Posted on 03/14/2010 2:30:21 PM PDT by NYer
One of the most common rebuttals to the situation of the children being raised by Lesbian couple not being able to attend a Catholic schools is the seeming issue of fairness. That a equal standard is not being applied to other irregular situations involving heterosexual couples and the children being raised by them. I agree with Jimmy Akin take on this and as he usually does he puts it succinctly.
You see, an awful lot of parents of kids in Catholic school aren’t morally perfect, and if children were to be excluded on the mere grounds that their parents are sinners then enrollment would be quite low indeed.
And this is true. If a Catholic school applied that kind of test in determining enrollment then it would thwart its principal mission, which is providing a Catholic education to students to help them be more holy and closer to God.
So, “Your child can’t enroll because you’re a sinner” is a nonstarter as a principle of enrollment.
But does it follow from this that a parents’ actions should have no bearing on the enrollment of their children? Couldn’t certain actions of the parents cause such a problem that it would fundamentally interfere with the school’s mission?
Suppose that the parents insisted that their child attend the school naked (and suppose that civil law allowed this, for purposes of the thought experiment).
This fundamental rejection of the school’s dress code would cause such severe problems that the school would be entirely warranted in saying, “I’m sorry, but your child cannot come to school if you’re going to insist on nakedness.”
That’s an extreme, but it’s not hard to see how having a child in class whose “parents” are of the same gender could interfere with the mission of the school:
1) It will impede the ability of teachers to be frank about the nature of marriage due to the problems that will ensue with a child in this situation in the classroom.
2) The child will also become a proselytizer for homosexual “marriage” and/or be tormented relentlessly by other children.
3) The other children will be scandalized (in both the proper and the colloquial senses) by knowledge of the child’s situation.
4) All of the above will be exacerbated to the extent that the “parents” have any presence at or try to play any role in the life of the school.
So . . . bad idea.
It’s not the fact that the “parents” are sinners that makes it rational for the school to deny their children entrance. It is the fact that the nature of their public relationship is such that either the school would have to refrain from teaching the fullness of Christian doctrine regarding the nature of matrimony or tremendous problems would arise with a child in this situation in the student body.
At least that’s how I see it.
How do you? [National Catholic Register Blog]
Catholic schools can’t become Parent Cops seeking out the situations of the children’s parents. But the situation of a same-sex couple is apparent from the get go and is quite public. The situation for the child is of course quite hard. Dawn Stefanowicz a child who grew up with same-sex parents has worked with many other children from similar situations and it is a very difficult circumstance for those children.
For those who were conflicted by this turn in events.
Sinning and “sinning with pride” are two different things ... one is the nature of a fallen world, the other is a deliberate defiance of God’s rules of order.
SnakeDoc
I still think the mother and her whatever must have done something to call the attention of the school to their situation and make an issue of this. They probably wanted this outcome. People like that are very happy to sacrifice their children for their political ideals, and gays are particularly willing to sacrifice and destroy anyone in their way. Add to that a press that hates the Church, and this is tailor made for them.
The essence of the issue is that the kid’s entire home life (through no fault of the kid) is in direct opposition to Catholic teaching.
Choices have consequences and it seems that certain ‘protected’ segments of society have bought into their own hype and believe that the rules don’t apply to them.
Yes .. they did not identify themselves up front. See Fr. Z's post on this matter.
Excellent, SnakeDoctor. That sums it up perfectly. No futher clarification is required.
I think they consciously staged the whole thing. If they just wanted the child to go to Catholic school, the biological mother could simply have enrolled her. There would be no reason to even mention the other woman. There are many Catholic “single mothers,” and many people live with family members or even friends of the same sex and it is not a sexual relationship. But with gays, everything is sexual and everything is political.
I’m sure this was probably staged by some gay group.
Exactly. I don’t have to read this caca to know it was all a setup.
Fr. Z’s post is excellent as is the excerpt he posted from Fr. Breslin’s blog.
How and why does anyone think these women would permit the school to instill values in their preschool child that are contrary to those they hold?
The argument that the school could offer the child values is ludicrous. The child would be conflicted constantly between what was taught at school and what was lived at home.
Ask why these women would push to enroll their preschool child in a Catholic school that teaches their lifestyle is sinful? They are using their kid (and others) to push a controversial social agenda.
For every kid accepted in these schools, others are turned away.
Who do you think ran to the press?
I don't think we can assume that these ladies' motive is innocent or pure, as the "WWJD" crowd seem to think. "Oh, they are just trying to get their child a Catholic education." "Oh, they have tried and failed to live a moral life, and they want their child to have a better chance." "They just want their child to have the best education available." Etc. Etc. Etc.
It is textbook Alinsky tactics to infiltrate bourgeois institutions in order to destroy them. If the press had half the interest in this as a news story that they have in it as an occasion to bash the Catholic Church, they would have done a little background investigation on the women.
Odd are an enterprising reporter would quickly find their names associated with various "out and proud" organizations, signatories to letters-to-the-editor, petitions, etc.
But I don't think the reporters want to go there, because they are pushing an agenda just as much as these ladies are.
Furthermore, they come from Boulder. One of my daughters lives in Denver, and when I visit her, we occasionally go to Boulder - home of cute restaurants and raving, drooling, shrieking, lefty political flakes (because of the university, I assume).
Coors Brewery is located in Boulder, and ever since the attacks on Coors for its supposedly anti-gay position, the area has been a virtual magnet for aggressive gay organizations that want to mix it up. In addition, they all hate Archbishop Chaput, who has been charitable but quite firm in his orthodoxy on sexual matters. So I suppose this was bound to happen.
Well, it looks to me like I might not want to bet the ranch, but I’d bet a steak dinner that this was a deliberate provocation, with the press release already written out when the ladies went to the school with their “demands”.
I have given this some thought, I believe the purpose of enrolling the child was to eventually bring a suit forcing Catholic schools not to teach the church doctrines on homosexuality.. they needed a test case..
I believe there is a way to offer Catholic education to the child and expose her to the teachings that homosexuality is immoral
Every Parent should have to sign a document on registration agreeing to the school teaching catholic doctrine and tradition on all sexual matters.. adultery, co habitation, fornication , homosexuality and divorce with NO exceptions.If the parent feels there might be an issue with teasing or with the teaching itself, then they would be required to make the decision to accept it or remove the child.
That would be a preemptive strike .. not singling out gays, but equally applied to all sexual sin
I am so sick of these gays pushing their sin down our throat ..
Exactly, SnakeDoc.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
Pinging both lists since this explains so well how, in this circumstance, the homosexual agenda seeps into other peoples' lives and infects them with immorality. One thing effects another, and so on. Just for example, if the two "mothers" came to a school event, the other children will ask their parents "Why does Karen (or whatever her name is) have two mothers? Where is her daddy?"
The parents would then have to talk to their children about homosexuality, and maybe they'd like to keep that topic alone until their child is older.
Well stated.
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.