S
St.Claire
Guest
Should active (practicing) homosexuals be allowed to volunteer or work at Catholic Schools ?
Should active homosexuals be allowed to volunteer or work at Catholic Schools?
- Status
J
Jermosh
Guest
I would vote yes. The only caveat is they must abide by the schools moral clause, if they have one and they should IMO.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
No, not because they are gay, but because there is a standard for teachers and volunteers in Catholic schools and parishes that says they must be living in conformity with Cathlic moral teaching, especially laws on marriage. An active homosexual (or a person living with a member of the opposite sex without benefit of marriage) is by definition rejecting in the most public, defiant way that Church teaching, therefore they cannot be the instructors and mentors of Catholic children. For the same reason, such a person cannot be a godparent or confirmation sponsor.
Your poll is an oxymoron, an active homosexual is by definition not living a chaste life. Your poll is also quite global, the standards, legal and canonical, for volunteers are more relaxed than for employees. For instance, a casual parent volunteer who assists at bingo is not held to the same standard as a classroom teacher. But a volunteer catechist whose responsibility is to teach the entire truth of the faith is held to a higher standard than someone who is in charge of gathering school supplies for classroom use.
This is not a restriction aimed at gays, this is a restriction aimed at all those who claim to be Catholic but publicly reject all or part of Catholic teaching. By the way, a priest who leaves the priesthood, whether through canonical process or on his own bat, is not allowed to serve in any parish ministry that involves teaching, preaching or liturgical ministry–lector, catechetics, extraordinary minister of the Eucharist. That is the law (although it is flouted in many places).
Your poll is an oxymoron, an active homosexual is by definition not living a chaste life. Your poll is also quite global, the standards, legal and canonical, for volunteers are more relaxed than for employees. For instance, a casual parent volunteer who assists at bingo is not held to the same standard as a classroom teacher. But a volunteer catechist whose responsibility is to teach the entire truth of the faith is held to a higher standard than someone who is in charge of gathering school supplies for classroom use.
This is not a restriction aimed at gays, this is a restriction aimed at all those who claim to be Catholic but publicly reject all or part of Catholic teaching. By the way, a priest who leaves the priesthood, whether through canonical process or on his own bat, is not allowed to serve in any parish ministry that involves teaching, preaching or liturgical ministry–lector, catechetics, extraordinary minister of the Eucharist. That is the law (although it is flouted in many places).
T
ThornGenX
Guest
I actually picked this choice (yes, if they agree to live a chaste life) before I thought about it, but how can someone be an “active homosexual” and live a chaste life at the same time? I thought chaste life meant not practicing homosexuality
.
.
T
tom.wineman
Guest
Not one with my kids in it !
K
katherine2
Guest
At my parish school all of the families are required to assist in helping the school in some way, often as classroom or playground monitors, etc. They are doing “volunteer” type work, but it is not voluntary. Both Catholic and non-Catholic families are required to do this.
I guess if some parents find this objectionable, homosexual parents should be exempted from this obligation.
For that matter, if the parent volunteering to do the bookkeeping has objections to handling a tuition check from a homosexual, them maybe the homosexuals should be exempted from that obligation as well.
I guess if some parents find this objectionable, homosexual parents should be exempted from this obligation.
For that matter, if the parent volunteering to do the bookkeeping has objections to handling a tuition check from a homosexual, them maybe the homosexuals should be exempted from that obligation as well.
L
Lisa_N
Guest
Katherine2 a ridiculous example does not advance the discussion in any meaningful way. Clearly the concern about homosexuals in the schools is their interaction with children. Somehow I don’t think anyone is afraid that if they touch a homosexual’s check they will immediately become homosexual or be tainted in some way…
I do agree the word ‘active’ homosexual makes the selection of ‘if they remain chaste’ a bit of an oxymoron. OTOH the person may not have been chaste in the past but agree to live chastely while involved with the school.
Lisa N
T
Timidity
Guest
Should active (practicing) homosexuals be allowed to volunteer or work at Catholic Schools ?
No more than an active (practicing) masturbator should.
L
Lisa_N
Guest
Well presuming he’s doing it in public or is public about his practice then I could see the concern. But the reality is that masturbation tends to be a private sin. Your teacher, your priest, your neighbor, your attorney could engage in this practice and you’d never know. Nor would that practice impact society so directly. That’s what makes the issue of homosexuals so ‘sticky.’ If they were not so insistent that they be viewed primarily by their sexual inclinations, there would be far fewer issues in their participation in society. I mean do you think there would ever be a “Masturbation Pride Day” in your city? Demanding that we all publically accept a deviant, unhealthy practice is where much of the conflict arises.
While private sins are just as serious with respect to your relationship to God, public sins have a far greater impact on society.
Lisa N
P
Pug
Guest
Your point makes me wonder about what type of active homosexual original poster meant. There is the kind that is active, but doesn’t tell anyone and conceals the behavior (they would just appear to be any old single person). There is also the kind that is living as a married person with their permanent person, wears a wedding ring, and is very publicly homosexual.
Furthermore, among the first type, they could be in a 12 step program trying to stop. This would not be the case for the second type, who would not be trying to change themselves in that fashion. I’m sure there is a range between these two positions as well.
How would anyone even know about the first type to object, unless the school questioned each volunteer before acceptance or someone happened by chance to know? Are school volunteers questioned about private sins, like the one Timidity mentions?
M
miguel
Guest
It would be extremely unwise if we are concerned for the children’s safety. At the very minimum, you don’t want to allow them to be alone with children. If the clergy sex abuse scandal (80% homosexual abuse) teaches us anything, it’s that.
G
GloriaPatri4
Guest
The homosexual who was volunteering at my children’s Catholic school (with kindergarteners) is open about his sexuality. He wears a wedding ring as does his partner, he lives in the same house with his partner and they’ve adopted four children (two of whom attend the school). The other (homosexual) man is the webmaster for the school’s website. Oh, and did I forget to mention? They are both affiliated with a Gay Advocacy group “Family Pride” and the whole school is A-Okay with the whole thing.
**There are a small minority of us that are praying
really hard that this thing isn’t going to influence too many of our young children and parents into thinking that the homosexual lifestyle is just another option to choose from. **I guess Catholic schools don’t feel comfortable telling parent’s they can’t volunteer in the classrooms just because they are active homosexuals.
You can read all about it “IN THE NEWS” forum under Group still opposes enrolling kids of gay or unmarried parents in Catholic schools. There are five pages of it.
T
Timidity
Guest
Following that logic, we should be more concerned for the children’s safety with heterosexuals volunteers. Afterall, most molesters are “straight”.
M
miguel
Guest
If that is correct, and it isn’t, why are 80% of the 10,000 or so victims of the clergy sex abuse scandal male?
S
StJeanneDArc
Guest
In my archdiocese a background check is required for anyone who is working with children, either as a volunteer or an employee. This would flag anyone who has been in legal trouble for a sexual crime.
Most molesters may be heterosexual, but the number of molesters who self-identify as homosexual vastly outweighs their numbers in the general population. Not every homosexual is a molester, but homosexuals are more likely to be molesters. Think about it–a sexual deviant may not stop with one kind of deviant practice, he sometimes wants to “up the ante” with other practices.
Also, the number of male molesters vastly outweighs the number of female molesters. There’s a reason why when you hear the word child-molester you generally picture a male.
G
GloriaPatri4
Guest
I guess you’ve never heard of the John Jay report. more than 80% of the church sexual abuses were homosexual in nature and the victims were boys.
K
Kevin_Walker
Guest
No!
That would be like having the wolf guard the sheep.
Homosexuals are irrational at best, and one might snap and touch your kid out of some psychotic rationalization. Homosexuals are almost incapable of accepting the responsibility for their own actions.
Just remember this rule of thumb, if it weren’t for homosexuality a great deal of psychiatrists would be out of business.
That would be like having the wolf guard the sheep.
Homosexuals are irrational at best, and one might snap and touch your kid out of some psychotic rationalization. Homosexuals are almost incapable of accepting the responsibility for their own actions.
Just remember this rule of thumb, if it weren’t for homosexuality a great deal of psychiatrists would be out of business.
P
Pug
Guest
GloriaPatri4 said:
GloriaPatri,
I fear your situation will become more common, but I hope it does not. In some ways I can see certain Catholic school environments as presenting a particular danger (to a child’s faith) that the public schools do not.
I’m so sorry you have to deal with this.
S
sweetchuck
Guest
Kevin Walker:
Kevin Walker:
at this point, your post stops making sense.
Kevin Walker:
Look, we, as Catholics, have to recognize the intrinsic dignity of homosexual people. To not employ a homosexual who has vowed to live a chaste life would be extremely unforgiving and discouraging. If they’re practicing homosexuals, they’re not in the right spiritual state to have influence over children. But it would do children good to be around a homosexual person who has given his or her life to Christ through chastity. If these people are shunned, no one will know they exist, and God forbid if your own children are confronted with this temptation, they will have no role model to show them how to live chaste lives. We cannot be people of hatred. We must be forgiving. Chaste homosexuals should not be pushed aside. Practicing homosexuals will lead others into sin. Chaste homosexuals fight a winning battle against it.
S
serendipity
Guest
No one should be working at a Catholic school, if they disclose so many details about their sex lives, that the public at large knows if they are gay or straight.
- Status