Probably no one would think twice about a “Don’t make fun of unwed mother’s” day.
You’re unfortunately wrong, “Frater.” I would think twice about any “special” day which singles out a particular category of person without sufficient reason to do so. (That is, employs a “special” argument for charity only for specific individuals.) I have set out my reasons quite consistently.
It’s so easy to demonize. Let’s stop, shall we?
Indeed. Your words are a good place to start. Let’s stop “demonizing” (your biased characterization of your opposition) victims of bullying who happen to have a mainstream sexual orientation, and are being bullied for random and miscellaneous reasons.
There is no “more acceptable” bullying. The entire argument of the other side directly opposes Catholic teaching (and the teaching of Her Founder, on which is based that teaching.) It is not “more acceptable” to violate charity against unwed mothers, LGBT people, non-LGBT people, pet owners, or short people. The public conversation, on and off CAF, should move on and transcend such pettiness.
By the way, indirectly I covered the unwed mother hypothetical in an earlier post about invasion of privacy. The umbrella violation is invasion of privacy – of sexuality, of circumstance of birth, of private family information, etc. The public schools (especially) have failed in this regard. They (1) are so controlled by fear of legal reprisals that they lack the courage to take a stand (2) when they do agree to a policy, they are inept about communicating that policy (3) if they succeed in communicating, they refuse to follow up through observation and supervision (4) if they do #3, they fail to enact promised consequences.
The solution to the failure of the schools is not to make it more acceptable to bully those without special sexual considerations, but for school leaders to grow a spine, communicate accountability, and to enforce accountability – with all members sharing in that accountability: staff, parents, students.