Massachusetts Catholic School Bars Same-Sex Couple From Prom

[PatienceAndLove]

I went with a friend as my “date” my junior year to Junior/Senior prom. I didn’t get any flack from administration about it. I also didn’t claim her as my date when I bought my ticket, I bought as a single. We were required to give the name, and age, of our date (school companion or not) and then administration made a decision (those over 21 were not permitted, etc…)
If the girl is “openly” bi-sexual, the school is naturally going to assume that this is a sexual relationship. And it’s a Catholic school. It is nice to see a school upholding Catholic doctrine instead of shying away from it (so as not to be hate-mongering anti-homosexuals)

 

[blessedtoo]

Slow down there …I never said that greenjeans has nothing to contribute. I was simply defending the other poster’s right to call out on the carpet the semblance of this poster to previous a (and banned) CA poster. Please get your facts correct.

You are correct and I suspected you would remember.

 

[setter]

It’s very difficult for these kids to harbor the attitude held by some of their seniors regarding homosexuality and homosexual conduct. The days are past when the gays stayed in the closet and the only professed gays were in the arts.

They see gays everyday, interact with them at school, and their experience shows them the gays fall all across the spectrum of the people they know. Few of their seniors spend much time condemning the heterosexual foibles and adventures of their own cohort, and the younger people have simply taken their example and extended it to gays.

As these kids age, they will continue to see gays in the workplace, raising kids, contributing to society, and will include them in their social circles much the way so many of their seniors include the divorced, remarried, and adulterous. It’s no big deal to them. They don’t think other people’s sex life is any of their business. This is really an incredible shift in social outlook and at the moment, I can’;t really think of any other shift that has happened so quickly.

IF your observation and prediction comes to pass, what will this mean to YOU?

 

[GreenJeans]

IF your observation and prediction comes to pass, what will this mean to YOU?

Nothing. What will it *mean *to YOU?

 

[fix]

I
As these kids age, they will continue to see gays in the workplace, raising kids, contributing to society, and will include them in their social circles much the way so many of their seniors include the divorced, remarried, and adulterous. It’s no big deal to them. They don’t think other people’s sex life is any of their business. This is really an incredible shift in social outlook and at the moment, I can’;t really think of any other shift that has happened so quickly.

Yes, it is called a dulling of conscience. Desensitization is at work. It has happend before in recent decades. The fruit of this desensitization is seen everywhere. We are paying for it today and it seems it will get even worse.

 

[GreenJeans]

Yes, it is called a dulling of conscience. Desensitization is at work. It has happend before in recent decades. The fruit of this desensitization is seen everywhere. We are paying for it today and it seems it will get even worse.

The big difference between the kids and their seniors is that the kids don’t think we are paying any price. Their values are such that the same situations which their seniors see as a price are seen as benign. They will agree the situations exist, but have no reason to see them as a problem. It is the variance n values that is at the core of the different perceptions.

 

[setter]

Nothing.

I appreciate your candor and transparency.

What will it *mean *to YOU?

To heed John Paul II’s call for the new evangelization:

Over the years, I have often repeated the summons to the new evangelization. I do so again now, especially in order to insist that we must rekindle in ourselves the impetus of the beginnings and allow ourselves to be filled with the ardor of the apostolic preaching which followed Pentecost. We must revive in ourselves the burning conviction of Paul, who cried out: ‘Woe to me if I do not preach the Gospel’ (1 Cor 9:16). This passion will not fail to stir in the Church a new sense of mission, which cannot be left to a group of ‘specialists’ but must involve the responsibility of all the members of the People of God. Those who have come into genuine contact with Christ cannot keep him for themselves; they must proclaim him. A new apostolic outreach is needed, which will be lived as the everyday commitment of Christian communities and groups.” (NMI, 40) ~ John Paul II

aodonline.org/aodonline-sqlimages/shms/publications/WhatIsNewEvangelization.pdf

 

[fix]

The big difference between the kids and their seniors is that the kids don’t think we are paying any price. Their values are such that the same situations which their seniors see as a price are seen as benign. They will agree the situations exist, but have no reason to see them as a problem. It is the variance n values that is at the core of the different perceptions.

Immaturity may lead one into faulty reasoning, but that is no justification for holding erroneous views. I think even the immature are capable of grasping truth.

 

[GreenJeans]

Immaturity may lead one into faulty reasoning, but that is no justification for holding erroneous views. I think even the immature are capable of grasping truth.

They certainly are capable of grasping the truth. However, the question they face is exactly what is the truth? Their experience leads them to reject what some of their seniors tell them is the truth because their own eyes show them something different. They have had the opportunity to interact with gays in a way their seniors did not. We might even say that despite their years they have more experiential knowledge with gays than their seniors, and therefore have a different variable to evaluate in their investigation of the truth.

 

[fix]

They certainly are capable of grasping the truth. However, the question they face is exactly what is the truth?

Sounds like Pilate?

Their experience leads them to reject what some of their seniors tell them is the truth because their own eyes show them something different.

It does? They make think truth is emotion, but that of course is folly. They will hold these erroneous beliefs if they think simply as materialists.

They have had the opportunity to interact with gays in a way their seniors did not. We might even say that despite their years they have more experiential knowledge with gays than their seniors, and therefore have a different variable to evaluate in their investigation of the truth.

The experential knowlege you speak of is really a type of emotionalism devoid of moral truth. One may come to approve of all types of immorality if one judges poorly because one has a faulty conscience.

 

[setter]

They certainly are capable of grasping the truth. However, the question they face is exactly what is the truth?

Hence the need for evangelization.

Their experience leads them to reject what some of their seniors tell them is the truth because their own eyes show them something different.

Who is living the truth?

They have had the opportunity to interact with gays in a way their seniors did not. We might even say that despite their years they have more experiential knowledge with gays than their seniors, and therefore have a different variable to evaluate in their investigation of the truth.

Without a natural law reference point, variables of deviant sexual attraction and expresions are left without critical evaluation. How is this “investigation of the truth”?

 

[Digitonomy]

TThe more that I think about, the parents for these confused and scandalous students ought to be put on notice that their will not be allowed to graduate until they have publically recanted of their anti-Catholic beliefs.

I don’t think anyone yet has addressed this point that you made. I don’t believe that the school can do this, nor should they. They can require students to be knowledgeable about Catholic doctrine, but they are not the thought police, and cannot deny students free will. Nor can they deny students their diplomas based merely on the students’ opinions. Remember that many non-Catholics attend Catholic schools.

Teaching faith is a like leading a horse to water. You can make sure they know where the water is, but you can only hope and pray they will become thirsty.

 

[GreenJeans]

Sounds like Pilate?

It does? They make think truth is emotion, but that of course is folly. They will hold these erroneous beliefs if they think simply as materialists.

The experential knowlege you speak of is really a type of emotionalism devoid of moral truth. One may come to approve of all types of immorality if one judges poorly because one has a faulty conscience.

If someone is capable of grasping the truth, it’s reasonable for them to ask what is the truth. It’s reasonable for Pilate, Plato, or Polonius, too.

There is little need to classify personal experience as emotion. We all make judgements based on our personal experience. Sometimes emotion is a component of the experience; sometimes it isn’t. Somtimes emotion is a factor in the judgement; sometimes it isn’t.

The kids are forming their consciences. They just disagree with some of their seniors about what a well formed conscience is. From a social and psychological perspective, the amazing thing is how rapidly this is happening. We are witnessing a complete social flip-flop in a very short time.

 

[fix]

I don’t think anyone yet has addressed this point that you made. I don’t believe that the school can do this, nor should they. They can require students to be knowledgeable about Catholic doctrine, but they are not the thought police, and cannot deny students free will. Nor can they deny students their diplomas based merely on the students’ opinions. Remember that many non-Catholics attend Catholic schools.

Teaching faith is a like leading a horse to water. You can make sure they know where the water is, but you can only hope and pray they will become thirsty.

This is an interesting point. Would you think it reasonable for a private school to require students to sign a pledge against cheating? If they refused they would not allowed to enroll?

I can see your point about non Catholics, but they are often exempt from religion class so they would be exempt from any Catholic oath. Is it unjustly dimishing free will for a Catholic school to insist Catholic students accept what the Church teaches and abide by it?

 

[GreenJeans]

Hence the need for evangelization.

Who is living the truth?

Without a natural law reference point, variables of deviant sexual attraction and expresions are left without critical evaluation. How is this “investigation of the truth”?

I can’t say who is living the truth because I don’t know what “living the truth” means. What does it mean?

The kids are told homosexual conduct is harmful to society. They are told this is the truth. Their personal experience is at odds with this claim. So, their evaluation is an investigation to determine if what they are told is true. They are concluding what they have been told is not true.

 

[fix]

If someone is capable of grasping the truth, it’s reasonable for them to ask what is the truth. It’s reasonable for Pilate, Plato, or Polonius, too.

OK, but Pilate stood before Truth when he asked that question and we are talking about a Catholic school here. I assume the school teaches truth. If students reject that truth such a rejection would be a reflection on them, not the truth.

There is little need to classify personal experience as emotion. We all make judgements based on our personal experience. Sometimes emotion is a component of the experience; sometimes it isn’t. Somtimes emotion is a factor in the judgement; sometimes it isn’t.

Personal experience that contradicts objective truth is being misinterpreted and happens because we our all open to deception.

The kids are forming their consciences. They just disagree with some of their seniors about what a well formed conscience is. From a social and psychological perspective, the amazing thing is how rapidly this is happening. We are witnessing a complete social flip-flop in a very short time.

That disagreement is not justified. It happens like all societal decay happens, but that is not justification.

 

[GreenJeans]

This is an interesting point. Would you think it reasonable for a private school to require students to sign a pledge against cheating? If they refused they would not allowed to enroll?

I can see your point about non Catholics, but they are often exempt from religion class so they would be exempt from any Catholic oath. Is it unjustly dimishing free will for a Catholic school to insist Catholic students accept what the Church teaches and abide by it?

It’s not at all unreasonable to demand such pledges at a private school at the beginning of the term. However, if the requirements for graduation are laid out at the beginning of the term, and the students fulfill those requirements, it is unreasonable to add an additional one just prior to graduation.

 

[setter]

I don’t think anyone yet has addressed this point that you made. I don’t believe that the school can do this, nor should they. They can require students to be knowledgeable about Catholic doctrine, but they are not the thought police, and cannot deny students free will. Nor can they deny students their diplomas based merely on the students’ opinions. Remember that many non-Catholics attend Catholic schools.

The Catholic school should hold accountable and subject to ongoing enrolment/graduation any public practices contrary to the faith and a cause for scandal, IMO.

Teaching faith is a like leading a horse to water. You can make sure they know where the water is, but you can only hope and pray they will become thirsty.

Then I can only conclude that the watering trough of these student’s parents is parched or non-potable.

The family is the primary unit for planting and watering the seed of faith. The public comments by those quoted wayward students show a gross deficit in basic catechism and natural law basis for morality. The greatest draw for any faith is one that is being lived in an attractive and vibrant manner – parents stand indicted.

 

[GreenJeans]

OK, but Pilate stood before Truth when he asked that question and we are talking about a Catholic school here. I assume the school teaches truth. If students reject that truth such a rejection would be a reflection on them, not the truth.

Personal experience that contradicts objective truth is being misinterpreted and happens because we our all open to deception.

That disagreement is not justified. It happens like all societal decay happens, but that is not justification.

We all stand before various truths all the time, but we only learn about them by asking questions. I don’t speak for Pilate, Plato, or Polonius, but I ask questions all the time. I ask if something is true, then investigate to detremine if it is.

Disagreement is always justified if there are reasonable grounds for disagreement. That’s how we progress in our knowledge. If a claim is tested, and fails the test, then disagrement is reasonable.

 

[fix]

It’s not at all unreasonable to demand such pledges at a private school at the beginning of the term. However, if the requirements for graduation are laid out at the beginning of the term, and the students fulfill those requirements, it is unreasonable to add an additional one just prior to graduation.

Ok, that much I will agree with. These students have been failed by their parents and the school it seems