Student Who Exposed Catholic Teacher's Abortion Work Expelled

[KathleenElsie]

harinkj:

Without additional information, i do not think she should be fired. she may be doing the right thing.

• Kathie :bowdown:

What “right thing” can anyone be doing escorting a woman into an abortion business? :banghead:

I don’t believe in violence against the people that work there. But, I DON’T WANT THEM TEACHING MY CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN. I also would not invite them into my home to be with my children or grandchildren.:nope:

 

[Trick]

Bella3502:

I highly respect Mr. Obama…
In typical “ProLife” style, you have taken his comments out of context. Just because you NOTE something doesn’t make it true.

The “rush to judgement” mentality of some Catholics, is one of the reasons why the Catholic Faith is not taken seriously.

I beg to differ, the Catholic faith is taken seriously by myself and hundreds of millions of people across the Globe.

I t is not only taken serious by Catholics but by other people, who even though they are not Catholic respect our Catholic Faith.

Trick

 

[harinkj]

KathleenElsie:

What “right thing” can anyone be doing escorting a woman into an abortion business? :banghead:

Sorry, i wasn’t clear. i was referring to the Sister and what she did in terms of expelling the young girl. Until we find out the facts, i thought we should wait to judge that particular action.

This bishop already took care of the teacher. She was a non-Catholic, but she had signed a contract that forbad activities such as supporting abortuaries.

Sorry i wan’t clear.

• kathie :bowdown:

 

[Walt_Oliver]

I have deleted several off-topic posts. Also, I think a general reminder about charity is in order. Thanks for your cooperation.

Walt

 

[miguel]

Let me simplify this for you. The 5th commandment of Catholic teaching states “Thou shall not kill”. A Catholic student and her family find out the teacher is working at an ABORTUARY as a DEATHSCORT. Anotherwards, the teacher is actively taking part in murdering innocent babies. The Catholic student & her family notify the Catholic school President, Sr. Helen Timothy. The Catholic school then EXPELLS the Catholic school student for PRACTICING HER CATHLIC FAITH!!

I don’t care what excuse the school gives for EXPELLING the student. If the student did not do anything as SEVERE as pulling a Columbine and shooting at all her classmates & teachers, murder someone or stab another student then the STUDENT SHOULD STILL BE IN THE CATHOLIC SCHOOL. IF THIS STUDENT DOES NOT BELONG IN THE SCHOOL FOR HER HIGHLY COURAGOUS ACT; THEN NONE OF THE OTHER STUDENTS DESERVE TO BELONG IN THE SCHOOL.

*If my kids went to Loretto HS, I would immediately pull them out of the school and send them somewhere else. *

*Sr. Helen Timothy MUST BE REMOVED FROM THE CATHOLIC SCHOOL and I would probably fire the entire staff in the school and start from scratch. This is the most outraguous story I have ever heard. *

If it turns out the expulsion was vindictive and an in-your-face reaction to the Bishop’s firing of the low-life pro-abort (sorry couldn’t help myself), and it sure looks that way to me, I’m with you.

 

[VociMike]

bapcathluth:

You don’t even know Sister Helen and her reasons for expelling the student.

If she has a good reason she’s being very inept by not making that reason known. Common sense tells us that where there’s smoke there’s fire. To continue the analogy, it may, just may, be that in this particular case where there’s smoke there’s not fire but only a smoke-making machine. But until they lift the veil of secrecy it’s not unreasonable to expect that the most likely reason is the real one. And the school is asking for the bad PR they’re getting if they can’t see that.

 

[YinYangMom]

VociMike:

If she has a good reason she’s being very inept by not making that reason known. Common sense tells us that where there’s smoke there’s fire. To continue the analogy, it may, just may, be that in this particular case where there’s smoke there’s not fire but only a smoke-making machine. But until they lift the veil of secrecy it’s not unreasonable to expect that the most likely reason is the real one. And the school is asking for the bad PR they’re getting if they can’t see that.

Good golly, in this day and age legally terms cannot be disclosed for matters like this - it’s a matter of privacy laws. The child expelled is a minor. The school is not in the position of divulging the real reason for her expulsion, that is information only the student and her family have the right to divulge.

Especially if a lawsuit may be pending the school will not reveal facts. Those will come up in court.

The school isn’t going to sue the student so we can’t rely on them to bring this matter to the public square.

The student (or her parents) can sue the school, but will they??

If in fact this is a retaliatory expulsion the student and her parents have nothing to lose by suing the school. The problem is the burden of proof that the school unjustifiably expelled the student would be placed on the parents’ lawyer to bear.

If in fact there are other grounds justifying the girl’s expulsion then suing the school would put those grounds under the limelight. Whatever those grounds may be, personally, I wouldn’t want my child’s mistakes revealed in public like that even if the school is using those grounds as a means to retaliate for the outing of that teacher.

The point is there is more to the story that we, the public, may never know. Please refrain from jumping to conclusions and making assumptions without having access to the facts.

 

[slackernerd]

Katelyn wrote this on her blog before her expulsion . It should still be there at standupandspeakout.blogspot.com/

“One thing that I had not mentioned was that Loretto’s administration has banned my mother from campus since October 16th. Obviously, we hope this can be resolved soon, especially since there are school events (such as the school play) that our family would like to attend.”

while the Sills’ name didn’t make it into the Sacbee until Saturday October 22nd. The original article was printed on the 15th. This seems like there’s more going on… Why would the mother tolerate being banned from her daughter’s campus if all she did was send Sr. Helen and the bishop an email?

I also am curious as to why anyone gave their names to the media in the first place. What reason would there be for such an action? And how exactly did the Sacbee give any relevant information by publicizing this? I think(I’m not sure) that Katelyn’s blog was anonymous before their identity was publicly revealed.

I don’t know who’s at fault with regard to the expulsion. Only the Sills and the administration know.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Prometheum_x:

That article tells us almost nothing. I’m not even sure whether the student’s explanation of the cause of the expulsion is the reason included in the letter or the student’s own conclusion. I myself find it hard to believe that the school would write a letter and say, “We have decided to expell you because your mother blew the whistle on a teacher who was violating our principles.”

Prometheum_x:

No one would ever be that stupid - They would find something that would sound plausible to someone who didn’t do any real digging. They probably said something like, “We found you and your mother (info from previous thread) too be disruptive to the life of Loretto and to be a cause of discord among the students and faculty of Loretto.”

The fact was that being forced to fire an instructor by the Bishop because that instructor had photographed working as an escort at an Abortuary had been disruptive and that had caused some discord among a student body that had never been taught the Church’s uncompromising position on Abortion.

I’ll leave the rest until after I’ve read the rest of the thread.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

YinYangMom:

Good golly, in this day and age legally terms cannot be disclosed for matters like this - it’s a matter of privacy laws. The child expelled is a minor. The school is not in the position of divulging the real reason for her expulsion, that is information only the student and her family have the right to divulge.

Especially if a lawsuit may be pending the school will not reveal facts. Those will come up in court.

The school isn’t going to sue the student so we can’t rely on them to bring this matter to the public square.

The student (or her parents) can sue the school, but will they??

If in fact this is a retaliatory expulsion the student and her parents have nothing to lose by suing the school. The problem is the burden of proof that the school unjustifiably expelled the student would be placed on the parents’ lawyer to bear.

If in fact there are other grounds justifying the girl’s expulsion then suing the school would put those grounds under the limelight. Whatever those grounds may be, personally, I wouldn’t want my child’s mistakes revealed in public like that even if the school is using those grounds as a means to retaliate for the outing of that teacher.

The point is there is more to the story that we, the public, may never know. Please refrain from jumping to conclusions and making assumptions without having access to the facts.

YinYangMom:

On the previous thread, a friend of Sister Helen’s e-mailed one of the posters to that thread and claimed that Mrs. Sills had somehow “threatened” Sister Helen. No specifics or evidence to support the charge were given, just an allegation. I also see it was continued on this thread in the same form.

I would say that, if Sister Helen believed that she was threatened by Mrs. Sills, she should make the details public, esp. since her friends already sent the allegation for posting here at Catholic answers. That doesn’t involve a minor, and the allegation has already been posted here.

Details of much of this story have already been published in the Sacramento Bee and on the “Blogosphere”. This isn’t like the Juvenile Justice System where no one can publish the name of the defendent. Everyone already knows who Kathelyn Sills is and that her mother took the photos that caused the teacher to be fired for being an escort at an Abortion Mill.

If there is information that is truly exculpatory for the school, they have every right to publish it so long as the information is true and they have evidence demonstrating it to be so. In this case, failure to so can only leave people to conclude the worst.

And, I don’t care how one sugarcoats it, a retaliatory expulsion is still wrong and the best way to handle it, in the Church and for a Christian, is to come clean. That doesn’t mean that Sister Helen or any of the staff at Loretto gets fired. It means that they write an Editorial to the Bee and get in front of a Microphone and say that what they did to Kathelyn Sills was wrong and that they shouldn’t have done it. And, That they then offer to continue her at Loretto or to give her the monetary credit towards the Catholic School of her choice.

If the Sister Helen and the rest of the Administration at Loretto can do that, a Law Suit by the Sills would obviously be wrong and would therefore be avoided. If they can’t, I believe that not only will Sister Helen find herself in the Defendant’s chair, but that Bishop Weigand will be a Co-Defendant and that the Diocese wil not only spend a lot of money defending this but will also spend a lot more in the paying the judgment after the Sills’ family wins.

I see no compelling reason why Kathelyn Sills should have been expelled from Loretto and no reason this couldn’t be settled amicably if some basic Christian Charity were applied along with obedience.

As it is, if it continues as is, the only creatures who will really win will be lawyers and the Devil who will have had a opportunity to weaken a young girl’s faith while setting Catholics against each other.

In Christ, Michael

PS: Kathelyn is a faithful Catholic, do you think she’ll remain so after hearing her mother slimed (even if the charges are true) and after a nasty legal fight?

 

[YinYangMom]

Traditional Ang:

I see no compelling reason why Kathelyn Sills should have been expelled from Loretto and no reason this couldn’t be settled amicably if some basic Christian Charity were applied along with obedience.

Then you must be privy to information others are not. Everything you’ve shared in your post is heresay. There are no facts, but a lot of assertions, assumptions, presumptions and accusations.

Have you ever been sued? Have you ever been in a legal situation where until a ruling is made anything and everything you say or do can be used against you and therefore you are bound not to utter a peep? I have, and I was in the right, yet I was forced to keep all facts of the matter to myself while a determination was first made whether or not the matter would result in charges or settled out of court. The only people I was allowed to reveal all the facts of the matter to were my lawyer and insurance representatives. It was one of the worst periods of my life. I wanted to scream at the top of my lungs but could not. The other party wanted the truth and never got it, even after it was determined there would be no charges filed, no case, no court, but a settlement. Because it was settled both parties were bound not to discuss the matter again.

I was wronged in that situation. So was the other party. The third party came out ahead and there was nothing we could do about it. Had I spoken out against the advice of my attorney and the state’s attorney I guarantee my words would have been twisted and innuendo construed around them against me, just as you are doing in this matter. It was evident in the reasoning for the settlement. I would have no opportunity to rebut the misconjecture and I could end up losing the case all together should it have gone to court. I knew I was in the right. I knew the other party’s lawyer’s job would be to do everything he/she could to discredit me.

It was a he says/she says situation. In the end the other party still believes the results of the settlement even though I know there are misstatements in it. I have to live with the knowledge that the other party believes a lie and I will not see justice in my lifetime over this matter. But I know, in heaven, the truth will be revealed and in that, I rest my peace of mind.

What I’m saying is that the way the system is designed the parties involved are not free to publicize facts of the matter. Just because the school is not posting on weblogs or writing articles in the newspaper or seeking air time on the news does not mean they are guilty of the accusations being levied against them.

 

[YinYangMom]

I guess I didn’t have to get into personal history to make my point…I could do just as well with Libby, Rove and DeLay…

For months now the media has been charging LRD with numerous accusations of wrongdoings.

Have we heard details from the LRD camp to refute the accusations? No.

Does that mean LRD are guilty of the accusations? No.

It means LRD are in the defensive position here. It is up to prosecuting attorneys to gather enough evidence to charge these men with any criminal activity.

All along the LRD camps have been gathering their facts, figures, evidence to support their innocence. They will reveal only as much is necessary to refute evidence presented against them. No more. No less.

In the case of the principal and the student/parents, I would wager the liability insurance company for the diocese, school and principal has already issued a gag order on this matter. They are gathering facts, testimony, evidence to support their innocence of expelling this student wrongfully.

The student/parents and their lawyers (if they have one yet) are the only ones in a position to bring this matter to court. If indeed she was wrongfully expelled then they can clear her name and honor by providing evidence to refute the reasons the school provided for her expulsion. They have the burden of proving the principal acted in retaliation and lied about the other reasons for the expulsion.

In the meantime there is nothing stopping the student/parents from presenting their case to the media. Just as the media is doing with the Libby, Rove, Delay matters.

In our country, however, public opinion doesn’t convict. Sufficient evidence in a court of law does. The fact of the matter is we may never know the truth in this case, just as we may never know the truth in the matters of Libby, Rove and Delay. But the fact that much of the student’s case is being presented via the media/web leads me to suspect they do not have the evidence necessary to prove the reasons given for her expulsion were lies. In the long run, it is not my business. We are not in a position to judge either the girl or the principal, there just are not enough facts available to make such a decision.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

YinYangMom:

Please read Post #47: Then you must be privy to information others are not. Everything you’ve shared in your post is heresay. There are no facts, but a lot of assertions, assumptions, presumptions and accusations…

What I’m saying is that the way the system is designed the parties involved are not free to publicize facts of the matter. Just because the school is not posting on weblogs or writing articles in the newspaper or seeking air time on the news does not mean they are guilty of the accusations being levied against them.

YinYangMom:

Regarding your involvement with our country’s broken legal system - It must have been an absolutely hellish experience. I think that the way it’s designed, no one really wins, except for the Devil, esp. when Christians take each other to Court

*How can any one of you with a case against another dare to bring it to the unjust for judgment instead of to the holy ones?

Do you not know that the holy ones will judge the world? If the world is to be judged by you, are you unqualified for the lowest law courts? Do you not know that we will judge angels? Then why not everyday matters?

If, therefore, you have courts for everyday matters, do you seat as judges people of no standing in the church? I say this to shame you. Can it be that there is not one among you wise enough to be able to settle a case between brothers? But rather brother goes to court against brother, and that before unbelievers?

Now indeed (then) it is, in any case, a failure on your part that you have lawsuits against one another. Why not rather put up with injustice? Why not rather let yourselves be cheated? Instead, you inflict injustice and cheat, and this to brothers.

Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? I Cor 6:1-9 NAB*

I’m sorry you experienced what you experienced. It’s just one more reason I believe St. Paul was right on this one.

I belong to a Church that took St. Paul’s admonition seriously and lost some vestments and other property when they refused to pursue someone who had stolen them, but grew in numbers as a congregation.

I wonder if the Church might be in the mess it’s in now because so many Bishops have been listening to lawyers and thinking about “legal implications” rather than thinking pastorally, about the people as members of a flock who need to be guided to the Kingdom of God.

Kathelyn Sills is part of that flock, and I believe that, by going through the legal process and spreading the story about her mother “threatening” Sister Helen, we’re risking losing that member of the flock, And, For What?

I believe that you might have exposed a real problem in the Church…

If the one of the leaders in the Church can’t admit error and try to correct it and make it right for fear of lawyers or what people might do, then we’ve lost the ability to trust each other and God enough to work AS A CHURCH, and that’s a very bad. How can a Church survive any kind of persecution if it’s members can’t work out problems such as the one we’re looking at here.

I realize the Church is an institution formed of human beings, and so, people will screw-up. If we threw everyone out who screwed-up, St. Peter would never have assumed office! And, St. Paul never would have been the Apostle to the Gentles! and, on to the present day…

But, we have to able to admit that we’ve screwed-up sp that we can learn whatever it was and then grow, or there’ll never be any progress.

We absolutely can’t let the fear of lawsuits take this away from us. It’ll harm the Church more than you can imagine if we do.

I hope this isn’t off topic, but it seems to be preventing a solution in this case, and that’s worse than tragic.

In Christ, Michael

PS: Most of what I said was based on posts and articles linked on the the previous thread on this issue. If you give them a careful reading, you’ll see that most of what I’ve said is on pretty firm ground. We have to find a better way than the legal system on this one - Are you really willing to lose sheep because of the fear of lawyers?

 

[manualman]

Good post. Besides, how much would it hurt the admin to have a press conference to say that “the expulsion was not improper or a means of payback. The situation that resulted in expulsion is personal and the school has no intention of violating the privacy of students unless forced to in a court of law.”

Viola. IMO, it’s pretty instructive that they haven’t even done this.

Side rant: Exactly WHEN did schools start teachings lawyers to do their all-out best to WIN their clients case, justice be danged? Seems to me that the lawyer ethic was once upon a time to endeavor to ensure that your client got a FAIR trial, not just a win at all costs.

 

[miguel]

]…How can any one of you with a case against another dare to bring it to the unjust for judgment instead of to the holy ones? Do you not know that the holy ones will judge the world?..Good point. Taking this to the court system should not be necessary. It is really up to the Bishop to investigate the expulsion and correct the problem…pronto.

 

[smartblkchick]

miguel:

Good point. Taking this to the court system should not be necessary. It is really up to the Bishop to investigate the expulsion and correct the problem…pronto.

A spokesman for the Bishop’s office said that he did not have the authority to interfere in the expulsion. It is considered a disciplinary issue. Because the school is an independent Catholic school and not a Diocesan Catholic school, the Bishop can only interfere on matters of faith.

 

[miguel]

smartblkchick:

A spokesman for the Bishop’s office said that he did not have the authority to interfere in the expulsion. It is considered a disciplinary issue. Because the school is an independent Catholic school and not a Diocesan Catholic school, the Bishop can only interfere on matters of faith.

Baloney (with all due respect to you). Expelling a pro-life student in retribution for taking a pro-life stand in a Catholic school is not a matter of faith? What message does that send to all the other kids? The Bishop has the authority to deal with any school calling itself Catholic in his diocese, even “independent” ones. If that wasn’t the case, the pro-abort would not have been fired.

 

[Tibbar]

This is all I see these days. Few, if any, stand up for pro-life issues. Most of the clergy and religious who run things are not willing to put themselves on the line over pro life matters like embryonic stem cell research, or so-called “right to die” legislation. Might be too controversial. Yet, they jump at every opportunity to stand up against capital punishment and the war on terror in Iraq.

Another good reason to home school your kids folks if you have the time, training and patience.

 

[Holly3278]

You’ve got to be kidding me! Can you say hypocrisy?

 

[smartblkchick]

miguel:

Baloney (with all due respect to you). Expelling a pro-life student in retribution for taking a pro-life stand in a Catholic school is not a matter of faith? What message does that send to all the other kids? The Bishop has the authority to deal with any school calling itself Catholic in his diocese, even “independent” ones. If that wasn’t the case, the pro-abort would not have been fired.

Perhaps the Bishop knows something we don’t about why she was expelled. My understanding of the situation is that after the mother was banned from the campus, the family made threats to interrupt other campus functions to get their point(s) across. This was AFTER the school had already fired the teacher. The student was expelled to keep her parents away from the school. This is the explanation that was posted by a student at the school.

Since it is likely the school may be facing a lawsuit from the family, it would be imprudent (and illegal under the Federal Educational Privacy Rights Act) for them to get into a public debate about the specifics of the situation. Arguments that the expulsion was simply retaliation for the report the bishop are premature. We don’t know that because we do not have first hand information. I am reserving judgment until that time the school present’s it’s case in court. Right now, the only perspective we are getting is the family’s perspective.