B
benjammin
Guest
For example, if I run a business, would the church be okay with me not hiring gay people, even if they are more highly qualified than other employees? What about banning gays from patronizing a business?
Is it okay for a catholic businessman to discriminate against gays?
- Status
T
TracerBullet
Guest
Why would you choose to discriminate?
P
Publisher
Guest
Y
Young_Thinker
Guest
No, that is not okay- while homosexual activity goes against Church, we are to be treated everyone with respect and kindness, including gays. And why wouldn’t you want to have the highest-qualified people work for you?- I’m sorry, but that’s totally illogical!
J
johnnyjones
Guest
Not a good idea.
S
St_Francis
Guest
I would hope not to know quite that much about the people applying for a job in my business (if I had one).
If they don’t know how to behave at a job interview, otoh, then they might not get the job.
If they don’t know how to behave at a job interview, otoh, then they might not get the job.
B
buffalo
Guest
Judgements are made all the time in hiring. Behaviors are part of that judgement.
J
johnnyjones
Guest
Thats a good point. I will have to ponder this.
P
PJD1987
Guest
If you’re in the United States, it’s against the law to discriminate based on sexual orientation. I would assume it’s also against the law in many other countries as well. We should preach Truth in Charity, as the Holy Father would say. What is charitable about willfully discriminating against certain people. It certainly will not bring them closer to Christ, and will further turn them against the Church, and by extension the Truth, then they already are.
Caritas in veritate, my friends. That is the way to change hearts and minds.
God bless!
-Paul
Caritas in veritate, my friends. That is the way to change hearts and minds.
God bless!
-Paul
S
Sneaux
Guest
No, that’s not okay by any means. Is that what Christ would want you to do?
O
Ohana
Guest
Why would you know, or want to know. what went on in the bedroom of any potential employee?
R
Rob_in_Oregon
Guest
I have photographed 500 weddings in the last 37 years. Although I’m retired from it now, I turned away gay couples who wanted me to take pictures at their weddings, just saying that I wasn’t available. I wonder if that violates non-discrimination laws? What about my religious rights to not participate in activities that violate my beliefs?
S
slotty
Guest
Definately not and it goes against the teaching of the church
CCC 2358: They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
Why would you want someone whose not the best just because their sinful acts don’t irk you just as much?
Would it be ok to discriminate in the same way against say those who are fornicators?
CCC 2358: They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
Why would you want someone whose not the best just because their sinful acts don’t irk you just as much?
Would it be ok to discriminate in the same way against say those who are fornicators?
H
hangel
Guest
we ALL sin.
Some times other people find out about a sin & others sins no one ever knows about.
It is between the person and God how they live their life, as long as it is not “in my face effecting me”.
Respectable people (even married men & women) don’t make out or overly grope in public just to cause a seen.
Gay people don’t look any differently, all the people act in a professional manner then no one knows. So you would probably not know when you were hiring or serving someone.
If it was obtrusive enough then I would want to service refuse because I don’t support anything that goes against me faith.
on the other hand If I refuse I am missing an opportunity to be a good Christian example.
Some times other people find out about a sin & others sins no one ever knows about.
It is between the person and God how they live their life, as long as it is not “in my face effecting me”.
Respectable people (even married men & women) don’t make out or overly grope in public just to cause a seen.
Gay people don’t look any differently, all the people act in a professional manner then no one knows. So you would probably not know when you were hiring or serving someone.
If it was obtrusive enough then I would want to service refuse because I don’t support anything that goes against me faith.
on the other hand If I refuse I am missing an opportunity to be a good Christian example.
C
Corki
Guest
There is no federal protection against employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. State laws differ quite a bit - some states prohibit all employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, some states only prohibit public (government) employers, some states do not cover it at all.
And what the Catechism teaches
Well, there are all kinds of discrimination. Some is just and some is unjust. *Just *discrimination could be done with charity.
R
Robert_in_SD
Guest
No. and No.
N
Nun_of_That
Guest
Gay, or openly gay? There is a difference. Also, the type of business makes a difference. Is this a Catholic institution, or a secular business? While we certainly cannot deny employment to a qualified person, we also cannot “condone” a lifestyle in open opposition to Church teaching - so if hiring that person would condone the lifestyle, then that disqualifies the person. That basically means that they are NOT the most qualified person for the job.
Let me illustrate. If I am the owner of a chicken coop, and I need to hire someone to gather the eggs, being gay or straight shouldn’t have an effect on their job performance. If I am running a Catholic school and hiring a teacher, then I shouldn’t hire anyone who is openly defying ANY of the Magisterial teachings. I should not hire a non-practicing Catholic, a co-habitating Catholic, a Catholic that is willfully teaching heresy, or an openly practicing homosexual. Nor should I hire a teacher who is moonlighting at the local abortion clinic.
Can I hire someone who was formerly a practicing homosexual who is now leading a chaste life? Absolutely. As someone pointed out in an earlier thread, we are ALL sinners.
Let me illustrate. If I am the owner of a chicken coop, and I need to hire someone to gather the eggs, being gay or straight shouldn’t have an effect on their job performance. If I am running a Catholic school and hiring a teacher, then I shouldn’t hire anyone who is openly defying ANY of the Magisterial teachings. I should not hire a non-practicing Catholic, a co-habitating Catholic, a Catholic that is willfully teaching heresy, or an openly practicing homosexual. Nor should I hire a teacher who is moonlighting at the local abortion clinic.
Can I hire someone who was formerly a practicing homosexual who is now leading a chaste life? Absolutely. As someone pointed out in an earlier thread, we are ALL sinners.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
It is neither legal nor moral to discriminate against any group qua their affiliation/membership in that group.
However, it is always permissible to screen candidates before hiring, and to review candidates after hiring, for their professionalism (discretion, respect for privacy, sense of propriety while on the job, etc.), and to do so equally for all. We once at a place of employment had a heterosexual secretary who constantly talked about her PID and other multiple STD’s
. We never promoted her. Ditto for an incident I mentioned more recently on another thread, about a person passed over for promotion due to making too public her private (lesbian) lifestyle (including discussing political stances about that).
Rob in Oregon, no, your example does not, i.m.o., violate any laws. To whom you provide services of a private nature based on an optional contractual arrangement (vs. waiting on someone wel behaved in a retail establishment) is a different question than to whom you provide employment (if they apply for an open position). We have a right to screen whom we want as clients, in accord with comfort level and with our ethics and morals. (I have been asked to do unethical things as a consultant; I have declined those invitations, and therefore I was “refusing” them as clients, though they were potentially lucrative invitations.)
And in both the situation of hiring an employee and responding to a request for services (photography or anything else of a contractual commercial nature), there is also the legitimate factor of comfort/discomfort with the personality/manner of the inquirer or applicant. In the case of employment, the subject of sexual orientation should not even be asked by the interviewer, nor offered by the applicant, unless that has been listed by the employer as relevant to the job description (such as might be requested counseling other homosexuals in a social agency of some kind). Nevertheless, other qualities of an applicant are legitimate to consider (tactlessness, abrasiveness, etc.), which can come from any applicant, but if paired coincidentally with homosexuality in a particular case would not necessarily indicate “discrimination.”
Also, in the case above of a worker under me who was not promoted due to her lack of discretion, I was not the one who hired her. However, I would have hired her for the position she had, but would not have promoted her to the position she sought, which demanded more public exposure and far more professionalism than she had shown. Ditto for the female in the other environment who discussed her STD’s audibly. She was acceptable at the lower level, unacceptable at a higher level.
Some people have not quite figured out that a work environment is not the place to air all of your political grievances or bare your soul. Generally, that backfires sooner or later.
However, it is always permissible to screen candidates before hiring, and to review candidates after hiring, for their professionalism (discretion, respect for privacy, sense of propriety while on the job, etc.), and to do so equally for all. We once at a place of employment had a heterosexual secretary who constantly talked about her PID and other multiple STD’s
. We never promoted her. Ditto for an incident I mentioned more recently on another thread, about a person passed over for promotion due to making too public her private (lesbian) lifestyle (including discussing political stances about that).Rob in Oregon, no, your example does not, i.m.o., violate any laws. To whom you provide services of a private nature based on an optional contractual arrangement (vs. waiting on someone wel behaved in a retail establishment) is a different question than to whom you provide employment (if they apply for an open position). We have a right to screen whom we want as clients, in accord with comfort level and with our ethics and morals. (I have been asked to do unethical things as a consultant; I have declined those invitations, and therefore I was “refusing” them as clients, though they were potentially lucrative invitations.)
And in both the situation of hiring an employee and responding to a request for services (photography or anything else of a contractual commercial nature), there is also the legitimate factor of comfort/discomfort with the personality/manner of the inquirer or applicant. In the case of employment, the subject of sexual orientation should not even be asked by the interviewer, nor offered by the applicant, unless that has been listed by the employer as relevant to the job description (such as might be requested counseling other homosexuals in a social agency of some kind). Nevertheless, other qualities of an applicant are legitimate to consider (tactlessness, abrasiveness, etc.), which can come from any applicant, but if paired coincidentally with homosexuality in a particular case would not necessarily indicate “discrimination.”
Also, in the case above of a worker under me who was not promoted due to her lack of discretion, I was not the one who hired her. However, I would have hired her for the position she had, but would not have promoted her to the position she sought, which demanded more public exposure and far more professionalism than she had shown. Ditto for the female in the other environment who discussed her STD’s audibly. She was acceptable at the lower level, unacceptable at a higher level.
Some people have not quite figured out that a work environment is not the place to air all of your political grievances or bare your soul. Generally, that backfires sooner or later.
A
Aggies08
Guest
Are you also going to refuse to employ the liars and selfish people? How would you know before hire, anyhow?
J
JustaServant
Guest
Years ago when I was a raging Baptist, my company asked me to train a guy for management in a new office they were opening. He also was a “born again Christian”, and not a very bright one. I knew he disliked blacks and gays.
Anyway the office sent down a sales guy to help get sales moving in the new office, but the manager didn’t want him because he was gay. Actually it was a double whammy, black and gay. He said as Christians we should not hire people like that. I told him we are not hiring him to teach Sunday School, we are hiring him because he can sell good. He said but if we hire one of ‘them’, the next thing you know he’ll bring in his buddies and and the whole office will be filled with…them.
I looked at him, and said. “Dude, if they all sell like him. I’ll put out a sign that says Gays Prefered!!”
He didn’t get it and never made it as a manager or much else from what I can gather.
I’ll never forget chatting with my boss (an atheist) about it. I said “would you believe it? Me of all people a champion for gay rights.”
This atheist boss of mine replied “wrong is always wrong”.
So the answer to your question should be obvious. As a manager its none of my business what you do after working hours, as long as it doesn’t interfer with your job.
Even as a Baptist I knew that.
How can our light shine under a bushel?
Anyway the office sent down a sales guy to help get sales moving in the new office, but the manager didn’t want him because he was gay. Actually it was a double whammy, black and gay. He said as Christians we should not hire people like that. I told him we are not hiring him to teach Sunday School, we are hiring him because he can sell good. He said but if we hire one of ‘them’, the next thing you know he’ll bring in his buddies and and the whole office will be filled with…them.
I looked at him, and said. “Dude, if they all sell like him. I’ll put out a sign that says Gays Prefered!!”
He didn’t get it and never made it as a manager or much else from what I can gather.
I’ll never forget chatting with my boss (an atheist) about it. I said “would you believe it? Me of all people a champion for gay rights.”
This atheist boss of mine replied “wrong is always wrong”.
So the answer to your question should be obvious. As a manager its none of my business what you do after working hours, as long as it doesn’t interfer with your job.
Even as a Baptist I knew that.
How can our light shine under a bushel?
- Status