’s the same here.
A generation from now, the anti-gay marriage crowed will be looked on in the same way we look at old racists: sometimes an awkward embarrassment at family gatherings, but tolerated because “That’s just something people used to believe back then, and gramps is set in his ways…”
Since the details of her relationship status were apparently unknown until the publication of the obituary, Carla Hale was obviously successful at maintaining a separation between her professional and personal life. So why allow the information to be printed in an obituary at all?
I wonder how I would feel if my mother died, how emotionally difficult that would be. If I had a long term partner whom I loved very much, who had been a part of my life during difficult times- and who was known and loved by my mother, I would want that person to be honored in the remembrance of my mother’s death. To ignore their role and contribution to my life in the context of an obituary after so many years together would be horrible.
Having attended 4 different Catholic schools through childhood I’m sure Carla Hale considered the risks. Maybe she didn’t want to believe some sick husk of a person would really read her mother’s obituary and then decide to use her mother’s obituary as grounds to pursue her termination. Seriously, what kind of person does that?
And again, after attending parochial schools? I guarantee this woman’s sexuality was an open secret around the time she was hired as the gym teacher. Let’s not kid ourselves. And who cares? She was teaching gym, not theology or human sexuality- as others have observed. She obviously took efforts to keep her personal life personal. And while personal tragedy forced her to make a difficult decision not to compromise herself and her mother’s memory through an obituary, you would think that any admin. with a shred of compassion or spine would honor her other efforts at privacy and not pursue termination.
I hardly think that NOT firing this poor woman would be confused by any sane person as a Catholic endorsement of homosexuality, although I would bet anything the majority of staff and students are perfectly fine with Ms. Hale. When I was in high school, similar action was pursued against some faculty by a small, obnoxious, and very vocal minority of neurotics who resembled the gym teacher from Donnie Darko. I’m sure it’s the same here.
A generation from now, the anti-gay marriage crowed will be looked on in the same way we look at old racists: sometimes an awkward embarrassment at family gatherings, but tolerated because “That’s just something people used to believe back then, and gramps is set in his ways…”
F
fix
Guest
So up is down, right is wrong, and evil is good. You simply turn vice into virtue by using secular emotionalism as the touchstone.
M
maryjk
Guest
Good question.
I don’t know how you would feel, nor do I know how Hale felt. But see, the sin didn’t start here. It didn’t start when she listed her partner in the obit. That is simply when the sin became public.
Why is the person that read the obit a “sick husk of a person.” Because they believe in what the Church teaches?
Obviously, you don’t care, but obviously the school did.
Which is why they had employees sign a morals contract.
Um, no. Keeping her would indicate that the school endorsed her life style.
And here you tell us what you really think.
As Fix said, up is down, down is up, wrong is right and right is wrong.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
The anti-gay “marriage” “crowd” would be the Bishops and the Vatican, who have defined the teaching as non-optional:
From the US Conference of Catholic Bishops:
usccb.org/issues-and-acti…f-marriage.cfm
The Vatican also does not agree with you:
vatican.va/roman_curia/co…unions_en.html
So the Magisterium and those in communion with them are the source of the “anti-gay marriage crowd” you speak of with such scorn.
E
estesbob
Guest
A generation from now the church will be under attack for not accepting pedophilia as a basic human right.
F
fix
Guest
Yep, not accepting deviant behavior is a hate crime to many today.
P
ProdigalSun
Guest
I presume since your Catholic and realise this as a Mortal you would go to confession to be absolved of this sin. In which case you are forgiven. I would also presume that if this woman where Catholic and denounced here relationship went to confession this would also go away. I doubt she is going to do this so no
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
Missing Mass is not a lifestyle. Assuming it is not permanent or even prolonged, it is a transgression, and is so by your own admission. (Infrequent) Were a teacher to refuse to attend for a significant time, and more importantly if that prolonged absence were to become known by students, then that would also be cause for scandal.
Even non-Catholic teachers are required to attend school Masses, for example, as well as special Sunday Masses which honor students, teachers, or adminstrators. A teacher who was visibly absent, consistently, at those, would be corrected by the principal, and if he/she refused to comply, would undoubtedly be fired. Similarly if the teacher publicized his or her absence in a self-congratulatory way.
It fits in with the “participation in the religious life of the school” which is mandated for students and teachers alike.
- Status