Massachusetts Catholic School Bars Same-Sex Couple From Prom

[fix]

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.

I ask questions constantly. The problem I have with your position is that the test utilized is substandard.

 

[setter]

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

Living in a way that accepts and conforms with the truth.

TRUTH. Conformity of mind and reality. Three kinds of conformity give rise to three kinds of truth. In* logical* truth, the mind is conformed or in agreement with things outside the mind, either in assenting to what is or in denying what is not. Its opposite is error. In *metaphysical *or *ontological *truth, things conform with the mind. This is primary conformity, when something corresponds to the idea of its maker, and it is secondary conformity when something is intelligible and therefore true to anyone who knows it. In *moral *truth, what is said conforms with what is on one’s mind. This is truthfulness and its opposite is falsehood.

therealpresence.org/dictionary/tdict.htm

“Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me.’” John 14: 6

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.

On what thoughtful basis beyond thier own limited subjective experience are these students supposedly concluding to know what is true or not?

 

[GreenJeans]

I ask questions constantly. The problem I have with your position is that the test utilized is substandard.

The kids are using a very simple test. They look for the harm that is caused by gays. They don’t see it. One might fault their maturity or thought process, but the strength of that personal experience trumps the contrary claims of some of their seniors.

To clarify my position: My position is that kid have a very different attitude towards homosexuality than some of their seniors, and the general social attitude is rapidly changing from one of condemnation to benign neglect or approval.

 

[fix]

The kids are using a very simple test. They look for the harm that is caused by gays. They don’t see it. One might fault their maturity or thought process, but the strength of that personal experience trumps the contrary claims of some of their seniors.

Their experience is limited and excludes so much that it is an invalid way to discern right from wrong. It is a type of materialism that excludes so much one feels sorry for those so deceived and holding to such erroneous notions.

To clarify my position: My position is that kid have a very different attitude towards homosexuality than some of their seniors, and the general social attitude is rapidly changing from one of condemnation to benign neglect or approval.

I agree that is what is happening. It is happening because they are reasoning poorly.

A good example of this is the wide spead acceptance of contraception. As you say people conclude no one is hurt thus it is good. Yet, we see that separating love and sex has led to all types of problems in this culture. Using your reasoning anything goes that does not cause direct physical harm.

 

[GreenJeans]

Living in a way that accepts and conforms with the truth.

therealpresence.org/dictionary/tdict.htm

“Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me.’” John 14: 6

On what thoughtful basis beyond thier own limited subjective experience are these students supposedly concluding to know what is true or not?

OK. I understand your terms. The kids are looking at activity outside their mind, assenting that gays are not causing any specific harm due to their sexual conduct, and dissenting with the idea that they are.

The kids are using their limited subjective experience to conclude that gays are not causing any harm. However, their limited experience with gays is often far more expansive than that of their seniors. It’s direct, personal observation. Outside of that, they may be relying on what others say. Some probably do, some probably don’t.

 

[setter]

OK. I understand your terms. The kids are looking at activity outside their mind, assenting that gays are not causing any specific harm due to their sexual conduct, and dissenting with the idea that they are.

The kids are using their limited subjective experience to conclude that gays are not causing any harm. However, their limited experience with gays is often far more expansive than that of their seniors. It’s direct, personal observation. Outside of that, they may be relying on what others say. Some probably do, some probably don’t.

Do you believe that there exists an absolute standard or basis for determining truth?

 

[GreenJeans]

Their experience is limited and excludes so much that it is an invalid way to discern right from wrong. It is a type of materialism that excludes so much one feels sorry for those so deceived and holding to such erroneous notions.

I agree that is what is happening. It is happening because they are reasoning poorly.

A good example of this is the wide spead acceptance of contraception. As you say people conclude no one is hurt thus it is good. Yet, we see that separating love and sex has led to all types of problems in this culture. Using your reasoning anything goes that does not cause direct physical harm.

The kids experience may be very limited. But we rely on our own personal experience to a huge extent. That’s what the kids are doing. They have a different experience than their elders. When a claim is made, and they don’t see it validated in their personal experience, they dismiss the claim. If these kids are capable of grasping the truth, that’s what they are grasping.

I have not presented any reasoning that says anything goes that does not cause direct physical harm. I have recognized a change in social attitudes and have offered reasons for it.

 

[GreenJeans]

Do you believe that there exists an absolute standard or basis for determining truth?

That’s not a discussion I choose to enter. I’m limiting myself here to discussing the change in kids attitudes and the reasons for them.

 

[fix]

The kids experience may be very limited. But we rely on our own personal experience to a huge extent. That’s what the kids are doing. They have a different experience than their elders. When a claim is made, and they don’t see it validated in their personal experience, they dismiss the claim. If these kids are capable of grasping the truth, that’s what they are grasping.

I have not presented any reasoning that says anything goes that does not cause direct physical harm. I have recognized a change in social attitudes and have offered reasons for it.

It seems your reasons are that people with little experience form beliefs that are based on incomplete information and exclude much objective truth. They will lead their lives based solely on personal judgement even if it contradicts what is true.

 

[setter]

That’s not a discussion I choose to enter. I’m limiting myself here to discussing the change in kids attitudes and the reasons for them.

Why is that? Why do you choose to throw in the towel of critical thinking and discussion and get to the foundational aspects of your observations and opinions?

Btw – A man without foundation or compass is inevitably on a freefall and lost.

 

[burnside]

The Boston Globe has an article about this in this morning’s paper - this paper constantly promotes the gay agenda and they’ll take any opportunity to make faithful Christians look unreasonable.

That happens with the Scottish newspapers as well.Some of us have stopped buying newspapers,except when our favourite soccer team has been playing.You should see the panic.Free CD’s,DVD’setc.

 

[GreenJeans]

It seems your reasons are that people with little experience form beliefs that are based on incomplete information and exclude much objective truth. They will lead their lives based solely on personal judgement even if it contradicts what is true.

Some are surely poorly informed. Others are just following the crowd. Others have extensive experience with gays, much more than some of their seniors. Some are smart, some are dull. I don’t see this as very different from the way humans generally develop ideas. Who is fully informed when making a decision?

They disagree with their seniors about what is true. That’s different from excluding what is true. Excluding the truth implies they know something is true, yet reject it. I agree they will lead their lives according to personal experience when personal experience does not validate one claim or another. That’s what most of us do. When enough of us have the same shared experience the dominant social attitude changes.

 

[GreenJeans]

Why is that? Why do you choose to throw in the towel of critical thinking and discussion and get to the foundational aspects of your observations and opinions?

Btw – A man without foundation or compass is inevitably on a freefall and lost.

But a man with a firm foundation and compass is confident in accepting or rejecting a challenge.

 

[Digitonomy]

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 think a private school can get away with that easily, if they are signing in advance. Private schools are free to set admission requirements in almost any category, unless otherwise constrained by requirements when they accept funding, . Once a student is enrolled and the school is providing the education, however, they have certain obligations under state law, and it’s a little tougher to say “You can’t have a diploma because you don’t fully accept the Church’s teaching on Purgatory.” Similarly, I don’t think you could kick a student out for expressing a Machiavellian or Hobbesian worldview that condoned cheating. But you could certainly kick them out if they did cheat, or if they incited others to do so.

fix:

Is it unjustly dimishing free will for a Catholic school to insist Catholic students accept what the Church teaches and abide by it?

Making students abide by what the Church teaches is fine. Whether making students accept what the Church teaches is OK depends on what you mean by accept. If they don’t accept e.g. the necessity of confession, forcing them to publicly state that they do (which is what setter proposed) is unlikely to help the situation. However, while they’re attending the school they must act according to the rules of the institution, so they must accept Church teaching and school discipline in that sense, even if they don’t accept it philosophically.

 

[magician]

If you go to a Kosher restaurant, you don’t order a pork chop. The whole thing is ridiculous. It looks like it was a planned event that would make the news. If the student is of the homosexual persuasion, then she should look for another religion. Catholicism is not going to change for her and neither should the school.

 

[anthony022071]

Catholics need to be aware of what they’re up against. Green Jeans’ observations on the situation are accurate. The relativism, peer-pressure tolerance,and lack of respect or concern for anything that reeks of Tradition that characterizes secular, popular culture have undermined the credibility of the Church even for many Catholics.The teachings of Catholicism are distinctly,the very definition of, “uncool”,“lame”,'hypocritical",“bogus”,“bull…”,ignorant, laughably old-fashioned to many people. Many Catholics
don’t want to make themselves conspicuous by their beliefs.
So their own Church is something of an embarrassment to them.

 

[fix]

I think a private school can get away with that easily, if they are signing in advance. Private schools are free to set admission requirements in almost any category, unless otherwise constrained by requirements when they accept funding, . Once a student is enrolled and the school is providing the education, however, they have certain obligations under state law, and it’s a little tougher to say “You can’t have a diploma because you don’t fully accept the Church’s teaching on Purgatory.”

OK

Similarly, I don’t think you could kick a student out for expressing a Machiavellian or Hobbesian worldview that condoned cheating. But you could certainly kick them out if they did cheat, or if they incited others to do so.Making students abide by what the Church teaches is fine. Whether making students accept what the Church teaches is OK depends on what you mean by accept. If they don’t accept e.g. the necessity of confession, forcing them to publicly state that they do (which is what setter proposed) is unlikely to help the situation.

I was thinking along the lines of an oath of fidelity that would be signed upon enrollment.

However, while they’re attending the school they must act according to the rules of the institution, so they must accept Church teaching and school discipline in that sense, even if they don’t accept it philosophically.

OK

 

[fix]

Some are surely poorly informed. Others are just following the crowd. Others have extensive experience with gays, much more than some of their seniors. Some are smart, some are dull. I don’t see this as very different from the way humans generally develop ideas. Who is fully informed when making a decision?

My point is experience does not mean one has a properly formed conscience. There is an absolute truth.

They disagree with their seniors about what is true. That’s different from excluding what is true. Excluding the truth implies they know something is true, yet reject it. I agree they will lead their lives according to personal experience when personal experience does not validate one claim or another. That’s what most of us do. When enough of us have the same shared experience the dominant social attitude changes.

Yes, that is called relativism.

 

[GreenJeans]

My point is experience does not mean one has a properly formed conscience. There is an absolute truth.

Yes, that is called relativism.

The kids may agree with some of their seniors about exerience, a properly formed conscience, and absolute truth. They just disagree with what a properly formed conscience is, and they disagree with their seniors ability to discern the absolute truth.

They are not engaging in relativism since they are making a firm statement that homosexuality and homosexual conduct are perfectly OK. Relativism would acknowledge various opinions on the matter and hold that we cannot know which is correct. The kids have no question; they reject one idea and embrace another.

 

[fix]

The kids may agree with some of their seniors about exerience, a properly formed conscience, and absolute truth. They just disagree with what a properly formed conscience is, and they disagree with their seniors ability to discern the absolute truth.

Disagreement does not mean one is correct. One may disagree that slavery is bad but one is not correct no matter what experience one has had.

They are not engaging in relativism since they are making a firm statement that homosexuality and homosexual conduct are perfectly OK. Relativism would acknowledge various opinions on the matter and hold that we cannot know which is correct. The kids have no question; they reject one idea and embrace another.

I would argue that absolutism requires a supreme law-giver and an interpreter that is infallible. These students may claim to hold to absolutes but their understanding of absolutism must be incorrect if it contradicts the law giver.

And if their absolutes are based on private judgement, what you call experience, that does not seem very absolute does it?