Student at Catholic elementary school has his parent's are two gay fathers

[JimG]

I imagine that young people, unless they are almost sequestered, know all about same gender marriage these days. It’s in the media, it’s on social networks, it’s in the neighborhood. DG, you are quite right in that the law of the land says that there is indeed marriage equality. The Roman Catholic Church and now the Mormons may define this as not possible and an ‘apostasy’, but it is still legal and part of what American families look like.

Perhaps the question to parents is how you explain to children that as Catholics you believe something different, while at the same time insisting on respect for your neighbors and their children.

I have not heard same sex marriage called an “apostasy,” though I have heard it called not possible. And that is true, but it is not that it is impossible sacramentally or religiously; it is not possible anatomically and biologically, which is prior to the other categories.

So if one is to teach children about procreation and marriage, they cannot help but learn that marital sex is impossible to two persons of the same sex. I think it is best not to burden children with learning about sex at too early an age, but it’s getting more difficult all the time.

 

[yellowbird]

To the OP if you’re still reading. What do you do? You treat this child and those with whom he lives with respect. They deserve that much as human beings. If you don’t want to give a mixed message to your child then explain to him/her (if age appropriate) what our beliefs are but that we always show love and respect.

If you’re not comfortable sending your child to their home (and this is a personal choice) and your child is friends with this child then keep play dates at your house. This may be a moot point of your kids never become friends, which may be for a thousand reasons unrelated to the parents.

How they live is none of your business as how you live is none of theirs.

This. All of it. But especially the bold. Wish this child went to my children’s Catholic school. I’d invite him over for a playdate and if his two Dads dropped in off, I’d offer them a glass of sweet tea. I’d be willing to overlook their sin if they’d be willing to overlook mine. That’s the thing. we’re all sinners, saved by GRACE. Who decided the gays’ sin stinks worse than our own?

 

[ComplineSanFran]

I have not heard same sex marriage called an “apostasy,” though I have heard it called not possible. And that is true, but it is not that it is impossible sacramentally or religiously; it is not possible anatomically and biologically, which is prior to the other categories.

The Mormons just came out with a ruling (right word?) that same sex marriages were banned and the people involved were to be known as ‘apostates.’ AND the children of such couples were to be refused Baptism and all other blessings until they reached the age of 18, when they could reject their parents and be admitted into the church.

 

[Zeldarocks2]

As a Gay man in a relationship, but willing to abstain from sexual intercourse, let me offer an alternative perspective:

The child is not at fault for whatever decisions the parents may make; therefore, the child should not be subjected to any criticism.

If the parents were married in a legal, civil ceremony, they are his parents, and his fathers, plain and simple. If you wish to differentiate to your child the fact that they are not recognized by the Church, you should do so; WHILE granting due respect for the other child and his parents.

 

[Thorolfr]

The Mormons just came out with a ruling (right word?) that same sex marriages were banned and the people involved were to be known as ‘apostates.’ AND the children of such couples were to be refused Baptism and all other blessings until they reached the age of 18, when they could reject their parents and be admitted into the church.

Children living in a same-sex household may not be blessed as babies or baptized until they are 18, the Mormon Church declared in a new policy. Once they reach 18, children may disavow the practice of same-sex cohabitation or marriage and stop living within the household and request to join the church.

The policy changes, which also state that those in a same-sex marriage are to be considered apostates, set off confusion and turmoil among many Mormons after the policy was leaked online. The changes in the handbook for local church leaders for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints were confirmed Thursday by church spokesman Eric Hawkins.

“Church handbooks are policy and procedural guides for lay leaders who must administer the church in many varied circumstances throughout the world,” Hawkins said in a statement. “The church has long been on record as opposing same-sex marriages. While it respects the law of the land, and acknowledges the right of others to think and act differently, it does not perform or accept same-sex marriage within its membership.”

washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/11/05/mormon-church-to-exclude-children-of-same-sex-couples-from-getting-blessed-and-baptized-until-they-are-18/

Seems rather cruel to treat children this way.

 

[Verdandi]

Seems rather cruel to treat children this way.

I don’t see why, no private club has to accept anyone into its membership. While it is not a universal policy and varies depending on the diocese the Catholic Church follows a similar practice where I live; homosexuals cannot get their children baptized as children, they may only be baptized after reaching adulthood and formally condemning their homosexual parent(s) choice of partner.

Something to do with the passage about a hope that the child will be raised to be a Catholic, which the religious authorities in the UK don’t feel homosexuals can do.

I should add I don’t object to this, whatever pleases them. I do have to admit it does seem like a rather poor plan in the long term, it is not as if Catholicism is a numerically stable never mind growing faith here and one would expect a new member to be desirable. Still, quality rather than quantity I would imagine the opinion is on this.

 

[Rico_S]

First of all, criticism (note that this is different from “bashing”) of Catholic schools on here is quite justified since many Catholic schools are really Catholic in name only.

How many? What percentage? Source beyond CAF anecdotes?

Criticism of specific instances is fine and certainly warranted in cases. Turning it into a sweeping general bashing of Catholic education is unwarranted. 1990Domer said “As Monicad said, Catholic schools are hardly pro-life.” That is not legit criticism, its bashing and not only is it a crock, its irresponsible. And its a staple from the very Holy CAF crowd.

 

[Rico_S]

I know for a fact you can’t count on a Catholic school to be truly Catholic you have to dig deeper.

You know for a fact that you can’t count on a Catholic school to be truly catholic? Or you know for a fact that a particular Catholic school of which you are familiar cannot be counted upon to be truly Catholic?

You see, one is a general indictment of catholic school–bashing. The other is a valid opinion of a particular school based on personal experience. See the difference?

 

[1990Domer]

This. All of it. But especially the bold. Wish this child went to my children’s Catholic school. I’d invite him over for a playdate and if his two Dads dropped in off, I’d offer them a glass of sweet tea. I’d be willing to overlook their sin if they’d be willing to overlook mine. That’s the thing. we’re all sinners, saved by GRACE. Who decided the gays’ sin stinks worse than our own?

I was taught that SSA was one of those sins that cry out to Heaven.

Now, would you invited a mildly autistic kid to your house for a play date and a cup of coffee? Or is this limited to kids with SSA parents. See why I feel isolated and that the system is unfair? Nobody ever reached out to me or my son. Yet, he has already faced two reported and investigated death threats.

Can’t anyone see there are other kids besides SSA kids that need support?

 

[1990Domer]

Except for I never said that.

I think when I was quoted it was intended to say “some” Catholic schools are hardly pro-life and it was a typo from a very Catholic and dedicated mother. I know for a fact you can’t count on a Catholic school to be truly Catholic you have to dig deeper. Based on years of personal experiences and those of families I know. You are right, bashing is irresponsible but I don’t see that here, just concerned parents. Sometimes with very different viewpoints but people trying to live out their faith as best as they can. God bless.

Sorry if I got the quote wrong. Yes, some diocese do offer acceptance to all children and make sure they have the correct accommodations. That teaches complete compassion to both special needs and regular Ed students.

However, in my area, this is not the case, the school students and teachers mocked my child and ignored the multiple educational meetings we had with a Ph.D. therapist. This is why I am sitting in a phychiatrist office hoping she can convince my son his life is worth living. This is why mom and son are on suicide watch.

Monicad has been one of the best cyber friends I have had. She understands the pain. Most do not. They simply open their mouth and make really rude comments.

 

[1990Domer]

You know for a fact that you can’t count on a Catholic school to be truly catholic? Or you know for a fact that a particular Catholic school of which you are familiar cannot be counted upon to be truly Catholic?

You see, one is a general indictment of catholic school–bashing. The other is a valid opinion of a particular school based on personal experience. See the difference?

Mine is not bashing–it is based on personal experience of all the schools in our 15 mile area. If you would like the facts, simply see why so many schools have closed or combined in the Archdiocese of Philly. I see more Catholic school kids in my son therapist’s office than public school–no lie. Why? No tolerance of differences and no discipline. They need the students to keep the schools opens.

I just gave an invisible disability talk to 21 parish religious Ed teachers. They were clueless about invisible disabilities. That is a big, big problem, as these disabilities are not going away!

I would love to visit a Catholic school that does it right. The one my son was in promised my husband the moon and the stars. However, the principal failed completely to share the information we put together for them with my son’s teachers. They ignored advice from respected professionals. Is that bashing? I don’t think so. I call it misrepresentation and failure to do their job.

 

[PhiloMed]

I was taught that SSA was one of those sins that cry out to Heaven.

Now, would you invited a mildly autistic kid to your house for a play date and a cup of coffee? Or is this limited to kids with SSA parents. See why I feel isolated and that the system is unfair? Nobody ever reached out to me or my son. Yet, he has already faced two reported and investigated death threats.

Can’t anyone see there are other kids besides SSA kids that need support?

Then you were taught wrong. SSA is a cross to bear, but not a sin. Homosexual activity, on the other hand, is gravely sinful. Nobody has disputed that.

Clearly, you are upset that your child was not welcomed when some of us here are advocating welcoming a child of SS parents. None of us rejected your child. There is no reason that should have happened.

On the other hand, your solution was to not allow such a child in the school in the first place. This is exactly how your son was treated. You are taking your personal issues with the school and applying them to a totally unrelated situation.

 

[Maximilan_Kolbe]

This. All of it. But especially the bold. Wish this child went to my children’s Catholic school. I’d invite him over for a playdate and if his two Dads dropped in off, I’d offer them a glass of sweet tea. I’d be willing to overlook their sin if they’d be willing to overlook mine. That’s the thing. we’re all sinners, saved by GRACE. Who decided the gays’ sin stinks worse than our own?

And that’s fine. For your children. Again, many of us are talking more about the response of a school prior to enrollment, while others are talking about how to treat people. Obviously, they are two very different things.

I’d also say that a lot of this probably depends on the age of the children in question. I am speaking from the worst case scenario, which is around the age of five or so for an elementary school.

I personally wouldn’t have the two men over to my house with young children around. And that’s fine, since thy are my children. Their child is a different story, especially at young ages. But it was Cardinal Bergoglio himself who said in 2006 that homosexual adoption was a form of child abuse, so the somewhat “meh” attitude many have would probably baffle him as well.

Parents have every right to set boundaries for what children at certain ages can be exposed to. I don’t buy the two prevalent attitudes thrown about here, mainly that 1) you can’t shelter your children since they are going to be exposed the society anyway one day and 2) unless you are without sin, or are excluding every other person with any minor sin, you are being a hypocrite.

Number one is nonsense because if that were true, the moms and dads wouldn’t object to sending their children over to someone’s house while the parents had pornography on display, or allowed the children exposure to ultra-violent movies (Kill Bill kind of stuff). They also wouldn’t object if the child was exposed to adults engaging in recreational drug use, provided there was a caretaker who was sober. So can we assume that things like pornography, violence, and drugs are okay as far as exposing our children, since eventually, they will learn about those things? I just want to be clear in terms of consistency.

Number two is disingenuous as well IMO because not a single person objected to the situation because a child’s parents or guardians are sinners. Not a single one. What they opposed for their own children is a very specific issue. As mentioned in the previous parapgraph, I myself would also not allow my children attend a school where pornography was tolerated (not that it generally is at Catholic Schools). But for a more realistic example, I doubt parents would support another parent attending school functions wearing t-shirts displaying profanity or nudity, even if the school did nothing. We are talking about specific things. To broadbrush the notion that unless you are perfect, you can’t ever object to anything ever is again, nonsense.

Everyone one objects to something. But why? How dare they; egads, they are sinners too! You have no right to oppose anything, using that logic.

Again, no one ever said “I don’t want my children hanging around sinners.” So why that is being addressed in responses is beyond me.

Can someone who disagrees with me (or some others) provide me a list of things they feel are unacceptable for their children, and then explain how you get off arbitrarily making that list up when you just got done saying people have no business worrying about other people’s sins? I am curious how you rationalize that.

 

[1990Domer]

Perhaps you can help me then, I mean that with all sincerity. In my life, and in the lives of my good friends we have encountered Catholic schools that had pro-choice sponsored activities, open support of the gay/lesbian lifestyle and criticisms and denials of the Catholic church and her teachings.

Because of these experiences and the number of them, I advocate that a person does not blindly trust a Catholic school to be truly Catholic and that a person should dig deeper before sending their child there. Perhaps I don’t know how to word this in a way that is not considered “bashing” by some because my intent is to encourage families to be thorough not a blanket judgment on the whole school system. Thanks and God bless.

Monicad, do you have any advice about “digging deeper.” DH and I thought we did our homework well and failed miserably.

 

[1990Domer]

Then you were taught wrong. SSA is a cross to bear, but not a sin. Homosexual activity, on the other hand, is gravely sinful. Nobody has disputed that.

Clearly, you are upset that your child was not welcomed when some of us here are advocating welcoming a child of SS parents. None of us rejected your child. There is no reason that should have happened.

On the other hand, your solution was to not allow such a child in the school in the first place. This is exactly how your son was treated. You are taking your personal issues with the school and applying them to a totally unrelated situation.

No, I was not taught wrong. I probably know more about it than I want to know. But yes, I am making the assumption that very few SSA people are chaste.

 

[Verdandi]

Can someone who disagrees with me (or some others) provide me a list of things they feel are unacceptable for their children, and then explain how you get off arbitrarily making that list up when you just got done saying people have no business worrying about other people’s sins? I am curious how you rationalize that.

I would object to my children if I them being shown porn at a young age, not because I think porn is sinful (because I don’t) or necessarily bad (although parts of the industry can be) but because it is neither suitable for their level of comprehension and development nor is it part of the culture I would try to raise them in. If someone desires to watch porn that is their buisness and I don’t care if they do or not, I simply choose not to indulge myself. Rather like how I don’t like McDonald’s and would never eat there but at the same time would not condemn anyone for choosing it.

In short not my preference for myself or my children (since any parent does what they think is best for them I would hope until they gain the faculties of their own independant reason).

Other things I would include as acceptable for other people but not for my own children are alcohol, violent cartoons, swearing, or converting to any religion. Don’t get me wrong, I would question their judgement (surely there are better things to do than watch south park or hear about Joseph Smith) but I’m not about to start condemning anyone for doing any of those things. I’m sure there are plenty of things I do (goodness, my religion box is enough I think ) that you would find bad.

It’s not that hard to rationalize at all really. We all make decisions that somebody is going to disagree with, it doesn’t make them mad, insane or evil however (necessarily I should add before someone invokes Godwins Law. Oh wait ).

 

[Maximilan_Kolbe]

I would object to my children if I them being shown porn at a young age, not because I think porn is sinful (because I don’t) or necessarily bad (although parts of the industry can be) but because it is neither suitable for their level of comprehension and development nor is it part of the culture I would try to raise them in. If someone desires to watch porn that is their buisness and I don’t care if they do or not, I simply choose not to indulge myself. Rather like how I don’t like McDonald’s and would never eat there but at the same time would not condemn anyone for choosing it.

In short not my preference for myself or my children (since any parent does what they think is best for them I would hope until they gain the faculties of their own independant reason).

Other things I would include as acceptable for other people but not for my own children are alcohol, violent cartoons, swearing, or converting to any religion. Don’t get me wrong, I would question their judgement (surely there are better things to do than watch south park or hear about Joseph Smith) but I’m not about to start condemning anyone for doing any of those things. I’m sure there are plenty of things I do (goodness, my religion box is enough I think ) that you would find bad.

It’s not that hard to rationalize at all really. We all make decisions that somebody is going to disagree with, it doesn’t make them mad, insane or evil however (necessarily I should add before someone invokes Godwins Law. Oh wait ).

I generally agree. But that flies in the face of the argumnets presented here that children will be exposed to things in life anyway, and that we are all sinners, so who are we to judge?

I’d like the people who maintain those arguments defend the things you oppose, that’s all.

 

[1990Domer]

I generally agree. But that flies in the face of the argumnets presented here that children will be exposed to things in life anyway, and that we are all sinners, so who are we to judge?

I’d like the people who maintain those arguments defend the things you oppose, that’s all.

We are all sinners and our job, if you believe in RCC doctrine, is to present yourself in a way to try to help get people to Heaven. It is to set an example, not shun them. And I would hope people would point that out to me. Personally, I use frequent Confesion for that because people think I am “too Catholic” because I follow the cathechism the best I can.

 

[Rico_S]

Mine is not bashing–it is based on personal experience of all the schools in our 15 mile area.

That’s a miniscule sampling, but I know you won’t hear that.

I really don’t want to engage your specific issue b/c anyone who doesn’t offer hugs you label as rude and mean spirited. I’ve read all your threads and posts. But I will say this. I feel terrible that your special needs child had such a rough go in the schools. The bullying you describe sounds terrible. It’s hard to fathom that your pleas for help fell on deaf ears—truly disheartening. No excuse…just awful. With that said, most Catholic schools aren’t equipped to deal with moderate/severe special needs kids. It is a sad reality that there aren’t enough resources, or it hasn’t been enough of a priority to direct more resources to that issue. My wife teaches in a Catholic school, she would seldom recommend putting a special needs kids in catholic school. She constantly sees the problems that these children face b/c parents won’t admit that there are issues (not saying you are one of them) or the school is too weak to draw the line with the parent and place the child somewhere better suited to meet the needs of the child.

Now, there are catholic schools in our area that are trying to address the issue, but its expensive and resource intensive.

But, your experience doesn’t invalidate Catholic schools no more than meeting a bad priest invalidates Catholicism.

 

[Rico_S]

Perhaps you can help me then, I mean that with all sincerity. In my life, and in the lives of my good friends we have encountered Catholic schools that had pro-choice sponsored activities, open support of the gay/lesbian lifestyle and criticisms and denials of the Catholic church and her teachings.

While I have run across a range of catholic parishes/schools, I can honestly say that I haven’t run into anything remotely close to what you are describing. I’ve run into plenty of the rad trad type–the type to which the typical CAFer would be drawn, but I’ve never seen anything close to schools sponsoring pro-choice sponsor activities.

Because of these experiences and the number of them, I advocate that a person does not blindly trust a Catholic school to be truly Catholic and that a person should dig deeper before sending their child there.

I certainly don’t disagree with you at all. Every catholic school has its issues. My wife taught at a Legionaires of Christ school for stint. They were staunchly pro-life, very orthodox, but treated women as inferior (different salary scale for men/women) and we all know what ultimately happened with that order.

So sure, do your digging, but overall Catholic education is a fantastic option and the default position shouldn’t be “catholic education isn’t really catholic.”