I respect the Catholic Church’s right to decide its admissions policy any way it wants but I don’t think they thought this one out very well. Here they have an innocent child who they can teach traditional values to who needs just such an education. Assuming that the parents are paying the child’s tuition, which the Church would need to maintain its school, it would seem that this whole issue is a non sequitur.
“Here they have an innocent child who they can teach traditional values to .. “
No, they can’t.
Not without the support, consent, and involvement (example) of the parents.
That is the point.
Here they have an innocent child who they can teach traditional values to who needs just such an education.
We are in a legal world where feelings count more than facts. As such, the Archdiocese is merely managing their assets in accordance with legal risk. Consider if the childs’ mommas both decide that she is being discriminated by not recognizing and equivicating the childs family status when the school teaches the Catholic ideal of family. Can they sue - sure. Will they win - not likely. Will it cost the Church money - you betcha. Avoiding this obvious risk is a moral choice. The child will at some point in her life wonder what the right answer is. At that point she can remember her exposure to the Christian faith and decide accordingly. I am personally suspicious of a same sex couple choosing a Catholic school for their daughter. Methinks the mommas have smaller fish to fry than the moral education of their daughter. Diversity cannot be allowed to exist to the left.
I believe that they have thought it out very well. We are getting all the negatives in this story from only one side, that of the parents. The school and the Archdiocese have taken the high road here and are not saying anything negative about what the parents have done. There is much more to the story than we are getting from the media who have gotten their story from a group of activist homosexuals.
I think that the school and the Church should be commended on their handling of this situation. They have chosen not to be confrontational.
BTW Did you see the other article posted about this where the church members crossed the street to offer the protesters donuts and coffee during Sunday services?
The purpose of a parochial school isn't merely to impart values. It's to bring the children deeper into the life of the Church. When you have a child who is unable to do so as a result of her upbringing, it defeats the purpose. The Church's role in this scenario is to convert the unconverted in an external and/or worship setting (minus the sacraments); not invite the unconverted to participate in a Christian educational setting.
Maybe, but then the “parents” will begin to worm other ideals into the curriculum and then site bias’ that are against federal laws and then you have a whole new can of worms opened. Attending a Catholic school is a privedge not a right. I smell a rat with the parents on this one.
I think you should get all of the facts before opining on a topic you know little about.
Chaput is right on the money. Those parents do not WANT their kid taught traditional values, and you can darned well bet that if that kid came home spouting traditional Catholic values against homosexuality, the parents would be miffed. Or sue. Or protest in some way.