Reaction grows to gay student's expulsion

[Other_Eric]

Those with same sex attraction are quite capable of living to the sexual mores of the rest of society. If this little known fact is not believed then we are missing the point altogether. If one is banned from a school because he is attracted one way but has never acted on it then I belive there has been a disservice done here. I continue to believe that there is no known cause of a homosexual orientation per se. This does not make homosexual behavior acceptable but we should not be quick to judge those with the orientation and say they must change that aspect of their personhood.

I disagree. Students attending a Christian education facility have the right not to have their formation in the faith compromised by the presence of one with a sexual disorder. The Church herself has affirmed that irrespective of whether or not the condition has been acted upon that the individuals subject to it are still unable to relate properly to either sex. Therefore, to expel a student with same-sex attractions from this university is an act of Christian charity towards the rest of the student body.

 

[goofyjim]

I disagree. Students attending a Christian education facility have the right not to have their formation in the faith compromised by the presence of one with a sexual disorder. The Church herself has affirmed that irrespective of whether or not the condition has been acted upon that the individuals subject to it are still unable to relate properly to either sex. Therefore, to expel a student with same-sex attractions from this university is an act of Christian charity towards the rest of the student body.

Where do you get your hatred from? I have lived celibately my whole life. If I had been kicked out of a school simply because of an attraction I sure would have complained. I can quite easily relate to people of either gender. This is not an act of Christian charity to expel someone unless he acts on it.

 

[hasikelee]

Where do you get your hatred from? I have lived celibately my whole life. If I had been kicked out of a school simply because of an attraction I sure would have complained. I can quite easily relate to people of either gender. This is not an act of Christian charity to expel someone unless he acts on it.

To add onto that, obviously if the student who was expelled had only an attraction, no one would know.

So quite obviously he made a choice to make it known, or his close friends ratted on him.

 

[goofyjim]

To add onto that, obviously if the student who was expelled had only an attraction, no one would know.

So quite obviously he made a choice to make it known, or his close friends ratted on him.

Or it was discovered w/o him revealing it, like a personal journal being read inadvertently. I am against homosexual acts but I believe we have a long way to go in compassion if we continue to demand heterosexual perfection and don’t allow some weakness in our fellow neighbor.

 

[MonicaC]

Where do you get your hatred from? I have lived celibately my whole life. If I had been kicked out of a school simply because of an attraction I sure would have complained. I can quite easily relate to people of either gender. This is not an act of Christian charity to expel someone unless he acts on it.

I agree that if he lived a life of celibatcy(sp?) than he should never have been expeled. But in the artical states that his boyfriend wrote the log to let others know. So apperently he wasn’t living a celibant life.

Just my two cents.

God Bless,

Monica

 

[Other_Eric]

Or it was discovered w/o him revealing it, like a personal journal being read inadvertently. I am against homosexual acts but I believe we have a long way to go in compassion if we continue to demand heterosexual perfection and don’t allow some weakness in our fellow neighbor.

Christ says we must be perfect to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. To my mind it would be an act of contemptible disregard for the salvation of another by demanding anything less than what Christ demands.

The simple fact is that in one with same-sex attractions, one inevitably finds a host of other disorders and self-destructive behaviors even without the disgusting genital behavior. A university is not the place in which to resolve these personal issues as their presence would sully the learning environment that needs to be fostered there. I maintain that the expulsion is therefore appropriate.

Hasikelee has made an instructive point. Put quite simply, unless the condition manifests itself in some way, no one should know. One generally does not know of the impulses and temptations that those with same-sex attractions are subject to outside of voluntary self-disclosure by those individuals. We must therefore attempt to discover what motivation an individual might have in such disclosure.

Outside of homosexual literature, which tends to describe “coming out” in terms of psychological self-acceptance, I can only think of two other reasons to make such a revelation. The aim would have to be either indoctrination or recruitment. So we can see that in the expulsion of such an individual, the university is well within its rights and is acting to protect the spiritual and physical welfare of its student body.

Even if we were to allow for the more florid explanations of the homosexual apologists and assert that the unsolicited dissemination of this information contributed to a positive self-image of the individual in question, we would have to ask exactly what that self-image is. The unpleasant answer would have to be that the individual has chosen to make his disordered sexuality a central component of his identity. Thus, the university would be faced with the prospect of a nascent homosexual apologist on its campus. We ought to applaud any university that is proactive in removing such a potentially disruptive influence.

We must remember that the Church condemns only unjust discrimination against these individuals. I see nothing unjust here.

 

[Exalt]

Other Eric:

I disagree. Students attending a Christian education facility have the right not to have their formation in the faith compromised by the presence of one with a sexual disorder. The Church herself has affirmed that irrespective of whether or not the condition has been acted upon that the individuals subject to it are still unable to relate properly to either sex. Therefore, to expel a student with same-sex attractions from this university is an act of Christian charity towards the rest of the student body.

Other Eric, do you ever masturbate? Do you ever look at pornographic material? Do you ever look at a woman with lust? Do you ever have homosexual thoughts? Have you ever had sex outside of marriage? If you’re married, have you ever slept with another woman? Have you ever had sex with a man?

None of my business?

That’s right. It’s none of my business.

And it’s none of any university’s business either.

Outside of homosexual literature, which tends to describe “coming out” in terms of psychological self-acceptance, I can only think of two other reasons to make such a revelation. The aim would have to be either indoctrination or recruitment.

In other words, when someone tells about their sexual orientation, they want to convert others to accepting that such sexual feelings should be acted upon?

I don’t think so.

The “point” of telling others about one’s homosexual inclinations is *not *for people to accept that acting on homosexual inclinations is okay. While that might be a part of one’s motivation, the primary factor is to simply free one’s self from deception. In my experience, many people with homosexual tendencies feel alienated from society. They have different feelings than other people of thier own gender. Many times, they are expected to participate in social situations that assume a heterosexual orientation (i.e., the pressure to date). To avoid persecution they must “blend in” and allow people to assume that they do indeed have a heterosexual orientation. Thus, you can see how many people with homosexual tendencies feel as if they are living a constant, unending lie. They see themselves as always decieving others. By telling people about thier condition, they free themselves from that deciet.

And not just “openly gay” people come out of the closet. How many Catholic folks on these forums have “come out” - but pledge themselves to celibacy?

Even if we were to allow for the more florid explanations of the homosexual apologists and assert that the unsolicited dissemination of this information contributed to a positive self-image of the individual in question, we would have to ask exactly what that self-image is. The unpleasant answer would have to be that the individual has chosen to make his disordered sexuality a central component of his identity. Thus, the university would be faced with the prospect of a nascent homosexual apologist on its campus. We ought to applaud any university that is proactive in removing such a potentially disruptive influence.

You know what, you’re absolutely right. How did I not see it before? Of course! Being homosexual makes you a pro-gay apologist! How was I so stupid before? You’ve really enlightened me. Now, excuse me while I go to my local Catholic university and demand that all muslims, jews, hindus, buddhists, and any unorthodox (read: heretical) Christians be expelled. Because, as you stated, the only reason for one to give out personal information is to convert others. And we can’t have dissent and differing opinions in our colleges! And while I’m at it, I’ll go ahead and check facebook and myspace for anyone admitting to drinking underage, having pre-marital sex, looking at pornography or masturbating, or not going to Mass every sunday. They might as well get expelled too, because they’re openly admitting to moral sins as well.

Hell, why stop at the universities? Why not expand it to America as a whole? After all, no one is **forcing **you to live here. You can leave whenever you like.

You people make me sick with your “freedom” and “openness” of ideas. It’s unchristian. We ought to only allow our people to see one set of ideas - and if anyone wavers from it - they just a quick boot out of the country.

Thank you Other Eric. You’ve really opened my eyes to the loving embrace of Jesus Christ.

 

[Reepicheep]

Christ says we must be perfect to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. To my mind it would be an act of contemptible disregard for the salvation of another by demanding anything less than what Christ demands.

**Other Eric, are you perfect? Are you totally free from all sins and defects? If not, than ought we not demand your expulsion from any institute of higher learning? Or for that matter, any school, even elementary school? Surely the pupils in high school have the right to be protected from such sinfulness?

** The simple fact is that in one with same-sex attractions, one inevitably finds a host of other disorders and self-destructive behaviors even without the disgusting genital behavior. A university is not the place in which to resolve these personal issues as their presence would sully the learning environment that needs to be fostered there. I maintain that the expulsion is therefore appropriate.

And the epileptics, the blind, the neurotic, the autistic, anyone with phobias or obsessive-compulsive behavior? Anyone with a drinking problem, or a drug problem, or a history of having had such problems? Anyone who suffers from clinical depression, or manic-depression?

Hasikelee has made an instructive point. Put quite simply, unless the condition manifests itself in some way, no one should know. One generally does not know of the impulses and temptations that those with same-sex attractions are subject to outside of voluntary self-disclosure by those individuals. We must therefore attempt to discover what motivation an individual might have in such disclosure.

Outside of homosexual literature, which tends to describe “coming out” in terms of psychological self-acceptance, I can only think of two other reasons to make such a revelation. The aim would have to be either indoctrination or recruitment.

**Or that keeping secrets is emoptionally painful, or that a person is tired of hearing other people tell filthy jokes about a part of him that he can’t help feeling, or using “gay” as a generic insult, or otherwise denigrating him: and it seems less painful to admit this than to keep hiding.
Or that someone else “outed” him against his will, or is threatening to out him, and he tells to avoid being told about.
Or it happens inadvertantly, with no intent on his part.
Or that he can’t stand not knowing which of his friends is really his friend, and which would turn on him if they knew the truth.
Or that he has a simple respect for truthfulness, so doesn’t want to lie abut it, even if telling the truth means he will be punished.
**
So we can see that in the expulsion of such an individual, the university is well within its rights

**Maybe. I’d say that circumstances alter cases. If the student signed a promise to obey certain rules, then broke them…

** and is acting to protect the spiritual and physical welfare of its student body.

Even if we were to allow for the more florid explanations of the homosexual apologists and assert that the unsolicited dissemination of this information contributed to a positive self-image of the individual in question, we would have to ask exactly what that self-image is.
The unpleasant answer would have to be that the individual has chosen to make his disordered sexuality a central component of his identity.

Really? I would have said that I never chose to be heterosexual…it’s just how I am. On the other hand, I suffer from poor eyesight, which I never chose for myself. Is it not even possible, in your eyes, that the disordered attraction for their own gender some people are afflicted with, happens without their prior consent?

Thus, the university would be faced with the prospect of a nascent homosexual apologist on its campus.

"Prospect". “Nascent”. Expel them not for what they did, but for what we’re worried they might do?

We ought to applaud any university that is proactive in removing such a potentially disruptive influence.

We must remember that the Church condemns only unjust discrimination against these individuals. I see nothing unjust here.

Because you see no injustice in expelling someone for experiencing homosexual urges. Regardless of whether they act on those urges, or desire to experience them.

.

 

[hasikelee]

Other Eric, do you ever masturbate? Do you ever look at pornographic material? Do you ever look at a woman with lust? Do you ever have homosexual thoughts? Have you ever had sex outside of marriage? If you’re married, have you ever slept with another woman? Have you ever had sex with a man?

None of my business?

That’s damn right. It’s none of my business.

And it’s none of any university’s business either.

Actually, that could be incorrect depending on the university. If a university drew up an agreement that its students would abide by the rule not to masturbate and the student was caught masturbating, then that would be breaking the university’s policy. Depending on the university’s stated consequences for breaking policy, the student could be expelled.

If the student signed an agreement stating a policy of not practicing homosexual acts on campus, and the student was caught doing those acts, then depending on the legitimacy and legality of the agreement, the university is well within its rights to expel the student.

I think this student’s outrage and publicity is only hurting the homosexual movement. It makes the student look as if he is deliberately digging for something, and also stupid. He signed an at will agreement with the university.

 

[Other_Eric]

Other Eric, do you ever masturbate? Do you ever look at pornographic material? Do you ever look at a woman with lust? Do you ever have homosexual thoughts? Have you ever had sex outside of marriage? If you’re married, have you ever slept with another woman? Have you ever had sex with a man?

None of my business?

That’s damn right. It’s none of my business.

And it’s none of any university’s business either.

In other words, when someone tells about their sexual orientation, they want to convert others to accepting that such sexual feelings should be acted upon?

I don’t think so.

The “point” of telling others about one’s homosexual inclinations is *not *for people to accept that acting on homosexual inclinations is okay. While that might be a part of one’s motivation, the primary factor is to simply free one’s self from deception. In my experience, many people with homosexual tendencies feel alienated from society. They have different feelings than other people of thier own gender. Many times, they are expected to participate in social situations that assume a heterosexual orientation (i.e., the pressure to date). To avoid persecution they must “blend in” and allow people to assume that they do indeed have a heterosexual orientation. Thus, you can see how many people with homosexual tendencies feel as if they are living a constant, unending lie. They see themselves as always decieving others. By telling people about thier condition, they free themselves from that deciet.

And not just “openly gay” people come out of the closet. How many Catholic folks on these forums have “come out” - but pledge themselves to celibacy?

You know what, you’re absolutely right. How did I not see it before? Of course! Being homosexual makes you a pro-gay apologist! How was I so stupid before? You’ve really enlightened me. Now, excuse me while I go to my local Catholic university and demand that all muslims, jews, hindus, buddhists, and any unorthodox (read: heretical) Christians be expelled. Because, as you stated, the only reason for one to give out personal information is to convert others. And we can’t have dissent and differing opinions in our colleges! And while I’m at it, I’ll go ahead and check facebook and myspace for anyone admitting to drinking underage, having pre-marital sex, looking at pornography or masturbating, or not going to Mass every sunday. They might as well get expelled too, because they’re openly admitting to moral sins as well.

Hell, why stop at the universities? Why not expand it to America as a whole? After all, no one is **forcing **you to live here. You can leave whenever you like.

It never ceases to amaze me how some in these forums can so easily shift into making arguments over this issue personal. What I do, think or feel is simply not relevant as I choose not to make my own personal faults an issue in either this or any other debate.

As for the rest of your argument, it seems to me that you are going to have to decide exactly how it is you expect a student in a university setting to behave. If you are going to say that the student’s sexual orientation or whatnot is his own business, then this implies that he will keep it his own business and not make it public knowledge. In other words, he will have to live that “constant, unending lie.” If he must bear his soul for his own psychic well-being, then there are therapists’ offices and confessionals.

As far as the “living a lie” line goes, I have two words for people caught up in such a dilemma: grow up. This sycophantic need for the approval of others to the exclusion of good sense is not becoming in a soldier of Christ. This is nothing more than window dressing for using other people as tools for one’s own selfish emotional needs. If you feel there is persecution in silence, I say: “Tough. Take up your cross!”

As for your rather juvenile over-reaction and leap to Christian totalitarianism once one suggests applying the virtue of prudence to issues such as this, I have to ask if you’ve been swallowing Andrew Sullivan’s suggestions about “theocons” whole. We can at least say of your first suggestion that the universities would finally have regained the Catholic character they were founded upon and that the nation as a whole would be in a far better position than it is now if it followed this program.

Men with same-sex attractions have all the freedoms that any of the rest of us has. What you are searching for is freedom from consequences.

 

[Exalt]

It never ceases to amaze me how some in these forums can so easily shift into making arguments over this issue personal. What I do, think or feel is simply not relevant as I choose not to make my own personal faults an issue in either this or any other debate.

If it’s not relevant to this debate, how is it relevant when you’re taking a class on accounting or theatre or business or any other major offered at a small liberal arts college like the one in question here? If it makes no difference here, in a religiously themed forum, directly dicussing an issue of morality and discrimination, how in the hell does it make a difference in a typical college lecture?

(Other Eric, I thought you would have seen this coming? Hmm… perhaps you’re not up on your game tonight? )

As for the rest of your argument, it seems to me that you are going to have to decide exactly how it is you expect a student in a university setting to behave.

The sexual orienation of students should not be grounds for dismissal from a university.

If you are going to say that the student’s sexual orientation or whatnot is his own business, then this implies that he will keep it his own business and not make it public knowledge.

What exactly is “public knowledge”? Is it public knowledge that I masturbate occasionally? Well, if someone I trusted asked me if I did, I’d probably tell them the truth or say that the question was inappropriate. But lie about it? Never. Does that make it public knowledge, in your mind?

When I say “it’s his own business,” I mean to say it’s none of the university’s concern for the purposes of the university-student relationship. Between friends, one’s sexual life might indeed be relevant and not inappriate to talk about. There are many things that would be relevant in the context of an aquantiance-aquantiance relationship that would be very irrelevant in the student-univeristy relationship.

In other words, he will have to live that “constant, unending lie.” If he must bear his soul for his own psychic well-being, then there are therapists’ offices and confessionals.

As far as the “living a lie” line goes, I have two words for people caught up in such a dilemma: grow up.

Not everyone is Catholic. Not everyone has the means to go to a therapist. And even so, how does telling strangers help one release one from the feeling of alienation from soceity and a life of deciet?

This sycophantic need for the approval of others to the exclusion of good sense is not becoming in a soldier of Christ. This is nothing more than window dressing for using other people as tools for one’s own selfish emotional needs. If you feel there is persecution in silence, I say: “Tough. Take up your cross!”

… wow.

You show no compasion. No understanding.

So, let me get this straight. You equate heart-felt disclosure of personal information “using other people as tools for one’s own selfish emotional needs?”

Damn dude.

That’s pretty cold.

Get off your high horse and come down to where real people are, with real problems and real feelings.

As for your rather juvenile over-reaction and leap to Christian totalitarianism once one suggests applying the virtue of prudence to issues such as this, I have to ask if you’ve been swallowing Andrew Sullivan’s suggestions about “theocons” whole. We can at least say of your first suggestion that the universities would finally have regained the Catholic character they were founded upon and that the nation as a whole would be in a far better position than it is now if it followed this program.

1. I have no idea who Andrew Sullivan is
2. Be a bit more specific. This statement (“Your first suggestion that the universities would finally have regained the Catholic character they were founded upon”) seems to refer to “Now, excuse me while I go to my local Catholic university and demand that all muslims, jews, hindus, buddhists, and any unorthodox (read: heretical) Christians be expelled.”

If that’s what you believe, I think you should take a look at Nostre Aetate and get back to me. Stop pretending to be an orthodox Catholic.

1. “The nation as a whole would be in a far better position than it is now if it followed this program”

…

Wow.

My leap to Christian totalitarian was inaccurate how…?

 

[Other_Eric]

If it’s not relevant to this debate, how is it relevant when you’re taking a class on accounting or theatre or business or any other major offered at a small liberal arts college like the one in question here? If it makes no difference here, in a religiously themed forum, directly dicussing an issue of morality and discrimination, how in the hell does it make a difference in a typical college lecture?
. . .

The most striking bit in your reply was that you have no idea who Andrew Sullivan is. It occurred to me that this is probably the most hopeful feature in your replies so far.

The difference between my faults and the faults of our hypothetical same-sex attracted student is that I don’t share mine even after repeated solicitation. This is not the case for a student who broadcasts this information and so makes it an issue in a class on accounting or theatre or business or any other major offered at a small liberal arts college. The student in question here was not shipped off to Guantanamo to have the information about his sexual orientation forcibly extracted from him; he freely volunteered it. Now, he is dealing with the consequences of that decision. Surely you understand the difference between asking after some bit of information and suddenly being told about something you never asked about.

In your reply, you use an example of masturbation and indicate that you might tell a close acquaintance, if they asked, about your struggles in this area or you might tell them that the question is inappropriate. Well, the question is inappropriate for masturbation and no less so than for same-sex attraction. Saying so is not “living a lie,” it is keeping personal information from people who have no conceivable right to it.

As far as the university’s interests in the private communications between intimate friends, it is true that there exist few but this does not mean that they do not exist at all. In the present case, this information became so widespread that it was no longer the subject of shared intimacy, but a public fact that the university would have been foolish to ignore.

I maintain that individuals with same-sex attraction disorder are free to use either the therapist’s office or the confessional if they need to “vent.” If they are not Catholic, I would point out that most universities offer free counseling to their student bodies. There exists no need for a student at a university to ever tell another student of this personal struggle. Saying that there is and encouraging disclosure does nothing more than enable the puerile adolescence such individuals are susceptible to and reinforces a sort of parasitic victim mentality.

As far as my being cold is concerned, truth is sometimes brutal. Christianity is not about turning our backs on its teachings simply because they happen to make us feel bad. If that was the case, there would be no such thing as sin. That fact is that there is sin and there are prudent ways of handling those subject to same-sex attractions and foolish ways that are borne out of an ignorant or misplaced compassion.

 

[Exalt]

The most striking bit in your reply was that you have no idea who Andrew Sullivan is. It occurred to me that this is probably the most hopeful feature in your replies so far.

The difference between my faults and the faults of our hypothetical same-sex attracted student is that I don’t share mine even after repeated solicitation.

This is not the case for a student who broadcasts this information and so makes it an issue in a class on accounting or theatre or business or any other major offered at a small liberal arts college.

You still have not demonstrated how posting about one’s sexual orientation on Myspace.com or in Facebook, or discussing it openly with friends outside of class neccessarily makes it an issue in a college class. If you demonstrate that, then you might have a point.

In your reply, you use an example of masturbation and indicate that you might tell a close acquaintance, if they asked, about your struggles in this area or you might tell them that the question is inappropriate. Well, the question is inappropriate for masturbation and no less so than for same-sex attraction. Saying so is not “living a lie,” it is keeping personal information from people who have no conceivable right to it.

Can you not even see how people who live with same sex attractions might feel like they are in a constant state of deciet? I don’t suppose you’ve ever been a teenager trying to explain to his peers or parents why he doesn’t date? Try answering that one without lying.

In the present case, this information became so widespread that it was no longer the subject of shared intimacy, but a public fact that the university would have been foolish to ignore.

Why would it have been foolish to ignore this? Why is a student’s sexual orientation an issue that any university should be concerned with?

As far as my being cold is concerned, truth is sometimes brutal. Christianity is not about turning our backs on its teachings simply because they happen to make us feel bad. If that was the case, there would be no such thing as sin. That fact is that there is sin and there are prudent ways of handling those subject to same-sex attractions and foolish ways that are borne out of an ignorant or misplaced compassion.

Yes, truth can be hard sometimes. But that doesn’t mean pain and suffering is a good thing. We ought to ease the pain of our brothers and sisters where we can. It’s our duty as Christians. Lighten the load, carry our crosses together. “We are one body,” after all.