Toronto Catholic School Board Pro-Gay Harassment Policy Threatens Priests

[bones_IV]

No, that is not accurate in the slightest.

Tell that to the Pope.

 

[Elric]

Tell that to the Pope.

Ok, do you have his phone number?

 

[bones_IV]

Ok, do you have his phone number?

No. You just refuse the recognize that homosexuality is a violation of human rights.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Ok, do you have his phone number?

Try this site:
vatican.va/phome_en.htm

 

[KCT]

The story really isn’t about separation of church and state, though. It’s about a “Catholic” school board deliberately trying to suppress Catholic truth. The government is not involved.

Again, I don’t know all the details. Are you sure the school board is not pressured by the government to act a certain way or make certain decisions? How might one find out that there is absolutely no pressure? —KCT

 

[Lost_Found]

Again, I don’t know all the details. Are you sure the school board is not pressured by the government to act a certain way or make certain decisions? How might one find out that there is absolutely no pressure? —KCT

The schools are funded on an per student basis. The set funding formula is not tied to the faith. The schools are busy trying to maxmimize customers, like any other business. That’s why the Poster was saying the problem is from within the school board.
A teacher here in Ontario is generally better paid than in the US. They have one of the most poweful unions anywhere. Five star pension plan.
Were not talking about teachers or administrators that have taken vows of poverty in order to surrender themselves and follow Jesus. They don’t love the faith. They love the money.
Always follow the money.

 

[Elric]

No. You just refuse the recognize that homosexuality is a violation of human rights.

Now you are going to have to explain that one, its right up there with homosexuallity scandalizes people and causes them to sin.

But I fail to see how exactly I am refusing to recognise that homosexuallity is a violation of human rights because I asked if you had the Popes phone number, after you advised me to talk to him.

But could you please explain how exactly homosexuallity is a violation of human rights and how it scandalises and causes people to sin?

 

[goofyjim]

Now you are going to have to explain that one, its right up there with homosexuallity scandalizes people and causes them to sin.

But I fail to see how exactly I am refusing to recognise that homosexuallity is a violation of human rights because I asked if you had the Popes phone number, after you advised me to talk to him.

But could you please explain how exactly homosexuallity is a violation of human rights and how it scandalises and causes people to sin?

I agree with you there. I am stuck in the middle. I find myself in defense against homosexual behavior but since homosexuality is so much more than that I do not see how it violates human rights. In fact just the opposite. Those who cast the first stone are more in violation of human rights.

 

[bones_IV]

I agree with you there. I am stuck in the middle. I find myself in defense against homosexual behavior but since homosexuality is so much more than that I do not see how it violates human rights. In fact just the opposite. Those who cast the first stone are more in violation of human rights.

Because homosexuality violates the right the reproduce and have children.

 

[Elric]

I agree with you there. I am stuck in the middle. I find myself in defense against homosexual behavior but since homosexuality is so much more than that I do not see how it violates human rights. In fact just the opposite. Those who cast the first stone are more in violation of human rights.

Like I said before, its simply a matter of respecting other peoples beliefs.

It is a two way street, which is what really annoyed me about that kid from the documentry. He was disrespecting other peoples beliefs.

Because homosexuality violates the right the reproduce and have children.

Is that all you could come up with?

 

[goofyjim]

Because homosexuality violates the right the reproduce and have children.

It is not preventing anyone else from reproducing. Are you suggesting we go to criminalizing the behavior? How do we enforce such laws? Follow two men into their home to see what they are doing and if they are having sex arrest them? That would be a violation of human rights.

 

[Lost_Found]

It goes against both natural law & divine revelation.
The act itself is objectively evil.
Culpability might/might not be reduced due to intent/circumstance & invicible ignorance. Regardless of culpability, any sex outside marriage shows a disordered will (ie not ordered toward unity with God)

 

[bones_IV]

It is not preventing anyone else from reproducing. Are you suggesting we go to criminalizing the behavior? How do we enforce such laws? Follow two men into their home to see what they are doing and if they are having sex arrest them? That would be a violation of human rights.

Read Humanae Vitae

1. Married love, therefore, requires of husband and wife the full awareness of their obligations in the matter of responsible parenthood, which today, rightly enough, is much insisted upon, but which at the same time should be rightly understood. Thus, we do well to consider responsible parenthood in the light of its varied legitimate and interrelated aspects. With regard to the biological processes, responsible parenthood means an awareness of, and respect for, their proper functions. In the procreative faculty the human mind discerns biological laws that apply to the human person. (9)
   With regard to man’s innate drives and emotions, responsible parenthood means that man’s reason and will must exert control over them.
   With regard to physical, economic, psychological and social conditions, responsible parenthood is exercised by those who prudently and generously decide to have more children, and by those who, for serious reasons and with due respect to moral precepts, decide not to have additional children for either a certain or an indefinite period of time.
   Responsible parenthood, as we use the term here, has one further essential aspect of paramount importance. It concerns the objective moral order which was established by God, and of which a right conscience is the true interpreter. In a word, the exercise of responsible parenthood requires that husband and wife, keeping a right order of priorities, recognize their own duties toward God, themselves, their families and human society.
   From this it follows that they are not free to act as they choose in the service of transmitting life, as if it were wholly up to them to decide what is the right course to follow. On the contrary, they are bound to ensure that what they do corresponds to the will of God the Creator. The very nature of marriage and its use makes His will clear, while the constant teaching of the Church spells it out. (10)
2. The sexual activity, in which husband and wife are intimately and chastely united with one another, through which human life is transmitted, is, as the recent Council recalled, "noble and worthy.’’ (11) It does not, moreover, cease to be legitimate even when, for reasons independent of their will, it is foreseen to be infertile. For its natural adaptation to the expression and strengthening of the union of husband and wife is not thereby suppressed. The fact is, as experience shows, that new life is not the result of each and every act of sexual intercourse. God has wisely ordered laws of nature and the incidence of fertility in such a way that successive births are already naturally spaced through the inherent operation of these laws. The Church, nevertheless, in urging men to the observance of the precepts of the natural law, which it interprets by its constant doctrine, teaches that each and every marital act must of necessity retain its intrinsic relationship to the procreation of human life. (12)
3. This particular doctrine, often expounded by the magisterium of the Church, is based on the inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act.
   The reason is that the fundamental nature of the marriage act, while uniting husband and wife in the closest intimacy, also renders them capable of generating new life—and this as a result of laws written into the actual nature of man and of woman. And if each of these essential qualities, the unitive and the procreative, is preserved, the use of marriage fully retains its sense of true mutual love and its ordination to the supreme responsibility of parenthood to which man is called. We believe that our contemporaries are particularly capable of seeing that this teaching is in harmony with human reason.

Every sexual act must be open to the gift of life. Look it up.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Read Humanae Vitae

1. Married love, therefore, requires of husband and wife the full awareness of their obligations in the matter of responsible parenthood, which today, rightly enough, is much insisted upon, but which at the same time should be rightly understood. Thus, we do well to consider responsible parenthood in the light of its varied legitimate and interrelated aspects. With regard to the biological processes, responsible parenthood means an awareness of, and respect for, their proper functions. In the procreative faculty the human mind discerns biological laws that apply to the human person. (9)
   With regard to man’s innate drives and emotions, responsible parenthood means that man’s reason and will must exert control over them.
   With regard to physical, economic, psychological and social conditions, responsible parenthood is exercised by those who prudently and generously decide to have more children, and by those who, for serious reasons and with due respect to moral precepts, decide not to have additional children for either a certain or an indefinite period of time.
   Responsible parenthood, as we use the term here, has one further essential aspect of paramount importance. It concerns the objective moral order which was established by God, and of which a right conscience is the true interpreter. In a word, the exercise of responsible parenthood requires that husband and wife, keeping a right order of priorities, recognize their own duties toward God, themselves, their families and human society.
   From this it follows that they are not free to act as they choose in the service of transmitting life, as if it were wholly up to them to decide what is the right course to follow. On the contrary, they are bound to ensure that what they do corresponds to the will of God the Creator. The very nature of marriage and its use makes His will clear, while the constant teaching of the Church spells it out. (10)
2. The sexual activity, in which husband and wife are intimately and chastely united with one another, through which human life is transmitted, is, as the recent Council recalled, "noble and worthy.’’ (11) It does not, moreover, cease to be legitimate even when, for reasons independent of their will, it is foreseen to be infertile. For its natural adaptation to the expression and strengthening of the union of husband and wife is not thereby suppressed. The fact is, as experience shows, that new life is not the result of each and every act of sexual intercourse. God has wisely ordered laws of nature and the incidence of fertility in such a way that successive births are already naturally spaced through the inherent operation of these laws. The Church, nevertheless, in urging men to the observance of the precepts of the natural law, which it interprets by its constant doctrine, teaches that each and every marital act must of necessity retain its intrinsic relationship to the procreation of human life. (12)
3. This particular doctrine, often expounded by the magisterium of the Church, is based on the inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act.
   The reason is that the fundamental nature of the marriage act, while uniting husband and wife in the closest intimacy, also renders them capable of generating new life—and this as a result of laws written into the actual nature of man and of woman. And if each of these essential qualities, the unitive and the procreative, is preserved, the use of marriage fully retains its sense of true mutual love and its ordination to the supreme responsibility of parenthood to which man is called. We believe that our contemporaries are particularly capable of seeing that this teaching is in harmony with human reason.

Every sexual act must be open to the gift of life. Look it up.

Even for us old peopl. Well said thank you.

 

[Elric]

It is not preventing anyone else from reproducing. Are you suggesting we go to criminalizing the behavior? How do we enforce such laws? Follow two men into their home to see what they are doing and if they are having sex arrest them? That would be a violation of human rights.

Up until about 10 years ago, homosexuality was illegal in the state of Tasmania (in Australia). I think it was in the seventies when the UK removmed their laws on homosexuality being illegal.

It has been done and very recently, I would imagine that there still countries that still consider homosexuality illegal (although many of those countries would also blame the woman/victim for being raped as well).