K
katherine2
Guest
males have a greater amount of child molestation on their side. We should only allow lesbians and straight women to volunteer.
Should active homosexuals be allowed to volunteer or work at Catholic Schools?
- Status
L
Lisa_N
Guest
Yeah right. Oh I don’t know, our sex has seen it share of disgraceful stories where adult women have preyed upon boys. Certainly the vast majority of child molesters are males but don’t assume females whether hetero or homosexual are to be trusted because they have two X chromosomes. I am frankly disgusted by the recent stories of predatory female school teachers.
Lisa N
S
SeeksTruth
Guest
I think Catholic schools would be best served if only Saints and non-sinners applied.
For all those who think that people who god gave gay feelings to are disordered. Are you sure? or did someone or your church tell you that? Do you not know any people who are gay? who live moral lives? Is it like the church who told us it was ok to burn witches or that said slavery was ok?
Just because we don’t understand everything that God created, does not mean that is a disorder. God created all and all was good. It does not say that he created disorders that were bad and deserved condemnation.
People who are gay are like the lepers of Jesus’ time. They are a test to us and he will know us by our acts.
For all those who think that people who god gave gay feelings to are disordered. Are you sure? or did someone or your church tell you that? Do you not know any people who are gay? who live moral lives? Is it like the church who told us it was ok to burn witches or that said slavery was ok?
Just because we don’t understand everything that God created, does not mean that is a disorder. God created all and all was good. It does not say that he created disorders that were bad and deserved condemnation.
People who are gay are like the lepers of Jesus’ time. They are a test to us and he will know us by our acts.
L
Lisa_N
Guest
The issue has never been the students, but the activity of the two men who have procured them and are to many of us using them to foist a normalization of homosexual relationships on Catholic school
You don’t need to go to the Bible for authority, basic biology will give you the answer. All species strive to survive and procreate. Any behavior or trait that interferes with either is by this standard abnormal. Interesting how the very thing that supports the secular Darwinian theories also supports the reality species engaging in non-procreative sexual acts will not procreate. Duh.
To answer your first question, yes I know quite a few homosexuals and I knew them before being homosexual was as acceptable in polite society as it is now. I have several dear friends who are homosexual. We do not discuss our mutual sex lives. I am not a part of theirs and they are not a part of mine. I do not have to approve or know about people’s private sexual matters to relate to them. Do you? As to moral lives, since I don’t know about their sex lives I can’t tell you if they are promiscuous but assuming they are active I guess they are sexually amoral although they are also honest, charming, hardworking and have many other wonderful characteristics. I don’t hear anyone saying all homosexuals are dishonest crooks but many of us do not think their lifestyle is healthy or holy.
As to the witch burnings, could you come up with an original or more modern objection? Say let’s bring in the Inquistion too. Like things have not progressed in a thousand years? As Ann Coulter said, can we move on? I don’t think homosexuals are likely to be burned at the stake nor taken into slavery anytime soon.
I’m afraid you need to get reacquainted with God’s word. He did condemn certain acts, including sodomy. You assume that being a homosexual is something God ordained. How do YOU know? We are human, we are weak, we are subject to temptation. Do you consider other aberrant behavior normal? Pedophelia? How about rape? Maybe robbery too? Serial murder? Using your standard that everything God made is good, I guess Ted Bundy walked right through those pearly gates.
Really? I didn’t know about any homosexual colony whereby they are segregated from society and some kind person throws food in a la Ben Hur.
As to the ‘test’ is anyone advocating cruel or unkind behavior toward homosexuals? I don’t think so.
Lisa N
K
katherine2
Guest
Lisa N:
Lisa, go back and read the first news reports from the minority of 18 parents attacking the Church’s decision. The issue very much was the students. After the strong negative reaction to expelling the students, they decided to do some better PR.
This could be seen as an attack on the honorable behavior of monastic and clerical celibacy.
Why is it that your continued realtionship with these people is not an approval of their lifestyle but the claim is asserted that treating this men as simply the people who have de facto responsibility for these children is considered an endorsement of their private behavior?
There are posters here who have siad homosexuals by their very nature cannot be trusted.
I hoep not. And if not it is because people were able to stnad up and say the immorality of an act does does close the debate on the appropriateness of a particular social sanction. Those who are unwilling to admit that you can not apply certain sanctions while still not endorsing a behavior are the heirs of those who would burn and enslave.
I do. And I see it every day.
L
Lisa_N
Guest
The STUDENTS would not have been an issue if not for the homosexual procurers who insisted in making their relationship a public stance.
Completely irrelevant. I was discussing the complete lack of BIOLOGICAL basis for homosexual behavior. It is the complete opposite of instinctive biological behavior as expressed by other species. Humans are not victims of their instincts. We can decide not to procreate for reasons such as a religious vow or we can decide we don’t want children and contracept. However I don’t think we have too many monastic turtles or apes.
Because the two men are clearly making their homosexuality an ISSUE. They show up an present themselves as a couple at a Catholic school. Catholicism does not approve of homosexual behavior. Therefore their presenting themselves as active homosexuals is IMO a slap in the face to those people who sent their kids to a Catholic school to be in a Catholic environment that promotes Catholic morals. Now we don’t know what these two gents are doing in the bedroom but since they are presenting themselves as de facto ‘married’ we can make assumptions.
My relationships with my homosexual friends are asexual. They do not involve me in their personal relationships, invite me to homosexual bars, or discuss homosexual issues with me. IOW they do not ask me to relate to them in a sexual way. They do not ask me to recognize what they do in the bedroom. They do not ask me to approve or validate their lifestyle. It simply is not an issue.
And you should address your complaints to the people who made the statements, not to me.
K2 you consistently overstate your case…burn and enslave. PUH LEASE. Why don’t you give me some examples of this kind of persecution so I will believe you.
Lisa N
F
fix
Guest
We know this from science, common sense, common experience and the Church. BTW, The issue is not having “feelings”, but acting on such “feelings”.
Yes, many.
If they identify themselves as “gay” then they would not be leading a moral ife. The term gay intends they are public and endorsing homosexual acts as virtuous. That is immoral.
It appears you are poorly informed of history and Church teachings.
Does God create evil? Is every act of every person good and created by God?
Lepers? More accurately they are like the Pharisees. They pretend to be righteous and condemn others who speak the truth. In short, the “gay” crowd and their agenda is hypocrisy.
K
katherine2
Guest
Lisa N:
First you suggest that no oen is making unfiar negative charges against gay people and nwo you pretend that it is not your conecern. Try to be a little consistent.
The first protests didn’t make that case. Only after it became clear how hateful their original statements were did they 'clean up their act" and move to plan B.
“In your opinion” is right. The vast majority of parents, parishioners and all of the clergy as well as the principal don’t see it that way. In fact, if you want to look at how most people interprete actions, except for a small group of 18, everyone seem to view those against the children as the ones slapping the face of the Church in her charity for providing an education to these children. Shame on them.
You and your friends would be better off spending less time imagining what thesemen are doing in the bedroom.
Which is about the way these two men in Orange are acting.
Lisa, really.
First you suggest that no oen is making unfiar negative charges against gay people and nwo you pretend that it is not your conecern. Try to be a little consistent.Read a book.
L
Lisa_N
Guest
K2 the children were not the issue. The children were not the problem. The children were committing no sin. Had the men not insisted in making their sins public the children’s status would not have been questioned. You interpret the statements as hateful. I interpret them as concerned parents who have put their children in a Catholic school to AVOID having to interact with public proclamations of sin.
katherine2 said:
Who is ‘everyone’ K2? We all have a very limited understanding of who has objected to the two males making their homosexuality a public issue. So speak of what you KNOW, not what you assume. Again no one is objecting to the children being educated. They are objecting to the males insisting on displaying themselves as a “couple,” involving themselves in the schoolroom and going to mass as a “two daddies.”
Frankly I don’t spend any time imagining what ANYONE does in the bedroom. However since they present themselves as a homosexual couple then I believe their relationship IS a sexual one and thus is sinful. I do not think it’s appropriate for people to involve others in their sins and ask for justification and affirmation. I would feel the same way about a mother who wore an “I had an abortion” tee shirt to the school. Or a married couple who insisted in bringing lovers instead of spouses to school events. In being so public about their relationship they are involving unwilling people in their sins.
Your sentence makes very little sense as well as being sloppily typed and hard to read. I have never stated no one is making unfair charges against homosexuals. I have said I do not see the kind of overt and hostile behavior or persecution of homosexuals that you seem to believe is a common occurrance. Again would you like to document these claims or can we all conclude they are the product of an overzealous defense and overactive imagination?Lisa, really.
In all fairness K2, you stated you SEE THESE HATEFUL ACTIONS ON A DAILY BASIS. Then when asked to document your outrageous claim you punt and tell me to “read a book.” Did you write a book documenting all of this homosexual persecution? Maybe I could find it on Amazon?
Lisa N
K
katherine2
Guest
Lisa N:
They are not making love in the street. YOU and a small group has decided that the two people responsible for these children both dropping them off at school is that same as dirty dancing at high noon in Macy’s window.
Well, the truth is that like it or not, we have gay couples in this world, we have divorced and remarried people, we have poeple who make their money from war profitering and child labor, we have people who drink.
I sympathize with people who would like to delay the inevitable exposure of these things to their young children. But the whole world cannot be made into a Disney set, hiding reality. And Catholic schools need not be a phoney cloister closed off to the rest of the world. its time some people grew up.
).
They WERE. Go back and read the very first post on this issue. The gang of 18 then got smart and changed their rhetoric.
Lisa, really.
They are not making love in the street. YOU and a small group has decided that the two people responsible for these children both dropping them off at school is that same as dirty dancing at high noon in Macy’s window.You have come close to the real issue here behind all of the smoke and mirrors. Thinking you are making some great liberal concession, you and the gang of 18 keep saying so long as it all kept quiet, you are tolerant of these parents (sheesh!). Keeping up apperances.
Well, the truth is that like it or not, we have gay couples in this world, we have divorced and remarried people, we have poeple who make their money from war profitering and child labor, we have people who drink.
I sympathize with people who would like to delay the inevitable exposure of these things to their young children. But the whole world cannot be made into a Disney set, hiding reality. And Catholic schools need not be a phoney cloister closed off to the rest of the world. its time some people grew up.
Lisa, there have been posts on this forum saying so. Not yours, but other people. If you want to disassociate yourself from these hateful people, go ahead. But stop pretending they don’t exist.
YOU and the gang of 18 have decided that dropping their children off at the school rather than using the back door is “justification and affirmation”. The rest of the world sees it as just bringing two kids to their school.
Neither of these men have worn a t-shirt saying any such things. A better example would be people who sniff around looking at other people’s child spacing and determine they are using contraception. (ohm dear, I shouldn’t start giving these people ideas
).And since the Catholic Church says marriage is lifelong, that would include a person who had divorced and remarried civilly.
read some of the early posts on this topic in this very forum.
L
Lisa_N
Guest
Oh my K2, your language is hilarious; “gang of 18” et al. How about the ‘boot licking toadies…’ or other hackneyed cliche from a bygone era? Really please use some imagination.
You also totally ignore the specific objections regarding the homosexuals’ activities. They were not merely ‘dropping them off.’ You have quite conveniently failed to mention that they have consistently appeared at the school for various events, at mass, and in the directory as “the two daddies.” One of the men is in the classroom as an aid. They belong to a very vocal group that is seeking to advance a homosexual agenda. They clearly want to have their very public relationship to be upheld and affirmed as if they were just another married couple.
Quite honestly if the boys were merely enrolled and if the homosexuals had been completely low key I doubt if it would have been an issue. After all how many of us know the sexual relationships of all the other parents at our kids’ schools UNLESS THEY MAKE IT AN ISSUE? These men have tried to draw fire in an effort to be the latest poster child for homosexual discrimination.
As to your outrageous claim that you see hostile persecution ‘every day’ I truly doubt if posts on a Catholic board are any threat to the homosexuals you encounter in your daily lives. So if you wish to continue to advance the ridiculous assumption that homosexuals are constantly being persecuted, you’ll need to do better than an occasional post on a Catholic forum.
Lisa N
You also totally ignore the specific objections regarding the homosexuals’ activities. They were not merely ‘dropping them off.’ You have quite conveniently failed to mention that they have consistently appeared at the school for various events, at mass, and in the directory as “the two daddies.” One of the men is in the classroom as an aid. They belong to a very vocal group that is seeking to advance a homosexual agenda. They clearly want to have their very public relationship to be upheld and affirmed as if they were just another married couple.
Quite honestly if the boys were merely enrolled and if the homosexuals had been completely low key I doubt if it would have been an issue. After all how many of us know the sexual relationships of all the other parents at our kids’ schools UNLESS THEY MAKE IT AN ISSUE? These men have tried to draw fire in an effort to be the latest poster child for homosexual discrimination.
As to your outrageous claim that you see hostile persecution ‘every day’ I truly doubt if posts on a Catholic board are any threat to the homosexuals you encounter in your daily lives. So if you wish to continue to advance the ridiculous assumption that homosexuals are constantly being persecuted, you’ll need to do better than an occasional post on a Catholic forum.
Lisa N
S
sweetchuck
Guest
EXACTLY! Will we reach out with love and condemn homosexual sex, pray for them and encourage them to turn from their sins and live chaste lives in Christ; or in a depraved act of spiritual homocide will we condone homosexual sex and affirm them in their sins?
It is a great test to us. Let us not fail. I have prayed for homosexuals every day this Lent, that they be strengthened, pick up their crosses and hear God’s call to chastity and purity in their lives.
S
sweetchuck
Guest
And this idea that homosexuality is some sort of thing created by God is utter nonsense and has no theological basis in any of the Sacred Scriptures. Depravity and disorder are the results of sin, God allows these temptations, but he did not create them. St. Paul explains in Romans:
(Rom. 1:22-32) While claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes. Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper. They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents. They are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
“God handed them over.” Because of their iniquity, he allowed their affliction with all sorts of temptations. He handed them over implies that these things are apart from God. The note on the text in the New American Bible explains:
[24] In order to expose the depth of humanity’s rebellion against the Creator, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts. Instead of curbing people’s evil interests, God abandoned them to self-indulgence, thereby removing the facade of apparent conformity to the divine will. Subsequently Paul will show that the Mosaic law produces the same effect; cf ⇒ Romans 5:20; ⇒ 7:13-24. The divine judgment expressed here is related to the theme of hardness of heart described in ⇒ Romans 9:17-18.
(Rom. 1:22-32) While claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes. Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper. They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents. They are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.
“God handed them over.” Because of their iniquity, he allowed their affliction with all sorts of temptations. He handed them over implies that these things are apart from God. The note on the text in the New American Bible explains:
[24] In order to expose the depth of humanity’s rebellion against the Creator, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts. Instead of curbing people’s evil interests, God abandoned them to self-indulgence, thereby removing the facade of apparent conformity to the divine will. Subsequently Paul will show that the Mosaic law produces the same effect; cf ⇒ Romans 5:20; ⇒ 7:13-24. The divine judgment expressed here is related to the theme of hardness of heart described in ⇒ Romans 9:17-18.
K
katherine2
Guest
Lisa N:
Your a bit of pip yourself.
Oh, Lordy, Lordy!!! Oh my gosh. Imagihe they drop off the kids (they car pool to work for all I know), they attend school events (as opposed to parents who are never seen at school), the go to Mass (I’ve always said, I wish less people went to Mass) and they volunteer in the school. Katie bar the door!!!
Well, the gang of 18 sure made it an issue before they cleaned up theri rhetoric. But how “low key” do they have to go. Use the back door to the school rather than the front door? Don’t come to parent’s night but have clandestien meetings with the school teachers on the children’s progress? This is all a plot to expell the kids in more socially accpetable ways than under the now discredited “Plan A”.
YOU assume they have a sexual relationship because they live together. Why shouldn;t it be equally assume divorced and civilly remarried people are in the same type of relationship?
Only one party has been putting out press releases and whipping up the media. These parents have refused all contact with the media while the gang of 18 is fanning the flames.
Oh, I certainly hope these people are totally ineffective in their unfortunate opinions. The great breath of support for these kids, including the bishop, the abbot, the principal, the pastor, the vast majority of school parents and parishioners, and Catholics nationwide even including a number of noted conservatives like Mr. Donahue fromt eh Catholic League does seem to support yoru view that the haters are a wack-o fringe who are totally ineffective. That certainly is my prayer.
L
Lisa_N
Guest
At the risk of repeating myself, I will rephrase my question:
Has there ever been a time where the concerned parents mentioned the boys themselves or the boys’ actions as the reason for their objections without the reference to the men and THEIR actions?
I have not seen any such reference to the boys. I have seen many references to the actions of the two homosexuals. THAT is the issue no matter how you may wish pour syrup over it. The boys are not the issue. If these same two boys were enrolled by their biological parents rather than two homosexuals who have acquired them somehow, do you honestly think they would have been singled out? Again the issue is the aberrant living arrangements of the two male homosexuals and their demand that they be accepted as a ‘couple.’ This is not the case of Father Joe and Father Bill adopting special needs children. We can assume they are living chastely. But in this instance there are two activist homosexuals who are pushing an agenda.
I truly believe that even had the two homosexuals agreed to enter the boys as students and NOT presented themselves as a couple the status of the boys’ enrollment would not have been an issue. Do you have a shred of evidence to the contrary? The issue has always been the public representation by the two men, not the boys.
If you can find some evidence to support your theory that it is a witchhunt against two six year olds sans the relationship with the two men I’d like to see it.
Lisa N
Has there ever been a time where the concerned parents mentioned the boys themselves or the boys’ actions as the reason for their objections without the reference to the men and THEIR actions?
I have not seen any such reference to the boys. I have seen many references to the actions of the two homosexuals. THAT is the issue no matter how you may wish pour syrup over it. The boys are not the issue. If these same two boys were enrolled by their biological parents rather than two homosexuals who have acquired them somehow, do you honestly think they would have been singled out? Again the issue is the aberrant living arrangements of the two male homosexuals and their demand that they be accepted as a ‘couple.’ This is not the case of Father Joe and Father Bill adopting special needs children. We can assume they are living chastely. But in this instance there are two activist homosexuals who are pushing an agenda.
I truly believe that even had the two homosexuals agreed to enter the boys as students and NOT presented themselves as a couple the status of the boys’ enrollment would not have been an issue. Do you have a shred of evidence to the contrary? The issue has always been the public representation by the two men, not the boys.
If you can find some evidence to support your theory that it is a witchhunt against two six year olds sans the relationship with the two men I’d like to see it.
Lisa N
K
katherine2
Guest
Lisa N:
Yes. Look at the very first post on this topic here at CA forum.
L
Lisa_N
Guest
Are you deliberately being obtuse or do you truly not understand?
The boys as individuals were never the issue. Their custodians have always been the ISSUE. If these same two boys were enrolled at the school, behaved the exact same way, did the same work in the classroom but arrived via two married biological parents do you really think THEY would have been asked to leave the school? No. The issue has been the homosexual males and their infiltration of the school. The kids are just a couple of kids.
Lisa N
J
Jimmy_B
Guest
In my opinion, NO!
S
selvaraj
Guest
Openly gay teachers have no place in Catholic schools says bishop
please visit:totalcatholic.com/universe/article_2005_03_29_5206.html
please visit:totalcatholic.com/universe/article_2005_03_29_5206.html
- Status