Posted on 07/09/2010 3:19:14 PM PDT by little jeremiah
Eaxactly
I did miss the part in the article where the ACLU is suing on behlf of the Professor.
...After losing his teaching position with the UI, Howell was told by the Newman Center that he would no longer be employed there either. The Newman Center referred requests for comment to the diocese office in Peoria.
This is troubling. They do say they are going to talk to the University but they could be a little more forthright in giving the professor some back-up.
This is a truth that is very close to my heart.
Those of us who stand for the moral absolutes that are the very foundation of human civilization, based on God’s laws, need to stand together to fight atheism, secularism, homosexualism, abortion and the culture of death, moral “relativity”, and the whole shebang.
We can discuss theological differences after we win. If we argue among ourselves, we will find that we have plenty of time for such discussions after hours at the re-education camp. If we’re not drugged or lobotomized.
Sectarian issues are fine - naturally each follower of a specific religion or denomination thinks theirs is the best way (of course I leave Islam out of this). But we should spend our valuable and short human lives defending truth against those who hate truth, not those who practice or believe just a little differently than we do.
And I say this as a devout Hindu. I consider all those who believe in God (yes, Hinduism is in truth and foundation monotheist) my brothers and sisters, even if many of the details they believe are not precisely the same. None of us will have any religious freedoms (or other freedoms) if the leftist atheist secularist homosexualists win. Or if the Muslims win.
So it was with Roe versus Wade. People were having abortions and doctors were performing them before the Supreme Court decision. The medical people performing them were offering that is was for the health and welfare of the mother. Both the doctors and the women getting abortions were burdened with guilt and societal censure. That's why people burdened with that guilt pushed so hard to get an affirmation from a respected body like the Supreme Court for the dark deed they were performing.
That is what this enormous push for approval of the homosexual way of acting is all about. They can get an occasional teacher fired. They can lay an assault on the clergy all they want. They can come up with propaganda phrases like ‘homophobe’. They can lobby politicians to pass laws saying that we can not be resistant to their acts. In the end it will do no good. Inherent in most people is the genetic inclination to be resistant.
You’re welcome. Glad to help.
So believing in what you are teaching is a no no - right?
Hers’s with some commentary on the letter.
‘It should be noted that my friend and I were both brought up Catholic’
This is standard fare. So called ‘ex’ Catholics are the ones who react violently to any expression of orthodox catholicism. This isn’t a dispute over what is or is not correct, but is a conflict over what the Church ought to teach.
‘which I believe you will agree is downright absurd’
Who believes? The professor? No. Make no mistake, this letter is not addressed to the professor but to the queer society. He’s soliciting opinions, not in order to challenge the professor but to get his buddies to say hey, we need to shut this idiot up.
The ‘response’ is his way of telling the professor, we’re going to come at you hard.
“I am in no way a gay rights activist”
Of course. I just like the odd buttsecks now and again.
“hard-working Illinoisans are funding the salary of a man who does nothing but try to indoctrinate students”
First salvo. Obviously it’s wrong for the government to fund churches but it is right for them to fund queer centeres. Again, not a free speech argument.
“a public university and should thus have no religious affiliation”
Second salvo. One course taught by a professor!= religious affiliation? No. The expression of orthodox catholicism is equated to the establishment of the religion. Again, this is an attack on free speech.
‘Declaring that homosexual acts violate the natural laws of man is another.”
This is the centerpiece of the argument. This is what pissed off the letter writer more than anything else. Saying that homosexuality is unnatural, and everything which is natural is good, Is a profound misunderstanding of the natural law.
He wants to believe, very strongly, that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, and there are no consequences for him. Arguing that it is unnatural is no different then arguing that he is less of a person for liking the buttsecks.
“The courses at this institution should be geared to contribute to the public discourse and promote independent thought’
Provided that thought agrees with me.
“not limit one’s worldview’
Disagreeing with me makes you a narrow minded bigot
“I can only imagine how ashamed and uncomfortable a gay student would feel if he/she were to take this course. “
Of course you can. Because you like the buttsecks.
‘I am a heterosexual male”
Thanks for telling us. So that one time where you enjoyed the buttsecks didn’t make me gay. but don’t let anyone tell you that enjoying buttsecks is wrong.
‘Also, my friend also told me that the teacher allowed little room for any opposition to Catholic dogma”
Oh, this is a beauty. ‘My friend said’, ie, I have zero proof that the professor actually said this and I’m repeating hearsay.
“limiting the marketplace of ideas”
by expressing opinions that I disagree with.
“Leslie Morrow, director of the LGBT Resource Center
Siobhan Somerville, a former teacher of mine and the founder of the queer studies major.’
Who happen to like the buttsecks too. I’m telling on you so that they can smack you down.
“I didn’t go to Notre Dame for a reason”
No, because I wanted my love of buttsecks to be confirmed.
Hey if you are willing to stick your neck out for us christians...
Welcome to the party.
‘Remember, that what you did for the least of us, you also did for me.’
In a course that deals with philsosophy, is it unethical to tell students why Catholic philosophy teaches what it teaches?
Is it illegal to say, "I'm a Catholic and I agree with that"?
Or all three?
This wouldn't have been the ditch I wanted to die in, but I guess you don't get to choose.
After reading the emails I come to the conclusion that whoever fired the professor is either and homosexual agenda activist themselves or a spineless idiot. Regardless, the accusatory email was hearsay and the professor never had the opportunity to face his wimpy anonymous accuser...
Thank you for the links to the emails! I cannot believe the student thinks the teacher’s email is hate speech...HATE speech!?!
Whether or not someone thinks homosexuality is OK, it’s obvious that, based on natural moral law, homosexuality is immoral. That’s a perfectly reasonable and rational opinion, because two males are obviously not designed to mate with each other. Again, I stress it doesn’t matter whether someone thinks homosexuality is immoral or not. The teacher’s express point was that homosexuality is considered immoral based on natural moral law. That TRUE, even though the student’s fragile mind couldn’t grasp the point.
What’s really amazing? The student actually claimed classes should encourage independent thought and public discourse while engaging in an attack on the very same things!!!
Being very literal minded, I carefully re-read the article looking for mention of the ACLU...
(crickets etc of course)
It’s only wrong to believe what you’re teaching if you believe in traditional (aka “real”) morality.
If you’re a homosexualist, it’s not only fine to believe what you’re teaching, but mandatory!
You are right. God is in everyones’ hearts telling them that killing babies is wrong, same sex acts are wrong (of course many other things as well). They try to drown out that voice of conscience by shutting up the voices in the world telling them that these things are wrong.
But they will never stop the voice of God in their hearts.
The real nature of the homosexual agenda is becoming much more open. It is nothing less than tyranny and total dominance.
More proof that liberalism is a mental illness. They cannot think rationally or morally; they are in a state of intellectual thralldom that is a form of criminal insanity.
I like your point about all religions needing to stand together. The homosexual rights movement is incompatible with religious freedom and free speech rights. I really don’t see a happy middle ground here. One side is going to be sacrificed for the other, and homosexuals control most of the media and education.
I consider Jesus’ teachings absolutely perfect.
The Muslims and the rest of the list mean to destroy all that is good and true in the world. They must be stopped. I am sure that God will take care of things but we must do our part.
These emails are well worth reading in their entirety.
&&&&
And comparing the quality of the arguments of each email is also quite instructive.
Some people live to be “ooooofffffennnnnnded.
The second writer mentions that he cc’ed his email to the someone associated with the Queer Studies Major. I’m sure that absolutely nothing offensive to anyone, even my aged mother, is ever said in those classes!!!
little jeremiah: “More proof that liberalism is a mental illness.”
Liberals seem rather irrational. How else could that student possibly believe he was fighting for independent thought, public discourse, and an open market for ideas while attacking the very same things??? It literally boggles my mind!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.