(A) No, it isn’t. We are called not to scandalize others by our actions, and especially children. Jesus himself made that clear, and what the consequences were for those who did.
(B) “Intolerance” isn’t a sin and “tolerance” isn’t a virtue, much less a Catholic virtue; it’s a leftist value.
(C) “Tolerance” means something, I suspect, different from what you’re taking it to mean. Specifically “tolerance” means reluctantly accepting an evil you have no authority to combat justly. But the Church does have authority over who it hires and what standards it holds them to as a condition of employment.
No, it isn’t. Pope Francis’ words touched specifically on people struggling with homosexual desire but living chastely – not on recalcitrant perverts who scandalize children and perjure themselves.
The Church does not owe people the willy-nilly validation and acceptance of their lifestyles, much less is doing so an act of “love.” If this woman is so unrepentant that she would prefer her sordid exploits to the Church of Christ then she cannot possibly be saved, anyway.
A “private relationship” which was forbidden per the terms of the contract she wittingly signed and serially violated.
Plenty do. There were big stories here a few months back about a few unmarried teachers who were fired after becoming pregnant. Surprise surprise, folks like you didn’t care much for those stories, either.
I’m pretty sure that the scandalous kvetching of laity like you is doing more harm to the Church than any gay rights activists she unwittingly, however briefly, employs.
