Uhhh…I thought that the original poster of this information said that the Bishop expelled the students from the school itself, not merely prom?what problem?
It is a Catholic high school. Students are expected to obey Catholic teaching. If two gay students wish to attend a CATHOLIC high school prom and to attend as an openly gay ‘prom couple’, then the Bishop was right to insist that they could not attend as such.
What you are arguing is against extremism, not liberalism. Although, these terms tend to get muddled in the American political system, which is why is best to stick to relativistic terms such as Democrat and Republican. Because to be fair, if we were to plot these parties on a linear graph (which I admit simplifies the issue) both fall on the center right of the line. Just to show the logical absurdity if we were to apply this Fascism/Nationalism is the logical conclusion of relatively conservative policies. Thus the regimes in Germany, Italy, and Spain during this time period were all ultra-conservative movements incidentally headed by Catholics. On the other hand taking liberal policies to the extreme doesn’t lead to socialism (its not a forum of government, but an economic policy that can be found in many different types of government) but communism. Neither of these policies work very well, but to associate either with Satan is hyperbole.Politics is the mass extension of ethics. It is unavoidable. The tyrannical activity of the homosexual students at Georgetown is political in nature.
Marxism, Leftism, homosexual behavior, abortion… they are all allied because they all come from the same source: Satan. They are Satanic in nature and their destiny is the Lake of Fire. There can be no more practical and sober political analysis than that.
Above: Spain, 1936. The practical application of Leftist politics.
This is what we are returning to: open warfare on the Catholic and Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ by the enemies of His Kingship.
yukonbrad just mentioned “two gay students attending”, whereas tantum ergo added the explicit mention of “the prom”.Uhhh…I thought that original poster of this information said that the Bishop expelled the students from the school itself, not merely prom?
If I read that correctly, it’s seriously troubling that a bishop would do this.
I agree - maybe we’ll get some clarification. Not allowing students to go to prom is petty, but understandable. Not allowing students to attend *school *is unacceptable.yukonbrad just mentioned “two gay students attending”, whereas tantum ergo added the explicit mention of “the prom”.
If it’s a question of attending the prom, that’s one thing; but being admitted as students seems to be quite another. perhaps yukonbrad might weigh in and help us understand whether we’re hearing him correctly/
I don’t believe that you should be allowed to lie on this forum. Germany was not headed by a “Catholic”, it was headed by Adolf Hitler, a quasi-pagan. Italy was not headed by a “Catholic”, it was headed by Benito Mussolini, a militant atheist. Spain was headed by a very good Catholic, Francisco Franco, who was not a socialist (unlike Hitler and Mussolini, who were). Franco was a friend of President Eisenhower and a staunch anti-Communist.What you are arguing is against extremism, not liberalism. Although, these terms tend to get muddled in the American political system, which is why is best to stick to relativistic terms such as Democrat and Republican. Because to be fair, if we were to plot these parties on a linear graph (which I admit simplifies the issue) both fall on the center right of the line. Just to show the logical absurdity if we were to apply this Fascism/Nationalism is the logical conclusion of relatively conservative policies. Thus the regimes in Germany, Italy, and Spain during this time period were all ultra-conservative movements incidentally headed by Catholics. On the other hand taking liberal policies to the extreme doesn’t lead to socialism (its not a forum of government, but an economic policy that can be found in many different types of government) but communism. Neither of these policies work very well, but to associate either with Satan is hyperbole.
Yes, there is a political nature to this debate. I grant you that, but what I am asking is can we not be the bigger person and not make it political? Your logical is basically suggesting because they did it, it is ok. This is no different from these students who are being intolerant of the Catholic position because the Priest was intolerant of their position.
Many atheists are trending Pro-Life, the late Christopher Hitchens was Pro-Life. Are they going to ban atheists now?Plus, he’s anti-abortion. The horror, the horror!
Apparently, Franco did compile a list of Spanish Jews for Hitler, presumably to send them to death camps.I don’t believe that you should be allowed to lie on this forum. Germany was not headed by a “Catholic”, it was headed by Adolf Hitler, a quasi-pagan. Italy was not headed by a “Catholic”, it was headed by Benito Mussolini, a militant atheist. Spain was headed by a very good Catholic, Francisco Franco, who was not a socialist (unlike Hitler and Mussolini, who were). Franco was a friend of President Eisenhower and a staunch anti-Communist.
In the early 1940’s, Adolf Hitler’s Germany brought a reign of terror on most of Europe and North Africa. Notwithstanding that both Madalyn O’Hair and the late famed atheist Christopher Hitchens aggressively contended that Adolf Hitler was not an atheist (citing a few references to being inspired by God to eradicate the Jewish people in “Mein Kampf” and a slogan on in the inside part of Nazi belt buckles: “God on Our Side”), much of “Mein Kampf” was based on the writings of the German atheist philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. “Nietzsche has been often described as the father of modern atheism” (11). “According to Nietzsche, man is an animal evolving from beast to what he referred to as the “superman”, a race of men and women unchained from the shackles of religion, belief in God, and morality, who will use their intelligence and will to create their own world, any world they like”. Nietzsche wrote: “Christianity must be ruthlessly destroyed in order to make way for the race of supermen who would rise above Christian superstition” (12).Thus the regimes in Germany, Italy, and Spain during this time period were all ultra-conservative movements incidentally headed by Catholics.
Infamous for brutal mass murder, Benito Mussolini was another tyrant dictator influenced by Friedrich Nietzsche. As a young man he proclaimed himself to be an atheist and several times tried to shock an audience by calling on God to strike him dead (20). Mussolini is also considered the Father of Relativism, during a speech given on June 21, 1921, he declared: “Everything I have said and done is these last years is relativism, by intuition. From the fact that all ideologies are of equal value, that all ideologies are mere fictions, the modern relativist infers that everybody has the right to create for himself his own ideology, and to attempt to enforce it with all the energy of which he is capable. If relativism signifies contempt for fixed categories, and men who claim to be the bearers of an objective immortal truth, then there is nothing more relativistic than fascism” (21). With the elimination of God, follows the elimination of moral laws. Relativism is the value system atheists substitute for morals, whereas each individual creates their own system of ethics.Thus the regimes in Germany, Italy, and Spain during this time period were all ultra-conservative movements incidentally headed by Catholics.
My apologizes all were raised Catholic. Hitler had pretty high esteem for the church even though he disagreed with its theology. Mussolini was indeed an atheist and took after his father. Oh since we ought not lie in this forum I think it ought to be clear that Franco was supported by the communists in the 1930s. Though I’m glad you agree with my point that socialism is exercised by both spectrums of the political line (ie. liberals and conservatives),I don’t believe that you should be allowed to lie on this forum. Germany was not headed by a “Catholic”, it was headed by Adolf Hitler, a quasi-pagan. Italy was not headed by a “Catholic”, it was headed by Benito Mussolini, a militant atheist. Spain was headed by a very good Catholic, Francisco Franco, who was not a socialist (unlike Hitler and Mussolini, who were). Franco was a friend of President Eisenhower and a staunch anti-Communist.
Just an ethical side (the academic in me) both of these posts come from Wikipedia.org.Infamous for brutal mass murder, Benito Mussolini was another tyrant dictator influenced by Friedrich Nietzsche. As a young man he proclaimed himself to be an atheist and several times tried to shock an audience by calling on God to strike him dead (20). Mussolini is also considered the Father of Relativism, during a speech given on June 21, 1921, he declared: “Everything I have said and done is these last years is relativism, by intuition. From the fact that all ideologies are of equal value, that all ideologies are mere fictions, the modern relativist infers that everybody has the right to create for himself his own ideology, and to attempt to enforce it with all the energy of which he is capable. If relativism signifies contempt for fixed categories, and men who claim to be the bearers of an objective immortal truth, then there is nothing more relativistic than fascism” (21). With the elimination of God, follows the elimination of moral laws. Relativism is the value system atheists substitute for morals, whereas each individual creates their own system of ethics.
Yes. It is only a matter of time before it becomes a matter that can lead to arrest. We have no idea of what persecution truly means yet.Quite true and it will get worse.
No it doesn’t.Well it smacks in the face of the message that “all are welcome” and two was this a prom? The manner in which I read this was that they weren’t allowed in the school. Second homosexuality is not a sin in the Catholic church, homosexual acts are. Does one consider attending a school prom and dancing as a “homosexual” act?
Hardly a synonymous claim. It’s too bad these students didn’t attend the Jesuit High School where the Priest allowed a gay couple to attend, saying all our brothers our welcome. Quite a different message and the loving message of Christ that sends.No it doesn’t.
I am pretty sure this referred to the prom.
Had the students attended not as a couple there would have been no problem.
Again, school officials are entitled to set rules. If I want to wear a T shirt and jeans to school, there is nothing wrong with the jeans per se, but if the school has a dress code which states ‘no jeans’, then can people start to demand they attend in jeans?
No it isnt, its actually perfectly reasonable.Uhhh…I thought that the original poster of this information said that the Bishop expelled the students from the school itself, not merely prom?
If I read that correctly, it’s seriously troubling that a bishop would do this.
And you think that has nothing to do with politics? Where exactly have you been the last 20 years?Seriously, we’re going to bring politics into this debate. I’m beginning to think this website might as well just be titled Conservative Republican Catholic & Answers. My point isn’t to attack this website, which I find quite informative, but to suggest that both liberals and conservatives are intolerant of others views. So how about we just stay on topic and discuss the matter at hand which is these students trying to banish a Catholic priest from campus.
The plan to oust Shaffer includes the creation of a video containing the statements of several students who have left GW’s Newman Center. That video, Legacy and Bergen hope, will surely arouse the generally left-leaning campus to anger, thus forcing school officials to act.
Agreed. The two students are using hate to drive out those they see as “different”.Hardly a synonymous claim. It’s too bad these students didn’t attend the Jesuit High School where the Priest allowed a gay couple to attend, saying all our brothers our welcome. Quite a different message and the loving message of Christ that sends.
Ah, so you’re judging the bishop as sending an unwelcoming, UnChristlike message. I see.Hardly a synonymous claim. It’s too bad these students didn’t attend the Jesuit High School where the Priest allowed a gay couple to attend, saying all our brothers our welcome. Quite a different message and the loving message of Christ that sends.
It is all fine and good to theorize about admitting openly gay male students to a Parochial School. However, where is it written that a gay student is entitled to go to a Parochial School - especially when acting on their homosexual urges is counter to Church teaching. And, if you think gay teenagers do not act on their sexual urges…what planet do you live on?Well it smacks in the face of the message that “all are welcome” and two was this a prom? The manner in which I read this was that they weren’t allowed in the school. Second homosexuality is not a sin in the Catholic church, homosexual acts are. Does one consider attending a school prom and dancing as a “homosexual” act?
Well clearly this is going to become a who judges who contest,since you are judging me as being unlike Christ. hmm. strange. Of course I said nothing of the sort I just said that the Jesuit Priest sent a welcoming message to the gay teens at his school. Perhaps the logical inference you are making is that the Bishop is not being welcoming, but I didn’t say that, but I will now. Yes that Bishop is being very welcoming. Just because he would allow them to attend doesn’t mean he supports their behavior. Do you not think he would have a better chance of being a pastoral minister to them if he allowed them to attend? Instead he is basically saying that is not allowed here go away until you change. That doesn’t sound like a message of Christ to me. However I make no judgments to you or to the Bishop.Ah, so you’re judging the bishop as sending an unwelcoming, UnChristlike message. I see.