F
Fiat
Guest
What do you mean that the phrase “sins that cry to heaven for vengeance” is nothing more than a “pious saying” and not a Catholic teaching?
Fiat
Should active homosexuals be allowed to volunteer or work at Catholic Schools?
- Status
Fiat
B
Brad
Guest
They should not be allowed to teach, supervise, or monitor children.
B
Brad
Guest
The sin may not be more grievous than adultery but it is more disordered because it is unnatural as well as an offense against God.
K
katherine2
Guest
there is nothing natural about abandoning your wife and shacking up with another woman.
F
Fiat
Guest
It is also a “sin that cries to heaven for vengeance.” Katherine2 suggests that this isn’t a Catholic teaching. Why she says this, I’m not sure. After all, the catechism uses this phrase. Does Katherine2 think this is not Catholic teaching because this is the way the sin was classified in the Old Testament? Based on that logic, does this mean that the 10 commandments are also not Catholic teaching?
Fiat
F
Fiat
Guest
Katherine2: Perhaps you misunderstand what the term “natural” means in this context. St. Paul refers to men leaving the “natural use” of the woman. Although there is grave sin in committing adultery, male-female sex is “natural.”
Fiat
L
Lisa_N
Guest
And Katherine2 I have said REPEATEDLY that such individuals should also be prohibited from volunteering at the school if their service puts them in contact with children. The issue here is whether people should involve innocent children in their sinful behavior. I think anyone working with kids should undergo an extensive background check, and I don’t just mean looking for felonies. I have been totally consistent on this position although you have consistently ignored this reality. If someone is engaged in sinful public behavior they should be kept away from kids. Period.
The lack of extensive background checks on school volunteers can really create serious compromises of kids’ safety. We have yet another disgusting situation where two homosexuals have a foster child, male, whom they procured to use for sexual favors. Apparently the one currently being charged was often at the school as some kind of volunteer, videotaping football games, etc. Once he was reported it was determined that there are least eight other boys at the foster child’s school who are alleging they were also molested by the man or his partner. Lovely. The school commented that they do not do background checks of their school volunteers and are “rethinking this position.” However the sad truth is that if someone is not already in the criminal justice system, it may well be difficult to find out anything. However a complete background check may have prevented this sad situation.
Lisa N
P
plaguemidman88
Guest
Steve Andersen:
very good point. Turning away a homosexual is the same thing as turning a person away someone who practices sex out of wedlock. Because if you actually look up the chruches standpoint the argument against homosexuality is that they are using sex or their sexuality for something other then creating life. So if you turn away homosexuals you have to turn away every teenager whos ever had sex, and adult whos ever had sex without being married so you cant do a double standard on this.droll
I think you’re confusing homosexuality and pedophilia
Most people who “touch” kids do it to perform heterosexual acts
To turn away volunteer labor is short sighted at best
There is always work to be done
And you were probably praying for more help anyhow; if someone shows up at your door…who knows Who sent him there
If I remember correctly a prostitute volunteered to wash Jesus’ feet
I thought we were a church that valued works
I thought Christianity was about second chances and redemption and hope
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?
K
katherine2
Guest
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.
L
Lisa_N
Guest
Katherine2 the CHURCH may decree that man and woman are to remain together for life but there is nothing inherently natural about it is there? If it were ‘natural’ (in our nature) to bond for life without the fetters of Church teachings or legalities, would we even NEED such things? It may well be more natural for human pair bonds to be transitory and thus the structures of society are needed to help keep them together. Look at how many people will risk all to get out of a marriage, to have an affair, to have a series of sexual partners. I think that is sadly more ‘natural’ then two people committed for life.
Yes you can point to the Church’s teaching but I don’t think nature is really the ruling party here.
Lisa N
G
Gratias_Grace
Guest
Hi BLB_Oregon!
BLB_Oregon:
As Cristians we are choosen (but not “pre-choosen”). God loves every one of us and “knocks at our doors to let Him in”. When we choose to open up (a litle bit), God choose to strengten us in our realtionship to Him. That has nothing to do with the Pharisees.
Noah’s relationship to God was Zaddek. That means that he was in ***Right Relationship ** * with God. Because the relationship with God was right, God could choose him to the task of building the ark.
The aim for every one of us is to be in ***Right Relationship ** * with God. That’s the aim of our beeing. That’s why God created us. Most of us will have to spend some time in purgatory to come into full right relationship with God.
My relationship with God is not "RIGHT" (in the way I have described it), yet. but I strive to come into it, more and more. I have to pray a lot about that. I think I am not alone in my stirving.
Tha trap for all of us who want to live rigthous, is that it is always possible for others to turn up their nose at us and mark us with a stamp were it is written: “The moral ones that think they are better than others”. (You don’t say that in your post).
Well, perhaps our judges should try to remember this: ***“Adulterers! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God” (Jm 4:4)." & “Do not speak evil against one another, brothers and sisters”(Jm 4:11). ** *
We are all sinners and if we will not be with other sinners we even can’t stay in our own company. The one who hates him-/herself will not be able to love others.
I agree with you that love is important. Love is the key to right relationship with God. Love is **not ** without borders. God has desided what is good and what is not good for us. Same-sex relationship is not good in Gods eyes.
I can’t see that chaste homosexuals should not do be trusted with volunteer work (This thread is about active homosexuals). It is not homosexuals that are dangerous for children. It is the pedophiles.
I think it’s very important that we don’t give the next generation the impression that everything is OK for God! We all know people who have lived in ways that we don’t want to copy. And that; to preserve our ability to know what is right and wrong after the moralstandard God has set for us, provide a good starting point to set things RIGHT with God!
Love is not always a feeling. It can be hard work! A s far as I know a lot of catholic teachers are able to theach in an environment were the children feel surrounded by love, but where they also are thaught right and wrong!
(A teacher in public school felt so sorry for a girl with dyslexia that he didn’t tell her about her difficulties with word. He gave her wrongly good grades not to hurt her feelings. Can you imagine the result? The child lost the opportunity to learn to cope whith her dyslexia in early age. When she grew older and understood by herself what was the matter, she got schocked. To do wrong to protect is never a good solution in the long run, either if it is connected to dyslexia, homosexuals or something else)!
Blessings!
G.Grace
Please, don’t read more in the capital letters then there is! The task for all of us is to be declared Rigthous. This is a task that we can’t do alone. We can’t earn our salvation! If we are saved it is by the Mercy of God.
As Cristians we are choosen (but not “pre-choosen”). God loves every one of us and “knocks at our doors to let Him in”. When we choose to open up (a litle bit), God choose to strengten us in our realtionship to Him. That has nothing to do with the Pharisees.
Noah’s relationship to God was Zaddek. That means that he was in ***Right Relationship ** * with God. Because the relationship with God was right, God could choose him to the task of building the ark.
The aim for every one of us is to be in ***Right Relationship ** * with God. That’s the aim of our beeing. That’s why God created us. Most of us will have to spend some time in purgatory to come into full right relationship with God.
My relationship with God is not "RIGHT" (in the way I have described it), yet. but I strive to come into it, more and more. I have to pray a lot about that. I think I am not alone in my stirving.
Tha trap for all of us who want to live rigthous, is that it is always possible for others to turn up their nose at us and mark us with a stamp were it is written: “The moral ones that think they are better than others”. (You don’t say that in your post).
Well, perhaps our judges should try to remember this: ***“Adulterers! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God” (Jm 4:4)." & “Do not speak evil against one another, brothers and sisters”(Jm 4:11). ** *
We are all sinners and if we will not be with other sinners we even can’t stay in our own company. The one who hates him-/herself will not be able to love others.
I agree with you that love is important. Love is the key to right relationship with God. Love is **not ** without borders. God has desided what is good and what is not good for us. Same-sex relationship is not good in Gods eyes.
I can’t see that chaste homosexuals should not do be trusted with volunteer work (This thread is about active homosexuals). It is not homosexuals that are dangerous for children. It is the pedophiles.
I think it’s very important that we don’t give the next generation the impression that everything is OK for God! We all know people who have lived in ways that we don’t want to copy. And that; to preserve our ability to know what is right and wrong after the moralstandard God has set for us, provide a good starting point to set things RIGHT with God!
Love is not always a feeling. It can be hard work! A s far as I know a lot of catholic teachers are able to theach in an environment were the children feel surrounded by love, but where they also are thaught right and wrong!
(A teacher in public school felt so sorry for a girl with dyslexia that he didn’t tell her about her difficulties with word. He gave her wrongly good grades not to hurt her feelings. Can you imagine the result? The child lost the opportunity to learn to cope whith her dyslexia in early age. When she grew older and understood by herself what was the matter, she got schocked. To do wrong to protect is never a good solution in the long run, either if it is connected to dyslexia, homosexuals or something else)!
Blessings!
G.Grace
D
Dolores49
Guest
I responded to the original question of this thread, “Should ACTIVE homosexuals be allowed to volunteer or work at Catholic Schools?” “Active homosexuals” means: anal intercourse, sodomy, an intrinsic evil. Maybe to you “active” means they jog daily?
Anyone in the Church who puts a child at risk - and excuse me, but I don’t mince words - by giving an active homosexual access to children - in light of the John Jay Report which uncovered over 3,000 cases of priest sexual abuse of adolescents, 80% of them boys - is in denial!!! I posted the article to give historical background and evidence that homosexual lobbyists have indeed “scrambled” to be on the defensive in order to push for marriage. In other words, to create an image make-over that they are harmless, not reckless.
Honestly. Equating smoking and sodomy? Your kidding, right?
Anyone who scandalizes the Catholic Church scandalizes all of us.
The most vulnerable in our society are children. Not homosexuals. Therefore, common sense tells me to protect children no matter who gets annoyed.
January 31, 2005: (see also February 1, 2, 3, 4 - ongoing)
Clackamas Homosexual Man “Married” in Oregon Arrested for Sexually Abusing Adopted Son…www.katu.com www.oregonlive.com (Gay Marriage Page archives)
CLACKAMAS, Ore. - Deputies say they have arrested a Clackamas man on several counts of sexually abusing a child after being tipped off by a computer technician. Clackamas County Sheriff’s office says they arrested Steven Bulleit, 40, on 13 counts of sodomy, two counts of encouraging child sexual abuse and the possession of child pornography Monday.
Deputy Joel Manley says a computer technician, who was repairing Bulleit’s computer, notified police after finding a large quantity of child pornography on the machine. The resulting investigation found evidence that a 16-year-old boy was repeatedly sexually abused in the case, which goes back over four years, deputies said.
The boy was placed in Bulleit and his partner, Karl Rusterholtz’s, guardianship by California Department of Human Services.
In a photo caption on the Unitarian Universalist Association Web site about Multnomah County marriage licenses, the boy is listed as Bulleit and Rusterholz’s son. www.uua.org
Deputies say he is well known in the community and is a Sunday school teacher for an Oregon City Unitarian Universalist church.
“We know that he was a Sunday school teacher and that he took films at Clackamas High School,” Manley says. “He filmed their sporting events, as a parent-helper and a volunteer for the school.”
Manley says there may be other victims and is requesting the public’s assistance in the investigation.
“Unfortunately I think there may be more victims out there and we are asking anyone with information about Mr. Bulleit, talk to your kids, sit down and have a conversation with them to see if they have been around Mr. Bulleit and ask them what the circumstances were when they were around him.” Manley says.
The public can contact investigators by calling 503-655-8211.
Bulleit is being held on $2.8 million bail in the Clackamas County Jail and is under a suicide watch."
I want to bring your attention to the fact that newspapers do not report homosexual crimes. This story was seen on TV and I got the story first on KATU’s site. The Oregonian’s first run of this story cleverly disguised the fact that the boy was Bulleit’s adopted son, identifying him as only “a boy.”
D
Dolores49
Guest
You aren’t serious, are you?!
Read my posts in this thread.
S
sweetchuck
Guest
Dolores49 said:
Listen up people: Quit projecting false arguments into other people’s posts! This is like the fourth or fifth time it’s happened to me in this thread! If you can’t get the gist of what the person is saying, ask them, rather than suggest that they are saying something that they are not saying. I have never once advocated the hiring of active homosexuals in this thread, but many people here have accused me of this. read…my…posts!
You think my post equated the two? You think an equation is the same as a comparison? You’re kidding, right?
Ever do any creative writing?
Her tears gushed forth like a raging river, her sobs pierced the soul like an arrows through a sea of Jell-o pudding.
If you were to write something like that, would I have reason to accuse you of equating tears with rivers and sobs with arrows? No. I’d use logic and reason to understand that you are making an analogical COMPARISON, not an equation.
I was comparing quitting smoking with quitting any destructive behavior. The longer you’re destructive-behavior-free, the more likely you are not to be subject to their side effects.
AGAIN I SAY, I was not making an argument in support of active homosexuals. If you read my multitude of posts in this threads, you will see that my opinions are quite contrary to the negative ones you would like to project into my posts. But I’ll leave that up to you to read back and discover for yourself that I am arguing in defense of chaste homosexuals. My argument is that one who lives their life in Christ is going to know right from wrong, and in resisting one temptation (gay sex) will have strength to resist another (child sex). Do they have the strength to resist the temptations? Active homosexuals, no. Chaste, yes. Active, no. Chaste, yes. Active, no. The further you are in sin, the more likely you are to sin. But if your life is in union with Christ, He will strengthen you.
Perhaps you should reread your own posts as well. You contradict yourself…
According to that line of thinking, there is no hope for the sinner to overcome his or her affliction; once a sinner, always a sinner; not even in purity dedicated to Christ can a reformed homosexual overcome his temptations enough to be around children, who it is likely that he or she was never attracted to in the first place.
S
selvaraj
Guest
No, never. They destroy the kids.
K
katherine2
Guest
Lisa N:
I know a lot of secular pyschologists have promoted your theory that people (or men) are naturally transitory in their sexuality. But as a Christian, I don’t accept it. The argument that homosexuality is unnatural is because Man is made for Woman – not WOMEN.
Even in my pre-Counciliar upbringing the Church has always allowed a reasonable difference in the firmess or mercy we take towards sinners – we were given the examples of St. Peter Damian (rigourous) and St. Alphonse Ligouri (merciful). So I can understand our discussion on how to treat gay parents in light of that traditional debate within the Church (I have some resentment when some suggest only one position belongs within the Church).
Because of that tradition within the Church, while I disagree with you on the school issue, I am not scandalized by your view.
However, I have to say I am scandalized by your “Peter Damian” view of gay people and your “St. Alphonse” view of men who run out on their families. it sthe inconsistency that is the cause of the scandal.
Lisa, in all honesty, I’m more than a little suprised and aghast at your liberalism here. it is NOT natural for a woman to abandon the child in her womb and it is not natural for a man to abandon his wife and children when the children are outside the womb.
I know a lot of secular pyschologists have promoted your theory that people (or men) are naturally transitory in their sexuality. But as a Christian, I don’t accept it. The argument that homosexuality is unnatural is because Man is made for Woman – not WOMEN.
Even in my pre-Counciliar upbringing the Church has always allowed a reasonable difference in the firmess or mercy we take towards sinners – we were given the examples of St. Peter Damian (rigourous) and St. Alphonse Ligouri (merciful). So I can understand our discussion on how to treat gay parents in light of that traditional debate within the Church (I have some resentment when some suggest only one position belongs within the Church).
Because of that tradition within the Church, while I disagree with you on the school issue, I am not scandalized by your view.
However, I have to say I am scandalized by your “Peter Damian” view of gay people and your “St. Alphonse” view of men who run out on their families. it sthe inconsistency that is the cause of the scandal.
M
miguel
Guest
You are not thinking logically here sweetchuck. With any homosexual, two things are at play…mental health and sin. No one here is arguing against the possibility of a sinner overcoming his temptations, with the help of Christ. All of us are in that boat together. And no one but Christ really knows the extent of that reform within each of us. IOW, none of us can predict the future with exact certainty. But this is where probability and risk assessment come in. Insurance companies use this technique all the time. Single male drivers under 25 are in the highest risk category. The accident data proves it. And the data justifies charging higher premiums to that category. As a 16 year old single male, I may feel I’m a low risk because I know I’m a good driver. But I’m not going to convince the insurance company of that. They don’t know how I drive. I get treated like everyone else in my risk group. That’s policy. I may not like getting charged more than older, more experienced drivers. But I can at least see why they do it. It’s fair to make the people who are causing most of the accidents shoulder most of the burden. And it’s a sensible way for business to deal with risk. In the world of insurance, we’re only talking about money. But with kids, the stakes are much higher. In comparing the risk to children of male homosexuals versus female heterosexuals, it’s folly to ignore the available data. And reasonable homosexuals wouldn’t argue with this.
N
Newman60
Guest
Actively gay parents are not conforming to Catholic teaching and should not be allowed ANY position of responsibility until they repudiate the gay lifestyle.
Perhaps we should take the original question even further and ask if any active homosexual should be involved in any of our schools not just the Catholic ones? Whether someone wants to admit it or not, that behavior is neither natural nor normal. Why pretend otherwise? Something which is neither natural nor normal should not be considered an acceptable lifestyle nor held out as such to our children in any school setting.
Newman60
S
sweetchuck
Guest
I understand the argument, and I am impressed with your reasoning capabilities as a 16-year-old. I disagree however. I don’t think anyone can make the argument that chaste homosexuals are any more likely to molest children than chaste married couples because there simply is NO data either way. The reverse of that is that I cannot definitively argue that they are equally or less likely than chaste married couples …because there simply is NO data.
But, being a person with a degree in Psychology and knowing what I know about the human condition, a great number of people live with mental disorders. And very few are untreatable. So, successful treatments are available. Study after study has shown that with a wide range of mental disorders, no treatment is bad, drug therapy is better, behavioral therapy is better than that, and a combination of drug therapy and behavioral therapy is the most successful form of treatment. But, in many, many cases, behavioral therapy is sufficient to cure many disorders.
Now, you’ll find no study on chaste homosexuals, and there’ll be no homosexual pill, such things are taboo in today’s culture, BUT Courage and other support groups would more than adequately serve as behavioral therapy. When taken in combination with a strict regimen of regular confession (also a form of behavioral counseling) and the Eucharist, through whom any may be healed if God wills, you have a blueprint for success.
Now, I understand everyone’s fear, and people should actively fear the thought of leaving their children around practicing homosexuals, not because they’re more likely to be a pedophile, but because they are living in a state of mortal sin. But anyone living in a state of mortal sin is a danger to children. But I’m telling you, homosexuals can be cured, no matter what practicing homosexuals and liberal apologists will say. Maybe this could be an uncomfortable situation for parents, but we need to be a people who gives hope to those struggling with such a weighty temptation. Telling them, “you’re cured but we don’t trust you,” just doesn’t cut it.
I just wish some professionals would have the chutzpa to do a real study on recovering homosexuals. That would surely make my argument much more reasonable, because my premise hinges on faith that Christ heals the afflicted human condition. And science, which Christ created, would surely confirm that.
D
dennisknapp
Guest
What are your views regarding homosexuality? Just curious?
Peace
- Status