Kept out: School discourages gay, transgender enrollment

[aicirt]

So religious education is affirmative action for the rich? Are rich sinners more worthy of consideration?

In order to accommodate the poorer child, the school is now forced to drop its beliefs that homosexuality is wrong thereby changing the very core of its beliefs that there is such a thing as sin and sin keeps you from God’s grace. This is the reason why people send their children to parochial schools. This is the reason why the schools have scholarships to embrace the poorer kids so that they too may have a religious base. But when the government insists on its way, all this changes and the choice of having a religious education ceases.

Explain to me why a parent of a child dealing with his/her sexual identity problem would even want to send that child to a school knowing this?

 

[aicirt]

The government should be there to facilitate not dictate.

Every time an institution accepts money from the federal government, it is opening itself to being dictated by that government. Religious institutions need to carry on without its help. Unfortunate but necessary.

 

[Hawkmaid]

Oh, I don’t know. Don’t sinners have to acknowledge that what they are doing is sinful? And isn’t Christianity about the redemption of sinners? And doesn’t Christianity and redemption presuppose an admission of sin, I.e. that what one is doing is sinful and that grace is available to overcome sin? Pretty much, what’s your point?

If we “are all sinners.” End stop. Doesn’t that mean that grace is ineffectual and that Christ’s sacrifice on the cross accomplished precisely nothing? Where did you get that grace is ineffectual? From your above comment of “grace is available to overcome sin”, I thought you rather accepted the point of Christ’s Passion. Can you clarify?

What you seem to be advocating is a kind of Christianity Light where we are all sinners and we should simply continue to be sinners (continue to sin) because someday we will be saved and until that day we all powerless to overcome sin? I don’t know where you’re getting that any of us are saying we should continue to sin. We are saying that there IS a way, NOW, to overcome sin; God’s grace.

How is that any different from the prescription to, “Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die,” just rephrased as “Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow Christ will save us?” The “Christianity Light” you’re proposing is no different. What we are saying isn’t Christianity Light, therefore it is not “East, drink, and be merry”.

What does it mean to be a Christian if it means nothing more than admitting you are sinner and do nothing to change that?

You are correct here, for that does mean nothing. Those who subscribe to that blameless “All shall be forgiven, so do whatever you want!” type of “Christianity” are in danger. I believe the thing your missing here is that there is a range of Christians, just like there is a range of all sorts of people in every religion and life style. People are different, period.

My point is that the Christians you describe exist, but so to do those who beg for God’s mercy and grace so that they can be healed and be better servants of God.

 

[josephback]

So since all of us are sinners the school must accommodate all sins?

No, but it should not scapegoat a minority for the sins of the multitude. To have self knowledge is to know that one is far from perfect, and to receive grace one must be willing to extend it. This isn’t about upholding the moral law.

 

[josephback]

Every time an institution accepts money from the federal government, it is opening itself to being dictated by that government. Religious institutions need to carry on without its help. Unfortunate but necessary.

True statement.

 

[estesbob]

No, but it should not scapegoat a minority for the sins of the multitude. To have self knowledge is to know that one is far from perfect, and to receive grace one must be willing to extend it. This isn’t about upholding the moral law.

They’re not scapegoating anybody. They’re saying that they are not equipped to handle mentally ill children . It is further complicated by the fact these children’s parents are enabling their illness and demanding that their children be presented as "normal " to the other students even though such a demand flies in the face of the teachings of our Church. These children need help. In a perfect world they would be placed with a couple who would help them overcome their delusions but in our degraded culture all sexual delusions must be accommodated . The school should be under no obligation to participate in the mistreatment of these children .

 

[estesbob]

No, but it should not scapegoat a minority for the sins of the multitude. To have self knowledge is to know that one is far from perfect, and to receive grace one must be willing to extend it. This isn’t about upholding the moral law.

So you believe One receive grace for accommodating sin?

 

[Peter_Plato]

You are correct here, for that does mean nothing. Those who subscribe to that blameless “All shall be forgiven, so do whatever you want!” type of “Christianity” are in danger. I believe the thing your missing here is that there is a range of Christians, just like there is a range of all sorts of people in every religion and life style. People are different, period.

My point is that the Christians you describe exist, but so to do those who beg for God’s mercy and grace so that they can be healed and be better servants of God.

So, apparently, your “everyone is different” amounts to endorsing the Christian Light position that some individuals are incapable of overcoming sin and therefore we ought to be more “tolerant” of their weakness and look the other way when they do fail?

It appears to me that as soon as a position that being “gay” or “transgender” is a legimate way to be, then there is no difference between that and the position that a person can have a “natural” propensity to being psychotic, masochistic or sadistic.

No, the fact that a person has become psychotic, masochistic or sadistic does not legitimize the behaviors that follow, nor does it make the psychological state “natural” or excusable.

Anyone who claims to be “gay” or “transgender” in the sense that everyone around them ought to take their claim as excusing or legitimizing any behaviours that follow is really no different from someone attempting to excuse psychotic, anti-social, sadistic or masochistic behaviours by claiming such states are, likewise, “natural.”

Society has been duped into purchasing a nonsensical set of positions regarding “gender.”

It started out as sexual orientation not being a “choice” and, therefore, ought to be excusable and tolerated to now one’s gender being totally up to one’s own determination, even if one happens to be a five or six year old – as if five or six year olds have any clue about what having a “gender” really means.

This whole issue has become nonsensical. Time to wake up to the fact that a delusion is being perpetrated upon a wholly ill-prepared and morally enfeebled society.

 

[estesbob]

You are correct here, for that does mean nothing. Those who subscribe to that blameless “All shall be forgiven, so do whatever you want!” type of “Christianity” are in danger. I believe the thing your missing here is that there is a range of Christians, just like there is a range of all sorts of people in every religion and life style. People are different, period.

My point is that the Christians you describe exist, but so to do those who beg for God’s mercy and grace so that they can be healed and be better servants of God.

Do you believe there are absolute moral truths.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Hillary Clinton has told us she expects us to “change our religious beliefs” to conform to her way of thinking. Obama has, in effect, told the same thing to the Little Sisters of the Poor, and tried to do it to the LCMS before.

People like Obama dn Clinton really are the enemies of religion and Catholics should realize they are the biggest targets on the secular humanist shooting range.

 

[josephback]

In order to accommodate the poorer child, the school is now forced to drop its beliefs that homosexuality is wrong thereby changing the very core of its beliefs that there is such a thing as sin and sin keeps you from God’s grace. This is the reason why people send their children to parochial schools. This is the reason why the schools have scholarships to embrace the poorer kids so that they too may have a religious base. But when the government insists on its way, all this changes and the choice of having a religious education ceases.

Explain to me why a parent of a child dealing with his/her sexual identity problem would even want to send that child to a school knowing this?

I didn’t think of that.

 

[ARSpade]

If the government withdraws funding for those items, all that will happen is that some students will no longer be able to go there and be replaced by wealthier students. Does the government think that is a good thing?

The government doesn’t want religious schools to exist anyway.

 

[Thorolfr]

Breitkreutz said the school’s policy with regard to homosexual and transgender students is similar to its policies for other behaviors that the church considers sinful, such as cheating or fighting with fellow students.

“We definitely don’t have a goal of finding a way to kick students out,” Breitkreutz said. “I mean, that’s not the goal. The goal is to share with them God’s word.”

The school has not had to discipline a homosexual or transgender student in his two years there, Breitkreutz said. But if a student displayed those tendencies, school officials would try to patiently instruct the child…

If the child was not receptive, and continued to live with a sexual orientation or gender identity that is not endorsed by St. John’s, the school board would have the right to expel that student, Breitkreutz said.

St. John’s Pastor Nick Maglietto said the February letter was intended to let parents know about the church’s views with regard to homosexual and transgender people prior to enrollment.

“So rather than us trying to weed them out, it’s more letting them know where we’re coming from up front and making their choice based on whether this would be an environment for their child,” he said.

Although Maglietto said the school does not intend to exclude people, he said it is “not welcoming” to homosexual and transgender students. But it is the parents’ choice to enroll their child or not.

I don’t know why anyone in this forum would defend this school. For example, according to the Catholic Church, there is nothing sinful about being a “homosexual person”, only engaging in homosexual activity, and I would expect that all sexual activity by underage students, whether homosexual or heterosexual, would be discouraged. These Lutherans obviously believe that even being homosexual, not just engaging in homosexual activity, is wrong and sinful which I find problematic.

 

[aicirt]

I don’t know why anyone in this forum would defend this school. For example, according to the Catholic Church, there is nothing sinful about being a “homosexual person”, only engaging in homosexual activity, and I would expect that all sexual activity by underage students, whether homosexual or heterosexual, would be discouraged. These Lutherans obviously believe that even being homosexual, not just engaging in homosexual activity, is wrong and sinful which I find problematic.

How would you know a person was a homosexual if he wasn’t acting on it? If this is a middle or high school level kid, who is declaring himself as such, why would he want to be in a religious school?

 

[estesbob]

I don’t know why anyone in this forum would defend this school. For example, according to the Catholic Church, there is nothing sinful about being a “homosexual person”, only engaging in homosexual activity, and I would expect that all sexual activity by underage students, whether homosexual or heterosexual, would be discouraged. These Lutherans obviously believe that even being homosexual, not just engaging in homosexual activity, is wrong and sinful which I find problematic.

How would anyone know a student has SSA unless they chose to reveal it?

 

[Ridgerunner]

I don’t know why anyone in this forum would defend this school. For example, according to the Catholic Church, there is nothing sinful about being a “homosexual person”, only engaging in homosexual activity, and I would expect that all sexual activity by underage students, whether homosexual or heterosexual, would be discouraged. These Lutherans obviously believe that even being homosexual, not just engaging in homosexual activity, is wrong and sinful which I find problematic.

I think a distinction needs to be made here.

I think it likely the Lutherans’ problem with homosexual or transgender students being there at all is a matter of whether it presents scandal to the other students. I imagine a homosexual student who kept his proclivities to himself would be no problem to the school. But in today’s world, in which homosexuality is considered “normal” by secular authorities and in which a homosexual has a “right” to so proclaim himself, it really can be a matter of scandalizing other students if the “normalcy” of it and particularly any physical expression of it is asserted by the student.

I could be wrong, but I doubt the school has an objection to a student being there who is homosexual, simply because he is homosexual.

It is considered "just the way things are’ if federal grants for, say, school lunch programs confers the power on the government to decree what a religious school can allow in the way of moral teachings or examples within the school. But the government, of course, does not reject the taxes of the parents.

 

[jtauke]

So you believe One receive grace for accommodating sin?

The better question is how do you expect these children that would be excluded to receive a proper religious education?

You and this school would turn them out to their life of "sin, rather than teach them christian values in the hopes that it would change them.

 

[Thorolfr]

How would you know a person was a homosexual if he wasn’t acting on it? If this is a middle or high school level kid, who is declaring himself as such, why would he want to be in a religious school?

It might be known that a student is homosexual because they don’t hide that fact from others. But this doesn’t mean that they are engaging in sexual activity. And a homosexual student is probably attending a religious school because that is where they were enrolled by their parents who want their children to attend such a school. How many underage students have much say in where they go to school?

 

[jtauke]

How many underage students have much say in where they go to school?

Good point. Kids go where the parents say.

 

[Memaw]

One would think it has nothing to do with this, but it does. Accepting federal funding will also give the feds the right regarding the bathroom and gym issues recently in the news.

There had to have been a time when schools had their own lunch programs.Tell the feds thank but no thanks, and tell the parents to start packing their kids a lunch.

And the federal government. would probably make a rule against that too. Just because fed. govt. helps with the lunch program why in the world would that all of a sudden include the bathrooms??? God Bless, Memaw