Should active homosexuals be allowed to volunteer or work at Catholic Schools?

[Brad]

katherine2:

there is nothing natural about abandoning your wife and shacking up with another woman.

If your point is that a husband shacking up with another woman should not be allowed to teach,monitor, or supervise kids in the classroom, then I agree.

 

[Brad]

Steve Andersen:

I think you’re confusing homosexuality and pedophilia

Most people who “touch” kids do it to perform heterosexual acts

The priest sex abuse scandal and organizations such as NAMBLA indicate that this is not true. There is quite a correlation between promiscuity, pedophilia, and homosexuality.
Steve Andersen:

To turn away volunteer labor is short sighted at best

Volunteer companies do not accept every person that wants to volunteer.
Steve Andersen:

If I remember correctly a prostitute volunteered to wash Jesus’ feet

Then Jesus taught the children, not her.
Steve Andersen:

I thought Christianity was about second chances and redemption and hope

Correct. Second chances, redemption, and hope. NOT being obstinant in refusing to believe you did wrong on your first chance, failing to seek redemption, and not putting your hope in the Lord.
Steve Andersen:

If someone comes to your door to help, to work, to do a good deed and you turn them away and tell them that there is no place for them even if they just want to do menial labor for free… What does that say about us?

It could be said you are using prudence, one of the cardinal virtues.

 

[katherine2]

Brad:

If your point is that a husband shacking up with another woman should not be allowed to teach,monitor, or supervise kids in the classroom, then I agree.

And even if the shacking up is justified by the state by a civil marriage, I take it.

 

[Brad]

katherine2:

You express an opinion I have found in too many irresponsible men.

As much as you would like to justify this immoral behavior, it is not natural. Nature unites a man and women for life. It is not natural for a man to leave his wife and children and take up with another women, even if the state allows divorce and remarriage.

I’m more than a little scandalized that my ‘conservative’ catholic friends are so weak or dissenting on this issue. I guess its all about whose ox is being gored.

Again, I agree that there is no divorce.

However, I am more scandalized that you are using this issue to justify allowing obstinant, grave, and open sinners, that promote the entire redefinition of the first and foundational covenant in the history of God’s people, to have an influence over children.

 

[katherine2]

Brad:

Not quite sure. I’m afraid the influence of the secular culture and it’s persuasive appeal has at least a partial impact.

I think you misunderstand me. The traditional sins that cry to heaven for justice (withholding just wages from workers; the sin of Sodom, offenses agains the poor, etc) are certainly sins within Catholic tradition. I only wish we had more Catholics who recognized sins against workers and the poor to be as severe as the sin of Sodom.

I’m saying while the sinfulness is clear from Church teaching, the popular phrase “cries to heaven for vengence” is a saying, its not a direct Scriptural quote or reference to a Counciliar or papal decree. Nor is it from a Doctor of the Church.

 

[Brad]

katherine2:

You express an opinion I have found in too many irresponsible men.

As much as you would like to justify this immoral behavior, it is not natural. Nature unites a man and women for life. It is not natural for a man to leave his wife and children and take up with another women, even if the state allows divorce and remarriage.

I’m more than a little scandalized that my ‘conservative’ catholic friends are so weak or dissenting on this issue. I guess its all about whose ox is being gored.

I agree that there is no divorce.

However, I am scandalized that you use this very serious issue (adultery) to somehow justify obstinantly immoral adults that are in many cases attempting to alter God’s most foundation covenant, to have influence over children.

 

[fix]

katherine2:

I think you misunderstand me. The traditional sins that cry to heaven for justice (withholding just wages from workers; the sin of Sodom, offenses agains the poor, etc) are certainly sins within Catholic tradition. I only wish we had more Catholics who recognized sins against workers and the poor to be as severe as the sin of Sodom.

Well, faithful Catholics do care, but in our society “gay” sex is an issue that is very popular right now and I can’t see your point. Is one sin detracting from the other sin? Instead of arguing with good Catholics, why not join them and also inform about those suffering from an unjust wage?

I’m saying while the sinfulness is clear from Church teaching, the popular phrase “cries to heaven for vengence” is a saying, its not a direct Scriptural quote or reference to a Counciliar or papal decree. Nor is it from a Doctor of the Church.

Clintonesque…

 

[katherine2]

fix:

Well, faithful Catholics do care, but in our society “gay” sex is an issue that is very popular right now and I can’t see your point. Is one sin detracting from the other sin? Instead of arguing with good Catholics, why not join them and also inform about those suffering from an unjust wage?

Injustice to the poor remains popular and widespread. And it is also socially tolerated, often under the guise of defense of the “free market”. Some want policies banning gay people volunteering in Catholic schools, but how many have policies banning unjust employers from their fundraising committees?

Clintonesque…

is that the new right wing code word for something too complicated for you to understand?

 

[katherine2]

Brad:

I agree that there is no divorce.

However, I am scandalized that you use this very serious issue (adultery) to somehow justify obstinantly immoral adults that are in many cases attempting to alter God’s most foundation covenant, to have influence over children.

Well, I’m scandalized by another poster minimizing the seriousness of adultery. Why has it been so difficult for some to say “yes, people who have divorced and remarried should be treated the same way as these gay parents”?

God’s covenent of marriage is a life long covenent between a man and a woman. Those who seek to alter it by declaring it a temporary union certain are wrong.

 

[fix]

katherine2:

Injustice to the poor remains popular and widespread. And it is also socially tolerated, often under the guise of defense of the “free market”. Some want policies banning gay people volunteering in Catholic schools, but how many have policies banning unjust employers from their fundraising committees?

If they are publicly unjust, I would agree with you. So your point is that if some public sins are ignored, in your opinion, all public sin must be ignored?

is that the new right wing code word for something too complicated for you to understand?

No, it is pointing out the craftiness and legalistic mindset of left wing, “adavnced”, elitist relativists.

 

[katherine2]

fix:

If they are publicly unjust, I would agree with you. So your point is that if some public sinns are ignored, in your opinion, all public sin must be ignored?

No, all should be addressed.

No, it is pointing out the craftiness and legalistic mindset of left wing, “adavnced”, elitist relativists.

Just a simple widow. But I guess over your head.

 

[fix]

Just a simple widow.

Thank you for admitting your limitations.

But I guess over your head.

No honey, I have your number.

 

[Lisa_N]

katherine2:

Injustice to the poor remains popular and widespread. And it is also socially tolerated, often under the guise of defense of the “free market”. Some want policies banning gay people volunteering in Catholic schools, but how many have policies banning unjust employers from their fundraising committees? ?

Now what in the world does that have to do with whether homosexuals should be working with children? “Unjust employers” is completely a matter of someone’s opinion. I can only imagine your view would differ from mine.

Also how would the Catholic school even know about the person’s employment policies? You are throwing out herrings again. Please stick to the subject of the thread.

katherine2:

is that the new right wing code word for something too complicated for you to understand?

Katherine2 you are so quick to call someone on their failings. Take a look at your post and ask yourself it it was either fair or kind or even germane to the discussion?

Lisa N

 

[fix]

Lisa N:

Now what in the world does that have to do with whether homosexuals should be working with children? “Unjust employers” is completely a matter of someone’s opinion. I can only imagine your view would differ from mine.

Also how would the Catholic school even know about the person’s employment policies? You are throwing out herrings again. Please stick to the subject of the thread.

Katherine2 you are so quick to call someone on their failings. Take a look at your post and ask yourself it it was either fair or kind or even germane to the discussion?

Lisa N

Actually, no one failed. K2 wants to split hairs to derail the argument at hand.

 

[Brad]

katherine2:

Well, I’m scandalized by another poster minimizing the seriousness of adultery. Why has it been so difficult for some to say “yes, people who have divorced and remarried should be treated the same way as these gay parents”?

God’s covenent of marriage is a life long covenent between a man and a woman. Those who seek to alter it by declaring it a temporary union certain are wrong.

I agree with your second paragraph 100% but it’s a separate issue and discussion than the one that considers whether active homosexuals should be allowed to influence children.

 

[Brad]

katherine2:

And even if the shacking up is justified by the state by a civil marriage, I take it.

Ok by me.

 

[sweetchuck]

katherine2:

Injustice to the poor remains popular and widespread. And it is also socially tolerated, often under the guise of defense of the “free market”. Some want policies banning gay people volunteering in Catholic schools, but how many have policies banning unjust employers from their fundraising committees?

My what a pretty red herring! Look at it swim downstream.

…oh wait, it’s a red herring made of straw, and it’s sinking. Must’ve been the weight of the false dilemma. That stuff’s like lead.

Seriously, the amount of fallacies in this single paragraph quoted above is truly amazing.

 

[sweetchuck]

AnnieD:

I don’t see the reason for sexual sinners who could put our children at risk, to be around our children.

Annie

You’re absolutely right. No self-proclaimed fornicator, masturbator, adulterer, pornography subscriber or practicing homosexual should be allowed to be around children.

Of course, the repentant who have struggled in the past with these sins but now live chastely in the bosom of Christ should without prejudice be allowed to be around children.

 

[miguel]

sweetchuck:

You’re absolutely right. No self-proclaimed fornicator, masturbator, adulterer, pornography subscriber or practicing homosexual should be allowed to be around children.

Of course, the repentant who have struggled in the past with these sins but now live chastely in the bosom of Christ should without prejudice be allowed to be around children.

Sweetchuck, you are ignoring the disorder part of this issue. You have not made a case that those with the homosexual condition disorder, are low risk around children, especially boys. And people who repent very often fall back into sin. You are putting their feelings above the safety of children. Big mistake.

 

[katherine2]

Brad:

I agree with your second paragraph 100% but it’s a separate issue and discussion than the one that considers whether active homosexuals should be allowed to influence children.

I’m glad we agree. But we have at least one poster here who does not agree with us. There are far, far more divorced and civilly remarried parents doing things in Catholic schools than there are gay parents. I have no probelm with a consistent school policy that handles both of these situations in the same way.